The problem with the legislation is that 1) it will cost a lot of money to
enforce (what government program doesn't?) 2)Anyone that thinks it will
keep guns away from idiots is living in another world. 3) The stricter the gun
control laws in an area, the more gun violence there is (e.g. Chicago and
Washington, DC). It will do the opposite that that the law is supposed to do.
For decades I've been hearing the mantra from the NRA: "Gun's
don't kill people, people do". The logical conclusion, if one accepts
this theory, is that we should do more to keep guns out of the hands of the
wrong people. This proposal seeks to keep guns out of the hands of the wrong
people. I would think that the NRA and its supporters would jump at the chance
to actually do something to show that they want to reduce gun deaths.The opposition to the idea of expanded background checks confirms for me the
obvious: The NRA and its supporters have no desire to reduce the number of gun
deaths in this country. Selling guns and ammunition is their bread and butter,
and they really don't care how many people die.
Universal Background Checks may not entirely remove the threat, but it will
reduce the threat and that is a good thing. For example, in states where
universal background checks are mandatory, women are 38% less likely to be
murdered by an abusive husband. Not 38% less likely to be murdered by a gun,
but simply 38% less likely to be murdered. No gun law anywhere can
stop violence or murder, but background checks do help. As a gun owner I cannot
see any logical argument which would explain why background checks are bad.
@JSB, in the area where I live, elementary schools that require school uniforms
are much more likely to have low standardized test scores than elementary
schools that don't require uniforms. Merits of school uniforms aside, that
correlation doesn't imply that the uniforms are responsible for the
students' test performance. For similar reasons, it would be foolish to
assume that because there is a correlation between gun violence and gun control
laws, somehow the gun control laws would be responsible for the gun violence.
Like the school uniforms, gun control laws are generally an attempt to address
an existing problem. Whether they work or not is a different question--and one
we'll have a hard time answering given current constraints placed on the
Centers for Disease Control.
Can anyone explain to me what is wrong with background checks? Why do
republicans oppose background checks so much? If we have background checks are
they worried they won't be able to buy guns anymore?
I can explain why Republicans are opposed to background checks on gun purchases.
It is very simple. The NRA wants to do all it can to sell guns. The NRA is
funded and supported primarily by gun manufacturing companies. The NRA is a
bully when it comes to any legislation that could slow gun sales. Using their
bullying tactics, they frame their arguments around protecting the Second
Amendment. The NRA has saturated America with the unfounded fear of criminals
and, in the process, has saturated America with guns. As more and more guns are
sold in the U.S. the more likely they will end up in the hands of a
"nutcake" who decides to kill people. When this happens, the NRA
quickly states the problem can be solved with more guns. Selling guns is the
NRA's goal and any legislation that slows that is opposed. It is a shame
that Utah's Senators and Congressman are so gullible.
More than 90% of Americans support background checks for all purchases or
transfers of guns. Currently, there are no background checks for 40% of such
transactions. These occur in private sells, at gun shows and over the Internet.
A little over a week ago, a felon just released from prison killed
his grandparents that night. Then Michael "Chadd" Boysen located gun
shows in the Northwest on the Internet. Law enforcement took him into custody
before he could reach a show and buy a gun. (The Boysen family is LDS, so some
readers may have heard about this example of why we need background checks for
all gun sales.)The research shows that states with background
checks, such as Pennsylvania, don't allow felons and the mentally ill with
violent inclinations to buy guns. There is no evidence that any gun control laws
cause higher rates of gun violence.
If there are 300M guns in America's private hands, that means there are a
lot of guns and people that have multiple guns. Registration is done not with
background checks and if there were 15,000 violations in the past year and only
44 were pursued, that is not going to improve by having a new law. We have seen
that many inspectors in the various OSHA, EPA, FBI, state and local authorities
have hasn't stopped the problems in those areas of responsibility.
Individuals have rights and if government gets too overpowered with laws that
can be used in different applications, it can be a dangerous place to live, with
laws and not a lack of laws. Government isn't to be the end all of our
existence. They are there for the safety and welfare of society not to govern
everything you do. How many times you turn on water, flush the toilet, each
unhealthy snacks, drink too much soda by the size of one drink and not how many
12 ounce cans you drink, etc. We know smoking is unhealthy along with drugs and
alcohol but those are still allowed. People make money on guns, training and
The main reason the NRA and many others are opposed is that we are very worried
about a federal database with names of all gun owners. Confiscation will be the
inevitable result. I don't want my name on a federal registry which will
be there as long as I live.
Who's going to do the background checks?ATF? How much will the
(worthless)background checks cost us? I assume this is the SAME ATF that
watched assault rifles be taken to Mexico for drug lords? Do we REALLY trust
the ATF to keep our personal information confidential?How much
"mental illness" can I have before I lose my 2nd amendment rights?
Aren't my medical files/diagnosis supposed to be confidential?Even if (a big if) the Senate passes background checks, the House for sure
won't go along.The sooner the whole gun control debate stops,
the sooner people will QUIT buying all the guns and ammo they can get their
hands on.Isn't that what the gun control crowd wants?
1 has the unique argument of the day - stop any and every attempt to regulate
gun sales and ownership, and that will cause people to stop wanting to buy them.
Has this little anti-marketing ploy actually worked for anything else? What
could we try it with? Somehing that doesn't kill or wound people, perhaps?
"The main reason the NRA and many others are opposed is that we are very
worried about a federal database with names of all gun owners. Confiscation will
be the inevitable result."This argument is made a lot, but
there's a huge gap between registering weapons and confiscation, based on a
number of large assumptions that are anything but clear. Can anyone explain all
of the "inevitable" steps that lead to confiscation? "I
don't want my name on a federal registry which will be there as long as I
live."Do you pay federal taxes? Have a SSN? Own a passport?
Ever served in the military? Ever been fingerprinted by federal law
enforcement? Registered with the Selective Service? A 'yes' answer
to any one of these questions means that ship has sailed.
@The Skeptical ChymistBefore we has all these gun laws, and
background checks,everyone had guns, children even took them
to school, and they did not have all these problems,So
clearly, to any reasonable person, it is the person.We need more
education in morals, values, and principles, more help for those with mental
problems,not more laws and regulations that only hurt the good
There's a pattern here. In a close vote,-the liberals will get their way.
Res Novae,If you don't think background checks will lead to a
registry of gun owners, oyu are incredibly naive.
Will some one please explain to me why in other countries where there are fewer
guns there is less gun violence and why is that bad?
"If you don't think background checks will lead to a registry of gun
owners, you are incredibly naive."We have had background checks
for many years now for gun sales by licensed gun dealers.Has there
been a "registry of gun owners" from those checks?There are
lots of things that are possible that will never happen.I think it
is naive to think that Americans would collectively allow guns to ever be
confiscated.I give the American people much more credit than that.
About two weeks ago, we came four votes away from the United States Senate
giving our Constitutional rights over to the United Nations. In a 53-46 vote,
the senate narrowly passed a measure that will stop the United States from
entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.
I'd love the part about a concealed carry permit being acceptable in all 50