![GunBackgroundCheckInfographic_4-1[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/nxp1gpK.png "GunBackgroundCheckInfographic_4-1[1].png")
What concessions would the anti have to give up for you to accept a ban on private sales? Like say if there was a bill that said, private sales are now banned and every sale needs a background check, but every state needs to have the same concealed carry laws as New Hampshire currently has?
>>30381478
No. Not one inch is to be given to grabbers. Every compromise has not been honored by them and every time they act as though they did not create the status quo and that it is never good enough
>>30381478
Hughes amendment repeal and making suppressors the same as a title one firearms with a serial number.
Also include NFA process streamlining.
I don't think any rational person opposes background checks.
If there were bills that just expanded background checks without adding any otherrors problematic Bullshit I'd support it.
For example here in WA, all sales have to go through ffl now. Except now you also can't loan a gun to a friend for any reason even if they ate in danger (maybe you can argue this somehow but check this out:) and you also technically can't let anyone shoot your gun outside unless you're actively hunting. Those are unreasonable restrictions that intentionally punish and restrictions law abiding gun owners.
That info graphic is retarded. Pretty sure they include c&r ffls who don't deal with the public, industry ffls who don't deal with the public, and kitchen ffls who probably won't want to do those transfers. And ask the Californian how much of a hassle private sales are.
Fuck them.
>>30381532
Postan from fone sry
>>30381514
THIS
>>30381544
Well yea duh. Also there are a lot of fuckers like jon oliver who bitch about how we have too many FFLs. Like what the fuck do you want? You bitch about private sales and then you bitch about places where you get background checks
>>30381532
I oppose them because it's security theatre. Added cost for negligible benefit.
>>30381514
This and if you don't agree you need to fuck off to fucking North Korea or CA
>>30381478
It pains me to think that people think I need to do a background check if I wanted to sell a gun to a friend I have known my entire life and has proven to be a good member of society,
>"But if we stoup just one accident"
>>30381532
>Those are unreasonable restrictions that intentionally punish and restrictions law abiding gun owners
there is no such thing as 'reasonable' gun control and you should know that by now it only exits in it minds of liberals who think that gun owners are all guilty and need to be punished and incredibly optimistic conservatives who think there is any bargaining with that mentality.
>>30381478
Repeal the NFA. MGs, suppressors, SBRs, SBSs, DDs no more regulated than a .22 is now.
>>30381478
I will never accept that, you shouldn't either because it creates a de-facto registry.
When the filthy American government knows who owns the gun because the transfer goes through it, from person to person, that is a registry.
Which is also by the way, either illegal or unconstitutional. Even after the so-called "universal" bg check system was installed, it would have had significant legal challenges.
Thank God we live in America.
>>30381478
nearest FFL is 30+ miles from me and charges $30 for transfers. hassle free!
SHALL
>>30381478
Is banning private sales what they really mean by "expanding background checks"?
Pretty sneaky. It always seems to be a buzzword game with these types.
>>30381478
Refuse. Private sales bans are an automatic refusal.
Let's try again. You can have universal background checks but here is what we get in return. The mandatory check will be absolutely free and (as promised at the beginning) almost instantaneous. There will only ever be on copy of the form 4473 (digital or physical) and upon completion of the transaction it will be immediately shredded or given to the consumer for their own record keeping. It shall be unlawful for any business or government body to keep a copy or record of this form, a record of the transaction, or any type of registry (pseudo or otherwise) of the transaction or NICS query.
Put in place harsh (and clear) laws to punish any business, governmental body, or private body that abuses this system or illegally retains the information.
Establish a system that allows citizens to perform the NICs check themselves without having to go to an FFL. (This may already be the case? I've never made a private firearms purchase))
So basically you can have your checks but you have to pay for it since it's mandatory and you cannot keep or do anything with the information after the fact.
>>30381478
That image is just perfect to go with the news a couple days ago that they want to stop the majority of FFL holders being able to get them in future by requiring you to have a 'proper' store first.
>it's so easy!
>look at how many dealeres there are
>oh wait, we want to take away a huge chunk of that number
Also what >>30381544 said, they're likely cramming as many as possible into that headline figure regardless of relevance, because fuck accuracy if it doesn't fit your narrative.
Not one fucking inch.
It really is the fucking KGB governments move now. Tempt fate. The whole country is basically daring these statist to fucking do it.
They know who all of us are we are legal owners because we are CITIZENS and these are our RIGHTS. These are not allowances bestowed upon us by some fucking kikey life time politician
THESE ARE OUR RIGHTS BECAUSE WE ARE FREE PEOPLES.
The Gov serves us. Just like they know who we are - we know who you are as well fuckers.
Keep this in mind. Love and hate is a two way street.
>>30381595
>Is banning private sales what they really mean by "expanding background checks"?
yes.
>ban private sales
>decrease number of FFLs
>increase NICS response time
just one prong of the "add bullshit hoops until no one even wants to bother and we can just ban guns entirely" plan for reasonable gun control.
>>30381576
This is pretty much the only compromise I personally would be willing to make.
>>30381599
> ever be on copy of the form 4473
Never ever gonna happen.
Too many Crimes today are solved with the 4473 pseudo registration for them to give it up.
>>30381478
Nationwide constitutional carry, full repeal of the NFA, full repeal of the GCA, and defunding of the ATF.
Get fucked, liberals.
>>30381532
>I don't think any rational person opposes background checks.
>i dont think anyone opposes creating a complete waste of time and money while also infringing on constitutional rights
Youd be wrong
>>30381589
NOT
Never compromise.
>>30381632
I don't disagree, but if they want compromise, that's the compromise, they can take it or leave it.
Or amend it just a little bit and allow the FFL to keep a copy as they always have and only allow access in the event of an actual criminal investigation.
Unrelated, but I heard they trash 4473 after like 14 years or so. Is that true?
