-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Article: POLL: AMERICANS DON’T UNDERSTAND BACKGROUND CHECKS ARE GUN CONTROL’S TROJAN
- Thread starter Admin
- Start date
The whole background check thing is just a ploy for the antis to get whatever added restrictions they can to move further down the path to complete disarmament of citizens. They all know that more background checks will not prevent any shootings. This has been proven out by the examples in this article (Tuscon and recent TV news shootings) as well as the guy that failed a background check but was still able to purchase a gun.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2009
- Messages
- 4,842
- Likes
- 2,705
If Background Checks are ever Universal (they never will truly be, because criminals won't obey those new laws), when those that pass them commit heinous crimes (as has already happened), the anti-gun extremists will claim the Background Checks need to be STRONGER.
This is their plan. They know background checks won't solve anything. But once they've gained that ground in the trench warfare, they'll change their tune of "no one wants to take your gun away" to "we need to take SOME people's guns away, because they are not fit to own them".
This is their plan. They know background checks won't solve anything. But once they've gained that ground in the trench warfare, they'll change their tune of "no one wants to take your gun away" to "we need to take SOME people's guns away, because they are not fit to own them".
It's all about how you phrase the question. If you ask, "Do you think background checks should be required for all gun buyers?", you will get a very difference response than if you ask, "Do you think the private sale of guns should be banned?".
Polling accuracy depends greatly upon the biases of those asking the questions.
Polling accuracy depends greatly upon the biases of those asking the questions.
one-eyed Jack
Manufacturer
Most don't know what an "Assault Rifle" is either. Jack.
Are there any public statistics on how many gun purchasers FAIL the background check and are denied the purchase? That would be a good indication of their (in)effectiveness, if available.
I don't know what the number is, but I have read that the DoJ can't be bothered to prosecute people who know they are prohibited persons and lie on the 4473.
Also, as breitbart keeps reporting, quite a lot of the mass shooters passed background checks no problem. So that right there says that they are ineffective, at least if you consider the goal to be to stop bad or deranged people from buying guns. As a means of determining who the gun owners are, I'd say background checks are very effective.
Yes, many try, (but probably unwittingly), So we do know the BATF prosecutes very few of these guys that try: 44, (yes 44) out of 48,000 felons who tried to purchase firearms were prosecuted.
Last edited by a moderator:
Whutmeworry
NES Member
Beyond that, it's also an excuse for our government NOT to do it's job, which is to remove those who would harm others from society and KEEP them removed from society. Whenever I get into a debate with those who support background checks (which is often, since so many support the idea), I tell them this.
We also now have concrete proof of the campaign to disarm us via background checks, in the form of the VA forwarding the names of veterans who merely appoint a fiduciary to manage their financial affairs to the NICS system with out any form of due process for the veteran, whatsoever. I have brought this to the attention of background check supporters and they are shocked when they hear this.
We all must do our part to expose the ever-more-obvious lie that the NICS system is good for liberty. Even the NSSF and the NRA are fooled (or are they?).
Universal background checks is the next step that the government is going to take, which will lead to registration, which will lead to confiscation, as it has everywhere else that is has occurred. Don't ever let them lull you into thinking that they will be satisfied with one small step. They plan on pushing through one tiny restriction at a time, until they finally achieve their goal of a completely disarmed society if we allow them to.
And after confiscation comes mass murder or genocide of the disarmed undesirables. History has shown this to be true time and time again.
I believe in the US vs Haynes the court ruled that criminals don't have to register their guns because it violates their 5th amendment right against self incrimination. So if criminals don't have to register their guns the innocent definitely should not have to. The goal is disarmament of the general population so that the corrupt govt. may do as it pleases. History has shown repeatedly that no good comes from registration.
You can only take what you know about.
That's the end game.
"Here's the list boys. , start kicking doors."
Not that they don't already have a pretty good start on that.
If you think those NCIS checks have been deleted as prescribed by law, I have some nice ocean front property in Nevada to sell you.
That's the end game.
"Here's the list boys. , start kicking doors."
Not that they don't already have a pretty good start on that.
If you think those NCIS checks have been deleted as prescribed by law, I have some nice ocean front property in Nevada to sell you.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2009
- Messages
- 4,842
- Likes
- 2,705
Paranoia about gun confiscation will soon be a 4473 question.
Or something like that...
As it is, it is reported that 90% of denials are false denials based on a similar name. I know a guy that was denied due to someone with the same name in Texas that had something from 30 years ago. It didn't matter that it was not him. The SO didn't even bother to verify who it was. They just denied it.
Heck even the DMV screws people with the same name. MASS RMV wouldn't let my brother-in-law renew his license because someone with the same name in Texas had unpaid parking tickets. He had to "prove" that he never lived in Texas because the RMV didn't want to be bothered.
Heck even the DMV screws people with the same name. MASS RMV wouldn't let my brother-in-law renew his license because someone with the same name in Texas had unpaid parking tickets. He had to "prove" that he never lived in Texas because the RMV didn't want to be bothered.
Similar threads
