How Do Background Checks Prevent Normal Citizens From Getting Guns?

Yup, because all criminals make guns just magically appear whenever they want one...
If the loopholes were closed that make it easy for criminals to get guns, there would be fewer criminals with guns. It's not that hard a concept, try to keep up.

No evidence of a cold war? How about the fact that you believe you need a firearm to protect yourself from "THEM" because THEY might have a firearm?
Sounds an awful lot like the Cold War to me...

None, which is why I don't live in fear of becoming "a victim". Only one of us has expressed that paranoia.

 

Sounds like you should move into a bunker before society totally collapses...

 

Yeah, go mock the people who lived through it. You people really don't care about anyone else do you?

 

Yup, because crime is real low in countries that have lots of unregulated guns...
Can you provide a source illustrating that the per capita crime rate has increased in countries without guns?

Because, 60 years ago, everyone was taught how to use one! That's what I'm proposing!

 

Actually all of those people are many times more well informed than you are. I'm sorry, but if I have to choose between a law professor, or some mojo on the internet, I'll go with the law professor.

Not to say that you can make a point.... but you haven't. It's just your personal opinion verses 200 years of constitutional law.

I'm sorry... you are not right on this. You can keep repeating it as many times as you like, it's still wrong. You are wrong. Sorry.

- - - Updated - - -

No, it's because 60 years ago, if you tried committing crimes, you had a good chance of being shot.

Yes, there are dozens. Start with the UK, and the Australia.

 

Cool story. Of course, those 3 lives were also only at risk because the attackers had a gun.

 

But the way they easily get firearms is by either stealing them from people who DO follow the law, or having a friend purchase them from a dealer who follows the law... Not following the law doesn't allow them some magic power to make guns magically appear.

Again, if we could just pass a law to 'make it harder for criminals to get X', then why don't we pass a law to make it harder for criminals to get Heroin? So we have a law controling Heroine, and they are ignoring that. [/QUOTE]
Are you saying that ANYONE who wants heroine knows how to go out and get some right now? I don't think so. The fact is that a small percentage of the population has a 'black market contact' who can supply them with these illegal substances.

Mostly OUT of the US, because guns are rarer in other countries than they are here. Do you have any idea how expensive a black market firearm would be if there weren't so many available? It'd definately be out of the average thug's price range. In the meantime, lawful weapons wouldn't have to change at all.

Seriously? Can you see your average grade school dropout gang banger whipping up a AK on a lathe? They can't even figure out how to use a belt to keep their pants up.

 

Nearly everyone had guns and schools even had shooting clubs because you had a good chance of getting shot if you tried committing crimes?

You still haven't provided any sources that indicate crime per capita has actually risen in those countries faster than it has here... I wonder why?

- - - Updated - - -

That's funny. A conservative talking to me about caring about others...

 

"How Do Background Checks Prevent Normal Citizens From Getting Guns?"

should we have background checks for religious freedom and freedom of speach too

what possible reasons could the government fail a persons background check for a constitutional right?

 

It is current practice in our republic; only well regulated militias are routinely exempted from State laws regarding gun control that are meant for civil persons who are specifically, unconnected with militia service.

 

And that's wrong. The right of the people to bare arms, means just that. Not, 'as long as they are part of a militia'. They are wrong.

 

No, you had a good chance of getting shot because everyone had a gun. Schools having shooting clubs, is just a fact of the time, not relevant to the point I was making.

Because it's still not relevant. Has no validity to the point that gun control has not been effective. You can keep asking something pointless as many times as you like, it doesn't make it more relevant.

Yeah, because I actually want as many people as possible to be able to defend themselves. You.... do not. You don't care. And further, just a point of fact, conservatives have ALWAYS cared far more about their fellow citizens than leftists ever have. Period.

There will always be someone willing to take advantage of a black market opportunity... just like we can't win the war on drugs, when the black market is so lucrative.