>>30381478
Repeal the 19th Amendment and prohibit women from voting. Guarantee it'd solve 80% of our problems.
>>30381478
There is nothing they could give, because I will not bargain.
>>30381659
PASS
>>30381681
You know, that's pretty fitting actually.
>>30381595
always assume malicious intentions when libs push for "harmless" gun control laws
>>30381662
It might be 20, and if you close or move locations the Feds get access to all your 4473 documents forever
>>30381681
LEGISLATION
>forcing people who aren't breaking the law to do a background check will somehow cause people who are breaking the law to also do a background check, which will stop them from breaking the law
people actually believe this?
>>30381478
>What concessions would the anti have to give up for you to accept a ban on private sales
>accept a ban on private sales
>accept a ban
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
>>30381662
Actually 20 years required record retention for 4473's.
But ask yourself, how many FFL holders have you ever seen stay in the same location, under the same corporation or business name, under one individual for more than 20 years?
If any of those three things change all 4473's are required to be sent to the ATF labs to be scanned, digitized and archived.
If
>>30381730
Yea, I've tried to explain that to people who bitch about the "gun show loophole" and they always tell me to fuck off when I ask them how they plan to physically prevent someone from exchanging goods for cash in the parking lot of Walmart
>>30381766
Well how dare you try to apply logic, that's totally unreasonable.
>>30381532
GTFO
they're coming soon, planning to ban private sales, planning on abusing the no fly list to keep certain problematic dissenters from owning guns, shillary presidency might promise even more. When the day they come to gather your weapons comes, will you fight back?
>>30381478
repeal the nfa
ez ez
Ironic stupid white boys used to keep everyone else from having guns...
Now stupid white boys can't get guns.
Racists and religious haters, all of you
>>30381641
Background check should literally only check if you are a felon or not and it should never take more than 10 minutes
>>30381766
guess we should make meth legal cause no way can we stop people from getting it in a walmart parking lot
>>30381847
weak bait, gonna have to try harder than that
>>30381858
My fucking favorite part is when someone tries to tell me felons and crazies shouldn't be allowed to own guns and then I point out that it is a felony to sell guns to anyone who has been convicted of a felony, domestic assault, or has been committed involuntarily for mental illness
>>30381879
it got a (You) though ;^)
>>30381863
Not really related, but yeah, probably.
>>30381514
fpbp
>>30381894
(((You)))
>>30381478
Remove silencers and sbr/sbs/aow from NFA
Require background checks for transfers be performed for nominal fee only (like $5)
Repeal Hughes amendment
Add post WW2 surplus us military weapons to CMP
Ban police from having machine guns
>>30381478
That graphic fails to mention that dealers can opt-in or out of doing private sales checks.
>>30381478
>Repeal of NFA Act and Hughes amendment
>Ban on anything that resembles registration
>Removal of "F" from "ATF"
>Constitutional Carry
>Deportation of all illegal immigrants
>Removal of shitty Supreme Court justices who think the second amendment doesn't apply to individuals
>End on import bans from specific countries
>>30381478
>what concessions would the anti have to give up for you to accept a ban on private sales?
They'd have to permanently give up their right to vote.
>>30381478
Since we're playing make-believe here
>Nationwide shall issue concealed carry
>Reopen Machinegun registry
>Remove SBR/Silencers from NFA
>CMP gets modern military surplus weapons
>Make background checks free
>Allow assault/class 3 weapons to be imported again
>>30381730
The idea being, if your friend has a criminal record that would forbid him from owning a gun, you can't give him a gun without making yourself an accomplice to a crime.
>>30381863
We should, People have the right to consume meth
>>30382116
it's already a crime to give/sell a gun to a felon.
>>30382116
Criminals who have done their time deserve to get all their rights back anyway
>>30381544
>And ask the Californian how much of a hassle private sales are.
Yup, I hear stories about overcharging fees, refusing to do transfers near closing time, saying such and such gun is illegal, and employees fucking with your guns during the waiting period.
How about we apply the same logic to private car sales. You shouldn't be able to buy a car if you have a suspended license.
>>30381595
"Banning" in the sense that you need to go through an FFL for the check. You could still sell and buy from private owners.
>>30382144
Mandatory background checks would mean you couldn't pretend to have been unaware of their criminal record. You wouldn't have plausible deniability.
Not ONE FUCKING INCH!
Hypothetically.
1. open up NICS to everyone. A website and phone app could generate a 4473. Give the seller the yes, no, delay response. Then email a completed 4473 to the seller's account for record keeping purposes.
2. remove silencers, SBS, and SBR from NFA
3. open up the machine gun registry
4. reform NFA tax stamps to 20% of the sale price on machine guns and DD.
5. eliminate the no fly list. reform the terror watch list. if someone on the terror list attempts to buy a gun. the FBI must investigate. they then must either deny the purchase and then arrest the person, or approve the purchase and purge them form the terror list.
6. national reciprocity of conceal carry
7. lift import bans on ammo and arms.
8. first time offenders get their gun and voting rights back automatically, after release from prison.
9. hillary has to be arrested for violations of the Record Keeping Act, Racketeering, and Espionage Act
10. Leland Yee has to be charged with firearms law violations and terrorism conspiracy
11. Feinstein and Schumer have to resign, renounce their american citizenship and move to Israel.
12. Obama has to admit he screwed up in the middle east worse than Bush. Sell all his residences, and exile him self to Puerto Rico.
>>30382455
THIS
>>30382455
oh i forgot.
13. no more AP pistol ammo ban
14. we can buy long guns and pistols in any state we choose and take it home with us directly. no more having to ship it to another FFL in our home state.
>>30381478
Not Infringed gun grabbing faggot
>>30382425
So youre going to make it illegal to sell a gun to someobe on the off chance that one of them is a felon and the other already knows? Whats to stop them from selling it and ilegally skipping the background check? Theyre already breaking federal law.
