Graham introduces background check bill with NRA backing

[texanjoker]

NRA - where were they in the State of CA when they banned all sorts of stuff in the 90's?

[Keith B]

NRA - where were they in the State of CA when they banned all sorts of stuff in the 90's?

I'm sure the NRA was there, but you have state associations that must lobby the representatives or you can't get anything done. If your state association was not there, then the NRA would not be able to get any foot hold. That is why we are so lucking in Texas to have the TSRA PAC team we have who have built a great relationship with our legislators and have a solid voice in Austin. One of those main folks is our own Charles Cotton that has done more for us regaining gun rights in this state than anyone I know.

[stevie_d_64]

You know, I had to go to the bathroom and check in the mirror...

My neck is NOT red...

But my head is certainly round...

I'm still not sure if anyone really gives a hoot about what I say about anything...Still working on that...

I know my wife definetly has some sort of "Husband Remote" that helps her "mute" me from time to time...

[The Annoyed Man]

Like almost all proposals aimed at "doing something," this one doesn't seem to promise any real effectiveness.

This law won't stop "some dude" who stole my pistol from selling it to the perp who got caught with it, having bought it for $200, no background check, no paperwork, no ten day wait, probably not even a cancelled check. The perp was good and ineligible, underaged, a prison record already. They weren't going to use an FFL, NICS or any other formality, and don't give a flip what the Legislature wants, Congress wants or anything else.

This and similar transactions, the ones we really do want to stop, will go on unimpeded, while some otherwise lawful transfers will be stopped.

And antis argue that the way to fix that "loophole" is to (besides requiring an FFL and NICS to process every private transaction) to make it a criminal offense to fail to report a stolen firearm to the police. Well, the only way that particular "loophole" can be made relevant and enforceable is to require that the police know about all of your guns, and the only way to fix that "loophole" is to require universal registration. And the only way to implement universal registration is to fix another "loophole" by mandating zero grandfathering of currently owned firearms, so that all previously purchased firearms are accounted for in the national registry. And the only way to enforce the addition of privately owned firearms to the national registry is to pass a law temporarily suspending the 4th Amendment and conducting involuntary door to door searches to account for those firearms. Then that "suspension of the 4th" law will be used as a precedent so that all homes can be swept for any other kind of projectile weapon such as compound bows and crossbows (sportsmen and hunters will be allowed to keep their old long-bows, but they can only have 3 arrows in the home). And finally, that law will be used to justify the installation of video monitoring equipment in each home, linked to Fusion Centers, to make sure that you don't have any steak knives with pointy tips.

I agree with RoyGBiv that this may be the best deal we can get, but JALLEN is right, it won't stop even the adjudicated mentally unfit from getting a gun if they want one. Our rights aside, the only way to make sure that criminals and the insane don't get their hands on guns is to literally find and physically destroy every single gun on the planet. Even the militaries of the world cannot be allowed guns because individual personnel sometimes have a habit of parting out a gun as "damaged parts" and shipping them home in somebody's seabag (I myself own one gun which was acquired by my father in such a manner). As long as there is such a thing as a gun on planet earth, some of them will wind up in the hands of people who shouldn't have them, and some of them will wind up in the hands of good people who are sane enough to say "bag this! If bad and crazy people have guns, then I'm going to get one too—even if it's illegal—to protect me and mine from armed bad and crazy people."

No....there is only ONE way to make all this work, and that is to A) get government out of the business of regulating what we can or can't buy or what we are required to buy (health insurance, for instance); and B) get government out of the business of adjudicating sanity. The world is not without risk, and it is not, nor should it be, government's role to minimize or mitigate risk. Every layer of risk management and security that the government lays upon us is another step away from encouraging personal responsibility among the people.

Let the people be as armed as they want to be, and every real statistic and all the lessons of history say that crime will decline. There will always be crazy people. They existed in both the Old and New Testaments. And communities will simply have to be left alone to figure out how to deal with them equitably and mercifully without sacrificing the public safety; but the notion that there is a single federal standard, a "one size fits all" approach that will do it better at the local level than the locals themselves can do it is not only boneheaded and false, but it encourages local communities to abandon their responsibilities to their fellow citizens in a just and merciful manner.

This pending bill may be what we have to do to fend off the looters in our country, but it will only be temporary, and it will eventually be used as a stepping stone to further restrictions—because THAT is the political history of our nation. Each time the left wants something, it requires another incremental emasculation of the right. The left never gives an inch or compromises. Their general approach is always this: "We both have a right, but I don't exercise mine, so we're going to cut your right in half, and we'll call that a 'compromise.'" I don't blame the NRA for doing what it thinks is the least poisonous thing in defense of our RKBA (I am an Endowment Member and support NRA financially to the extent that I'm able), but this is not over with the passage of this bill.

The NRA is like the boy with his finger in the dike. He stops the leak, but there's no assistance from the water on the other side of the dike to stop the water pressure against that plug; and eventually another leak springs forth 3 feet way, and the boy reaches way over and sticks another finger in that leak. And pretty soon other leaks spring forth and the boy stretches out and plugs them with his toes, and now the water on the other side of the dike has the boy right where it wants him, spread-eagle and ready for gutting.

In the end, as a people we are going to live with one of two alternatives: universal disarmament, or revolution. Nobody in their right mind wants either alternative, but that is exactly where the excesses of the left are leading us. I'm not even convinced that bills like the one above will buy us any time, but I agree that the NONONONONONONO faction are not going to buy us any time either.

I'm depressed as heck about this stuff...........but don't tell the courts that I'm depressed about it or they'll take away my guns.

NRA - where were they in the State of CA when they banned all sorts of stuff in the 90's?

I was there. There simply weren't enough of us California voters who cared to stop that stuff. You can't blame it on the NRA. That would be an irrational accusation. That was entirely the fault of the neocoms in California government, and the dumbing down of California's educational system—now one of the very worst in the country, when it used to be among the very best.

[Aggie_engr]

I personally think we have enough firearms laws in this country. Do we really need any more? The answer is simply no.

[anygunanywhere]

No, this is the senator (singular) who thinks this way. Admittedly there are a few others on her boat, but overall this type or rhetoric will cause her discredit with her peers.

One of the things you need to think about is your level of fear. It seems you believe everyone is in cahoots and they are all out to take us down. While there are several in the anti-gun crowd in Washington than have been able to gain traction by sensationalizing the Newtown shootings, reasonable legislation can be implemented and the ludicrous over the top gun-grab bills can be blocked. To do this you must keep a level head and not get in a Chicken Little mode running around yelling 'The sky is falling'. Take off your tin hats, look logically at the pending legislation (which is a threat for sure), approach your representatives in a strong but business-like manner expressing your views and wants, and make sure your voice is heard as a level headed person and you are not perceived as some deranged gun-loving redneck

I seriously doubt that feinsteins rhetoric will discredit her with too many in the senate. The majority of them are exactly like her, some more obvious than others.

My "level of fear" is quite well founded given the actions of this legislature and administration. Most of them are out to take America down.

I am tired of being accused of wearing a tin hat. This label is demeaning and I object to its use. I do my part in expressing my opinions to my representative and senators.

My strength of convictions and belief that the Second Amendment is meant to be taken literally as written do not make me a deranged gun loving redneck. I am a Consitution loving individual, a veteran, and I love my country, my state, and want to enjoy a life without the shackles of a tyrannical government that acts as if they can solve all of my problems. I want the government to govern by the rule of law, the Constitution, and leave me alone.

As I have stated before I have no trust or faith in anything that comes out of DC these days. A government that ignores the facts surrounding the economy, the deficit spending, and all other far more important issues and focuses on these trivial details in a never ending attempt to erode away our freedoms is not a valid government.

Anygunanywhere

[SewTexas]

I personally think we have enough firearms laws in this country. Do we really need any more? The answer is simply no.

wrong....I really, really, really NEED that lilac ruger lc9

edit : I'm sorry I really read Aggie's note wrong....I missed the word "laws". I'm going to go do something constructive now.

[suthdj]

Where is the ctrl-alt-delete buttons for this country only thing going to help it now is a good reboot. Sorry for the rant but I get tired of all the politics they play. just "geter done"

[Slowplay]

The media and the folks in the middle are a fickle bunch. While most in the media have a pretty firm ideology, their "news" coverage flows like water through whatever hot topics are helping to flood or sink their politically-minded opposition (while not completely jumping the shark - they have to maintain some professional decorum).

Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems the gun control topic is waning in the news cycle. Regardless, the important thing is to make sure the liberal/progressives lose ground and lose power, not us. They are the ones fighting for post-Constitutional rule and the continued infringement of rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Those rights stand in the way of their utopia.

Who is helped with the in-fighting and a circular firing squad squabbles we are now seeing? Bottom line - Reid has no reason to help get this through unless it would it help the dems politically...and I'm not seeing that (but repubs fighting over it do help the dems).

[RottenApple]

Where is the ctrl-alt-delete buttons for this country only thing going to help it now is a good reboot. Sorry for the rant but I get tired of all the politics they play. just "geter done"

It's called the Second Amendment. Or, as my Pop likes to call it, The Constitutional Reset Button. And every day that goes by brings us closer and closer to having to use it.

[cw3van]

I am sure the NRA appreciates you just reading the first paragraph.

I read the whole article.

I also posted more reasons for my objection, which, by the way, applies to all infringements and firearms regulations.

Congress has no constitutional authority to pass any firearms laws. None.

Furthermore, this allowing the federal government the authority to determine sanity or insanity, or whether or not someone can purchase, own, or carry firearms is in the extreme absurd.

The government in its present form can do NOTHING right. NOTHING!> I trust the federal govertnment with NOTHING. All three branches are corrupt and do not follow the Constitution at all unless it furthers their agenda of running this country into the ground, turning it into a socilaist mecca.

Anygunanywhere

I know folks get a little hot under the collar when talking about the 2A but I must say if anyone believes that the gun grabbers will be happy with a few changes in the law well I think your spoon fell out of your cereal bowl. These folks want a total ban on firearms in this country & won't stop until they have it. The goal here is to start chipping away at our 2A very much like the ole float the pumpkin down the river trick. If they can get some stuff here they will be back & very soon right now just throwing wild punches trying to see where we're weak.

[mojo84]

Sometimes throwing the anti-gun crowd a bone will help sway public opinion and perception that at least something is being done. At this point, it is easy for the anti-gun crowd to sway the less informed less interested emotionally driven public their way.

I don't think anyone believes this will satisfy their objectives but it may help strengthen the pro 2nd Amendment position.

Then again, I am a complete amateur in the political arena and am doing my best to learn how the game is played as we go.

[cw3van]

Sometimes throwing the anti-gun crowd a bone will help sway public opinion and perception that at least something is being done. At this point, it is easy for the anti-gun crowd to sway the less informed less interested emotionally driven public their way.

I don't think anyone believes this will satisfy their objectives but it may help strengthen the pro 2nd Amendment position.

Then again, I am a complete amateur in the politics arena and am doing my best to learn how the game is played as we go.

Sir I too am an amateur when it comes to politics was a public servant a lot of my adult life now find as I'm getting older have to learn to bend a little more than I want. I may vent a little but when it comes time to listen I take my lead from people like Mr Cotton who has done a lot more for our gun rights than I could have ever done seems he's right a whole lot more than wrong.

[Zoo]

Conservatives need better marketing. Instead of being simple and straightforward by calling it Voter ID, we should have sold it as closing the dead voter loophole and stopping high capacity assault hollow votes.

[cw3van]

Conservatives need better marketing. Instead of being simple and straightforward by calling it Voter ID, we should have sold it as closing the dead voter loophole and stopping high capacity assault hollow votes.

Now that's funny