Oh good heaven.... I went to an upper middle class high school. Even there, I knew exactly who to talk to if I wanted pot, heroin, or a gun. The drug dealers often rolled to high school in new cars. I could get anything I wanted. Most people can. When I worked at Columbus Cadillac, owners drove their Caddies into the car wash, and you could find stashes of pot and other nifty things like scales and pipes, all the time.

Supply and Demand. Right now the cost of a black market weapon is higher than the legal weapons, because there is a limited black market. The legal market is too large, so the limited supply of black market weapons makes them expensive.

If you cut the supply of legal weapons, through bans or restrictions, the black market will grow, and as it grows the cost will drop.

As for smuggling guns out of the US, obviously there will be some smuggled from the US, no doubt. But from what I read in the Australia, the number one importer of illegal guns, was from China.

By the way, here's another article from the UK.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...Liverpool-grandfather-exposed-gun-runner.html
This guy setup a gun factory, where they manufactured Uzi's and other fully automatic guns. Of course he was caught. But how many black market gun factories are not getting caught?

Again, the guy above was part of a gang that sold guns. Yes, the gangster kiddies that can't keep their pants up are not going to be making AK-47s. But when there is a black market demand, they will find someone. It's stupid to think they won't.

 

Thanks for randomly bringing it up...

The fact that their crime per capita is not as high as ours isn't relevant to whether or not their crime went down after implementing gun control?! How does that make sense?

And I want them to have less to defend themselves from. People shouldn't have to live in fear.

Whose presidential cantidate basically wrote off 47% of the population again?

Yup, and limiting the number of sources to just these a**holes would make them easier to identify and catch.

What?! If the supply drops, the demand (and price) goes up! Basic economics. Look into it. I wish only the highest eschelon of criminals could afford a black-market firearm.

Probably not as many as there are licensed dealers where a straw purchase can easily be made with today's system...

And it'll only take one of those little kiddies opening his mouth to get that gunmaker put away.

 

It can't be wrong if it is current practice in our republic and bears true witness to our own Second Amendment.

From DC v Heller:

Only well regulated militias of the United States are routinely exempted from State laws regarding gun control due to that literal interpretation of our Second Amendment.

 

You're missing an important point. A gun is an equalizer. A gun can make a 80 year old woman equal(in regards to lethality) to a ripped 200lb 26 year old. Take that gun away and there is no way she would ever be a match for anyone who wished to do her harm. Taking guns out of the equation doesn't change the mentality of the criminal.

 

It can't be wrong? Didn't we have slavery before? For a good number of years, there will people just like you, saying slavery can't be wrong if it is current practice in our republic.

They were wrong then. And the court and you, are wrong now.

 

Again. If you weight 200 lbs, and I weight 300 lbs, and you go on a diet, and a year later you weight 250 lbs. Did your diet work?

"But I weight 50 lbs less than you! So clearly it worked!"

No.... you weight 100 lbs less than me when you started. You have gained weight since going on the diet. Your diet failed.

It did not work. Australia and the UK, had much lower rates of crime BEFORE they implemented gun control. And yes, they *STILL* have lower crime rates after implemented gun control. But their crime rate is HIGHER than before they implemented gun control. It didn't work. The fact it is still a lower crime rate than ours, is irrelevant.

That's your goal. But the actions you want to implement to do that, would do the exact reverse of your goal. People would have more to fear, and more to defend themselves from, if they were not armed, and criminals knew it was safe to terrorize people.

Again, this is exactly what happened in Australia and the UK.

He wrote off trying to convince them to vote for him. He didn't write off caring about them. And he wasn't my candidate anyway. I voted for someone else.

The difference is, my policy would benefit EVERYONE. Even you, and all those like you. The policies that conservatives promote, benefit the entire country. The policies you support would harm everyone. And you don't care, as long as people don't have easy access to weapons.

