GUN CONTROL!

[Dyakovo]

Being irresponsible in the purchase or sale of a firearm is an indication of being an irresponsible gun owner.

Already covered that:

Indeed. "Innocent until proven guilty" applies.

Indeed, covered it with a falsehood.

---

And that is exactly what you are arguing for. Allowing criminals to freely buy and sell weapons.

By not requiring background checks for person-to-person sales? That seems like a bit of a stretch.

It isn't a stretch at all. If you had a shred of intellectual honesty you would realize that.

[Hathradic States]

99% of gun owners aren't going to sell to somebody they don't know. And if they already know that someone is a criminal, a background check won't stop them from selling to them.

You* knowing someone is no guarantee of you knowing whether or not they have something in their background that would prohibit them from owning a firearm.
* general you, not specific.

And if you don't, then you've committed a crime and you go to jail. That simple.

[Big Jim P]

Already covered that:

Indeed, covered it with a falsehood.

How would you explain that I covered it in falsehood?

[Dyakovo]

No, it really doesn't.

Yes it does. I am not a criminal. it is the States job to prove that I am, not mine to prove that I am not.

Actually, if you sell a firearm to a criminal, you would be a criminal, and you are arguing against having any way to determine whether or not the person you are selling to is a criminal. Also, a criminal record is not the only thing which does/should prohibit someone from owning a firearm. And finally, the presumption of innocence is for criminal trials, the sale of weapons is not a criminal trial.

[Big Jim P]

Yes it does. I am not a criminal. it is the States job to prove that I am, not mine to prove that I am not.

Actually, if you sell a firearm to a criminal, you would be a criminal, and you are arguing against having any way to determine whether or not the person you are selling to is a criminal. Also, a criminal record is not the only thing which does/should prohibit someone from owning a firearm. And finally, the presumption of innocence is for criminal trials, the sale of weapons is not a criminal trial.

Therefore, I should not be treated as a suspected criminal just to buy a firearm.

[Dyakovo]

One which you are arguing for the de facto legalization of, since you want to make sure there is no system in place to check and see if it is happening inadvertently.

No, I think it should still be illegal to sell to those who can't legally own guns. Part of being a responsible gun owner is knowing who you sell to. If you don't, it is on you and you are a criminal as well.

And yet you are arguing against the way to know whether or not someone is prohibited from owning a firearm, which puts a lie to your claim.

[Hathradic States]

Yes it does. I am not a criminal. it is the States job to prove that I am, not mine to prove that I am not.

Also, a criminal record is not the only thing which does/should prohibit someone from owning a firearm.

Felony record, violent misdemeanor, any involving domestic violence, being under the age of 18 in most states, history of mental health issues...anything I'm missing?

[Dyakovo]

Actually, if you sell a firearm to a criminal, you would be a criminal, and you are arguing against having any way to determine whether or not the person you are selling to is a criminal. Also, a criminal record is not the only thing which does/should prohibit someone from owning a firearm. And finally, the presumption of innocence is for criminal trials, the sale of weapons is not a criminal trial.

Therefore, I should not be treated as a suspected criminal just to buy a firearm.

Background checks are required for everyone to purchase a firearm, not just criminals, therefore having to submit to a background check is not in any way treating you like a criminal.

[Divair]

Also, a criminal record is not the only thing which does/should prohibit someone from owning a firearm.

Felony record, violent misdemeanor, any involving domestic violence, being under the age of 18 in most states, history of mental health issues...anything I'm missing?

http://usgovinfo.about.com/blnoguns.htm

Persons under indictment for, or convicted of, any crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding on year;
Fugitives from justice;
Persons who are unlawful users of, or addicted to, any controlled substance;
Persons who have been declared by a court as mental defectives or have been committed to a mental institution;
Illegal aliens, or aliens who were admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa;
Persons who have been dishonorably discharged from the Armed Forces;
Persons who have renounced their United States citizenship;
Persons subject to certain types of restraining orders; and
Persons who have been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.

[Len Hyet]

Felony record, violent misdemeanor, any involving domestic violence, being under the age of 18 in most states, history of mental health issues...anything I'm missing?

http://usgovinfo.about.com/blnoguns.htm

Persons under indictment for, or convicted of, any crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding on year;
Fugitives from justice;
Persons who are unlawful users of, or addicted to, any controlled substance;
Persons who have been declared by a court as mental defectives or have been committed to a mental institution;
Illegal aliens, or aliens who were admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa;
Persons who have been dishonorably discharged from the Armed Forces;
Persons who have renounced their United States citizenship;
Persons subject to certain types of restraining orders; and
Persons who have been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.

Oh hey, new flag?

[Hathradic States]

No, I think it should still be illegal to sell to those who can't legally own guns. Part of being a responsible gun owner is knowing who you sell to. If you don't, it is on you and you are a criminal as well.

And yet you are arguing against the way to know whether or not someone is prohibited from owning a firearm, which puts a lie to your claim.

I am against it being mandated by law, yes. It infringes on the right to private sales.

[Dyakovo]

Also, a criminal record is not the only thing which does/should prohibit someone from owning a firearm.

Felony record, violent misdemeanor, any involving domestic violence, being under the age of 18 in most states, history of mental health issues...anything I'm missing?

I'll let you try and figure out which of the things you listed are not criminal offenses...

[Divair]

http://usgovinfo.about.com/blnoguns.htm

Oh hey, new flag?

Yes.

