Posted on 02/16/2019 10:53:24 AM PST by rktman
If you’re terrified of guns, or if you want all power to collect and reside in the hands of “the authorities,” then background checks are not the wrong thing. Background checks are a tool for control over the population. But they don’t control crime. They don’t even address crime. Democrats know this, or should.
These checks are something the organizers of this free country could not even imagine, much less sanction. Your acquisition of power (firearms) is supposed to stand totally apart from government reach. But that’s philosophical, too deep for many modern citizens. It’s hopelessly arcane for typical public school or even recent college grads.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
February 15, 2019 Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you all for being here for this historic occasion for our families and our state. There are so many people to thank, without whom today would not be possible. I want to start by thanking Majority Leader Atkinson, Speaker Frierson, and all those in the Legislature who helped get this bill to my desk. I want to thank the constitutional officers who joined me in testifying at Tuesday’s hearing in an effort to ensure the will of the voters is finally implemented with this law on the books. I also want to thank the volunteers, activists, moms, dads, students, educators, and organizations across the state who have spent years advocating for policies to address gun violence. We owe today’s victory to you – without your steady activism and demand for our state to do better, we could not be here today. And, most importantly, I want to thank the survivors of gun violence who, over the last several years and especially this week, have displayed such courage in telling their stories. I cannot begin to fathom the pain you feel as a survivor of gun violence, and I cannot begin to match the bravery you’ve displayed as you turned your sorrow into action. Thank you from the bottom of my heart. The bill I’m about to sign is a long-overdue, common-sense measure that will make Nevada safer and has the power to save lives from gun violence. We have already lost too many lives across the country to guns. With this bill, we are taking an important step to address the nationwide public health crisis that is gun violence, and we are making our children and families safer here at home by making it harder for potentially dangerous individuals to access a firearm. But that’s not all we’re doing today. In addition to being sensible policy, this bill is, in effect, the will of the voters cemented into law. In November 2016, the majority of Nevadans made it clear they wanted us to do more to address gun violence – but for the 829 days since, they’ve been ignored. That finally changes today. To all of you in this room, and to the majority of Nevadans who voted for this in 2016, I’m so happy to tell you that the wait is finally over. So without further ado, it’s my great pleasure and highest honor to sign this bill into law!
Pro gun folks were basically ignored at the meeting. Of course this completely ignores there will be negligible results here as well when it comes to "gun violence". But, they don't care. Thank you gov sissiepants.
9 months to stock up!
Hmmmm. Storage locker some obscure location?
One possibility. That said it is an unenforceable law.
Uh, what ‘law’? LOL!
Just having background checks in place may provide a deterrent factor that reduces the number of prohibited persons from attempting to purchase from a gun store.
I get that the Second Amendment is my concealed carry permit, and I get shall not be infringed, but I find it intellectually disingenuous to argue against background checks, but argue for voter ID.
However, I also do not think that so-called "universal background checks" do anything in deterring or preventing criminals from obtaining firearms, but further burden only the law abiding.
I'm not sure what the answer is, short of an out-and-out firearm owner ID card like the states of New York, Illinois, and a few others require.
The whole system is based on false premises.
Gun control is people control. It is also class warfare against citizens who vote against gun control.
Citizens with guns are a brake upon the march of socialism.
Yes. The no-fly list. Who can add to it? Who can make corrections?
A government worker can add your name to the list. Then you can’t buy a gun. You have no recourse.
Last year’s version, the one that required the FBI to do the check. The FBI refused, making the law unenforceable.
Since there are no states where you can buy a gun from a gun store or have it delivered to your home from an online purchase without any sort of background check, there is no real way to prove or disprove the premise that all background checks are ineffective in reducing crime.
The only studies that have been done are comparing crime rates before "universal background checks" are put in place, and afterwards.
Those studies do prove the futility of requiring background checks on face-to-face purchases, but say nothing about the effectiveness of background checks on gun store and online purchases, which account for 90% of gun sales.
I am not saying that all background checks are good, or bad. I'm just saying that there is no way to gather the data to prove one or the other.
***Background checks have no measurable effect on crime. ***
Forty years ago Tulsa and Oklahoma City required handgun purchasers to have fingerprints taken. In Tulsa, it was done in the store, in OKC you had to go down to the police station to have it done.
This was “to prevent crime”. After years of having my fingers covered with black dye, they realized the law had NEVER solved or prevented a crime, so it was finally discarded.
You're arguing the wrong point.
The question is not whether background checks reduce crime.
The question is whether the government has the constitutional authority to impose background checks. See United States Constitution, Amendment II.
.
“shall not be infringed.”
Background checks are a very mild barrier intended to raise the cost and dissuade law-abiding people from acquiring firearms. They work fairly well for their true purpose.
According to news, the Aruora shooter was a convicted felon that had his right to own a firearm revoked but the authorities failed to confiscate the gun he bought while he still had permit. The government is great in passing laws then only enforcing them on law abiding citizens.
- but I find it intellectually disingenuous to argue against background checks, but argue for voter ID. -
ok I’ll bite...
Remember the Vegas shooting, police knew by the next day how many guns the shooter owned and that he had passed background checks to purchase them all.
How do you suppose they knew that fast? Probably within 8 hours, the public announcement was the next day I think.
Background check. Federal database of background checks, available to police on short notice at any time. Every background check done since they were started, the government has a record of it in the form of an easily searchable database.
This is why Democrats want universal background checks. They know within a few years, this database would include nearly every gun in the US, since they would naturally insist on a background check when grandpa wants to pass his civil war relic on to you in his will. That makes the background check database the equivalent of a national gun registry.
Notice you don’t see Democrats screaming for a national gun registry too? That’s why. Universal background checks is a disguised gun registry. Once they get it, they have a database of gun owners. No need for a gun registry, the background check database serves the same purpose.
Dylan Roof killed several people in a church, police knew he passed a background check and used a legally purchased gun before the day was over. Shooter at the Florida school, same thing, we knew in a few hours he used legally purchased guns. Pick your mass shooting, every one I’m aware of in the past 10 years or so, the police knew in a matter of hours the shooter used legally purchased guns.
Background check database, that’s why. I just heard a report about the shooter yesterday in Illinois, he had a state gun owner card, despite having a felony record, legally purchased his gun, but was denied a carry permit. (I missed part of it, not sure of the details) At least one felony, several arrests or incidents with police in Aurora, felony was in Mississippi I think they said, I think it was assault.
That’s why I don’t like background checks, in addition to the strong indication that it does nothing to prevent or reduce crime. That’s because most criminals buy guns on the black market, I’m surprised this guy in Illinois did buy one legally. That’s an unusual case.
Voter ID is another story entirely, the main purpose there is to try and prevent non citizens from voting, which is an increasing problem. Democrats are against it because they want as many non citizens as possible to vote...for Democrats of course...
I’m certainly all for voter ID, and all against background checks because that database can easily become a gun registry - already has - and it has little or no affect on crime.
They demand backgound checks for all, including private sales or to family.
They are against background checks by landlords to check out potential problem tenants.
What makes more sense?
Possibly even “loaning”a weapon to a neighbor so he can take it hunting. As far as not letting the guy in the next lane at the range take a couple shots with your weapon?
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.