Which explains why it was so easy to identify and catch all the black market alcohol in the 1920s. Remember how easy it was? It so easy that Al Capone only ran his cartel for a mere decade, and caught on the massive charge of.... tax evasion? For which he spent about 7 years in prison, and that was it. He was released.

And of course we are thankfully having a easy time identifying and catching all those illegal drug smugglers today. So easy in fact, that the US illegal drug market has an estimated $60 Billion dollars a year in revenue. My goodness! Darn good thing those smugglers and dealers are so easy to identify and catch!

And what does price spur? More investment. When the price of corn goes up, more farmers grow corn, to profit from the higher price. When the price of housing went up, more companies were building housing. As more investment goes into production, the price drops. Which is exactly what happened with housing.

Same thing with guns. As supply goes down, and demand goes up, more people are going to get into production. Either by more black market home made guns, or by more guns smuggled into the market from China or where ever.

This will push prices back down. Just like it did in Australia. $100 for a gun on the black market in Australia. Cheaper than a legal gun here in the US.

That's your opinion. There is no evidence to support that claim, or deny it.
And how would you propose to stop straw purchases anyway?

Right, and it only takes one of those little kiddies opening his mouth about Al Capone, to have him put away...... oddly.... it didn't happen. Instead it required over a decade of police work, and even then, they only got him on tax evasion.

 

Why do you believe it is wrong? Our Second Amendment clearly enumerates what is necessary to the security of a free State.

 

We have already discussed this. In order to get to point A: a regulated militia, you must have point B: the right of the people to bare arms must not be infringed.

You don't get to point A, without point B. You have to have point B to have point A.

If someone said, in order to have a long healthy life, one's access to water must not be denied. You would never conclude that one must first have a long healthy life, before they are given access to water. They would die first.

 

Are you familiar with the term "per capita"?

Yeah, Australians are wandering around terrified that they could be shot at any moment... Even though they have only one third as many gun murders PER CAPITA as we do.

Yup, because politicians care about people that they believe won't vote for them...

Your policy? Can you elaborate on what that is?
How would it harm lawful users to undertake training (given that they presumably WANT to fire the weapons they're purchasing)?
How would it harm lawful users to register their firearms, given that registration has been in place in other first-world democracies without leading to confiscation?
How would it harm lawful users to own a gun safe?

Do you know what the annual revenue is for cigarettes alone? You really believe addictive drugs would have LESS revenue if they were legal?

Yup, because the average gangbanger "invests" in guns when prices are low and sell when prices are high...
Seriously, these guys aren't stock brokers.

"or wherever"? Since we're currently the primary source for black market weapons in the rest of the world, I disagree.

According to some teenager on a sensationalised media program who never actually produced a weapon... nice place to base your beliefs.

If firearms were registered to the owner, it would become easy to determine who is purchasing weapons and providing them to criminals. These folks then get charged as an accomplice. Not that complicated.

Seriously? Straw man much?

 

I'm not missing the point that a gun can make a weak person powerful. I'm just saying that "weak" does not mean "innocent".

The easier a crime is to commit, the more likely it is to be committed. Guns make crime easy by making criminals more powerful.

 

Our Second Amendment specifically enumerates what is necessary to the security of a free State.

The people of the several States already have rights in private property which are secured by State Constitutions, including property in the class called Arms.

 

and having one for defense makes defending yourself easier................

 

Yes, it's easier to kill someone and claim "self defense" in the extremely rare event that the circumstance presents inself.
Keeping it easy for criminals to get firearms also makes it easy to convince gullible and/or paranoid folks they need firearms to defend themselves. Why else do you think the firearms industry lobbies right-wing politicians so aggressively that the GOP has shot down a treaty designed to stop weapons from being imported into nations that support terrorism (such as Iran and North Korea), even though it has zero impact on weapons within the US?
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/03/us-arms-treaty-un-idUSBRE95211920130603

 

You starting a new fight?