Poll: 92 percent of gun owners support universal background checks

"Ninety-two percent of voters, including 92 percent of gun owners and 86 percent of Republicans, support background checks prior to all gun sales, according to a new poll from Quinnipiac University."
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...un-owners-support-universal-background-checks

I think that I could find some common ground if I sat down with the average gun owner and had a discussion about gun control. That, however, seems impossible here. Online discussions tend to attract people who feel very strongly about an issue and those people often have extreme views.

 

You and countless others have been informed, time and time again, that these supposed universal background checks are unenforceable without a corresponding universal registration of every last firearm in existence, to prove who owns what at any given time. Without one the other exists only in theory, but carries no weight, will go unenforced, will go ignored, and there will be no prosecutions who those who decide to not carry out a background check in the first place.

Ask these supposed voters how many of them would support the mandatory registration of every firearm in the united states with the federal government, and the answers given will be vastly different.

 

Was this poll paid for by the Clinton Foundation?

Just because your arguments are always wrong doesn't mean we can't have a discussion.

 

That's a two year old poll. The DOJ still hasn't changed their mind about the actual enforceability of UBCs.

 

I support background checks. What do you think about a father giving a gun to his son, who has already purchased guns through an FFL?

 

I have passed a background check and am not sure why some oppose them.

 

Sarah Brady endorsed giving guns to family members without background checks.

 

No one opposes background checks. They're just trying to use clever language to yack about "gun show loopholes" and "private sales".

Of course, they need the background checks to be firmly entrenched, so that they can then begin working to make sure no one can pass a background check.

 

I have passed background checks, had an F.F.L. etc......
They are not going away any time soon, every State has them.
What I do say is this, background checks only verify a law abiding primary purchaser but in general, an empty measure.
Why ?
Because even if every law abiding purchaser and Gun owner registered every Gun in the U.S.
Guns could still be;

1. Stolen
2. Smuggled in with already illegal drugs
3. Made here in the U.S.

Gun control is a feel good useless measure as crimes were commited long before there were Guns.

Those background check statistics are bogus and manipulated.

 

because the federal government doesn't have the power to make me conduct a background check on an INTRASTATE sale and because its worthless without registration

do you also support registration of all currently owned firearms?

 

Duplicate post

 

The Pro Gun Anti Gunner...
lol

 

lots of gun banners don't want OTHER people to have guns. I know lots of rich Democrats who don't want average citizens to be able to own guns

 

Very true.
NYC

 

the Editor of the NYT and Joan Rivers-Both major league gun banners, both had carry permits

 

Considering the lies on the left we are supposed to believe this. Just like Benghazi was all because of a movie. Take it somewhere else. I don't know why post this BS here because no one believes you.

 

No, why would I?

 

Because the united states department of justice has stated that without such, universal background checks are impossible to implement and enforce. They would exist in concept only, as no one could realistically be prosecuted for failing or otherwise refusing to perform a background check in a private transaction.

 

Universal background checks are impossible, for reasons stated ad-nauseum over and over in thread after thread.

However, if the NICS system were opened up for free access, and checks were instant, via a phone app, then most people would voluntarily use it.

Also, if an ID card system were implemented, where prospective buyers had a NICS check done at an FFL and received a photo ID, many folks who are shopping would use it, and individual sellers could require it.

Of course neither of these would affect the criminal sellers selling to criminal buyers, but neither would the UBC law the OP wants. It would only give honest sellers some tools to help them know their buyer is legit.

 

Lol! Really? How hypocritical of them!

 

Yes very !

Sigh....... such very blue eyes !

 

If this were true, it would be federal law as -no- politician will vote against something 92% of the people support.

You have only yourself to blame.

 

*************************

I think that I could find some common ground if I sat down with the average gun owner and had a discussion about gun control.

There is the main issue.
An honest discussion.
It could happen here, or in real time.

See, a drowning person grasps at straws in a useless attempt not to drown, or panics and drowns the person trying to save them, and drowns anyway.

There is logic and truth too, not just useless knee jerk reactions to things in life.

 

An intellectual coward attempts to use a guilt by association fallacy to divert attention away from the fact he is unable to refute anything in the OP. Noted.

 

I think registration is good but is not necessary for UBCs to be effective. Better enforcement of gun laws could do a lot of good but that is not the focus of this thread. The focus is on contrasting a mostly silent majority to an outspoken minority which tends to have extreme views on the gun control issue.