NRA member and pro-gun guy willing to compromise

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by TOG 6, Nov 30, 2015.

  1. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Getting a CCW permit is not a basic exercise of the right to arms.
    Buying a gun is.
    Thus, the difference.
     
  2. perdidochas

    perdidochas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Messages:
    27,293
    Likes Received:
    4,346
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Has to do with the way the Terrorist Watch list is created. There are no set standards, nor due process involved in creating the Terrorist Watch list. Every other thing that bans a person in the U.S. from exercising a constitutional right involves due process. A HS agent can put you on the terrorist watch list for being on a "prepper" mailing list (and they have done so). That said, under current law and practices, if a person on the Terrorist Watch list tries to buy a gun using the NICS, the FBI is immediately informed. That doesn't stomp on the 5th and 14th amendments like the other proposal does.

    http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-127
     
  3. Bastiats libertarians

    Bastiats libertarians Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2014
    Messages:
    2,042
    Likes Received:
    505
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gun owners have comprised too much already. A ban on heavy weapons should be all we need. Any type of personal firearm should be fine to buy with a NICS check. That is more than sufficient.
     
  4. Alwayssa

    Alwayssa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    Messages:
    32,956
    Likes Received:
    7,587
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Then why did the NRA and the GOP oppose the bill that was pretty straight forward?
     
  5. perdidochas

    perdidochas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Messages:
    27,293
    Likes Received:
    4,346
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    That's because CCL is a subset of gun ownership. The right to own a gun is basic. The privilege to carry a concealed gun in public is not so. It's reasonable to require more out of a person that wants to carry a gun in public than one that just wants a gun in their nightstand for home defense.
     
  6. Alwayssa

    Alwayssa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    Messages:
    32,956
    Likes Received:
    7,587
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Owning a firearm is. CCL is just the modern way on owning a firearm while at the same time getting permission on how to conceal or carry that firearm. It is the same argument used by open carry proponents under the 2a.
     
  7. perdidochas

    perdidochas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Messages:
    27,293
    Likes Received:
    4,346
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Not in FL. A background check is done, but it's a different one (more thorough and more expensive) than the NICS check, as it involves running your fingerprints as well as your name. It's a 90 day process, not the fairly quick NICS process (that is currently required of all guns sold by FFLs). A NICS check from a FFL dealer is free.
     
  8. Alwayssa

    Alwayssa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    Messages:
    32,956
    Likes Received:
    7,587
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And yet, there is a current bill sponsored by a GOP congresswoman from Michigan who wants the same types of lists, and their methodology based on US methodology, to be shared by those countries or risk the visa waiver process for all its citizens of that country. That is very hypocritical by the GOP.
     
  9. perdidochas

    perdidochas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Messages:
    27,293
    Likes Received:
    4,346
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Because there are no set standards for being put on the list, and no due process involved.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Not really. Future immigrants have no rights under the U.S. constitution until they get on U.S. soil.
     
  10. CRUE CAB

    CRUE CAB New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2013
    Messages:
    5,952
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I will not offer up my rights, in exchange for anything.
     
  11. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Doesn't matter -- buying/owning a gun is basic, while carrying is not.

    That you agree to a background checks in order to exercise an expanded version of the right does not in any way necessitate agreement to the same check for the basic version.

    That said, universal background checks are useless as they are unenforceable.
     
  12. Alwayssa

    Alwayssa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    Messages:
    32,956
    Likes Received:
    7,587
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A UBC is a more thorough background check than the NCIC.
     
  13. Alwayssa

    Alwayssa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    Messages:
    32,956
    Likes Received:
    7,587
    Trophy Points:
    113
    i am simply expanding the right that carrying a firearm is just as basic as owning a gun, but with the background check that is required for carrying a firearm in public.
     
  14. perdidochas

    perdidochas Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2008
    Messages:
    27,293
    Likes Received:
    4,346
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Please explain. I thought a UBC was a Universal Background Check, run through NICS (the current requirement for FFLs), but required for all purchases, not just through an FFL.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Interesting that, while pro-gun folks (for the most part) are willing to compromise a bit, the anti-gun folks won't. Until both sides are willing to give a little, there is no compromise.
     
  15. maat

    maat Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2010
    Messages:
    6,911
    Likes Received:
    282
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Not so, carrying is as fundamental a right as buying and owning a gun.
     
  16. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    UBC is a background check done through the NICS for private sales of guns, just like the check when you buy a gun from a dealer.
    ??
     
  17. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    How are they unenforceable?

    - - - Updated - - -

    No it isn't. Which is why you can't carry on a plane, in any federal or state building, or in most schools.
     
  18. maat

    maat Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2010
    Messages:
    6,911
    Likes Received:
    282
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Planes and federal buildings(when properly screening everyone) is understandable and not what I meant. My assertion is that a us citizen, as per the Constitution, should be able to carry arms in public. I can choose not to fly or frequent federal buildings. My problems is with the infringements of licenses, registrations and bans on firearms.
     
  19. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,488
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It is the same thing, expanded to include your wife when you give her a gun.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Never been enforceable for criminals. Nuff said.
     
  20. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Restrictions on carrying serve a public interest. An untrained individual has no business carrying a deadly weapon in public.

    And I say this as a daily carrier
     
  21. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Uh, neither has theft or murder. Terrible argument.
     
  22. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,488
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yet, it answers the question.
     
  23. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, it's a terrible argument.
     
  24. cupAsoup

    cupAsoup Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2015
    Messages:
    7,879
    Likes Received:
    899
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There will never be compromise with gun whackos because their ownership of arms and ordinance is directly tied to their inadequacies and failures in life. The only time compromise would happen is after they sought mental help. However, if the mental help was successful, they would no longer be gun whackos.
     
  25. TOG 6

    TOG 6 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2015
    Messages:
    47,848
    Likes Received:
    19,638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Absent some sort of sting operation it is impossible to prove that any gun was sold after the UBC law is enacted..
    "I bought it from some guy in 2014" << State must prove otherwise

    - - - Updated - - -

    Aside form your ad homs and logical fallacies, I see nothing here.

    I especially do not see where you offer something up for compromise, as per the challenge in the OP.
     

Share This Page