And yet you are arguing against the way to know whether or not someone is prohibited from owning a firearm, which puts a lie to your claim.

I am against it being mandated by law, yes. It infringes on the right to private sales.

You've previously admitted to being fine with infringing on rights (remember the nuke convo?). You may want to take another approach, say, debating whether or not the added safety is worth the loss of freedom. Simply say it's a loss of freedom doesn't mean much.

[Dyakovo]

And yet you are arguing against the way to know whether or not someone is prohibited from owning a firearm, which puts a lie to your claim.

I am against it being mandated by law, yes. It infringes on the right to private sales.

There exists no right to sell prohibited items.

[Spirit of Hope]

Felony record, violent misdemeanor, any involving domestic violence, being under the age of 18 in most states, history of mental health issues...anything I'm missing?

http://usgovinfo.about.com/blnoguns.htm

Persons under indictment for, or convicted of, any crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding on year;
Fugitives from justice;
Persons who are unlawful users of, or addicted to, any controlled substance;
Persons who have been declared by a court as mental defectives or have been committed to a mental institution;
Illegal aliens, or aliens who were admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa;
Persons who have been dishonorably discharged from the Armed Forces;
Persons who have renounced their United States citizenship;
Persons subject to certain types of restraining orders; and
Persons who have been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.

I actually don't agree with the dishonorable discharge, or persons who have renounced there citizenship.

[Dyakovo]

http://usgovinfo.about.com/blnoguns.htm

I actually don't agree with the dishonorable discharge, or persons who have renounced there citizenship.

Why?

[Divair]

http://usgovinfo.about.com/blnoguns.htm

I actually don't agree with the dishonorable discharge, or persons who have renounced there citizenship.

That's fine? I don't particularly care. We were clarifying who exactly cannot own guns.

[Hathradic States]

Felony record, violent misdemeanor, any involving domestic violence, being under the age of 18 in most states, history of mental health issues...anything I'm missing?

http://usgovinfo.about.com/blnoguns.htm

Persons under indictment for, or convicted of, any crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding on year;
Fugitives from justice;
Persons who are unlawful users of, or addicted to, any controlled substance;
Persons who have been declared by a court as mental defectives or have been committed to a mental institution;
Illegal aliens, or aliens who were admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa;
Persons who have been dishonorably discharged from the Armed Forces;
Persons who have renounced their United States citizenship;
Persons subject to certain types of restraining orders; and
Persons who have been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.

Okay, no objections to any but the last one on that list.

I got charged with that when I got into a fight with my brother. -_-

Before anybody goes on about how I am felon because I still own guns, I had the whole thing expunged back in August.

[Yue-Laou]

If you sell something it's your job to make sure that the transaction is legal. If you sell someone alcohol you have to make sure he's of legal age and allowed to buy it.

[Tel]

Currently, the system through which you purchase firearms is incredibly lax.

A schizophrenic killer my friend defended in court took a drive down to ____'s guns in my state's capitol city. She had to fill out a basic questionnaire with only one question pertaining to her mental health. It was a 'yes' or 'no' question in relation to whether or not she had any serious mental problems. What do you think she answered?

She got her Beretta 9mm and a clip of ammunition within the next three weeks and murdered her husband with it.
Funny thing, the store owner remarked that nothing appeared to be wrong with her.

That's partially the fault of the mental health system for giving her pills and hoping she takes them, but a good portion of it falls on the fact that trying to find a loaded firearm(legally) in the U.S is like trying to find water in the Atlantic Ocean.

Addressing the system by saying "Registry will be like X" will only leave loopholes. Making gun stores and manufacturers guilty for the crimes that are committed with their weapons, is much better. The Arms industry doesn't like publicity, neither do gun stores. They'd cover the loopholes on their own.

[Hathradic States]

Oh hey, new flag?

Yes.

I am against it being mandated by law, yes. It infringes on the right to private sales.

You've previously admitted to being fine with infringing on rights (remember the nuke convo?). You may want to take another approach, say, debating whether or not the added safety is worth the loss of freedom. Simply say it's a loss of freedom doesn't mean much.

That is not infringing on rights. That's keep the most dangerous weapons where they won't be used. What the the fuck are you on to make you think that keeping nukes away from civilian buyers is in any way infringing on rights?

[Dyakovo]

http://usgovinfo.about.com/blnoguns.htm

Okay, no objections to any but the last one on that list.

I got charged with that when I got into a fight with my brother.

Which goes a long ways in explaining why you do not want universal background checks.

[Imperializt Russia]

http://usgovinfo.about.com/blnoguns.htm

I actually don't agree with the dishonorable discharge, or persons who have renounced there citizenship.

As I recall, it takes quite a bit to actually get dishonourably discharged, so it's probably a justifiable disqualification.
Personally, I don't really agree with "users of controlled substances". Known addiction, that seems fine, which can be lifted upon being certified (or however it's done) as "clean".

[Hathradic States]

I am against it being mandated by law, yes. It infringes on the right to private sales.

There exists no right to sell prohibited items.

But there exists a right to sell legal items. And selling firearms is perfectly legal.

[Divair]

That is not infringing on rights. That's keep the most dangerous weapons where they won't be used. What the the fuck are you on to make you think that keeping nukes away from civilian buyers is in any way infringing on rights?

The difference is arbitrary. It's up to you to justify that arbitrariness. Simply saying it's infringing on rights doesn't mean anything. Governments frequently infringe on rights. They wouldn't exist otherwise.