1. 2aHawaii
  2. General Topics
  3. General Discussion
  4. HR8 2019- "universal background checks"
Print
Pages: 1 [2]

HR8 2019- "universal background checks" (Read 10466 times)

changemyoil66

Re: HR8 2019- "universal background checks"
« Reply #20 on: January 11, 2019, 09:40:10 AM »
Cool story, my friend moved to OK and worked late nights in the office sometimes.  Her boss handed her a pistol and said "here you can have this since you work late.  I want you to protect yourself".

OK has no registration and since they did the background check for employment, he knew she had no felonies.

She declined because she is uncomfortable with guns.  She was also freaked out when she saw people in OK open carrying.  But after a few months she didn't even care or notice.  She adjusted.
Logged

groveler

Re: HR8 2019- "universal background checks"
« Reply #21 on: January 11, 2019, 01:10:21 PM »
Quote from: RSN172 on January 11, 2019, 06:56:15 AM
In states that do not require a permit to buy or registration, how would they know if A sold a gun to B in a private sale.  Another stupid law.
Do you really think anybody other than an idiot, registers their guns?
Or asks for permission to buy one?
I'm just curious.
I never violate any constitutional Federal, state or local laws.
Logged

RSN172

Re: HR8 2019- "universal background checks"
« Reply #22 on: January 11, 2019, 01:23:32 PM »
Quote from: groveler on January 11, 2019, 01:10:21 PM
Do you really think anybody other than an idiot, registers their guns?
Or asks for permission to buy one?
I'm just curious.
I never violate any constitutional Federal, state or local laws.
Judging by the success they had in Connecticut and the success they are having in NJ with the magazine ban, I would have to say no.  If you built up a 80%er, rifle or handgun, would you register it?  Don’t answer.  I know we all would because nobody here does anything illegal.
Logged
Happily living in Puna

eyeeatingfish

Re: HR8 2019- "universal background checks"
« Reply #23 on: January 15, 2019, 08:14:42 PM »
Quote from: punaperson on January 11, 2019, 06:26:31 AM
Then you'd be wrong.

They all passed background checks. So, you're wrong again.
What's an "advanced background check"? There is no such thing as part of the bill for "universal background checks"... all it does is make private sales illegal. And of course, as stated above, people who steal guns or otherwise obtain them illegally don't submit to any background check, "advanced" or otherwise, and never will.

How can you say they would have passed a hypothetical background check? The whole thread is around the topic of new "better" background checks, therefore you cannot state with certainty that 100% of them would pass these yet to exist background checks.
Logged

eyeeatingfish

Re: HR8 2019- "universal background checks"
« Reply #24 on: January 15, 2019, 08:31:05 PM »
Quote from: changemyoil66 on January 11, 2019, 08:52:33 AM
Red flags were all over Nick Cruz, but nothing was done. 

And that is their strongest argument for why a "newer better" background system needs to be implemented. Honestly it is a good argument because it hits us either way we respond. If we say current background checks don't work then they get to say that better background checks must be needed. But if we say background checks will never work then they simply say that we are right and therefore guns must be taken away.



Quote
So the million dollar question is how do you prevent something without violating rights (due process)?  Although some states have already violated them due to red flag laws (WA & FL).

You are right, this is the million dollar question and it is a very tough question. It is also where I feel that the gun rights crowd is failing. We seem to just be digging in and I fear we are losing. The 2nd amendment rights are being slowly eroded away and we need to be proactive in proposing real solutions to the problem. I think the liberals are winning because they can point to the NRA and gun rights groups and show that they really have done nothing to address the mental health issues as it relates to background checks. Some NRA spokesman says "the best way to stop a bag guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun" but that doesn't work very well when someone makes a machine gun nest and barricades themself inside while killing dozens of people. We need to address that million dollar question because if we don't we just look like we are refusing the problem.

Now I don't claim to be a genius, I don't have the perfect answer to that question. I know that no system will 100% protect rights and stop these guys at the same time. Now having said that I do think we could do better. I have some rough ideas on a system that could better address the red flags while at the same time be minimally restrictive of our rights. Sometimes information may justify a temporary revocation of rights and when that does happen, the appeals process for the person whose rights were restricted must be very quick. When police arrest someone they have 48 hours to get charges filed. That could be a start for a framework. I will stop there, if we want to have a discussion about gun rights group ideas on a better background check system we can start a separate thread.
Logged

punaperson

Re: HR8 2019- "universal background checks"
« Reply #25 on: January 15, 2019, 08:53:58 PM »
Quote from: eyeeatingfish on January 15, 2019, 08:14:42 PM
How can you say they would have passed a hypothetical background check? The whole thread is around the topic of new "better" background checks, therefore you cannot state with certainty that 100% of them would pass these yet to exist background checks.
:wtf: You're full of shit, or a liar, or just plain stupid... maybe all three.