>>30381478
kill yourself
>>30381514
/thread
>>30381532
Are you retarded?
universal background checks = registry
>>30381478
do they know quite a few of those FFL holders are "private" only or do it just as a side job?
>>30382116
But that's already a crime.
It's a crime for you to knowingly sell him a gun and it's a crime for him to possess one.
>>30382425
You're ignoring the fact that someone who wants to sell a gun to a felon will not background check them no matter what, because
1) Hello, they're a fucking felon. Why would they background check them if their intent is to sell them a gun?
2) Criminals won't just go "Oh gee, the check failed, I guess I won't get a gun then". They'll just sell them the gun, period.
>>30381478
Repeal NFA and Hugues
What is the justification for Congress attempting to directly regulate intrastate transactions of legal items between private citizens? Pretty fucking sure that is outside of their purview.
>>30381663
I like you.
>>30381478
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
now delete thread and kys okay? bye.
>>30381478
every time they ask for compromise, it needs to begin at zero gun laws.
>>30382741
Commerce Clause and some bad SCOTUS case law.
You buying a gun from someone inside your own state, means you aren't buying a gun from someone outside the state. Which affects interstate commerce. Therefore, fuck you, we're the government. What you going to do? Spend millions on a lawyer to fight it in court.
>>30381532
t. Senator Fienstien
1) repeal the hughes amendment
2) remove silencers from the NFA
3) open up the background check hotline so that ANYONE can call in a 4473, not just FFLs, complete with increased staffing
>>30382774
Fuck, you're probably right. I was just reading today the SCOTUS opinion on a case where they deemed that someone attempting to rob a weed dealer fell under "interstate commerce" despite the guy not actually getting any weed and the government not proving the weed was involved in interstate transactions in any way. Only Alito dissented.
>>30382812
that isn't even the worst recent ruling.
they just decided(the conservative pro gun justices), that the police can pull you over for no reason at all. demand your ID. then use your ID to look for warrants or "probable cause", for a search. then anything they find in that search is legal evidence.
the previous law was that if the police pulled you over for no good reason, that was an illegal pull over. therefore any evidence from the illegal search of the illegal stop, was illegal it self.
The OPs question presents the notion that the left is willing to compromise. They aren't. The end goal is total elimination of private firearms ownership.
By making guns expensive and hard to buy through taxes and regulations, waiting periods, background checks, etc fewer people will buy them.
Start limiting places to shoot through environmental bans, green ammo, city noise laws, etc.
stigmatize gun owners as murderous villains and stupid rednecks.
Basically use the playbook in how they reduced smoking from like 70% to under 25%.
Then you go for the throat and ban guns entirely.
Not one inch to statist bastards and their incrementalism. I will never surrender my weapons while I still draw breathe. I will never forget I am an American, dedicated to the preservation of liberty and the constitution of the United States of America. I am willing to give my life in the defense of the Republic from all enemies forgien and domestic.
>>30382833
Yeah, I saw that too, pretty damn bad.
>>30381478
>limiting what people can or cannot do with private property
Even if I was completely anti-gunI wouldn't do this on the basis of property rights.
>>30382875
I'm glad i'm not the only one that realizes they are using the same playbook that they used against tobacco.
>smoking is bad, mmkay
>dude weed
from the same party
>>30381478
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
>>30381478
Their lives.
>>30381478
Registration leads to confiscation.
The US government has proven to be a force not to be trusted.
I will not give One iota to restrict the Right of my children and grandchildren.
Fuck the Anti-Gun crowd. Fuck the Commies riding on the shirttail of any tragedy to exploit for their political gain.
There is no Compromising the things such as Rights.
Why do they always propose things that would have never stopped the event that made them propose these things?
>>30382985
>>30382998
They're not interested in stopping massacres.
They're interested in controlling you and the political opposition as a whole.
>>30381514
This
>>30381478
Actually better question, why do they always propose this and then ignore Illinois, the one state that has IMPLEMENTED this?
I mean, it's not like Chicago is the murder capital of the U.S. right? Surely the FOID system has stopped those criminals from obtaining guns right?
Honestly, the only thing FOID has done is delay me from buying a gun, because I willingly follow the law. Plus there's plenty of otherwise law-abiding people who never got a FOID card who own guns without the ISP's knowledge.
In short, their proposal wouldn't work. It hasn't in Illinois, and sure as hell wouldn't on a national scale.
>>30381478
Free NICS access for anyone.
Carry permits are shall issue and all states are forced to recognize all of them.
Suppressor is treated no different than a handgun.
>>30381532
>I don't think any rational person opposes background checks.
This one does. NICS is already a complete fucking trainwreck. A more complex system would be a nightmare.
>>30383053
They just blame neighboring states.
>>30382138
Enumerated by what clause in the Constitution?
Don't water down the concept of a right.
>>30381478
Here would be my requirements:
Suppressors, SBR's, SBS, AOW out of the NFA
Reopen the MG registry and provide a 1 week maximum wait for transfer, with the tax stamp reduced to the $5 AOW one.
UBC's are only required for people you do not personally know, family members, friends, and coworkers are exempt. This gets us around the 'Oh I want to loan a buddy a firearm, but we gotta pay for a background check'
And finally some wording to have all state level AWB's and the like nullified, constitutional carry throughout all states, and making sure no further gun control can be enacted.
Repeal the NFA, nation-wide CC reciprocity, burn Diane Feinstein at the stake, nuke California, launch all of congress out of a large trebuchet into the sea, declare me Emperor of Pennsylvania and prince of North Korea.
These are my terms.
>>30383077
From a technical standpoint NICS is not as bad as it could have been. Sure it's not perfect and delays happen (to me, but I know why, I wasn't born in the US).
What makes is so "bad" or rather useless is the Garbage-In-Garbage-Out principle.
It's only as good as the data that states submit and while some states do an OK job in submitting (and most importantly, validating) data some states do not.
