Bill Background Checks on Guns Rejected.

It's embarrassing that this bill didn't pass.

Anytime anybody tries to use the Constitution as an argument it just makes me so sick I want to vomit. At the time of the writing of the Constitution they had MUSKETS. Real bullets didn't even exist. There is no way in hell the founding fathers would advocate people owning the types of weapons that exist today. It is just completely unnecessary.

Why people would NOT want background checks on guns purchased at gun shows and over the internet makes no logical sense. All this does is create a huge opportunity for a psychopath to buy a gun over the internet or from a gun show and walk into another school or public place and murder our people. If you buy a gun from a gun DEALER there is already a law that has a mandatory background check. All this bill would have done was extend that law to internet and gun shows so that criminals can not illegally and anonymously acquire guns.

Mind boggling. Republicans really need to get with the program and join the rest of us in the 21st century.

this


as a gun owner, i think most of us dont mind a gun background check.

but taking away guns is another story.


its just scare tactics by the government......most people who voted for this bill dont even know how to hold a gun correctly......guns dont kill people.....people do.

So then I guess when they said freedom of the press they wouldn't have wanted it to extend to the internet or TV?



The myth about the gun show loop hole stems from a 1997 survey of roughly 250 people from guns they bought in 1993 and 1994. That was BEFORE there was a system of background checks that we know today as NICS.

You honestly think that making more gun laws will stop criminals from getting guns?

It's embarrassing that such a blatant infringement upon the Constitution was even introduced as a bill. If anything, this should be a Constitutional Amendment, similar to Prohibition.



Oh, I'm sorry. Did my right to defend myself get in the way of your tyranny?



So did the government.



Oh yeah?


"What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty.... Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins." (Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, spoken during floor debate over the Second Amendment [ I Annals of Congress at 750 {August 17, 1789}])

"Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." (James Madison, The Federalist Papers #46 at 243-244)

"the ultimate authority ... resides in the people alone," (James Madison, author of the Bill of Rights, in Federalist Paper #46.)

"Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state government, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people" (Tench Coxe, Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788)

"The Constitution shall never be construed....to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms" (Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 86-87)

"The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them." (Zachariah Johnson, 3 Elliot, Debates at 646)

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined or determined to commit crimes. Such laws only make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assassins; they serve to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." (1764 Letter and speech from T. Jefferson quoting with approval an essay by Cesare Beccari)

"The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -- (Thomas Jefferson)

----

As Thomas Jefferson explained, the people need to be sufficiently able to protect themselves from tyranny.

Sorry, I'm not cool with another Nazi regime. You go ahead and keep on believing that the government is all-loving, all-giving, though.

Then what's the point of the bill? If criminals will still get guns then what good will the law do? Criminals don't care about the law.

I think the point of the bill is to make the public happy and feel like they're actually doing something. When in reality what they are doing doesn't even matter.

But as you said background checks haven't helped in recent cases.

If someone is intent on breaking the law and killing someone, I highly doubt they will let a rejection from a gun shop due to a failed background check stop them. If they are going to kill, one more broken law isn't going to matter.

I don't get this "it hasn't helped that much, why bother?" thing that a lot of Americans seem to say.

Isn't different/more thorough background checks worth it if it saves even a few lives? Let me guess, we should stop giving to charity since poverty will never end?

So Congress should pass more laws that don't actually do anything because they don't harm anyone?

I'm confused by what you mean that it isn't a bad thing to force criminals to get guns illegally.

How do you know it will save lives? How do you know that a person who gets rejected won't buy a gun illegally and still kill? If someone is intent on killing they aren't going to bother following gun laws.

Charity is a voluntary thing and you can do what you want with your money.