Schumer gun bill would expand background checks (close gun-show loophole)

[onehandle]

Source: AP

NEW YORK (AP) -- U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer said Wednesday he will propose legislation requiring all gun buyers to undergo a background check and broadly increasing penalties against states that don't contribute names to the national background-check system.

"All we're talking about here is making sure that certain individuals who demonstrated violent behavior in the past, who have documented mental illness, who could be inclined to terrorism, or who have a history of drug abuse, don't get a weapon," Schumer said.

The bill would also increase and make mandatory financial consequences against states that don't comply with the background check system. States that currently can be penalized up to 3 percent of federal justice grants would have to meet higher standards or lose 25 percent of the funds by 2018.

Last week, an Associated Press review found that more than half the states are not complying with a law requiring them to share the names of mentally ill people with the national background-check system.

Read more: http://www.cnycentral.com/news/story.aspx?id=585206

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[krispos42]

2. There is no gun-show loophole

The term "gun show" should not even be used, because it falsely implies that the "loophole" is somehow exclusive to gun shows.

:banghead:

How's that "death tax" working out for ya?

[Name removed]

3. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[melm00se]

4. Great...another law

Does good old Chuck have a mechanism for a private individual to access the NCIC system to do a background check?

Does his proposal include safeguards that keeps my neighbor from running me (or another neighbor/acquaintance) through a background check (which would be a violation of my privacy)?

Also, did you know that <1% of felons acquired their weapons at gun shows? IMO, if you are going to pass laws (or step up enforcement), perhaps going after straw purchasers and the retailers who enable them would be better time (and money) spent.

While it is a challenge to hold a gun shop accountable for what a gun is used for once it leaves the shop, if a a large number (enough to be a significant indicator of a problem) of weapons sold by Bobby's Bang Bang Gun Emporium end up used in a crime may provide a basis for action.

[fittosurvive]

5. It's no wonder that Congressional approval hovers @ or below 20%...

They are continually seeking to place more on more restrictions on all facets a human activity.

We the People to The Congress: Please stop messing with us!

[krabigirl]

28. I agree.

[jpak]

6. Too bad, felons, gunrunners and terrorists - your gravy train's about to leave the tracks

yup

[LAGC]

7. This bill is going nowhere fast.

All it will do is get any Dem who signs onto it painted with a big target in 2012.

[jpak]

8. Yup - terrorists, felons, gunrunners, gang bangers, GOP and NRA will prevail

n/t

[LAGC]

13. Oops, sorry, I didn't mean to respond to you, but the OP.

Since you opined though, can you cite any study that "terrorists, felons, gunrunners, and gang-bangers" get their guns primarily from gun shows? With links please?

[rl6214]

103. "GOP and NRA will prevail"

Yup, sure looks like it, just wish more Democratic members of the house and senate would get behind gun rights.

YUP

YUP

YUP

[Hoopla Phil]

111. Link supporting pontification please.

but doubtful.


YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP

[jpak]

14. If Gabby Giffords supports this bill - will "they" paint a big target on her too?

Oops

"They" already did

[beevul]

15. Giffords supports amendment 2...

Giffords supports amendment 2, supports gun rights, and is herself a gun owner - a glock to be precise.

[jpak]

16. So all Dems that support this bill should have a "big target" painted on them?

fucking disgusting

yup

[Upton]

18. delete...

[beevul]

26. Where did I imply that? N/T

[rl6214]

105. AH, let's see where YOU saw that

HUH?

Waiting

and waiting

and waiting.

[Hoopla Phil]

112. Again with the putting of words into a fellow DUer's mouth.

that seems to be a habit.

YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP

[Upton]

17. Gabby Giffords supports the 2nd Amendment....

are the abolitionists going to accuse her of being a lover of "weapons of mass murder".....

[jpak]

19. No - she was a victim in a mass murder

yup

[Upton]

20. She's also a gun owner...

and a supporter of RKBA....

yup

[LAGC]

21. Why don't we wait and see what Gabby says about it herself?

I, for one, would like to hear her opinion.