Where did you get the plainly wrong idea that "The whole thread is around the topic of new "better" background checks"? No, NO it's not. It's about the title of the thread: HR8. Dumbass. Can't you even fucking read? I guess not. On page one of HR8, the bill referenced in the title of this thread, it says that the new law will  "utilize the current background checks process". Can you fucking read it now? Can you comprehend it now? You're just making shit up out of thin air. All this bill does, as I've and others have repeatedly written, is make a now legal private transfer (not in Hawaii of course where it's already illegal) illegal, as a felony. So if a father-in-law lends his daughter-in-law a gun to protect herself from a stalker without going to a gun store and formally transferring it for a nice fee, he is a felon. And, NO, IT'S NOT A "NEW 'BETTER' BACKGROUND CHECK".

I didn't say they would have passed a hypothetical background check, dumbass, I said they passed the existing background check, which is exactly the same background check that will be utilized by HR8 if it passes the House, the Senate, and Trump signs it. You think that criminals that now don't submit to background checks in acquiring firearms are suddenly going to do so in honor of their deep respect for Gabby?

SMH  :wtf:
Logged

Flapp_Jackson

Re: HR8 2019- "universal background checks"
« Reply #26 on: January 15, 2019, 09:25:15 PM »
DOJ: Less than 3 Percent of Nation’s Prisoners Acquired Firearms at Retail Stores, Gun Shows

Quote
A January 2019 Department of Justice report shows fewer than three percent of prisoners who used guns
in crime acquired those guns at retail stores or at a gun show.

The report, titled, “Source and Use of Firearms Involved in Crimes: Survey of Prison Inmates, 2016,” presents
information ascertained via face-to-face interviews with some of the nearly 300,000 prisoners who used a gun
in commission of a crime.

It shows that roughly “1.3 percent of prisoners obtained a gun from a retail source and used it during their
offense.” Only 0.8 percent of prisoners acquired their guns at a gun show.

The vast majority of all criminals–56 percent–stole their guns, acquired them at the scene of a crime, or got them
via the black market.

This information undercuts Democrat claims that expanding background checks will keep us safer.

Politico quoted Rep. Mike Thompson (D-CA) saying universal background check legislation “will help save lives.”
But how will it save lives if less than three percent of criminals acquire their guns at retail or gun show while the
vast majority steal or otherwise acquire them on the side?

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/01/15/doj-less-3-percent-nations-prisoners-acquired-firearms-retail-gun-shows/
Logged
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world;
the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.
Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
-- George Bernard Shaw

changemyoil66

Re: HR8 2019- "universal background checks"
« Reply #27 on: January 15, 2019, 11:01:28 PM »
EEF, we have a mental health problem disguised as a gun problem.

How many active shooters had pharma drugs in their system. Once you do sufficient research about that, follow the money...

Look at that guy in his undies in Ross with the knife. He was released and deamed not crazy, then killed someone the next day. Because sane people go into Ross in their undies all the time.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Logged

eyeeatingfish

Re: HR8 2019- "universal background checks"
« Reply #28 on: January 24, 2019, 06:57:55 PM »
Quote from: punaperson on January 15, 2019, 08:53:58 PM
:wtf: You're full of shit, or a liar, or just plain stupid... maybe all three.

Where did you get the plainly wrong idea that "The whole thread is around the topic of new "better" background checks"? No, NO it's not.

Gosh, do you even read the thread? The post talked about a bill Gabby Gifford is planning on introducing. It hasn't been passed, it hasn't become law, hence it is a hypothetical.
Since you missed it apparently, I used quotation marks to illustrate they claim it to be a better system, not that I actually think it will be a better system. It is a bit of what we call sarcasm.


Quote
I didn't say they would have passed a hypothetical background check, dumbass, I said they passed the existing background check, which is exactly the same background check that will be utilized by HR8 if it passes the House, the Senate, and Trump signs it. You think that criminals that now don't submit to background checks in acquiring firearms are suddenly going to do so in honor of their deep respect for Gabby?

