TexasCHLforum.com

DynamicDan wrote: ↑Tue Sep 17, 2019 2:05 pm I, myself will not be giving up any weapons I might possess.

I sold/lost all mine years ago.

I also voted 4. 3 and 4 seem like they could be listed together. Maybe the poll is attempting to drill down into the reasons people have. I agree with 3 and 4 equally though.

Grayling813 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 16, 2019 4:38 pm

flintknapper wrote: ↑Mon Sep 16, 2019 1:36 pm

TxRVer wrote: ↑Mon Sep 16, 2019 12:29 pm

LDP wrote: ↑Mon Sep 16, 2019 12:25 pm I might be misunderstanding the meaning and intent of the poll.
We already have a MANDATORY universal background check for purchasing firearms. It goes through the FBI.
In which case, the poll makes 0 sense to me. And it seems a little biased with not exactly an exhaustive list of options for answers.

The UBC calls for a background check for ALL gun purchases, including private sales. Some people even want background checks if you loan a gun to a friend at a gun range.

^^^^ Correct.

Which would put an unnecessary and undue burden on Law Abiding gun owners. What needs to happen is for officials to swiftly and severely prosecute and sentence violators...using the gun laws already in place.

And the Dims are admitting that the only way Universal Background Checks will work is if there is Uniform Firearms Registration.

Funny how they are already trying to expand on universal background checks to sneak in registration and it has not yet even passed.

Grayling813 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 16, 2019 7:12 am If the so called “loophole” is closed, the result will be that the likely minuscule number of criminals obtaining firearms at gun shows or from law abiding strangers would become even less. Criminals who are already selling firearms to other criminals are not going to start obeying another law.
It’s almost as if 40-50% of people have no ability to perform critical thinking anymore. Or are just too lazy and let politicians, the media, indoctrinators aka “educators” and activists do their thinking for them.

Just keep dolling out my free stuff and I’ll believe whatever you say.

I think people are far more afraid of a random shooter than they are of being an innocent victim of a drive by shooting, a rape, mugging or assault. Most people feel they can avoid these things if they just stay in the right neighborhood. This makes them feel in control and that these things won't happen to them. But being shot by a random person while walking around walmart scares them into complete stupidity. They feel the random shooter is out of their control and might happen to them. People want to feel safe. Making all the big bad guns go away is an easy tonic for them. Like turning the light in the closet on at night so your child will see their is no monster in there.

Anyone should realize they are far more likely to suffer the random assault, mugging, rape or murder than they are to suffer death by a mass shooter.

Soccerdad1995 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 16, 2019 2:51 pm Many more people are killed by drunk drivers than by criminals using guns. Unlike guns, vehicles cannot be used to defend yourself from a drunk driver (the fact that you are in a vehicle actually makes it MORE likely that you will be killed by such a criminal).

So lets drop the bull about gun background checks and focus on vehicle background checks. There is no reason why a person who has a history of drug / alcohol abuse should be able to own a vehicle. Not to mention folks who have proven that they cannot control their anger. And let's also deny vehicles to anyone behind on their child support payments. It makes as much sense as denying them ownership of a gun.

If you want to loan your car to someone, just go to a licensed dealer and have them run a background check first. Should only take a few days at most.

Considering there is no constitutional protected right to own a vehicle, it makes even more sense.

Oldgringo wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2019 10:07 pm

03Lightningrocks wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:51 pm

Oldgringo wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:34 pm

03Lightningrocks wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2019 8:59 pm

AF-Odin wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2019 7:31 pm As of 7:30PM Sunday night, poll is 56.9% against background checks, 37.9 for, and 5.2 Unsure, would depend on specifics. Currently very small sample size.

I wonder how many of the 37.9 don't realize there is already a background check?

Although I'm one to wear out the Tracking Notice and wait anxiously for the delivery vehicle, I don't think I'd oppose a 3-day waiting period IF a true background check was made, would you? Granted, criminals by definition are still criminals, but there are a lot of loonies loose on our streets and in our 'hoods. Just watch CNN and MSNBC for examples thereof.

After all folks, this is 2019AD and it ain't 'your father's Oldsmobile'.

I would hate a 3 day period if I needed a gun for self defense right away.

If one needed a gun for self-defense "right away", shouldn't one have already screamed, locked the doors, picked up a cudgel of some sort, and called 911? If the evildoers are already on the premises, it's a little late to run down to the local gun store.

Be Prepared! {who says that?}

Many assaults are by people known by the victim. It isn't always a stranger suddenly popping up in ones life. Finding out ones life is in danger and wanting to get a firearm for self defense immediately happens more than many think.

Secondly, there is nothing to be gained by giving an extra three days to wait. Criminal background checks are instant. Mass shooters don't get weapons because the criminal background check failed. Making a person wait 3 days just doesn't seem to have any purpose.

Oldgringo wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2019 9:34 pm

03Lightningrocks wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2019 8:59 pm

AF-Odin wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2019 7:31 pm As of 7:30PM Sunday night, poll is 56.9% against background checks, 37.9 for, and 5.2 Unsure, would depend on specifics. Currently very small sample size.

I wonder how many of the 37.9 don't realize there is already a background check?

Although I'm one to wear out the Tracking Notice and wait anxiously for the delivery vehicle, I don't think I'd oppose a 3-day waiting period IF a true background check was made, would you? Granted, criminals by definition are still criminals, but there are a lot of loonies loose on our streets and in our 'hoods. Just watch CNN and MSNBC for examples thereof.

After all folks, this is 2019AD and it ain't 'your father's Oldsmobile'.

I would hate a 3 day period if I needed a gun for self defense right away.

AF-Odin wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2019 7:31 pm As of 7:30PM Sunday night, poll is 56.9% against background checks, 37.9 for, and 5.2 Unsure, would depend on specifics. Currently very small sample size.

I wonder how many of the 37.9 don't realize there is already a background check?

flintknapper wrote: ↑Sun Sep 15, 2019 6:56 pm https://www.gao.gov/assets/700/694290.pdf

ATF Referred about 13,000 Firearms Denials to Its Field Divisions for Investigation in Fiscal Year
2017, of Which USAOs Have Prosecuted 12 Cases.

Yep a whole twelve!

Might not hurt to tighten things up a little in this case.

Different than 'expanding' background checks....I understand. I am NOT for that, but it wouldn't hurt things to vigorously ENFORCE some of the gun laws we already have in place.

That is just unacceptable. Then the politicians say we need more laws that won't be enforced. Maybe less donuts and more enforcement work is in order.