Something tells me she won't blame her injury on the gun...

[jpak]

22. What is the acceptable death toll for protecting the rights of killers to own 30 round magazines?

Ft.Hood x 1000?

Tucson X 1000?

insanity

yup

[LAGC]

23. Changing the subject now?

Do you really think the Ft. Hood and Tucson shooters wouldn't have been able to kill just as many people with normal capacity magazines?

It doesn't take that long for even a half-skilled shooter to swap out mags...

[ileus]

48. Do killers have the right to own any magazines?

[spin]

93. If you banned magazines that held more than 10 rounds and massacres still occurred ...

you would seek to ban semi-auto firearms. When that didn't work you would seek to ban any handgun, rifle or shotgun that holds more than one round.

[mediator]

41. They don't need first person testimony, they have Magic 8 Balls.

Or magic some kind of balls...:eyes:

[RamboLiberal]

46. +1 - I too am waiting for her opinion

I think she may be in favor of NIC checks on all firearms transfers.

[speltwon]

58. If they are going to require it then they will have to pay for it

Like set up some sort of kiosk at every gun show and have a toll free # that gun sellers (private sellers at a gun show or otherwise) can use to access NCIS info, and how would that work?

Personally, I think it would be great if private sellers could access NCIS but there would have to be a way to ensure it's not a person fishing for info and is in fact a seller inquiry with the consent of the prospective purchaser.

There is no gun show loophole of course since NO private sale requires an NCIS check, whether in or out of a gun show.

[Hoopla Phil]

113. She is still a supporter of 2A.

YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP

[friendly_iconoclast]

87. Nice dodge. Now can you answer his question?

Protip: "Shouting, waving the bloody shirt, and wharrgarbl are not synonymous with "answering the question"...

[rl6214]

104. Not they, he

Don't know why you can't seem to understand that and hold the individual responsible for their actions.

YUP

YUP

YUP

[PavePusher]

120. You should try a little harder to not be a vile fuckstick on a progressive website. n/t

[krabigirl]

32. Lol, "terrorists." like a terrorist, or a felon, would actually get a gun through proper channels.

[jpak]

52. John Loughner and Hasan Nidar got their guns and 30 round magazines through "proper channels"

Fort Hood terrorist attack 13 killed - 30 wounded

Tucson terrorist assassination attack - 6 dead - 13 wounded

yup

[mediator]

64. I'll give you a hundred bucks if you let me frandle your hagarma

It would be the best gomoshder you ever had, I promise!

[jpak]

81. What a stupid post

:rofl:

[Hoopla Phil]

115. Yet somehow apropos.

YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP

[LAGC]

75. What about shooter Cho at Virginia Tech?

He killed way more people, and did it all with standard capacity magazines.

[jpak]

82. FAIL - He was mentally ill and should never have been allowed to buy a gun in the first place

yuppo

[LAGC]

86. Changing the subject again?

First it was about the terrorists, then the 30-round mags, and now its the mentally ill.

Face it: what you are really after is a police state.

Where every gun and owner is registered, where only government approved people are able to buy a gun, where private sales are outlawed, and capability is severely limited.

Do you feel the same way about limiting the rest of our civil liberties? Maybe we should just do away with the Bill of Rights altogether?

[jpak]

89. Cho was a terrorist

yup

[rl6214]

108. Cho wasn't a terrorist

Cho was a killer, mentally deranged. You really think he thought before hand "I am going to go terrorize those people and every other student from now on"?

NOPE

NOPE

NOPE

[Hoopla Phil]

116. I don't think you understand the definition of "terrorist".

YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP YUP

[rl6214]

107. But he still did it with standard 10 round magazines

He was just as mentally ill as Hassan and Loughner.

Even with his 10 round magazine he fired 170 shots, changing magazines 17 times and killing 32 people.

