|
Your continuous donations keep RPGWatch running!
RPGWatch Forums » General Forums » Politics & Religion » Background checks - what's the deal?

Default Background checks - what's the deal?

April 17th, 2013, 16:58
"The bipartisan effort to expand background checks will not have the votes to advance in the Senate today, according to one of the architects of the deal.

"We will not get the votes today," Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., told NBC News.

Potential supporters, Republican Sens. Jeff Flake, of Arizona, and Florida’s Marco Rubio, could not risk a stand on background checks in the face of opposition from their conservative base because they are already leading on immigration, Manchin said."

http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/nationa…203365291.html

Can somebody explain to me what seems to be the problem? I thought that expanded background checks were a common sense way of preventing guns falling into the hands of the more disturbed individuals. But, apparently, some folks have problem even with that?
Last edited by zahratustra; April 17th, 2013 at 17:50.
zahratustra is offline

zahratustra

SasqWatch

#1

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,349

Default 

April 17th, 2013, 17:12
It is common sense. Unfortunately common sense is not common. I didn't support this deal because it did nto go far enough. It exempted background checks for inherited guns or sales to relatives or neighbors.

————————————————-

"Ya'll can go to HELL! I'm-a-goin' to TEXAS!"

- Davy Crockett
blatantninja is offline

blatantninja

blatantninja's Avatar
Resident Redneck Facist

#2

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 4,089

Default 

April 17th, 2013, 17:36
Background checks is a no brainer to me. With how broken Washington is, they need to take what they can get. I have zero confidence a truly smart compromise will be done.
Toff is offline

Toff

Toff's Avatar
Sentinel

#3

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Houston Texas
Posts: 530

Default 

April 17th, 2013, 17:58
I know that neither of you is a "conservative base" mentioned in my quote but does anybody have a clue what aforementioned "base" beef with this watered down bill?
zahratustra is offline

zahratustra

SasqWatch

#4

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,349

Default 

April 17th, 2013, 18:05
It will implement background checks at gun shows and I believe private sales, which means that you can't just go to a gun show, pay your money and take home your gun.

Some don't like being inconvienced. Others think, wrongly, that the right to bear arms is absolute.

————————————————-

"Ya'll can go to HELL! I'm-a-goin' to TEXAS!"

- Davy Crockett
blatantninja is offline

blatantninja

blatantninja's Avatar
Resident Redneck Facist

#5

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 4,089

Default 

April 17th, 2013, 18:11
I think it boils down to a slippery slope argument. The gun control folks have openly stated many times that their plan is to take many small steps toward a complete ban. Even if a given program makes good sense (as this one does, at least to me), it's viewed as part of a broader plot. Sure, the "militia righties" are being paranoid about what will be done with such a list, but when the other side openly states that they're not negotiating in good faith it gets pretty hard to trust them on anything.

Sorry. No pearls of wisdom in this oyster.
Dallas Cowboys: Afraid to hope / / Detroit Red Wings: Another rollercoaster season?
dteowner is offline

dteowner

dteowner's Avatar
Shoegazer

#6

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Indiana, USA
Posts: 11,328

Default 

April 17th, 2013, 19:25
There are plenty of people who do not believe in a complete ban but think that better background checks is a good idea. These are reasonable people. The extreme on the far right (who are the base of the Republican party) are not reasonable. They are paranoids who think the government is going to take control of their life.
Thrasher is offline

Thrasher

Thrasher's Avatar
Wheeee!
RPGWatch Donor

#7

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Studio City, CA
Posts: 10,007

Default 

April 17th, 2013, 19:52
That's because the extreme on the far left want to.

And that's the problem, our elected officials have become beholden to the extremes.

————————————————-

"Ya'll can go to HELL! I'm-a-goin' to TEXAS!"

- Davy Crockett
blatantninja is offline

blatantninja

blatantninja's Avatar
Resident Redneck Facist

#8

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 4,089

Default 

April 17th, 2013, 20:32
What does this term "background checks" imply ? Any crimes ?

Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction. (E.F.Schumacher, Economist, Source)
Alrik Fassbauer is offline

Alrik Fassbauer

Alrik Fassbauer's Avatar
TL;DR

#9

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Old Europe
Posts: 15,987

Default 

April 17th, 2013, 20:48
Mainly so. It will bring up if you meet any of the criteria that would violate the law to sell you a weapon. I believe, though I could be wrong, that you have to state on the app that you don't have any mental illness that would make it a danger to yourself or others to possess the weapon, of course that's not worth much since its dependent on the honor system.

————————————————-

"Ya'll can go to HELL! I'm-a-goin' to TEXAS!"

