Right or wrong, this bill should be pushed on whatever merits it might have, not
on temporary high emotions from a tragedy. Obama flies victims' families
around on Air Force One (at taxpayer's expense) to push his agenda. On the surface, this bill seems to make a certain degree of common
sense. But my biggest concern is that those pushing it are just trying to get
their foot in the door to much more restrictive legislation... which has been
their admitted goal for decades. Make no mistake about it, there are influential
people out there who would love to have a national registry of all gun owners,
and eventually the confiscation of their guns, just has it happened in England
and Australia... and even in Chicago. Incidently, doing so has only worsened the
overall felony crime rates in those areas. Look up the statistics.It
doesn't take rocket science to figure out what happens in society when only
criminals have guns. Knowing their intended victims won't have a weapon,
perpetrators become emboldened. Having common sense, our forefathers were wise
when establishing the 2nd amendment to the Constitution. It was relevant then,
and it's still relevant now.
To "Tators" it is worse than that. We already have background check
laws in place.The question that has yet to be answered is why do we
need more laws? Why not enforce the laws that we already have?
Yes, Redshirt, we do already have background checks in place... at least from
federally licensed gun dealers. But those just determine who and who can't
buy guns from those dealiers. But (thankfully) what we don't have (yet) is
an inclusive national registry of gun owners and a list of what guns they
currently own. One of my (and the NRA's) biggest fears is that someday that
might happen... if the leftists with their liberal agenda get their way. After that, it would be easy to start confiscating people's guns if
another Obama down the road somehow gets in office, especially if we're
dumb enough to open the door to similar things now. That's exactly the path
of what happened in Great Britain and then Australia. It was and is a nightmare
for previous gun owners in those countries. And they still continue to pay the
price with higher felony crime rates.
68 to 31Yes!We're finally getting somewhere.===========FYI - Tators and RedShirt.Bush's "Patriot Act" left your gun privacy paranioa in the dust
years and years ago.
To "LDS Liberal" yes, and thanks to Obama, Bush's "Patriot
Act" was just a stepping stone to more destruction of our freedoms and
constitutional rights. If it wasn't for Obama, the Patriot Act would be
nothing but a bad memory. Why do you want to keep bad laws alive?The question for you is why do you keep supporting somebody who destroying our
rights and freedoms as fast as he is able?Bush and Obama are taking
us to the same place, yet you have problems with how Bush was doing things.How many rights will you need to lose before you will stop your support
for Obama and his Progressive/Liberal adgenda?
@ LDS Liberal:No gun privacy paranoia. I absolutely guarantee you
that the federal government has no idea of how many, what kind, or if I even own
any guns.You need to brush up on what the Patriot Act really is and
does before your comments start making you seem to have some sort of political
paranoia and/or ignorance. Just a friendly suggestion.
"Gun control bill clears first hurdle in Senate"?What part
of the second amendment don't they understand?How can we trust
a government, which has put all of us, 17 trillion dollars in debt, and yet has
seventy percent of the people on the dole?And now they want
background checks on us? The president didn't have a background check, and
has armed gun touting guards for protection. Are the
Obama's better then the rest of us?
A few questions:1. Was our government suppose to have as much power
as it does?.2. Will our government ever take money from our bank accounts
to pay the debt?3. Do parents raise their children?
So here we are, once again debating passing more law. Does anyone believe that
more law in Washington D.C. is going to really change much. Look at how much
law already exists on the books that is ignored by the people who should be
enforcing it. Best example is the immmigration laws. As for
background checks for guns. That raises lots of questions and concerns. As
stated above, we already have some form of background check, so just what does
this add to the check? What agency of government will be in charge of the
checks. Where will they be allowed to get information from. For instance, can
they check citizenship? Medical records? Political leanings? You see, as is
usually the case, the devil will be in the details.
@redshirt actually that is a very simple question to answer. The back
ground checks currently in place only apply to licensed gun stores and this law
closes the loophole given to gun shows and other people that sale guns. frankly
the current law gives an unfair marketing advantage to those that are not
licensed dealers which seems rather backwards if the point is to make access to
guns more accessible to law abiding citizens and less so to criminals.
@redshirtthe only way you lose any rights under this law is if you are a
convicted felon or been found to be mentally incompetent, so which is it?
George-- Define mentally incompetent.Could mean many things.