I would venture to say that all of these shooters were mentally ill, can you use your crystal ball and tell us how to stop these mentally ill from aquiring their guns. Better yet, you get elected to the House or the Senate and you make it happen instead of just bitching and whining about it.

YUP

YUP

YUP

[Hoopla Phil]

117. Don't forget the homemade bombs.

48 -- Carbon Dioxide bombs
27 -- Pipe bombs
11 -- 1.5 gallon propane bombs
7 -- gas or napalm bombs
2 -- 20 pound propane bombs

http://www.acolumbinesite.com/weapon.html

[right2bfree]

123. Bingo! We have a winner !! nt

[friendly_iconoclast]

90. Can I get some vinaigrette on the side to go with that "logic salad"?

[rl6214]

106. Fort Hood shooting=terrorist attack

Tuscon shooting=assasination attempt

YUP

YUP

YUP

[Hoopla Phil]

114. Ask the sheriff about why Lochner was able to buy a firearm.

For hood was a "gun free zone". That couldn't have happened.

[right2bfree]

125. The Cockroaches are depending on the (R)'s to save thier guns. W-R-O-N-G.

Its gonna be about jobs in 2012, not more guns on the streets.

[rl6214]

102. Not even gonna get close to passing

aaaahahahahahahahahahaha.

YUP

YUP

YUP

[right2bfree]

122. Straight up!!! Its O-V-E-R for the NRA gunners when Big O makes his return to the Whitehouse. nt

[Euromutt]

126. That rather depends on who controls Congress

Civics 101: the President is the head of the executive branch of government. Congress is the legislative branch; "legislative" means they get to make the laws, not the president. Which is a large part of why it wasn't "O-V-E-R for the NRA gunners" when Clinton won his second term.

[right2bfree]

134. That rather depends on how many more mass gun murders people will stand. nt

[Euromutt]

136. That explains all those stringent gun laws passed after Virginia Tech

After all, more than five times as many people were murdered at Virginia Tech than in Tucson, and the Democrats controlled Congress at the time.

Oh wait, that didn't happen, did it?

[Euromutt]

137. "Terrorists," my achin' ass; Schumer's trying to pull Lautenberg's bullshit

Namely, prohibiting people whose names are on the "terrorist watch list" and "no-fly list" from being able to buy guns. For those short of memory, these lists are unconstitutional abominations, originally imposed by the Bush administration and inexplicably not scrapped by the Obama administration. Note that these are lists names, not people, which is why everyone named "David Nelson," "John Williams" or "T. Kennedy" (to name but three of the estimated million+ names) gets hassled at the airport.

All it takes is an arbitrary decision by some TSA asshole to get your name on the list, or the fact that some suspected terrorist is believed to have once used your name as an alias. One marine reservist wound up on the list when the TSA detected gunpowder residue on his boots. His uniform boots. While he was returning from Iraq.

And once you're one of these lists, there's no established protocol to appeal and get yourself taken off. Even if you're a U.S. Senator, it's a hassle.

And the filthy secret is that actual terrorist suspects don't wind up on the list, because the intelligence community doesn't want that information available to every two-bit airline check-in clerk. That's why individuals whose names appear on the "watch list" aren't even prevented from actually flying; they're just given a harder time at airport security, but they aren't prevented from getting on the plane. The term "suspected terrorist" has about as much meaning as the term "weapon of mass destruction."

And now, Schumer is trying to pull the same thing Lautenberg tried just under two years ago, which is to have these people, who aren't even seriously suspected of plotting any wrongdoing, deprived of freedoms without due process. It's fucking disgusting, and it's an affront to the Fifth Amendment.

[slackmaster]

9. It's unfortunate that he plans to conflate two unrelated issues

Deficiencies in the background check database should certainly be addressed. Putting restrictions on private transfers of used firearms could be a political loser.

[X_Digger]

10. Think he got 'excited'?

[beevul]

27. LOL.

Remember the one where the gun was photoshopped backwards in that photo?

LOL.

[w4rma]

11. I hope most Dems run away from this. (nt)

[jpak]

12. I hope they don't and make the GOP & NRA justify their love of weapons of mass murder

yup

[melm00se]

25. define "weapons of mass murder"

BTW, I am a Democrat and I belong to the NRA.

The Constitution isn't like a cafeteria where you go thru and say I'd like a little of this and a little of that. I support all the Rights protected by the Constitution why don't you?

[jpak]

53. A semi-auto gun (pistol or long gun) with a magazine/clip that holds more than 10 rounds

Oh yeah, the second amendment doesn't trump my 9th and 10th amendment rights to gun-free public places.

No matter what lies the NRA makes up.

yup

[GreenStormCloud]

88. You don't have a right to gun-free public spaces. N/T

[beevul]

95. Then you better get used to them.

Because they aren't going to go away.

[rl6214]

109. Don't see anything here about a right to gun free public place

AMENDMENT IX to the Constitution of the United States:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.



AMENDMENT X to the Constitution of the United States:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

NOPE

NOPE

NOPE

[Ter]

37. You're becoming obsessed with this issue

Off topic but do you support a handgun ban?

[Callisto32]

127. Association fallacy.

[krabigirl]

30. Me too.

[mediator]

24. With idiots like Schumer, who needs republicans.

:eyes:

[Paladin]

29. You And The Rest Of The Gun Rights Movement.

You need Republicans. Obviously......

[krabigirl]

31. Really?

[jpak]

54. ding ding ding ding ding - we have a winner

:rofl:

:toast:

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Paladin]

76. And What's Left Of The Gun Rights Movement Without The Republican Party?

Exactly zip, "podner."

I invite anyone on any day to visit the DU Guns Forum and see how many threads are devoted to trashing Democrats, as opposed to Republicans; with the 2012 elections coming up, it will predictably get worse in the Gungeon---it always does. And this, on what is supposed to be a Democratic site. If you really want to grasp what the present-day gun rights movement thinks of Democrats and liberalism, Google "NRA Comic Book" and see what turns up......

[LAGC]

79. Do you feel more confident because most gun-owners don't identify as Democrats?

I'd think you'd be more welcoming to Democratic gun-owners, cause if the proverbial shit hits the fan, do you really want only the right-wingers to be running around with all the guns?

[RamboLiberal]

83. I don't see a lot of trashing of Democrats in the "Gungeon"

We certainly disagree with DU'ers who think all guns should be banned to civilians. Or who want to pass the AWB ban or limit magazine capacity.

For this DU'er I'm not a 1 issue voter. I vote Dem. And I expect my Dem lawmakers to listen to my views as well as the banners & not pass stupid feel good no effect gun laws.

[GreenStormCloud]

92. That book was a hoax, not by NRA. N/T

[Euromutt]

135. I don't know that it was a hoax, but even so, the NRA never published it

For all I know, it may genuinely have been something that somebody in the NRA put together, since I've definitely seen the same artist's work in issues of America's First Freedom, but the bottom line is, it's something the NRA never officially put its name to and disseminated, possibly because the organization thought it went too far.

[beevul]

97. My dear Paladin...

"I invite anyone on any day to visit the DU Guns Forum and see how many threads are devoted to trashing Democrats, as opposed to Republicans"

There is FAR more trashing of Democrats during the primaries, in other subforums, than there EVER was in the guns forum. You know it, I know it, and everyone here knows it.

Any trashing you see of a Democrat in THIS forum, isn't BECAUSE they're a Democrat, its because of their stand on this issue.


I'm sorry this bothers you so much that it compels you to post this tripe.

It must really chap your backside how much progress gun owners have made within the Democratic party, and here on DU.

[right2bfree]

124. Yeap. When 2012 rolls around, its gonna be hell to pay at the NRA....

Just saying! :-)

[Callisto32]

128. Also an association fallacy.

You and jpak should swap notes.

[RamboLiberal]

33. K&R - as a gun owner I guess I'm in the minority

But I have no problem with this law. IMHO all gun buyers should have to pass the background check. And boo f*ing hoo private sellers if your buyer has to pay an FFL a fee to do so. The Feds though should have a way for a private seller to access the system. Can't be rocket science to setup a phone and/or online system.