- Davy Crockett
blatantninja is offline

blatantninja

blatantninja's Avatar
Resident Redneck Facist

#10

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 4,089

Default 

April 17th, 2013, 21:40
Originally Posted by Thrasher View Post
The extreme on the far right (who are the base of the Republican party) are not reasonable. They are paranoids who think the government is going to take control of their life.
You're letting your stereotyping show. All it takes is a quick thought to know that your statement simply does not hold water. 29% of Americans self-identify as Republican (31% as democrat, for comparison). Presumably, to be considered a "base", a group should be at least half of the whole, yes? So, you're claiming 14% of all Americans are "extreme on the far right". It follows that 14% of all Americans would be considered "extreme on the far left", assuming something close to a normal distribution. So you're wanting to label roughly a quarter of all Americans as extremists. We appear to have a different definition of "extreme".

If you want to demonize the other side with some broad brush slander, it's generally best to make sure your numbers at least sorta kinda stand up to scrutiny.

Sorry. No pearls of wisdom in this oyster.
Dallas Cowboys: Afraid to hope / / Detroit Red Wings: Another rollercoaster season?
dteowner is offline

dteowner

dteowner's Avatar
Shoegazer

#11

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Indiana, USA
Posts: 11,328

Default 

April 17th, 2013, 22:24
Originally Posted by blatantninja View Post
That's because the extreme on the far left want to.

And that's the problem, our elected officials have become beholden to the extremes.
That's simply not true.
Thrasher is offline

Thrasher

Thrasher's Avatar
Wheeee!
RPGWatch Donor

#12

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Studio City, CA
Posts: 10,007

Default 

April 17th, 2013, 22:25
There you go strawmanning again DTE, with false claims about what I actually said. Not surprised.
Thrasher is offline

Thrasher

Thrasher's Avatar
Wheeee!
RPGWatch Donor

#13

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Studio City, CA
Posts: 10,007

Default 

April 17th, 2013, 22:26
Originally Posted by Thrasher View Post
That's simply not true.
Bullshit. The far left has as much influence of people like Nancy Pelosi as the far right has over Michelle Bachman.

————————————————-

"Ya'll can go to HELL! I'm-a-goin' to TEXAS!"

- Davy Crockett
blatantninja is offline

blatantninja

blatantninja's Avatar
Resident Redneck Facist

#14

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 4,089

Default 

April 17th, 2013, 22:31
No, you said that the far left wants government to take control of all people's lives. That is not true. Or you were just being unclear. If so, clarify.
Last edited by Thrasher; April 18th, 2013 at 00:07.
Thrasher is offline

Thrasher

Thrasher's Avatar
Wheeee!
RPGWatch Donor

#15

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Studio City, CA
Posts: 10,007

Default 

April 17th, 2013, 23:55
the gun lobby, not the gun industry, fears this will create a central repository of gun owners for the government to hound in the future. Its as simple as that, truism or paranoia. I am friends with a couple of gun hoarders. As much as I hate the things fear of the gov't is their main argument, even for buying an anti-tank weapon.

They're also a great investment, though no one will state that. You can always find a buyer and they only seem to in

Developer of The Wizard's Grave Android game. Discussion Thread:
http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22520
Lucky Day is offline

Lucky Day

Lucky Day's Avatar
Daywatch

#16

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Uncanny Valley
Posts: 3,199

Default 

April 18th, 2013, 03:41
It should be noted that background checks are mandatory in nearly every state for the types of guns that are used in 98% of gun violence. Maybe some people think its silly to pass laws that have little chance of actually accomplishing their stated goals. Especially when that law contains a variety of other measures whose long term effects on the situation are unclear.

One of the biggest problems we have is that people tend to judge bills based on their name or some popular description, rather than their content. Of course that makes it especially easy to demonize its detractors. "He voted against the violence prevention act! How can anyone be against preventing violence!" Most of the political arguments you hear these days (from anyone) are just long sequences of thought terminating cliches.
CrazyIrish is offline

CrazyIrish

Keeper of the Watch

#17

Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 604

Default 

April 18th, 2013, 03:44
Originally Posted by Thrasher View Post
No, you said that the far left wants government to take control of all people's lives. That is not true. Or you were just being unclear. If so, clarify.
Actually the far left and the far right both want to control peoples lives. I think this is fairly obvious to anyone that steps back and stops looking at the world through partisan colored glasses.
CrazyIrish is offline

CrazyIrish

Keeper of the Watch

#18

Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 604

Default 

April 18th, 2013, 15:54
Originally Posted by Thrasher View Post
There you go strawmanning again DTE, with false claims about what I actually said. Not surprised.
I even quoted what you actually said. All I did was spell out for you the numerical implications of exactly what you said. That's not strawman—that's simply doing the thinking you were too lazy or too foamy to consider.

Sorry. No pearls of wisdom in this oyster.
Dallas Cowboys: Afraid to hope / / Detroit Red Wings: Another rollercoaster season?
dteowner is offline

dteowner

dteowner's Avatar
Shoegazer

#19

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Indiana, USA
Posts: 11,328

Default 

April 19th, 2013, 05:09
Does anyone have a link to the text of the expanded gun background check proposal? I searched the library of congress but didn't find it…
MasterKromm is offline

MasterKromm

Sentinel

#20

Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 376
RPGWatch Forums » General Forums » Politics & Religion » Background checks - what's the deal?
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 19:07.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch