Posted on 04/18/2013 10:20:25 AM PDT by Puppage
Do you support universal background checks on gun buyers?
NO!!!
No background checks ever.
You beat me to the post! I was going to say, the poll did not have a “hell no” vote!
61% no,39%yes
Do you support universal background checks on gun buyers?
Yes 38%
No 61%
Total Votes: 1,227
Do you support universal background checks on political candidates?
Do you support universal background checks on gun buyers?
Yes
38%
No
61%
Total Votes: 1,280
No, but I support universal background checks for candidates for national office, and state office for that matter.
Where is the “F*ck NO!” button?
Yes
31%
No
68%
Total Votes: 2,171
(just now)
How about, "Do you support prosecution of those attempting to purchase guns illegally?"
I know that the BATF and the Obama Administration have already voted "No" on this one.
Alert: Universal Background Checks Explained
Now that I'm an "expert" on universal background checks, I have a major problem with the following statements from the referenced page.
It is ALREADY a federal felony to be engaged in the business of buying and selling firearms, for livelihood and profit, without having a federal (emphases added) firearm dealers license.It is ALREADY a crime for a federally licensed dealer to sell (emphases added) a gun without doing a background check – that's all dealers, everywhere, including at retail stores, gun shows, flea markets or anywhere else.
Further, it is ALREADY a federal felony for any private person to sell (emphases added), trade, give, lend, rent or transfer a gun to a person you know or should have known is not legally allowed to own, purchase or possess a firearm.
My problem with federal government regulatation of intrastate firearms sales is the following. When Thomas Jefferson and James Madison had a major disagreement with Alexander Hamilton because Hamilton wanted Congress to establish a national bank without having the Article I, Section 8 authority to do so, Jefferson had clarified the limits of Congress's Commerce Clause powers as follows. Using terms like "does not extend" and "exclusively," Jefferson had noted that Congress has no business sticking its big nose into intrastate commerce. (I've previously posted the following excerpts in related threads.)
“For the power given to Congress by the Constitution does not extend to the internal regulation of the commerce of a State, (that is to say of the commerce between citizen and citizen,) which remain exclusively (emphases added) with its own legislature; but to its external commerce only, that is to say, its commerce with another State, or with foreign nations, or with the Indian tribes.” –Thomas Jefferson, Jefferson’s Opinion on the Constitutionality of a National Bank : 1791.
Also, since some liberals wrongly argue that no interpretation of the Constitution from anybody but a (an activist) justice counts, Justice John Marshall had seemingly reflected on Jefferson's words about Congress's limited Commerce Clause powers as evidenced by the following excerpt.
"State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress (emphases added)." --Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
Given that neither Jefferson or Marshall explicitily indicated that firearms sales are an exception to Congress's limited Commerce Clause powers, the way that I read both excerpts is the following. Simply put, federal laws which regulate such intrastate sales are constitutionally indefensible. I've never seen these laws, but I wouldn't be surprised if such laws appeared in the books during or after the FDR era when Congress and the Oval Office began blatantly ignoring Congress's Section 8-limited powers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.