I use NCIC and state equivalents (which use this same data as NICS) daily as a police dispatcher and often times poor data quality prevents you from positively identifying persons.
>>30383091
If loose gun laws encourage more murders that spill over into neighboring states, would the home state have a higher ratio of murders than the neighbor state?
>>30383141
It's not that the neighboring states' violence spills over, the idea is that people from Illinois go to neighboring states to buy guns and bring them back.
Which, of course, would require a background check.
>>30381858
What back water village are you in where your name and SSN has resulted in a wait longer than 10 minutes. Fuck man, filling out the damn form takes longer than sending it.
>>30381514
This
>>30381478
>What concessions would the anti have to give up for you to accept a ban on private sales?
I wouldn't recognize the authority to make such an unenforceable declaration.
Its my property, if I want to sell it, trade it or gift it then that's my business.
How is the state going to stop me? Spy on me all the time? Send out thousands of agents to bait people into selling their weapons illegally and spend billions trying to enforce it with fear and paranoia?
Its a stupid concept, there's no way to stop the sort of criminals you'd want to target with it; but very easy to inconvenience law abiding citizens. Its that sort of stupid unenforcable legislation (prohibition, drug war) that makes people cease to respect the law.
>>30383164
1. Isn't it already illegal to buy a gun from a neighboring state without an FFL?
2. Wouldn't that point to OTHER differences instead of guns being the problem then?
>>30381527
>>30381478
This, I came here to suggest that. I never see me doing private sales anyway besides online, which is need ffl anyway. And maybe just require gun shows to do background check before entering, then do whatever you want.
>>30381478
liberals, like women, think that "compromise" means "capitulate"
a good compromise is when neither side gets everything they wanted.
>>30383214
>1. Isn't it already illegal to buy a gun from a neighboring state without an FFL?
Yes.
I'm not trying to argue the point, I'm just telling you what they say.
>>30383186
Yeah. This is my argument.
Private sale bans aren't necessarily a registry, although it is in WA becasue we have a virtual handgun registry for FFL transfers.
It's not the kind of thing that is an existential threat to firearm ownership, but it is the type of thing that doesn't work and has no reason to exist.
>>30381577
>you shouldn't either because it creates a de-facto registry.
let me tell you about NICS and form 4473
>>30382555
>>30382675
I'm not talking about making private gun sales completely illegal, rather I'm proposing they require mandatory background checks. So as long as the person you're selling it too has a clean record, there's no issue. The idea here is that mandatory background checks make it so the seller can't claim they were unaware of the buyer's criminal record. That's going to deter people who would otherwise be willing to sell guns to criminals and then turn around and say they were unaware they had a criminal record.
>>30382688
The point is that now, if you're caught selling guns without performing background checks, that's automatically incredibly suspicious.
>>30383267
>I'm not talking about making private gun sales completely illegal, rather I'm proposing they require mandatory background checks.
how many do i have to have? i mean besides the one to get my FOID card.
fucking libtards dont even know which laws are already on the books.
GUN SHOW LOOPHOLE reeeeeeeeee
>>30383252
>private sale bans are not an existential threat to firearm ownership
You have to have gone through some serious brainwashing to believe this.
>>30383267
>That's going to deter people who would otherwise be willing to sell guns to criminals and then turn around and say they were unaware they had a criminal record.
is your name Pollyanna? laws only bother the law-abiding.
>>30383267
>I'm not talking about making private gun sales completely illegal, rather I'm proposing they require mandatory background checks
How are you so confused about this?
If you require a background check to sell a gun, you have made it illegal to make a private sale.
It's that simple.
>>30383231
>a good compromise is when neither side gets everything they wanted.
So then compromise would mean disarming half the population, right? Because then each side gets 50% of what they want.
>>30383290
Is it already required BY LAW to show your firearm owner ID to legally purchase a firearm through private sales?
>>30383267
>if you're caught selling guns without performing background checks, that's automatically incredibly suspicious.
How?
Thousands of people do this every single day. Have you never bought or sold a gun? I don't understand how you can think this is "incredibly suspicious". It's as commonplace and normal as selling a sofa.
>>30383315
I's a sheltered suburbanite, Ausfag, or Eurofag
>>30381478
What mass shooting would this have stopped?
None.
>Aurora
Dude had no criminal record, just seemingly snapped one day
>Charleston
Dude was already not supposed to be able to buy a gun, FBI fucked up or something
>Sandy Hook
Autist didn't even but the guns, his mom did.
>Gay Bar in FL
Dude passed more BG checks than are currently required, FBI "investigated" him and found nothing.
>Columbine
Guns were straw purchased from people who would've passed all BG checks
etc, etc.
>>30383315
Babby-killing assault sofas.
>>30381514
This.
>>30383298
>laws only bother the law-abiding.
They bother criminals too, when the laws are properly enforced and there's a substantial risk of being caught. If you can sell guns to felons and then say "well I didn't know they had a criminal record", you have no reason to fear the law.
>>30383301
How do you reason that "private" means "without background checks"? I'm using "private" to mean as in transfer of ownership between individual citizens, rather than buying it at a gun shop, not private in the sense of "outside the legal system".
>>30383315
Because selling a gun without a background check would itself be a crime. That way, the only ones who would have any reason to sell guns without background checks would be those selling to felons.
>>30383356
Funny, the laws against straw purchases haven't seemed to curb jack shit.
Maybe it's because anyone intending to kill another human being is going to break laws indiscriminately up to that point?
>>30383356
>I'm using "private" to mean as in transfer of ownership between individual citizens
Which is the way it is now, you're proposing involving the government as a third party, making it not private.
>>30381478
Repeal the '86 full auto enactment
Repeal the 200 stamp on sbr, auto, sbs, and silencers
Streamline gun purchases and chp permits so it can be done online. No fee.
