Wow. Used to blanket opposition but there is some room for agreement. But, then, despite noting the comments of critics of private seller access to the NICS, I never understood why a voluntary BC system was not allowed while keeping the current FFL requirements in place. These days I provide services to an FFL so I have immediate, free access to some that can do a BC for me, but I haven’t sold a gun in quite some time. Prior to that, I once had a collection of over 60 guns that I liquidated over the space of about a year and a half. I, like many, if not most gun owners I know, had no interest in selling a gun to someone that was prohibited from owning one. For each sale, with the exception of my black powder pieces, I required current identification which I made photo copies or had the buyer provide copies and required a signed statement attesting the buyer was no prohibited from owning a gun, and I retained these and details of the transaction, along with photos and serial numbers of each gun sold. I still retain those records. In addition, I had my own subtle interview means to further assess a buyer and I verified information on the identification provided. During that time, I turned down two sales because a buyer raised red flags in my mind. I have always objected to the opinion that I should have paid a fee to an FFL for a BC but did sell two guns out of state, both transferred for me by an FFL to an FFL; one costing $25 and the other $40, something that would still be required even with a voluntary BC system. Had I had access to the NICS then, I would have definitely used it... I think most law abiding gun owners would do the same if they had easy and ready access to the NCIS. Even then, I would still have retained the details of ever transfer for my records. Opening the NICS to private sellers has always seemed a no brained to me.
Aside from universal registration and forcing sales through FFLs which requires a fee for which the majority of gun owners will oppose, what does ‘better’ mean?
why do you support a law that cannot even be used to prosecute a person banned from owning a gun? Registration is designed to facilitate confiscation.
Now now now.....we all know that is not true and you are just making it up. Lots of places have registration and have not had large scale confiscations
And lots places have. The lefties in this country have proventime and time again they can’t be trusted, so many of us assign no credibility to the notion of benevolent registration. Even you when posting you’d have no issue with opening the NCIS to private sellers for conducting voluntary background check you then backtracked. Trust in your assessment... ah....nah.
lots of people who chain smoke don't die of lung cancer either. and I am correct about the registration laws being unable to prosecute felons. That pesky fifth amendment
that's not a valid argument. it is like saying five out of six times, you won't lose in Russian Roulette so its mostly safe to play.
we know that if you want to harass honest gun owners-you push for gun control. that is undisputed. claiming gun control (a term you really never explain or tie to low deaths-the stuff you CLAIM you want-UBGCs and registration doesn't do anything useful) lowers deaths is worthless
want freedom? want citizens able to resist violent felons? reject gun control. want to harass honest gun owners-PUSH GUN CONTROL
only if you use them on public roads. I have no problem with people having CCW permits to carry concealed on public streets. Again, your car analogy crashes
Oh please you have to be registered to vote....oh wait no other right makes me register to exercise a right....I want my freeeeeeeeeedom!!!! LOL
you continue to pretend that as long as a stupid law doesn't bother YOU then the law is valid. That is a bogus position to take. laws that don't accomplish anything useful and are unconstitutional are still invalid even if the harm they visit on the citizenry doesn't rise high enough to offend anti gun advocates
show us the specific laws that save lives combined with the evidence supporting your claim. You use the generic term "gun control laws" but never demonstrate which ones save lives. Now if you mean locking criminals up when they commit violent crimes-that does save lives. Nonsense like registration does not. So until you actually show us which specific laws you are referencing, combined with evidence pertaining to that SPECIFIC law, then we cannot tell if your claims are correct.
