POLL: Would you support or oppose 'universal background checks?'

[Dave Workman]

Would you support or oppose 'universal background checks?'

YES

YES, provided in exchange the state abolishes the pistol registry and record keeping is prohibited, and there are exemptions for CPL holders, transfers between family members, and loans to friends

NO under any circumstances

[pendoreilleadventures]

I know I might get blasted for this but why would it be a bad thing to have a universal background check for firearm purchases? I know it would prevent some folks for bearing arms but in most cases weren't those people not suppose to have guns to begin with??? How many guns get sold at gun shows to felons i bet a lot. 

[baldopepper]

Just my opinion, but I would rather see the legislature do  it than see the referendum if they don't.  I'm guessing the referendum will pass easily (not just my opinion , but also what most polls show) and really embolden them for more stringent laws. I don't think I need to remind anyone of where the votes are in a straight election. I think it's a bad mistake to lobby the legislators to do nothing. 

[Atroxus]

No, I don't think it could be enforced any better than the current laws against selling to ineligible people.

[Special T]

This is NOT a gun issue! It is a TRUST issue!  I don't trust them! IF the state could prove/show that his is an issue, and IF they showed that they were procecuting bad guys to the fullest extent of the law(They arn't currently) then i might consider it.

Do you keep loaning that suposed "friend" of yours money when he has faild to pay you back, after you have loaded him several times and he has failed you?

Point out to me how this state, and its majority leadership has acted that should earn my trust on this issue... THE ONLY reason why we still have decent gun rights in this state is BECAUSE our states founders did NOT trust The FED gov. WE are very fortunate that our state founders spelled out many of our rights (despite them being a natural as breathing) otherwise we would have already fallen like CA or more like OR. 

[pianoman9701]

It's completely unenforceable without maintaining a list of gun owners. This is why I oppose it. I could back gun show checks if the government could guarantee the information would be flushed once the check came back positive. But private sales can't work like that. It's not when the sale is made that's the problem. It's when there's a problem involving that gun. How would the seller be able to prove he'd had a background check pass for the person if all records had been expunged? He wouldn't be able to and it would be his word against a prosecutor.

[DRENALINJUNKIE]

The problem is what does it do. Will it really stop a criminal from getting a gun? Last I checked they don't follow laws we already have.

[Special T]

I'll give you a reason why you shouldn't trust them on this issue. Can you call your local WSP or Sherrif and have them run a serial # on a private sale for you? NOPE! most won't do it!

[Huntboy]

The problem is what does it do. Will it really stop a criminal from getting a gun? Last I checked they don't follow laws we already have.

Nope it won't.

[pendoreilleadventures]

My local sheriff office will run numbers for you. I have had them do it a few times.

[lokidog]

I know I might get blasted for this but why would it be a bad thing to have a universal background check for firearm purchases? I know it would prevent some folks for bearing arms but in most cases weren't those people not suppose to have guns to begin with??? How many guns get sold at gun shows to felons i bet a lot. 

The fault to that idea is that studies have shown that less than 1% of firearms used in crimes are obtained at gun shows, but I guess, if it saves one life....   

[Special T]

My local sheriff office will run numbers for you. I have had them do it a few times.

But its not people from your area pushing this kind of nonsence either. 

[Shooter]

I voted no but might be willing to consider a one for one, universal ID/drivers licence etc. for all living in America and if you don't have one or there's not a record of you, deported back to where ever you came from with a swift kick in the ass that hurts enough that you won't come back. It was confirmed today that the Boston terrorists family has claimed over 100K in free government handouts, I'm a little pissed about this today.

This measure for universal backround checks was all political and will be used as a wedge for the 2014 elections. Their goal is to ban all weapons, don't be fooled by this baby step measure to get to the next bigger step(s) they don't even believe people should hunt, why do those hunters need guns to kill animals when we raise cattle for them..

I say no, punish the criminals and spank bad people hard and leave us alone and work on the big problems facing our country.

[Bofire]

Pianoman has it right. Withput a regestry list this is not enforceable. If they cannot prove who owns the gun now, How can they prove it was sold illegally? There are millions of guns in private ownership no agency anywhere knows who owns what.
Carl

[Gringo31]

I voted no.  It won't stop bad guys from getting guns....period.


I have thought about this a bit and what do you guys think of this?

The "right" to have/own/etc a firearm is given to everyone.  IF you are guilty of a felony, assault, mental status changes etc.....when convicted, you would have your drivers license punched.  You would require to have with you paperwork that says your right to carry, or own has been reinstated (if it was) to get a normal looking license the next time you got a new one.

This way, everyone has the right to keep and bear arms unless you've done something which has removed that right from you.  It would be easy to verify by a quick ID check and no list of gun owners or list of what guns you have would be required. 

This way......its NOT about the guns, but about the people who have them. 

 

Thoughts?