Nation wide id's for chp, like drivers licenses
Stand your ground for every state
Maximum 30 day hold on any firearm seized as part of a criminal case. If a gun has been seized previously it cannot be seized a second time (double jeopardy)
I can't imagine most, if any of those things ever happening, but if they were done, I would be more open to private sale enactments. Something to the affect of how cellphones can be used to scan credit cards - enable individuals to have the power of a small business.
>>30383372
Officer, the gun was free. The book was $500.
>>30381478
Wait are you guys crazy or am I missing something? Can't you do a background check without the whole transfer form? Like you two literally go to a gun store, they run the check and charge $5 or whatever. Say you two are good to go, and just watch you do the transaction and go? Can't you call in the background check yourself?? Idk what exactly has been proposed/how it works in Wa or whatever
>>30383384
>Maybe it's because anyone intending to kill another human being is going to break laws indiscriminately up to that point?
Of course, but the idea is that the one who sells them the gun should be legally responsible for making sure they pass a background check. That would at least make it somewhat harder for convicted felons to pull off straw purchases. Of course, it wouldn't do anything to stop those murderers with no pre-existing criminal record.
>Which is the way it is now, you're proposing involving the government as a third party, making it not private.
Is "private" (by your definition) sale of automobiles illegal? If so, what's to prevent me from selling a car to my five year old cousin?
>>30381478
unregulated full autos, release of all import restrictions and bans, complete removal of the NFA, a law requiring all transfers to be shall-issue and paid for by the government, considering they are the one's forcing it on us, and constitutional CCW laws while simultaneously removing restrictions on gun-free zones.
>>30383433
>the one who sells them the gun should be legally responsible
THEY'RE ALREADY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE YOU DUMB TWAT
THEY GO TO JAIL IF SAID BUYER COMMITS A CRIME WITH A STRAW-PURCHASED GUN.
>>30383433
>Is "private" (by your definition) sale of automobiles illegal? If so, what's to prevent me from selling a car to my five year old cousin?
1. Registration is only necessary if you want to drive the car on the road, on private property, jack shit is needed.
2. There's nothing stopping you now, and there's nothing stopping your five-year-old cousin from doing donuts on your land in said car.
3. Let's say you want to have sex with a girl (I know it could never happen to you, but for the sake of argument let's imagine) and someone came in and said "I'm going to watch you to make sure you don't do anything funny like stick it up her ass without her consent", is it still a private act between two people?
>>30381478
>What concessions would the anti have to give up for you to accept a ban on private sales?
I will not give them up.
>>30381478
All import bans repealed
Hughes Amendment repealed
Suppressors, SBRs and SBSs removed from the NFA and treated like normal firearms
All gun related things must be Shall Issue by federal law
Unified carry permit with universal reciprocity
>>30383505
>THEY'RE ALREADY LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE YOU DUMB TWAT
>THEY GO TO JAIL IF SAID BUYER COMMITS A CRIME WITH A STRAW-PURCHASED GUN.
How does the legal system detect "straw purchases", if private transfers of ownership are not illegal?
>said "I'm going to watch you to make sure you don't do anything funny like stick it up her ass without her consent", is it still a private act between two people?
I don't think this is a good example, because non-consensual sex is ALWAYS illegal, even without a third party there actually watching. Because there are laws regarding sex, sex isn't really ever a private matter, by your definition of private.
>>30383522
Oh yeah and federal preemption of state law when it comes to guns. I.e. no state can be stricter than the federal law.
>>30381478
>ban on private sales
Yeah no. I'm a U.S. Citizen who is legally allowed to own a firearm. If I want to meet someone in a gas station parking lot to buy a gun I'm going to do it.
I'd also like to be able to buy a newly manufactured automatic weapon by filling out a 4473 and having the cash for it. I should also be able to have my shotgun or rifle be whatever length I want and be able to walk into my LGS and buy a suppressor.
>>30383505
>Let's say you want to have sex with a girl (I know it could never happen to you, but for the sake of argument let's imagine)
I never asked for this.
>>30383356
A private sale is, by definition, outside the scope of the government's purview. If you introduce background checks into this, it is not outside their purview, but solidly within it.
This is an extremely simple matter. I cannot grasp what about this is so confounding for you. You either want the government to intervene, or you don't. You can't possibly twist this around to mean both things.
>>30383536
>How does the legal system detect "straw purchases", if private transfers of ownership are not illegal?
>Hey Jamal jus killed Tyrone for calling him a bitch ass nigga
>He didn't buy the gun himself
>He said one of his baby mommas did
That at least narrows it down to 10.
>Because there are laws regarding sex, sex isn't really ever a private matter, by your definition of private.
There are laws regarding buying of firearms too, the laws don't make it non-private the REQUIREMENT of supervision does.
Please keep up with basic concepts like presumption of innocence.
>>30383536
>How does the legal system detect "straw purchases", if private transfers of ownership are not illegal?
how does the legal system know a transfer even occurred without a registry of all guns?
>>30383372
>Because selling a gun without a background check would itself be a crime.
Yes, in your magical unicorn fantasy-land where such a law exists.
Bu in the real world, where we actually live, that is not a crime. Yet.
You should answer my actual question, the one I asked you in my post, which is: Why is it suspicious for someone to sell a gun without a background check?
>>30383582
>You can't possibly twist this around to mean both things.
Don't underestimate liberals.
>>30383567
Lmao
>>30383586
hey guys , how is buying a gun that you know someone wants as a gift any different to a straw purchase ?
Is this idiot seriously arguing that because the government exists, there is no such thing as privacy, and therefore the government should have the right to invade privacy whenever it wants to?
How can someone possibly have this opinion? The government is not God, it's something we invented to keep the roads clean and the army polished. It's not supposed to be an all-seeing, all-controlling force that prevents us from ever doing anything without its direct permission.
I think we've got a liberal on our hands here, boys.
>>30383598
The premise being discussed is "what if such a law existed"? And if such a law did indeed exist, selling someone a gun without a background check would obviously be suspicious, since it would be illegal. There would be no reason to do so unless you knew the person you were selling to wouldn't pass a background check.
>>30381478
Everything NFA becomes unregulated, post 86 machine guns unregulated, all import bans and restrictions lifted, nationwide CCW, and all state laws that restrict firearms freedoms are immediately and unquestionably struck down (the state cannot appeal this decision and must comply).
Oh, and the law must be reviewed every year for effectiveness in PREVENTING crime, not simply deterring it. There must be clear, statistically supported evidence that it significantly lowered crime. If this burden is not met, the law can be thrown out, but the concessions are here to stay FOREVER, WITHOUT QUESTION, no body of government can ever enact or enable the return of such legislation again in the future.
>>30383647
Pretty much whether or not you knew they were restricted from owning one.
None
>>30383678
Ok cool , so if someone who can legally buy a gun is bought a gun as a gift , then it is legal.
As opposed to a convicted felon being bought a gun.
>>30383655
>Law A: If you have sex with children, you go to jail.
>Law B: If you sell a gun to someone without them passing a background check, you go to jail.
What's fundamentally different between these two laws? Why is Law B a violation of privacy while Law A is not?
>>30383647
A straw purchase is when you knowingly buy a gun for someone who cannot legally buy one for themselves.
If you knowingly gift a felon a gun, you have committed a crime (and so have they, for receiving it).
You can't just go "But officer, it was a gift!"...it doesn't matter specifically how they came into possession of the gun, except to the court that will judge the case. Either way, a crime of some kind has been committed.
>>30383647
Buying a gun specifically so that you can sell it to someone who can't (or may not be able to) is a straw purchase. Buying a gun to give as a gift to someone who can is not.
>>30381514
>>30381514
>>30381514
>>30381514
This.
>>30381478
But if there's any compromise to be made. Complete repeal of the NFA, repeal of Hughes Amendment, and end of Russian import bans, and federal carry reciprocity if not constitutional carry. Come with anything short of that, fuck off, you don't get another inch.
>>30383678
And without mandatory background checks, there's no way to prove whether the seller actually knew the buyer was restricted from owning one.
>>30383345
>Guns were straw purchased from people who would've passed all BG checks
Plus they were AWB '94 compliant guns.
>>30383053
Buh buh buh but they all get their guns out of state surely! The guns aren't already black market before they cross into the state to begin with! We need to implement it nationally for it to work!
>>30383062
>Free NICS access for anyone.
What would you need that for? Private sales would be illegal.
>>30383408
Heh, my coworker's from Texas, and says he and his wife agree his MIL is a living Peggy Hill.
>>30383704
"Knowingly" is the issue here. Without mandatory background checks, how will the authorities know whether you were aware of the buyer's criminal record?
>>30383669
>And if such a law did indeed exist, selling someone a gun without a background check would obviously be suspicious, since it would be illegal
It would not be "suspicious". It would be illegal, period, if it were a crime to sell a gun without a background check.
Your confusion about the meaning of basic words has been a chronic disability for you in this conversation.
>>30383751
(Again, I know you're an autist and talking to people is a foreign concept to you, but please bear with me.)
They talk to people, get testimonies.
>>30383751
>how will the authorities know whether you were aware of the buyer's criminal record?
Like literally every other serious infraction of the law, it would have to be proven or disproven in a court of law.
You seem to have forgotten that trials exist. Police do not just magically hand out prison sentences, they merely arrest people and make them show up for their trial.
>>30383396
go back to pre-1934 NFA laws , being no laws on the manufacture ,possession , sale etc of any type of firearm.
Just make the punishment for murder and gang crimes committed with any weapon so fucken harsh like say MANDATORY death sentence , you will exterminate the problem mostly.
Kill your repeat offenders.
>>30383751
I do not understand what argument you are trying to make, or even if you are making one at all. You're just asking us to explain to you how the basics of the justice system operate.
>>30383751
>Hey man can you buy this gun for me? Here's $500.
>Well sure buddy, I don't actually know that you can't buy a gun, I'll be safe from straw purchase prosecution!
>>30383290
Someone today tried to explain to me what the "gun show loophole" was. The conversation ended with him getting mad at "my side" and saying the vast majority of Americans want to ban private sales. I pointed out that that poll probably isn't accurate judging by the fact the GOP owns both houses of congress
>>30383810
If you can prove to the satisfaction of a jury that you did not know the person was not able to buy a gun, you would not be able to be convicted of that crime, yes.
>>30383567
What about hot as fuck traps ?
Do we get to be sodomised by hot traps semi-against our will ?
>>30383815
With the Anti-Gunners , just bring up Paris.
Harshly strict gun laws did nothing to stop the Paris attacks.
>>30383766
The point is, the only ones who would have a reason to not do background checks would be those selling to felons. Whereas without background checks being required by law, you'd have a situation where only some of those selling guns without doing background checks would be selling to felons.
>>30383817
I lost / that gun was stolen. Take the serial numbers off. Aka there will forever be ways around checks. Just like how the inner city hoodlums get their guns today.
>>30383817
The other person not being legally able to buy a gun is actually not a requirement of a straw purchase.
>>30383815
Fun fact about polls: You can influence the outcome by wording.
i.e. if you ask Americans:
"Do you want to end loopholes that allow criminals to buy guns?"
Most would answer "yes" because they don't want criminals to have guns and are probably ignorant of the actual Law in question.
However, ask "Do you want to ban private sales of guns?"
And most would answer "NO"
Basic sociology.
>>30383785
Who would be aware of the transaction other than the buyer and seller?
>>30383838
True, but that was a powerful and organized terrorist group, not random criminals.
>>30383865
>Who would be aware of the transaction other than the buyer and seller?
And if a sale is completely anonymous, and said seller didn't do a background check, how is it traceable?
