The Devil's in the details. (Reply #1)

In the discussion thread: This message was self-deleted by its author [View all]

Thu Sep 1, 2016, 02:41 PM

1. The Devil's in the details.

In NC I can loan my brother or friend a rifle for hunting season. In NY by letter of the law a background check must be done. Seems a little anal retentive. What happens at the trap range if my shotgun breaks down, do I really need a background check to borrow one?

Unfortunately there seems to be no compromise or latitude for discussion.

Who's going to enforce background checks on gang members?

I think the solution is a two level approach, a FOID card or hunting license for long guns and a national CCW license for handguns. Documentation and certification would include firearm safety and storage.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

41 replies	Author	Time	Post
This message was self-deleted by its author [View all]	Mosby	Sep 2016	OP
The Devil's in the details.	JonathanRackham	Sep 2016	#1
Apparently all you have to do to is be a anti-gun preacher.	oneshooter	Sep 2016	#10
Yes, it's one of the exemptions.	Straw Man	Sep 2016	#11
Which version of "Universal Background Checks"?	DonP	Sep 2016	#2
OT: side question	discntnt_irny_srcsm	Sep 2016	#3
Some of them already know the results they want before they draft the questions n/t	DonP	Sep 2016	#4
And, in addition...	discntnt_irny_srcsm	Sep 2016	#5
Create your own scary definition ... to support our prejudice.	DonP	Sep 2016	#6
The survey places I've worked for and been involved with...	discntnt_irny_srcsm	Sep 2016	#8
Add that registration will be a part of it (so called UBC) and see how it polls.	beevul	Sep 2016	#7
Correction.	Straw Man	Sep 2016	#9
how is it a myth?	Mosby	Sep 2016	#12
rhetorical shorthands are buzzwords are propaganda	gejohnston	Sep 2016	#13
"Weapons of war", "weapons meant for war", "weapons meant for the battlefield".	beevul	Sep 2016	#14
whats "assault-style weapons"	Duckhunter935	Sep 2016	#16
They have no clue what a "weapon of war" is..	virginia mountainman	Sep 2016	#17
not really	Duckhunter935	Sep 2016	#15
Here's how.	Straw Man	Sep 2016	#18
so what? I couldn't care less about the way gun shows are percieved	Mosby	Sep 2016	#21
What evidence is there, that private sales are a problem in need of a solution?	beevul	Sep 2016	#24
you don't support background checks on principle?	Mosby	Sep 2016	#25
I support private property rights on principle, so I'll ask you again...	beevul	Sep 2016	#27
can't answer the question?	Mosby	Sep 2016	#28
I asked you first.	beevul	Sep 2016	#29
"who do you support?"	beergood	Sep 2016	#34
Would that support change if they tell you registration is included? N/T	beevul	Sep 2016	#35
i live in CA	beergood	Sep 2016	#36
Obviously.	Straw Man	Sep 2016	#30
"the "gun show loophole" language is rhetorical shorthand or private party to party gun sales."	pablo_marmol	Sep 2016	#19
I think gun shows should be banned in the US	Mosby	Sep 2016	#22
Actually, they aren't brave	gejohnston	Sep 2016	#23
Great suggestion	mainstreetonce	Sep 2016	#26
If only social policy was based on 'feelings' rather than facts?!	pablo_marmol	Sep 2016	#39
Why?	Straw Man	Sep 2016	#31
"I 'think' gun shows should be banned in the US."	pablo_marmol	Sep 2016	#32
less guns, less death.	Mosby	Sep 2016	#37
"less guns, less death." Unproven according to at least 3 liberal criminologists.	pablo_marmol	Sep 2016	#38
".......which is why I avoid it."	pablo_marmol	Sep 2016	#40
get a grip.	Mosby	Sep 2016	#41
I have a slightly different take on the issus you raise...	Eleanors38	Sep 2016	#20
My nomination for Thread Winner.	pablo_marmol	Sep 2016	#33

Edit History

Please login to view edit histories.