@worfactually the only way that shows up on a background check is atfer a
formal diagnosis by a licensed professional which then must go before a judicial
hearing where they must show the person is mentally incapable of understanding
the consequences of their actions and present a significant risk to themselves
or others if left to make their own decisions so no it really is not a broad
tterm that can be free applied to anyone.
Hope you're right.
We need criminal control not gun control. Any restrictions on guns will only
hurt citizens who agree to abide by the law. The most dangerous weapon in
harmless in a responsible citizen.In addition, the right to keep AND
bear arms, shall not be infringed. Amazing how that is being ignored. Enforce law, don't restrict constitutional rights.
To "George" and tell us how you are going to enforce any law requiring
that all gun purchases go through a background check?If I sell a gun
to my neighbor, how will the government know that transaction ever took
place?Meanwhile, there are countless people filling out false
applications at gun shops and are purchasing guns when background checks
theoretically should prevent it.Wouln't you keep more guns off
the street if you enforced current laws and made penalties more severe? That is
what the police say.
Could you imagine if only supermarkets were required to check ID's before
selling alcohol to someone?People who were underage would simply go
next door and buy from the gas station. That is the situation we currently have
with guns.I completely agree that background checks are worthless as
long as there is such an easy workaround.So, either get rid of all
background checks or make them universal.
If the Obama administration only pursued 44 of 15,000 gun violations in 2012, it
appears as if it is an enforcement issue and not a law problem. There has to be a reason for more laws when they don't go by the ones
already on the books. More laws don't make us safer. It is to ensure good
laws are enforced. Bad people will always get access to weapons. Parents of
children with mental illness have some responsibility in the process, if the
fault is with men having mental illness, whether adult or child. Access is not
an issue as those people that have done these acts have spent months or years
planning their processes. They set up a plan, get weapons or devices and
munitions to accomplish their actions. Even though mental problems may exist,
these individuals have plans to disguise, get access to a building with weapons
and store them and retrieve them. Their mental abilities are good enough for
that. They leave message or notes and e-mails for tracking, sometimes
deliberately. Where have the parents of these people been? School authorities
knew of problems with these people that are still in school or older students.
There is no issue that illustrates our broken political system more than gun
regulation. The powerful gun lobby, the NRA in particular, exerts extreme
influence over our politicians and citizenry. The ad campaigns they engage in
are meant to instill fear through misinformation. The idea that both Utah
Senators are beholden to such dynamics sidelines those of us that disagree with
this warped stance. The "guns without limits" culture is thrust upon all
of us by politicians that are too cowardly to do the right thing. The fact that
the Bush administration let the assault weapons ban expire speaks volumes about
how rigged the game is. It is fairly obvious, to those of us paying attention,
that Mike Lee has found a home within the wayward fringe of the GOP. In doing
so, he so alienates the majority of us that I find it unbelievable that he was
elected in the first place. Utah is a RED state; that is a given. However,
within this same political universe live many, like myself, that subscribe to a
more sensible philosophy about what creates a healthy society. The GOP mantra:
Our way, or the highway. That no longer works for me.
With the Obamacare that was passed by our elected officials around the country
when they voted before they read or understood what they were voting for, I am
afraid that mentally competent or incompetent is hiding in that bill to make it
anything that someone wants to make it. The President has said that laws should
be changed because the Constitution means something different today than it did
in 1800. He is such an expert having a law degree. The Supreme Court has
it's mission but the President now is interpreting what it means. He is
supposed to be out governing but is campaigning all the time and using the
Chicago mentality as his guide.
@RedshirtActually this law does not apply to the private sale of guns to
neighbors. As to the rest of your comment I would respond as always do using
your logic what is the point of having any laws since criminals may choose to
try to evade it. The answer being that without the laws you cannot prosecute the
criminal and just because one particular law does not solve every problem does
not mean the law is worthless.
@redshirtIs this "poll" the same one by the weapons manufacturer
you where trying to claim was ligitimate before?
The thing that is being ignored and the most important fact is that guns
don't shoot without a human being in control. It's not the guns,
bombs, etc. that are killing it's those who are holding them, pulling the
trigger. It's human beings. Guns are our protection from all the bad
people who are dishonest, dangerous and put our lives in danger. The Second
Amendment is for our Rights and is not to be taken lightly as it is being done
by our present Administration. They do not have respect for our Constitution of
the United States of America.We need to ban together as citizens of this
precious country of ours. If we don't we will lose what is most precious to