>>30383516
You live in fucking NJ you can't do a fucking private sale you stupid nigger
What do you mean by banning private sales?
How about going to an FFL who does the paperwork for two parties?
If private sales are completely banned, fuck that, goodbye to any historic or uncommon weapons.
>No restrictions or paperwork on firearms
>No restrictions or paperwork on ammunition
>No restrictions or paperwork on carrying firearms
>No restrictions or paperwork on anything related to firearms (silencers, etc)
>No restrictions on imports
I would probably accept having to go to an FFL to transfer firearms then.
>>30383838
>b-but things would be even worse in France if they had laxer gun laws!!1
>>30383882
this retard is assuming complete gun registration.
mandatory background checks are unenforceable without it.
>>30383912
And they told me the slippery slope was a fallacy.
>>30383865
Don't argue the point of who it was , but what they used , use the anti-gunners tactics against them.
They never want to hear about how it is criminals or insane people that commit crimes , because you might have to deal with real issues like poverty and mental illness , instead focus on tools & sporting equipment that they choose to use to murder people , because you can be seen doing a lot if you ban or restrict those items , it makes ignorant & scared people FEEL better knowing that those pieces of steal , wood & polymer are illegal or harder to get.
>>30381514
Exactly this. Not one fucking inch. Banning private sales paves the way for a national registry and eventually confiscation.
>>30383908
Reply with "Worse than 150 people dead ?"
"Worse than the Charlie Hebdo killings and the cop who had a gun with rubber bullets?"
>>30383926
http://www.guncite.com/journals/okslip.html
:)
>>30383932
I am Australian , trust me , the grabbers will not stop , they are never happy , they took our semi-auto long arms , they are now trying to ban lever action shotguns , pump & lever action rifles and pistols/handguns of any kind.
Grabbers lie , they want you disarmed.
>>30383929
*Steel , not steal.
>>30381478
>What concessions would the anti have to give up for you to accept a ban on private sales?
None.
>>30381514
Im conflicted.
If the Hughes amendment was kill i wouldn't vare about private sales at all since i do most private sells at my lgs anyway outside family and friends.
Plus i already have an ffl, so i get shit shilped to my door regardless.
>>30382455
>reform NFA tax stamps to 20% of the sale price on machine guns and DD.
That can very well end up being more than 200 bucks.
>>30384046
Bottom tier machine guns are like 4K. That would be 800$....
>>30384086
Mostly because of rarity though.
>>30384086
machine gun prices would plummet if the registry were reopened. still, many would still be over $1000
>>30384086
If you were not allowed to buy newly produced machineguns that is.
But yes , should be no tax stamp.
Pre-1934 NFA
Government shouldnt need to stick its cock in.
Every single gun assault weapons ban, magazine limit, permit to purchase, may issue conceal carry
In exchange, maybe we won't call them nasty names.
That will be my compromise
>>30384028
>Plus i already have an ffl, so i get shit shilped to my door regardless
...yeah, you're not getting that renewed under new laws
>>30381478
>What concessions would the anti have to give up for you to accept a ban on private sales?
GET FUCKED.
The only "compromise" I'd accept would be opening up the NICS for private sales because that's actually a compromise, not rights being taken away and getting nothing in return. We all know criminals don't follow the law but me, being an upstanding citizen, would use it before I sell a gun to someone to make sure they're above level.
Of course, Democrats will never support this, even though it's (as they say) "common sense" because all they really want is full registration and eventually confiscation.
>>30383898
>you can't do a fucking private sale you stupid nigger
Are you fucking dumb? Private sales are legal in NJ, even with the commie system.
>>30384358
>has to have an FID and keep a recite to do a transfer
>private sale
>>30383744
No shit, my sister's MIL is peggy down to a t. She is so self-important it's annoying. Literally everyone ignores her.
>>30381478
you give them a centimeter they take two godamn miles
>>30384418
>give gun
>get money
>tell no one
That wasn't so hard, was it?
>>30381514
/thread
speak it true, my fellow freedom lover
>>30381478
I would require a lesbian threesome between Loretta Lynch and Condlezza Rice. After I got that, they could do whatever the fuck they wanted, I'd die happy.
>>30383841
They would be selling to people who believe in privacy, and innocence before guilt
>>30381532
I'm against them, I'm reasonable but all weapons laws are unconstitutional.
Trolls post hoax NRA page to give free handguns to ‘at-risk’ youth in urban areas (VIDEO)
http://www.guns.com/2016/06/23/trolls-post-hoax-nra-page-to-give-free-handguns-to-at-risk-youth-in-urban-areas-video/
>>30381632
No crimes have been solved with a 4473.
>>30382116
I think you mean an accomplice to freedom.
>>30382158
Damn right
>>30382741
A lot of things they do are out of their allowed authority. They were not created with the intent make laws outside of matters of interstate and international commerce. Also all laws were not made to apply to private property only public.
>>30383356
Found they guy who doesn't know any felons.
>>30383669
Or you both believe in I don't know.....the bill of rights.
>>30383697
Because one is commerce and a natural right and the other is the rape of a child that doesn't have the ability to consent.
>>30383350
>Great Britain
>european union
Will they unfuck their people?
>>30381478
National concealed carry reciprocity. Get rid of the NFA entirely and all laws that ban or restrict the production or civilian ownership of real automatic weapons. Undo all weapon related import bans. Present me with a tank made of pure bullshitronium straight from 40k. Capture Feinstein and erase her binding seal. A personal flying saucer. Introduce criminal charges for willfully attempting to infringe upon the constitution.
In other words, not going to happen.
"Universal" background checks are a fucking retarded idea. Considering only a couple states require registration there's no real way to know who owns what and if they performed a private sale after this law was passed. You simply cannot do it without registration and if you try that shit non-compliance will be ridiculously high with many LE agencies across the country simply not enforcing and some outright refusing.
>>30388038
Just keep telling yourself that.
