23 Proposals?

[lawrocket 3]

Get you've hit two of them.
(1) Universal background check for anyone trying to buy a gun, aka, "Creating a black market" and
(2) Restore assault weapons ban and 10 round limit on magazines

"Ask your Congressman what's more important?" The Constitution, Mr. President.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[GeorgiaDon 362]

So you even oppose background checks?

Can you name even one measure you could support that doesn't involve making this country even more of an armed camp than it already is?

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[billvon 2,990]

I like the universal background check and increased penalties for illegal arms dealers. I don't like the magazine limit or assault weapon ban.

[regulator 0]

I'd be willing to add closing the loophole for unrestricted purchases without background checks on private sales (ie gunshows). But if an actual ban occurs which will probably start as a registration and suddenly escalate to confiscation this country could erupt in civil war. And if there are 88 fireams in this country per 100 people then yes this could turn out to happen. I hope it doesnt. Should find out soon in around 30 minutes or so.

[ianmdrennan 2]

Quote

I like the universal background check and increased penalties for illegal arms dealers. I don't like the magazine limit or assault weapon ban.

I agree. I don't see much point in regulating clip size, or "assault weapons".

I do believe the gunshow loophole should be closed though.

Ian

Performance Designs Factory Team

[jclalor 12]

I thought he was suppose to issue an executive order to confiscate all guns?

I'm guessing that the background check will pass, there will be a good fight over large magazines and they will never get the assault weapons ban reinstated.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

I like the universal background check and increased penalties for illegal arms dealers. I don't like the magazine limit or assault weapon ban.

I agree. I don't see much point in regulating clip size, or "assault weapons".

I do believe the gunshow loophole should be closed though.

Ian

What gun show loophole?

[wmw999 2,442]

On the "gunshow loophole", one thing I've heard proposed in the past was to have certified buyers or something like that. This would be pre-done background checks that would allow holders to buy guns at shows without waiting periods or new background checks.

Kind of like the "safe entry" programs or whatever they call them for streamlining the security lines at airports.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[billvon 2,990]

>What gun show loophole?

People can sell guns at a gun show without a background check - and thus it is an excellent place for a criminal to obtain a weapon illegally.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

>What gun show loophole?

People can sell guns at a gun show without a background check - and thus it is an excellent place for a criminal to obtain a weapon illegally.

False. Anytime a citizen purchases a gun from a dealer, he must submit to a background check. Gun shows are no exception.

[jclalor 12]

Quote

But if an actual ban occurs which will probably start as a registration and suddenly escalate to confiscation this country could erupt in civil war. And if there are 88 fireams in this country per 100 people then yes this could turn out to happen. I hope it doesnt. Should find out soon in around 30 minutes or so.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

But if an actual ban occurs which will probably start as a registration and suddenly escalate to confiscation this country could erupt in civil war. And if there are 88 fireams in this country per 100 people then yes this could turn out to happen. I hope it doesnt. Should find out soon in around 30 minutes or so.

Can you let us know when the 30 minutes is up, if there's a civil war I think I may call in sick tonight.

[killler 2]

That would make sense...

When I bought my sig 522 rifle they did the back round check and I had to wait till the next day to get it..

I was standing at the counter with my hi-power locked and load in the small of my back, Being a CW permit holder for 30yrs... We had a good laugh at least...

Killler

[regulator 0]

You couldnt see it through your rose colored glasses.

[quade 4]

Quote

Get you've hit two of them.
(1) Universal background check for anyone trying to buy a gun, aka, "Creating a black market" and
(2) Restore assault weapons ban and 10 round limit on magazines

"Ask your Congressman what's more important?" The Constitution, Mr. President.

We're you just guessing when you wrote this or can you cite the number of the proposal that bans assault weapons?

Because it sure as hell ain't the second one.

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/16/obama-to-announce-gun-control-proposals-shortly/?hpt=hp_c1

What you're talking about is NOT part of the 23 Executive Orders, but a request to Congress. It's going through completely Constitutional procedures.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[jclalor 12]

Quote

False. Anytime a citizen purchases a gun from a dealer, he must submit to a background check. Gun shows are no exception.

[regulator 0]

I'm agreement on this one. But my question is that since the 23 items were listed...and seemed reasonable why couldnt he do that through congress as well?

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

>What gun show loophole?

People can sell guns at a gun show without a background check - and thus it is an excellent place for a criminal to obtain a weapon illegally.

You would be more successful calling it the Craigs List loophole as avoidance of background checks is only available when purchasing through a private party.

This would mean that if your brother wanted to give you a gun, he would be required to take the gun to a licensed firearms dealer and have him process the sale for a fee and then the dealer would perform a background check on you. Then you would be required to register the firearm before taking possession.

[jclalor 12]

Quote

A better strategy would be to buy a gun.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

False. Anytime a citizen purchases a gun from a dealer, he must submit to a background check. Gun shows are no exception.

Anytime someone buys a firearm from a NON-LICENSED DEALER at a gun show, or anywhere else, no background check.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Anytime someone buys a firearm from a NON-LICENSED DEALER at a gun show, or anywhere else, no background check.

so it has nothing to do with "gun shows"

I wonder why they choose to call it that? Why is the implied lie such a popular term?

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

A better strategy would be to buy a gun.

I never have bought a gun in my life, I do have a .308 savage, 20 gauge shotgun, and a revolver that my Grandfather gave me.

[billvon 2,990]

>Anytime a citizen purchases a gun from a dealer, he must submit to a background
>check. Gun shows are no exception.

I didn't say "gun dealer." You can show up at a gun show with some handmade belt buckles, some fancy holsters and some guns. You can then sell the belt buckles to some Texans, sell the fancy holsters to some gun club and sell the guns to convicted murderers. And you will have done nothing wrong - at least, legally.

That's why gun shows are a great place for criminals to get weapons. Take in your cash, carry out your gun.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

This would mean that if your brother wanted to give you a gun, he would be required to take the gun to a licensed firearms dealer and have him process the sale for a fee and then the dealer would perform a background check on you. Then you would be required to register the firearm before taking possession.

and watch the fees for an FFL transaction skyrocket

clearly closing the 'private transaction allowance' is racist and elitist. If they do this, I think a new tax on yachts will be needed so the government can pay the FFL fees for the underprivileged.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Remster 30]

Quote

I'm agreement on this one. But my question is that since the 23 items were listed...and seemed reasonable why couldnt he do that through congress as well?

When was the last time something that seemed reasonable made it through congress?

Remster