[mediator]

34. I'm pushing for a background check to buy a computer...and to vote too.

...

[RamboLiberal]

35. 1 vote or 1 computer cannot kill

1 gun can. Sorry but as a gun owner I recognize there is a responsibility to owning a firearm and that there are people are prohibited from owning.

BTW, there are people prohibited from voting and from owning computers. As a voter you have to be of proper age, registered and be a citizen to vote. And you can be prohibited from voting for being a felon.

[mediator]

38. Okay, I went back and read your post again...and I'm not sure how you meant that.

If you're proposing a system where a person can pass a background check that is not connected with any particular gun purchase, I wouldn't strongly object to that...like if I could get a card that allows me to buy guns without any further vetting, for instance. I would not support any system that would link any particular gun to me for inclusion in some sort of database. I maintain this position as an owner of many guns for over 60 years (I'm a ways shy of 70, you can do the arithmetic) :-)

[RamboLiberal]

39. I'd say use the existing system

Every time I buy a gun in my state I have to go through the background check. I don't go along with a card because situations can change. For instance someone who's had a PFA filed against them, a mental illness, an arrest, etc and card hadn't been confiscated or revoked. Change I would make is for a way for a private seller to run a buyer through the check via phone/internet.

[mediator]

43. I wouldn't oppose that last part, it comports with my previous comment

Of course situations can also change between purchases even if each one involves a separate check. Anybody can go nuts at any time but I think it's so rare it's not worth trying to prevent let alone predict.

[RamboLiberal]

51. Before NICS there was a waiting period in my state

Now if you had a LTCF you could walk out with the firearm. Otherwise even if you purchased a gun before you had a waiting period. I believe it was something like 5+ days.

[Tejas]

68. Do/would you have something to hide?

Bi-monthly porn sweeps of your hardrive...for the children.

[friendly_iconoclast]

91. If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about.

You don't have anything illegal on your computer, do you Citizen RamboLiberal?

[Llewlladdwr]

94. Apparently you've never had a CPU dropped on your head. NT

[Callisto32]

129. A CPU or a computer?

CPU=

[beevul]

36. Its bigger than guns, in that context.

"But I have no problem with this law. IMHO all gun buyers should have to pass the background check. And boo f*ing hoo private sellers if your buyer has to pay an FFL a fee to do so. The Feds though should have a way for a private seller to access the system. Can't be rocket science to setup a phone and/or online system."

Requiring by law at the federal level, that background checks be done in intra-state private sales, is a stretch of the ICC.

I support completely, a voluntary system.

I can not and will not support stretching the ICC to conver intra state commerce as well.

Plus, even in a voluntary system, there are always valid concerns about misuse, and privacy.

[RamboLiberal]

40. Voluntary doesn't work

You get checked for a helluva lot of things. Buying alchohol for instance. I don't really see a problem for buying an item that can be used for deadly results having my background checked.

Pass the law then let the courts fight it out. It doesn't infringe IMHO on people lawfully owning/buying/selling a gun.

[beevul]

44. Like I said...

"You get checked for a helluva lot of things. Buying alchohol for instance. I don't really see a problem for buying an item that can be used for deadly results having my background checked."

You get checked for alcohol and tobacco if you look under a certain age.

Have you had your background checked to buy a used car? They can most certainly be used for deadly results.

IMO, its not a matter of infringement, its a matter of Government flexing muscles it was never granted power or authority to flex.

And thats far more dangerous, IMO, than guns are, in any context.

[RamboLiberal]

45. Hell yeah I've been checked for buying a car

My insurance is checked. I have to register & license the car. I have to get it inspected. I have my DL checked.

Unless I'm paying cash my credit is checked.

Last time I bought a car I spent 2+ hours in the dealership on the paperwork & checks.

Last time I sold a car we spent 30-60 minutes at a notary getting title transfer plus some extra time over the phone with bank. (My late father's car).

I traded 2 guns for a new gun Sunday & had it done in 15-20 minutes at the gun store.

[beevul]

47. I thought it was implied that private sale was the scenario.

"My insurance is checked. I have to register & license the car. I have to get it inspected. I have my DL checked."

Do you realize, that in most places in America, one need not have license, registration, insurance or inspection to buy or own OWN a car? Those things are required ONLY if one plans to drive the car on a public street or road. I've gone rounds with police over this over a racecar I had on a trailer (1968 chevelle), even so far as to have a judge chew that officers ass in court for writing me bogus ticket for the slicks, no plates, no registration, and no insurance. I told the cop he was being foolish by writing them, and he said "tell that to the judge if you fight them in court". The judge told him, in court. :rofl:

"Unless I'm paying cash my credit is checked."

Obviously, if you're using credit, your credit will be checked.

"Last time I bought a car I spent 2+ hours in the dealership on the paperwork & checks."

Like I said, I thought it was implied that used private party transfer was the scenario.

Do you have to have any of the above for buying a car from a private party?






On edit:

I hope I'm not coming off as gruff, and if I am, I apologize, I do not intend to.

[RamboLiberal]

50. And you realize in many jurisdictions they can tow & charge you

for a derelict parked on private property if registration & tags are not current. In many areas you could not park that car on a trailer on your own property.

In my state if I sell a car the buyer & myself have to go to a notary to do a title transfer.

[beevul]

56. A small handful, relatively speaking.

In the great majority of states and localities, this is not law.

"And you realize in many jurisdictions they can tow & charge you for a derelict parked on private property if registration & tags are not current."

I'll just bet those few jurisdictions define "derelict" as not being licensed or plated, too. I'd never live in such a place.

"In many areas you could not park that car on a trailer on your own property."

Im most places, its lawful.

As for places it isn't?

I would NEVER live in a place with such an absurd, backward view of property rights. Plus, in rural areas of which this nation is mostly made up of, many many farms have vehices which NEVER see a public road. They generally don't get plated registered, or insured. People without drivers licenses drive them regularly. All legal. I grew up rural, and deliberately stayed rural most of my life, to avoid the the type of thinking and the nonsense it leads to, like having to license and register and insure a vehicle not being used on public roads, or not being able to trailer a racecar on ones own property.

The car in question, was better looking than most of the garbage on the roads these days, and even if thats subjective, it most certainly was neither derelict, nor an eyesore.

It looked a little like this but prettier:




Not driven on public roads, no reason for plates license registration, or liability insurance.

Jurisdictions that say different, just want the money AFAIC.

[mediator]

62. Well, most of us don't live in upscale gated communities with ridiculous rules like those.

:eyes:

[RamboLiberal]

84. Hello - I've live in an area that is a downtrodden ex-steel town

And the mayor & police chief enforce the law against abandoned vehicles - even those on private property.

[beevul]

98. The question, is how they define "abandoned". N/T

[Callisto32]

130. Just becuase it is done...

does not make it right.

That's that same petty, authoritarian thinking that leads to "you can only have a house one of these 4 colors, oh and the grass can't be more than 4 inches, and your mailbox has to be plastic, and you can't park on your driveway at night, and you can't...."
""

[mediator]

61. Oh, get real...that's just silly, you do not need anything but a wad of cash to buy a car

anywhere in the United States of America. You're overinflating the car stuff with superfluous crap like bank liens and registration and making light of the gun situation. That is being disingenuous. I won't go so far as to say lying, but...

[RamboLiberal]

85. Get real yourself - this is the law in my state

http://www.dmv.state.pa.us/motorVehicleCenter/buying.shtml#paTitle

One reason is the state wants their sales tax on a used car.

From link:
When purchasing or selling used vehicles (including motorcycles) in Pennsylvania, many taxpayers are unaware that sales tax due to the Department of Revenue is a percentage of the fair market value of a vehicle, rather than a percentage of the purchase price. When a purchase price is set considerably lower than fair market value – as often happens in transactions between family members – the PA Department of Revenue has the authority to review the transaction to determine and collect the correct amount of sales tax due. For more information, please visit the Motor Vehicle Understated Value Program page on the PA Department of Revenue’s Website.

[one-eyed fat man]

100. What irony!!

The state government in Pennsylvania wanting to extract its 'pound of flesh' for the car you sell your kid for a buck. Here, there is no sales tax on the casual sale of a personal motor vehicle. I'm surprised the money grubbing intrusive bastards up there haven't melted down the Liberty Bell.

[one-eyed fat man]

80. Neither did Bush's wiretaps....

...if you had nothing to hide.

I've heard that song before. You are welcome to give up any of your rights you want. Leave mine alone.

[boppers]

57. Wow. You may not realize how far the Interstate Commerce regulation already extends.

(I assume that's what you meant, as the ICC was abolished 15 years ago)...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn

If an intra-state private sale affects interstate commerce markets (for example, allowing gun-runners cheaper purchases without background checks, which affects the cross-state sales markets), it's arguable that it's legal for Congress to legislate it.... as it's legal for them to regulate how much corn you grow to feed your own chickens (not only doesn't leave the state, it doesn't leave the farm).

As far as FFL's being able to "abuse privacy" and run a background check, what private records are involved? Last I looked, all the records involved were public, if occasionally hard to get to (hence the need for a central database).

[pipoman]

59. The only way the .gov

can regulate how much corn you can feed your chickens is if you agree, by participating in farm subsidies, to let them. Interstate Commerce Clause. As it stands, and has for years, a purchase of a privately owned firearm by a resident of the same state does not have a federal requirement for an NICS check. It can't. The feds have no control of private intrastate commerce...nor should they, it is a dangerous precedent.

[boppers]

66. If it's commerce or affects commerce, it can be regulated.

It's more than just subsidies, it's anything that affects commerce, including products that aren't even sold....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Lopez (Carrying guns is not commerce)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzales_v._Raich (...but growing weed is...)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Morrison (...however, suing over sexual assault is not)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printz_v._United_States (...but you can't force a state to enact federal regulations)

Yes, there are concerns among the "states rights" advocates that dangerous precedents have been set. It's certainly eyebrow-raising....

Put on top of that the FFL issues (FFL sellers must run checks), and determining who is a "dealer" (even if it's only intrastate), and it's a right mess.

[beevul]

96. Even more reason to oppose the enactment of such things, if true. N/T

[Callisto32]

131. delete

[One_Life_To_Give]

42. "Could be inclined to terrorism" WTF

Does that include all muslims and other select malcontents?

[ileus]

49. wonder how that is determined...

[slackmaster]

55. He is on record as supporting denying gun sales to people on the Sooper Seekrit Terra Watch List

He hasn't indicated whether or not he supports stopping people on the list from voting.

[pipoman]

60. It surprises me that Dems can suddenly support Bush's

Patriot Act and Terrorism Watch List and keep their seats. To listen before this administration one would think that both would have been repealed in the first months...:wtf:

This bill, like every one before it, will not make it out of committee. The Feds have no jurisdiction. It is up to the states to require NICS on private sales. In lieu of this, if Schumer was really interested in this he would propose a method which would allow private sellers to access NICS voluntarily and in return for doing so sellers should be given immunity from civil or criminal actions if they do transfer through NICS. Or offer inticements to states to enact NICS legislation. Another attempt to pass an unconstitutional law will fail.

[defendandprotect]

63. Good for Schumer -- probably will now be targeted by GOP/NRA in new fund-raising -- !!

[ProgressiveProfessor]

78. He is in a safe seat, but he continues to do damage to the party and the people with asinine

positions like this.

[The Wielding Truth]

67. That would be good. Now if we could just sell bravery the need would plummet.

[Tejas]

69. More self-serving bureaucracy.

[right2bfree]

70. Sen. Chuck Schumer: Tougher Background Checks For Guns

Source: The Gothamist

Sen. Schumer Wants Tougher Background Checks For Guns

By Ben Yakas in News on February 24, 2011

Sen. Chuck Schumer, a long-time advocate of "rational gun-control laws," is putting his legislative money where his mouth is when it comes to gun laws: he told reporters that he is drafting legislation to require all gun buyers to undergo a thorough background check. And he wants to increase penalties to any states that don't contribute names to the national background-check system.

Schumer presented his plan, which he said was modeled after the proposals of Mayor Bloomberg's national gun-control coalition, at Manhattan police headquarters yesterday. Schumer was inspired into action after the tragic shooting in Tucson, Arizona last month, which left six people dead and 14 others injured: "All we're talking about here is making sure that certain individuals who demonstrated violent behavior in the past, who have documented mental illness, who could be inclined to terrorism, or who have a history of drug abuse, don't get a weapon," Schumer said.


Read more: http://gothamist.com/2011/02/24/sen_schumer_wants_tougher_backgroun.php

---

Its about damn time we cracked down on all these firearms in the hands of mentally ill people!!

[LAGC]

71. Duplicate thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4746452&mesg_id=4746452

[RandomThoughts]

72. LOL

He thinks, or the writer of that article things, a weapon is the ability to communicate with people by media and such.

I actually like the guy, and know he is on my side on many issues, so do like Schumer, but disagree with many of the things he thinks are better, mostly security measures, and his reluctance to correct beer and travel money issues.

I know he is on my side because I look like Benny Hill, and he looks like his side kick :D

The Doors - Riders on the storm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKbPUzhWeeI

For Humor :D In metaphor, since violence is sad and not the way of peaceful resistance.
:loveya:


I do agree that the military, and many in private sector and public sector governance should have their metaphoric 'guns' removed, and have been working on that for awhile now, and actually with some success.

The reason I find the 'mental illness' issue bad, is it can be used for politics, if what is said to be that way is done by politics, anyone that begins to see the wrong in the system, will have to pass through some storms, and someone who is not trying to make things better will think that 'thinking and feeling' is crazy. Some do get taken down by storms, many ride through it.

One eye man, kingdom of blind, and all that.

[Name removed]

73. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. 
[link:www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html|Click
here] to review the message board rules.

[Kingofalldems]

74. Kick this important story

[ProgressiveProfessor]

77. Anolther Democrat who is blind to the best interests of the party and the people

Then again, this has always been one of his pet rocks.

[beevul]

101. "Rational gun-control laws" . Pfft. My collection says...

"All we ask for is registration, just like we do for cars."
- Charles Shumer

We're here to tell the NRA their nightmare is true! We're going to hammer guns on the anvil of relentless legislative strategy. We're going to beat guns into submission!


Charles Schumer
quoted on NBC nightly news
U.S. Representative (D-NY)
1993-11-30

...the only people who use them (so called asult weapons) are mass murderers...


Charles Schumer
PBS debate with Bill McCollum
U.S. Senator (D-NY)
1996


Rational my ass.

[Callisto32]

132. That last one isn't even TRUE.

[Glassunion]

99. I predict it will be a dismal failure...

"was modeled after the proposals of Mayor Michael Bloomberg's national gun-control coalition, said Schumer"

They are working with the wrong model...

[Ken_Fish]

110. will not even get to a vote. These guys are the Jesse Helms of their day..

they picked the very wrong side of the issue. and they will regret it on down the line.

[Callisto32]

133. Unfortunately,

not before dying in an office they have kept for 50 years....

[lawodevolution]

118. The government doesn't get to decide who owns a gun or not by producing a fake black list and then

Banning people with it. The people on a jury decide this. Dies anyone know of a situation where the government gets to decide by itself if a civilian is banned in the US?

[Hoopla Phil]

119. If such regulations could/would be applied to all voters then I'll go along

with it. If not, then it is unconstitutional - period.

[Name removed]

121. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.