>>30381478
Hypothetically? Federally funded high school level firearms safety and marksmanship course. Elective of course. Completion would automatically qualify the student for a Federal gun permit. Federal gun permits would be Shall Issue upon completion of a written and practical test for the general public. Federal gun permits would supersede and override all state gun laws, and would also act as a concealed carry permit. A Federal gun permit would allow the holder to own any weapon legal under federal law, and exempt them from state or local laws. It would also allow the holder to carry, transport, own or store and federally legal firearm in any of the fifty States or U.S. territories.
The written test would demonstrate a knowledge of gun safety and federally firearms law. The practical test would demonstrate basic rifle, shotgun and handgun marksmanship, safety and handling. Training would not be mandatory, but would be encouraged. Passing the written and practical test would be the only criteria.
None of this will ever happen, but that's my personal price for no private sales.
>>30381559
The John Olivers of the world want guns to go away entirely. Which is why they seem to contradict themselves. But they don't, because they don't actually want anyone to be able to buy a gun. Ever.
>>30381681
kek
>>30381478
shall not be infringed
>>30381514
Give an inch, they'll take a mile
>>30383788
Was on board until you got to the punishments.>>30383807
>>30381532
Guys I did say RATIONAL person.
>>30381478
> ban private sales
All I ask is op to kill himself
>>30388812
Give them an inch and they'll make themselves a ruler.
If they really wanted just a "background check" then they would make an app for it. Enter a driver's license number and expiration date and it comes back green or red. No charge.
They stopped issuing "kitchen table FFLs" this year, charge money, and require the forms filled out BECAUSE they want it to be a hassle.
>>30383372
Well there's always this to consider. The Feds will let a career criminal like ol Dontray here slide for all kind of shit, because to justify a police state you need a thriving criminal element.
But let the average person with a good life slip up and they will ruin his life to set an example.
>>30388941
>believing this shit
National CCW reciprocity.
>>30389004
Kelley is never wrong.
>>30381478
My cuck state already requires private sale background checks. So, nothing. Fuck you gun grabbers.
>>30381478
SHALL. NOT. BE. INFIRINGED.
>>30381478
all gun laws going back past the 1934 NFA are removed besides the 1999 brady bill for background checks so that there is a system for f2f sale background checks and a federal law is put in place banning all state and local firearm regualtion, then the supreme court rules the brady bill and this new law unconstitutional.
>>30381478
>What concessions would the anti have to give up for you to accept a ban on private sales?
>ban private sales
Total elimination of the National Firearms Act.
>but they'll never accept that!
Exactly.
>>30381478
None. Don't require bg checks. Just make it easy. Free for people to get them.
>ban private sales
None, because niggers will sell to other niggers anyway.
>>30381863
SHALL
>>30381514
Absolutely this. No more compromise, never again. Fuck them!
>>30381478
at no point will I ever accept a ban on private sales, fuck off statist
>>30381514
The sentiment of the pro 2nd amendment right has never been so well expressed in such layman terms.
I'm for background checks, but it's never "just one more thing". The anti gun left and the pro gun right not only don't see eye to eye, the trust factor simply is not there.
On other hot topics such as abortion, both sides respect the fact that you must give and take. For example when determining the cut off date for abortion one side could easily say "one week sooner!" And the other side would be just as justified to say "one week later!" And it could be taken at their word the current bill would be limited in scope to that topic.
With gun debates it's not that simple, "background checks" becomes "background checks + waiting periods + carry limits" and the other side is just as justified in demanding a new bill "no background checks + no waiting periods + constitutional carry"
>>30387384
If your notion of "privacy" involves illegal activity, then obviously there is no innocence involved.
>>30388099
I don't consider unrestricted freedom to be an ideal which we should strive for above everything else. Freedom is good, but it's not the only consideration.
>>30388310
It's not a right if it's against the law. By definition, any illegal activity is NOT a right except in some abstract philosophical sense.
>>30383092
pursuit of happiness?
Repeal nfa act, enact law that guarantees ownership of any type of firearm regardless of features.
Id take a background check to own a Ma Deuce.
Then when it fails to save a life because criminals dont buy at a dealer and go black market we can all laugh at how stupid people are.
>>30381639
This though.And give all Americans a $500 credit when they turn 18 to buy arms. Guns, knives, fucking katanas if they want
>>30383266
thats only when you buy cmmercial thoug. so in otherwords. it doesnt affect private party in the non cucked states. so really NICS and 4473 are jsut to cover the FFL dealers asses.
>>30388962
this was interesting to fact check. first, barack obama didnt do anything about this, not a single thing. dontray got probation, yes, but no evidence exists that i can find that dontray being released had anything to do with anyone but the judge. the judge was Rudolph Randa.
whats even MORE interesting, is that no one cared about this case, until judge randa said this:
"People kill people, guns dont kill people"
Basically, he let dontray off because he didnt see why someone who wasnt at the time, barred from purchasing weapons...should be barred...from purchasing weapons. the one charge that stuck, was over the fact that dontray LIED on his forms. not that he acquired guns illegally.
I guess, the point to all this about 80% of the articles about this, was about how "judge randa is clearly and obviously a pro-nra shill"...and how obviously pro-gun judge randa is.
Which is a tiiiinnnny bit different to what that image seems to indicate. anyways, moral to the story: dont believe the shit you get in your inbox
>>30396005
and uh, cant post one image without the other
>>30396005
>>30396059
Where the fuck would the piston even be? How would it even work?
>>30396132
im pretty new to guns in general, but i believe its made that way so the action wont cycle. one shot, reload the grenade/smoke, cycle the action manually, ready to go. its probably for blanks only
>>30383312
Sure, libs can give up all their guns and access to guns forever more. And what do you know, gun violence in the nation plummets! I guess gun control does work!
>>30396005
>"People kill people, guns dont kill people"
Well, you can't charge a gun with murder.
