Skip to main content

View Diary: RKBA: Universal Background Check Proposal (346 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Self regulation works so well (15+ / 0-)

    for private industry, what could possibly go wrong.  

    This isn't a good proposal.   It's lip service, with no teeth.  

    Why am I not surprised that RKBA supports a Republican bill to offer fake background checks?

    How about we just pass a real background check bill, which a vast majority of Americans support?   Oh yeah, it might piss of the NRA and Republican politicians.  

    The tent got so big it now stands for nothing.

    by Beelzebud on Tue Apr 30, 2013 at 10:38:18 AM PDT

    •  So you wouldn't use this as a base? (12+ / 0-)

      It's something. And quite frankly, it looks like it'd have a better chance of passing than, say, the one that just failed.

      What's fake about these background checks anyway?

      Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

      by KVoimakas on Tue Apr 30, 2013 at 10:40:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Amen. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mark Mywurtz, dream weaver, Duckmg

      This is just provocateur stuff. It's a way to avoid the only effective means of getting guns out of the hands of the murder-obsessed: federal registration. Every background check proposal in the world is worth spit without federal registration: a common sense proposal which the writer of this blog, by his own admission, says would be  a law he would not obey.
      We need it, and we need it now.
      And people like this writer are the reason.

    •  I too would like to know what you see as being (8+ / 0-)

      fundamentally different between this idea and the one that failed to pass?  How was the one that was defeated any more encompassing?

      •  It moves regulation over to the ones being (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        coquiero, PsychoSavannah

        regulated, for one.  

        Let me turn the question back around on you.   If the original bill isn't much different than this one, why not just pass it as the majority of citizens wanted?  

        What database does this plan use?

        What is the plan to enforce the law when people ignore it?

        How easy would it be to fake an identity on this "free to use" public website, that has no oversight about who is using it?  

        The tent got so big it now stands for nothing.

        by Beelzebud on Tue Apr 30, 2013 at 11:00:27 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The apparent differences between this one and (13+ / 0-)

          the Manchin-Toomey one, insofar as this one has been described, is two-fold:

          1) this one is presumably universal, whereas M-T applied only to commercial sales by non-FFL dealers (ie, it had been advertised anywhere).

          2) this one doesn't require a LEO or FFL to run the check, but allows the private seller and buyer to do it themselves.

          This provision does not appear to rely on good-faith compliance any less than M-T, since under M-T the only way to catch someone is to sting them.

          Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

          by Robobagpiper on Tue Apr 30, 2013 at 11:09:10 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  In response to your questions (8+ / 0-)
          why not just pass it as the majority of citizens wanted?
          I think that the level of support for that bill is debatable.  My personal hang up with the bill was with the language specifying that the atty general couldn't compile a registry list.  One of the few things I have certainty about when it comes to legal documents is that exact wording matters and this would have superseded a law that already prevents any govt agency from creating a registry.
          What database does this plan use?
          To the best of my knowledge there is only one for this purpose: the NICS.  This also goes back to your previous question, but one of the major problems with NICS is lack of input.
          What is the plan to enforce the law when people ignore it?
          This is going to be a problem no matter what law is in place.  If someone is willing to buy and sell out of their car trunk a law isn't going to stop them.  The only effect the law will have is to govern the steps that the law abiding must take.
          How easy would it be to fake an identity on this "free to use" public website, that has no oversight about who is using it?
          About as easy as it would be to create fake identities now, or as easy as it would be to get a straw purchaser now.  Laws, at least any that have a prayer of passage, are not going to change this.

          My personal view is that the BG should not be based upon point of sale and that people should have permits issued instead.

        •  Huh? (6+ / 0-)
          It moves regulation over to the ones being regulated, for one.
          As opposed to assuming people will go to a dealer for a BC?

          I think you are confused on how criminals operate...

          Your hate-mail will be graded.

          by PavePusher on Tue Apr 30, 2013 at 11:50:09 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I wanted the other to pass (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          PavePusher, theatre goon, gerrilea

          It didn't. Why can't we try this one? At least look under the hood?

          "The scientific nature of the ordinary man is to go on out and do the best you can." John Prine

          by high uintas on Tue Apr 30, 2013 at 10:31:15 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Right (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Duckmg

      This would be amazing anywhere on this site EXCEPT in an RKBA diary.  

      Everybody knows that republicans:  

      - Negotiate in bad faith
      - Would never support an expanded government function designed for public safety UNLESS it was purposely designed to fail
      - Don't give a shit about preventing dangerous people from purchasing guns
      - Are in the NRA's pocket

      You have to be incredibly naive or be so fanatically pro-gun that you WANT a bad faith attempt at registration to actually support this.  

      Honestly, I wouldn't take a piece of candy from a republican senator, let alone offered up gun safety legislation.  There aren't a lot of details here, but when you find them, you can be there are only about a dozen Kossacks that would actually support them.  

      Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

      by Mark Mywurtz on Tue Apr 30, 2013 at 03:59:18 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  No-one said we should take it hook, line and... (5+ / 0-)

        sinker.

        That's why we're deconstructing it, inspecting the wording, flaws, potential pitfalls and trying to suss out the unintended consequences.

        Sheesh.

        Look, being a Democrat/Liberal/Progressive is a little more complicated than simply being a mirror image of Republicans/Conservatives.

        Anyone who doesn't grok THAT, might not be ready for adult discussion, such as we're trying to have.

        YMMV.

        Your hate-mail will be graded.

        by PavePusher on Tue Apr 30, 2013 at 11:39:09 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Except (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          dream weaver

          that the RKBAers have continually jumped on anyone here who points out this plan's weaknesses (well, whatever one can get out of a plan with few details) and defended it because it would apparently be free, convenient, and not at all enforceable.  So when you say "we're deconstructing it", you mean "they're deconstructing it".  

          I get it.  You see everything as a slippery slope and everything as a potential inconvenience to what you perceive is guaranteed to you by the Constitution, even if you're apparently not sure why you want it.  

          You don't, apparently, get why this is completely secondary to most of us who are primarily concerned with stopping the bloodshed first, seeing if you can have your AR-15 second.  You also don't seem to get why the black gun / black helicopter people are a complete embarrassment to hunters.  

          That's not the only reason most of us have given up on an '"adult" discussion.  One huge reason, and I've seen this posted by many Kossacks, is that any attempt to actually engage one of the gun-absolutists is rewarded by several of them jumping in and trying to pull the conversation into features of particular firearms and gun semantics until the victim is ultimately declared far to ignorant to have an opinion.  The big picture is completely lost.  That's the RKBA version of "adult" conversation with anyone they disagree with.  Why would anyone sign up for that?    

          Meanwhile, the NRA continues to buy politicians and people keep dying and you and others completely dismiss those inconvenient details because......  

          Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

          by Mark Mywurtz on Wed May 01, 2013 at 04:17:42 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  These statements (6+ / 0-)
            You don't, apparently, get why this is completely secondary to most of us who are primarily concerned with stopping the bloodshed first, seeing if you can have your AR-15 second.  You also don't seem to get why the black gun / black helicopter people are a complete embarrassment to hunters.  
            Demonstrate why many in the pro gun rights community won't take you or your views seriously.  Our guns, including ARs are not contributing to the bloodshed that you aim to stop and we resent being blindly targeted by rhetoric FUD.  The pro gun community is not going to bear the burden of the the actions of terrorists. Second, you are sorely mistaken if you believe, which your statements clearly allude to, that the issue about hunters.
            •  The feeling is mutual (0+ / 0-)
              The pro gun community is not going to bear the burden of the the actions of terrorists.
              The actions....maybe not.  The easy access and availability of weapons to these people, weapons that make their killing easier and possible...absolutely.  
              Second, you are sorely mistaken if you believe, which your statements clearly allude to, that the issue about hunters.
              I hunt.  And the possibility that I might be associated with the extreme views of the NRA/RKBA embarrass me terribly.  

              Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

              by Mark Mywurtz on Wed May 01, 2013 at 04:17:29 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Why does it need to be "enforceable" again? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            noway2, PavePusher

            I thought "the plan" was to reduce gun violence?  I guess I don't see it from the same perspective.  What part of "shall not be infringed" is not understandable?

            This doesn't mean any State can't do something...see NYS SAFE ACT.

            The adult discussion starts with accepting the limits we put upon our created government and trying to work within said framework.  Or not, you could always decide to amend that framework, Article V is always an option.

            The NRA's power doesn't come from the politicians it comes from the people that pay their dues.  How do you deny their increasing membership?

            The people are supporting the NRA more and more, frightening as that is, they are doing it.

            How do you deny that more and more Americans are arming themselves?  

            Doesn't this mean there's a problem with your position.  If everyone believed as you do, then the solution would be a no-brainer.  

            -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

            by gerrilea on Wed May 01, 2013 at 07:26:48 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  WRT NRA Membership (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              gerrilea, PavePusher

              I haven't seen any official figures, and they seem hard to come by, but the word I've seen bandied about is that NRA membership is now over 5 million, which is roughly a 25%-30% increase since mid December.  If we estimate the increase at 1 million, that is roughly 30 million in additional revenue to throw at their lobby efforts.

              Certainly some food for thought.  

            •  Sad (0+ / 0-)
              Doesn't this mean there's a problem with your position.
              It means people are giving up.  They are deciding that Congress will never do anything meaningful about this issue no matter how much the public wants it.  They see that the NRA strategy of whipping up fear and saturating this country with guns is working and they feel like they HAVE to buy guns to protect themselves from all the other goofballs buying guns.  It's EXACTLY what the manufacturers--and you, apparently--want.  

              It's sad that the only answer from the NRA and RKBA to people who want to be safe from gun violence is, of course, MOAR GUNZ!  ARM YOURSELF!  

              Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

              by Mark Mywurtz on Wed May 01, 2013 at 04:23:24 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  No, in fact, this is what I wish... (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                theatre goon, PavePusher, KVoimakas

                http://www.dailykos.com/...

                As a start.

                Culminating in a nation where my fellow Americans don't feel the need or desire to own firearms but will always have the right if they so chose.

                -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                by gerrilea on Wed May 01, 2013 at 05:31:46 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  If only your claims were true... (4+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                PavePusher, KVoimakas, noway2, johnel
                It's sad that the only answer from the NRA and RKBA to people who want to be safe from gun violence is, of course, MOAR GUNZ!  ARM YOURSELF!

                This is, of course, simply a falsehood -- not to mention a childish attempt to paint those who disagree with you as uneducated or unintelligent.

                Really, if you must resort to this sort of dishonest tactic to support your own stance, perhaps you need to reconsider that stance.

                Or, you can stick with outright dishonesty, if you prefer.  

                It's really up to you.

                Yes, I often dress as a pirate. Your point?

                by theatre goon on Wed May 01, 2013 at 06:38:54 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Yeah, it's not entirely true (0+ / 0-)

                  I may have given the group too much credit.  

                  They have no meaningful solutions.  That's why I mock the NR-KBA.

                  Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

                  by Mark Mywurtz on Wed May 01, 2013 at 07:41:57 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  So, sticking with the dishonesty, then. (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Wordsinthewind, noway2, johnel

                    When you can't engage in meaningful debate, just repeatedly lie and insult those who disagree with you.

                    I guess if that's all you have -- it certainly does make you look childish and foolish, though.

                    Apparently, you don't mind that.  Kinda sad, really.  And people wonder why the tone of debate has fallen so badly on this site -- you provide a perfect example.

                    Yes, I often dress as a pirate. Your point?

                    by theatre goon on Thu May 02, 2013 at 04:22:21 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

          •  Yeah, technical details.... (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Wordsinthewind, theatre goon, johnel

            ...they actually matter when you write laws.

            Odd, that.....

            I refer you back to my observation about "adult conversation".

            Have a great day.

            Your hate-mail will be graded.

            by PavePusher on Wed May 01, 2013 at 10:00:45 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  So, the rest of us will cower in the bushes (0+ / 0-)

              waiting for the Gun Pro Staff to write us some meaningful legislation because everyone else is too ignorant to do it.  

              Fuck.

              Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

              by Mark Mywurtz on Wed May 01, 2013 at 04:24:57 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  No one claimed... (4+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                PavePusher, KVoimakas, noway2, johnel

                ...that "everyone else" is too ignorant to write the legislation -- once again, you have resorted to an outright falsehood to support a contention that you apparently have no real support for.

                What was quite clearly stated, however, is that people who are ignorant of a subject are probably not qualified to craft legislation about that subject.

                Pretty straightforward, really.  It is really quite sad how you seem to find it necessary to repeatedly resort to such dishonest tactics.

                Yes, I often dress as a pirate. Your point?

                by theatre goon on Wed May 01, 2013 at 06:43:36 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Apparently (0+ / 0-)

                  you get to decide how informed someone must be about guns before they are no longer too ignorant to be part of the debate.  (With the implication, of course, that once they come around to your views, then they are truly 'informed'.)

                  Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

                  by Mark Mywurtz on Wed May 01, 2013 at 07:44:39 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  OK, but would you admit that someone who, (6+ / 0-)

                    when asked if they know what the thing is that they're trying to ban, (which would seem to be an essential component of knowing why it should be banned,) says "it's a shoulder thing that goes up," when the thing is actually a hand thing that goes down, might not know enough about the subject to be writing laws about it?

                    We do want the people who write the laws that we all have to live under to be somewhat informed about the subjects they're legislating, right?

                    --Shannon

                    "It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees." -- Emiliano Zapata Salazar
                    "Dissent is patriotic. Blind obedience is treason." --me

                    by Leftie Gunner on Wed May 01, 2013 at 09:27:34 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Of course (0+ / 0-)

                      But I reject the notion that guns somehow fit into some special category of required expertise for legislation.  We have laws covering all aspects of our lives and it only seems to be when those laws might pertain to guns do we hear this kind of screaming for a particular level of technical knowledge.  We don't say that a legislator has to be a mechanic to make a traffic law that might affect car use or laws affecting the sales of cars--if we did, we wouldn't have any traffic or auto sales laws at all.  

                      I don't know why guns would fit into a special category...except for "because you want it that way"...which would, of course, be a way to stifle debate and prevent action by, again, declaring Legislator X or Debater X too ignorant to participate.  

                      Gun legislation need only be complicated if we make it that way.  Wading into the weeds with the NRA lobby and its supporters never results in anything positive.  

                      Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

                      by Mark Mywurtz on Thu May 02, 2013 at 04:00:03 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Really? (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        theatre goon, Wordsinthewind, johnel

                        So the complaint about men not having any 'first hand' knowledge when it comes to restricting abortion doesn't count? Isn't that where we get bullshit political terms like partial birth abortion?

                        My position (in case there is any question as to where I stand): abortion should be free, federally funded, and the mother's decision up to birth.

                        Republicans cause more damage than guns ever will. Share Our Wealth

                        by KVoimakas on Thu May 02, 2013 at 05:16:00 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                  •  You misrepresent what I stated. (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Wordsinthewind, johnel

                    At not point did I say anything along the lines of "...once they come around to your views, then they are truly 'informed'."

                    Nor did I claim to be any sort of arbiter about how informed someone must be to have a meaningful opinion about firearms.

                    Yet again, you resort to falsehoods to support your arguments.

                    Yes, I often dress as a pirate. Your point?

                    by theatre goon on Thu May 02, 2013 at 04:24:36 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

              •  It's not a difficult subject... (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                theatre goon, Wordsinthewind, johnel

                to become familiar with.

                But you have to want to cure your ignorance.

                The choice, as always, is yours and yours alone.

                Your hate-mail will be graded.

                by PavePusher on Wed May 01, 2013 at 08:14:18 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I'm sure (0+ / 0-)

                  that unless I come around to your views, I'll be too ignorant by your standards to have a credible opinion.  

                  Since you're tooting your own horn as a gun expert, it sure would be nice if you had something beneficial  to add.  

                  Instead, you'd rather reflexively fight any kind of sensible gun safety reform.

                  Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

                  by Mark Mywurtz on Wed May 01, 2013 at 08:19:31 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Have fun beating up your strawman. (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    theatre goon, Wordsinthewind, johnel

                    If you're ever in the Tucson area, I'd be happy to take you to the range and teach you about the subject.  

                    Have a good night.

                    Your hate-mail will be graded.

                    by PavePusher on Wed May 01, 2013 at 09:20:49 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  We're not talking about gun handling (0+ / 0-)

                      At least I'm not.  Safe gun handling is important, but it's more about WHO can buy guns and WHAT guns are being cranked out for general consumption and WHAT are the reasonable uses for those guns.  All topics that a day at the range wouldn't change much.  

                      Political compass: -8.75 / -4.72

                      by Mark Mywurtz on Thu May 02, 2013 at 04:11:48 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site