Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Is this "the" case for requiring private gun sales background checks?
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="abajaj11" data-source="post: 2135669" data-attributes="member: 3553"><p>The problem is that, IMHO, it is impossible to monitor a system that requires/mandates that <strong>all</strong> sales undergo a background check, without knowing who owns what already. Otherwise how would anyone even know that a sale had taken place?</p><p>If we are just relying on the goodness of the seller to do a background check, then that is impractical from a legal enforcement standpoint. </p><p>The only solution is a database of who owns what. </p><p>Otherwise, we can all just accept that UBCs will not prevent crimes, and move on. </p><p>Also, the <em>"even if one life were saved...</em>" argument that liberals put forward is totally hoaky IMHO. This is similar to saying that <strong>we should monitor and control burger and fries consumption in the USA, even if one life can be saved from it. </strong></p><p><strong></strong>. Should government be allowed to monitor food intake and the amount we exercise, so that some lives may be saved? You'll be surprised how many progressives will say yes! </p><p><img src="/images/smilies/smile.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="abajaj11, post: 2135669, member: 3553"] The problem is that, IMHO, it is impossible to monitor a system that requires/mandates that [B]all[/B] sales undergo a background check, without knowing who owns what already. Otherwise how would anyone even know that a sale had taken place? If we are just relying on the goodness of the seller to do a background check, then that is impractical from a legal enforcement standpoint. The only solution is a database of who owns what. Otherwise, we can all just accept that UBCs will not prevent crimes, and move on. Also, the [I]"even if one life were saved...[/I]" argument that liberals put forward is totally hoaky IMHO. This is similar to saying that [B]we should monitor and control burger and fries consumption in the USA, even if one life can be saved from it. [/B]. Should government be allowed to monitor food intake and the amount we exercise, so that some lives may be saved? You'll be surprised how many progressives will say yes! :) [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Is this "the" case for requiring private gun sales background checks?
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom