TexasCHLforum.com

jmra wrote:

K5GU wrote:

jmra wrote:

K5GU wrote:

Pawpaw wrote:

K5GU wrote:Right. I don't think we need registration, which can develop into an expensive and mismanaged administrative nightmare. But I do think the purchase of any firearm or lethal weapon needs at least a criminal background check. I would also like to see more (enhanced) firearm management education for firearm owners to attempt to lower the chance of accidental discharges, but I guess that's for another thread?

Bull! Making things more and more inconvenient for law abiding citizens has never worked and never will. Making me go through a background check will have exactly zero effect on a criminal getting a gun. It won't even slow him down, but he might laugh as more and more money is wasted on such stupid efforts.

Okay. So you don't believe there should be a background check when you purchase and then carry a handgun?

Of course I don't believe that law abiding citizens should have to undergo background checks. Why should I?

Maybe I'm dumber than I should be and with all due respect, what other method could there be to determine if we are law-abiding citizens?

We are innocent until proven guilty. We as law abiding citizens shouldn't have to prove anything in order to exercise our God given right.

K5GU wrote:

jmra wrote:

K5GU wrote:

Pawpaw wrote:

K5GU wrote:Right. I don't think we need registration, which can develop into an expensive and mismanaged administrative nightmare. But I do think the purchase of any firearm or lethal weapon needs at least a criminal background check. I would also like to see more (enhanced) firearm management education for firearm owners to attempt to lower the chance of accidental discharges, but I guess that's for another thread?

Bull! Making things more and more inconvenient for law abiding citizens has never worked and never will. Making me go through a background check will have exactly zero effect on a criminal getting a gun. It won't even slow him down, but he might laugh as more and more money is wasted on such stupid efforts.

Okay. So you don't believe there should be a background check when you purchase and then carry a handgun?

Of course I don't believe that law abiding citizens should have to undergo background checks. Why should I?

Maybe I'm dumber than I should be and with all due respect, what other method could there be to determine if we are law-abiding citizens? This of course is in the context of a legitimate purchase from a federally regulated FFL, which is in place today.

K5GU wrote:

jmra wrote:

K5GU wrote:

jmra wrote:

K5GU wrote:

Pawpaw wrote:

K5GU wrote:Right. I don't think we need registration, which can develop into an expensive and mismanaged administrative nightmare. But I do think the purchase of any firearm or lethal weapon needs at least a criminal background check. I would also like to see more (enhanced) firearm management education for firearm owners to attempt to lower the chance of accidental discharges, but I guess that's for another thread?

Bull! Making things more and more inconvenient for law abiding citizens has never worked and never will. Making me go through a background check will have exactly zero effect on a criminal getting a gun. It won't even slow him down, but he might laugh as more and more money is wasted on such stupid efforts.

Okay. So you don't believe there should be a background check when you purchase and then carry a handgun?

Of course I don't believe that law abiding citizens should have to undergo background checks. Why should I?

Maybe I'm dumber than I should be and with all due respect, what other method could there be to determine if we are law-abiding citizens?

We are innocent until proven guilty. We as law abiding citizens shouldn't have to prove anything in order to exercise our God given right.

Your post came after my last edit/quote. But educate me please. How is it determined by an FFL or anyone else, that we are law abiding if there's not some recorded data somewhere??

anygunanywhere wrote:

K5GU wrote:

jmra wrote:

K5GU wrote:

Pawpaw wrote:

K5GU wrote:Right. I don't think we need registration, which can develop into an expensive and mismanaged administrative nightmare. But I do think the purchase of any firearm or lethal weapon needs at least a criminal background check. I would also like to see more (enhanced) firearm management education for firearm owners to attempt to lower the chance of accidental discharges, but I guess that's for another thread?

Bull! Making things more and more inconvenient for law abiding citizens has never worked and never will. Making me go through a background check will have exactly zero effect on a criminal getting a gun. It won't even slow him down, but he might laugh as more and more money is wasted on such stupid efforts.

Okay. So you don't believe there should be a background check when you purchase and then carry a handgun?

Of course I don't believe that law abiding citizens should have to undergo background checks. Why should I?

Maybe I'm dumber than I should be and with all due respect, what other method could there be to determine if we are law-abiding citizens? This of course is in the context of a legitimate purchase from a federally regulated FFL, which is in place today.

Papers! Let me see your papers, subject!

K5GU wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote:

K5GU wrote:

jmra wrote:

K5GU wrote:

Pawpaw wrote:

K5GU wrote:Right. I don't think we need registration, which can develop into an expensive and mismanaged administrative nightmare. But I do think the purchase of any firearm or lethal weapon needs at least a criminal background check. I would also like to see more (enhanced) firearm management education for firearm owners to attempt to lower the chance of accidental discharges, but I guess that's for another thread?

Bull! Making things more and more inconvenient for law abiding citizens has never worked and never will. Making me go through a background check will have exactly zero effect on a criminal getting a gun. It won't even slow him down, but he might laugh as more and more money is wasted on such stupid efforts.

Okay. So you don't believe there should be a background check when you purchase and then carry a handgun?

Of course I don't believe that law abiding citizens should have to undergo background checks. Why should I?

Maybe I'm dumber than I should be and with all due respect, what other method could there be to determine if we are law-abiding citizens? This of course is in the context of a legitimate purchase from a federally regulated FFL, which is in place today.

Papers! Let me see your papers, subject!

K5GU wrote:

K5GU wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote:

K5GU wrote:

jmra wrote:

K5GU wrote:

Pawpaw wrote:

K5GU wrote:Right. I don't think we need registration, which can develop into an expensive and mismanaged administrative nightmare. But I do think the purchase of any firearm or lethal weapon needs at least a criminal background check. I would also like to see more (enhanced) firearm management education for firearm owners to attempt to lower the chance of accidental discharges, but I guess that's for another thread?

Bull! Making things more and more inconvenient for law abiding citizens has never worked and never will. Making me go through a background check will have exactly zero effect on a criminal getting a gun. It won't even slow him down, but he might laugh as more and more money is wasted on such stupid efforts.

Okay. So you don't believe there should be a background check when you purchase and then carry a handgun?

Of course I don't believe that law abiding citizens should have to undergo background checks. Why should I?

Maybe I'm dumber than I should be and with all due respect, what other method could there be to determine if we are law-abiding citizens? This of course is in the context of a legitimate purchase from a federally regulated FFL, which is in place today.

Papers! Let me see your papers, subject!

jmra wrote:

K5GU wrote:

K5GU wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote:

K5GU wrote:

jmra wrote:

K5GU wrote:

Pawpaw wrote:

K5GU wrote:Right. I don't think we need registration, which can develop into an expensive and mismanaged administrative nightmare. But I do think the purchase of any firearm or lethal weapon needs at least a criminal background check. I would also like to see more (enhanced) firearm management education for firearm owners to attempt to lower the chance of accidental discharges, but I guess that's for another thread?

Bull! Making things more and more inconvenient for law abiding citizens has never worked and never will. Making me go through a background check will have exactly zero effect on a criminal getting a gun. It won't even slow him down, but he might laugh as more and more money is wasted on such stupid efforts.

Okay. So you don't believe there should be a background check when you purchase and then carry a handgun?

Of course I don't believe that law abiding citizens should have to undergo background checks. Why should I?

Maybe I'm dumber than I should be and with all due respect, what other method could there be to determine if we are law-abiding citizens? This of course is in the context of a legitimate purchase from a federally regulated FFL, which is in place today.

Papers! Let me see your papers, subject!

Unfortunately it's not a laughing matter.

K5GU wrote:So what do you all think about SB 718?

jmra wrote:

K5GU wrote:So what do you all think about SB 718?

I think that anyone who supports such a bill either hasn't read the constitution, has read it but doesn't understand it, or has read it and understands it but are intentionally trying to undermine it.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:This bill will not pass. Ironically, it was filed because of constituents who want to bypass the NICS checks without getting a CHL. That's the goal of the bill. Unfortunately, it will be used as a vehicle in the future to require everyone to get such a permit to buy a firearm, must like the FOID card is required in Illinois.

Intentions were good, but the bill is a problem.
Chas.

K5GU wrote:

jmra wrote:

K5GU wrote:So what do you all think about SB 718?

I think that anyone who supports such a bill either hasn't read the constitution, has read it but doesn't understand it, or has read it and understands it but are intentionally trying to undermine it.

I've read it a couple of times and can't find anywhere in the bill that says a permit is required to legally purchase a firearm, so I'm not sure about the intent of Senator Hall. Maybe Charles has some knowledge regarding this and has a post forthcoming related to SB 718.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:This bill will not pass. Ironically, it was filed because of constituents who want to bypass the NICS checks without getting a CHL. That's the goal of the bill. Unfortunately, it will be used as a vehicle in the future to require everyone to get such a permit to buy a firearm, must like the FOID card is required in Illinois.

Intentions were good, but the bill is a problem.
Chas.

Pawpaw wrote:From the founding of this country until 198-something, there were no restrictions AT ALL to buying a weapon. Background checks have done nothing to enhance security or safety in all the decades they have been law.

K5GU wrote: The State Affairs meeting and discussion on this one should be 'entertaining' at least. I'm not sure what the intent of a new 'firearms purchaser's permit' for a handgun is other than maybe in the unlikely case an unlicensed carry bill gets enacted the permit would act similar to showing the FFL your CHL license, which currently speeds up the purchase process.