Apparently I have to post your own statement for you to read....  :wtf:

You piggy backed on changemyoil's statement that Gabby's bill would not have prevented her from being shot by saying
"Nor any other victim of a "mass public shooting" in the 21st century."

Now I am going to spell this out for you since you seem to have trouble following.
1. You are making a blanket statement about dozens/hundreds of incidences
2. The bill Gabby proposed does not yet exist as law
3. You are making an affirmative statement that this yet to exist law would not have caught a single individual.

Now maybe I am making a foolish assumption, maybe you have researched each mass shooting over the past 19 years, and maybe you tracked each gun and confirmed that none of the guns used in any of these shootings were ever sold to someone who would have failed a background check but I am betting you haven't.

Logged

eyeeatingfish

Re: HR8 2019- "universal background checks"
« Reply #29 on: January 24, 2019, 07:34:13 PM »
Quote from: changemyoil66 on January 15, 2019, 11:01:28 PM
EEF, we have a mental health problem disguised as a gun problem.

How many active shooters had pharma drugs in their system. Once you do sufficient research about that, follow the money...

Look at that guy in his undies in Ross with the knife. He was released and deamed not crazy, then killed someone the next day. Because sane people go into Ross in their undies all the time.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Well yes and no. Our gun violence problem isn't limited to mental people shooting up random crowds but I do agree that when it comes to most of these mass shootings that it is a mental health problem.

I think that it is very important that we as a gun rights crowd try to do something so address that mental health otherwise we will continue to lose gun rights because it looks like we ignoring the problem instead of trying to solve it. We can't continuously say "that won't work".

The pharma question is a difficult one because often it remains unknown if the pharmaceuticals were the cause or the symptom. Was the killer murderous because of medications or was he on the medications because of his murderous thoughts? And the answer can be different for different medications.

The hard question that I think the gun rights crowd shies away from is when and how shall a mental diagnosis and/or use of certain medications disqualify someone (permanently or temporarily) from owning firearms. The second question is how to ensure that the system is able to screen transactions to the point that it can catch a significant number of these individuals.


I have a few ideas for a framework but they need a bit of work. I do keep thinking about how to bring it to an elected representative but the process is a little daunting.
Logged

changemyoil66

Re: HR8 2019- "universal background checks"
« Reply #30 on: January 24, 2019, 08:23:08 PM »
Its not a hard question. Majority of active shootings happen in gun free zones. So do Way and maybe a good guy with a gun can reduce the deaths.

Shortly after the batman shooting, a mall shooting also happened in OR. Good guy with a gun stopped it. Guess how much media attention it got?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Logged

eyeeatingfish

Re: HR8 2019- "universal background checks"
« Reply #31 on: January 25, 2019, 07:54:21 PM »
Quote from: changemyoil66 on January 24, 2019, 08:23:08 PM
Its not a hard question. Majority of active shootings happen in gun free zones. So do Way and maybe a good guy with a gun can reduce the deaths.

Shortly after the batman shooting, a mall shooting also happened in OR. Good guy with a gun stopped it. Guess how much media attention it got?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Three reasons I don't think we should put all our eggs in that one basket:
1. It relies on a good guy with a gun being in the right place at the right time. Now of course sometimes this happens and when it does the casualties certainly decrease but statistically speaking there are still going to be times when there just isn't a good guy with a gun. In a shopping mall there are better odds but in a school the odds are much lower.
2. There will always be gun free zones. Places like bars, courthouses, etc. But I also don't see any evidence that a lack of gun free zones would deter these shooters, these people are often on a suicide mission. Of course they choose easier targets like schools but we have no reason to believe that they would simply give up if they couldn't find a gun free zone.
3. The good guy with a gun is a reactive response to the problem, not a pro-active one. It serves to reduce the body count but not to prevent the incident. Nothing wrong with reactive solutions but they shouldn't be the only answer.

There are also a number of examples where a good guy with a gun could really do nothing to stop the bad guy with the gun. The most notable would be the Las Vegas shooting. Note that I am not knocking on a good guy with a gun idea, I like it and I want to see it in Hawaii but it cannot be our only solution.

To add to the importance of being proactive, it is only a matter of time until someone thinks of a different way to cause mass casualties and once successful you will see copy cats. In fact I can think of a number of very violent means these crazies could rack up large body counts even without guns and in ways the good guy with a gun would simply be ineffective. I won't share them because I don't want to give anyone ideas but that is why I think we need proactive responses and not just reactive.
Logged
Print
Pages: 1 [2]
« previous next »