Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » Looks Like They Have a Deal in the Senate on Strengthening Background Checks

Looks Like They Have a Deal in the Senate on Strengthening Background Checks

+4
bizguy
Hospital Bob
2seaoat
Sal
8 posters

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Sal

Sal

It's a start ...

(CNN) - Sens. Joe Manchin, D-West Virginia, and Patrick J. Toomey, R-Pennsylvania, plan to announce a bipartisan deal on background checks for gun shows and Internet sales at an 11 a.m. press conference today, CNN's Dana Bash has learned.

A Democratic leadership source says the compromise will likely be the first amendment to gun legislation being considered, after the Senate votes to begin the gun debate Thursday.

The breakthrough background check agreement is a key part of gun legislation. Because it has been struck by two senators with strong support from the NRA, they hope to find the 60 votes that will be needed to overcome opposition to pass their amendment

The senate is expected to debate gun legislation for at least two weeks.

Democrats believe as many as a dozen GOP senators will vote with them, making up for the handful of pro-gun Democrats who might vote against beginning debate on the bill.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/04/10/deal-reached-on-background-checks-in-senate/?hpt=hp_t1

2seaoat



That is just like those who want to take my guns away......making convicted felons to give their background before purchasing a gun.......whats next........making sure a convicted child molester is not driving the school bus? Tyranny!

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

I hope it passes just so we don't have to hear about it anymore. The "background check" has gone way past it's 15 minutes of fame.

Get back to me in another few years and show me how it actually did act to curtail gun crime and then I'll be impressed. But not until then.

Guest


Guest

Nothing wrong with background checks but until criminally minded folk decide to cooperate it won't help even a little bit. They either steal their guns or buy stolen ones. Here's a thought, how about enforcing current gun laws and strengthen penalties for those convicted of crimes while armed.....

bizguy



As a gun collector and enthusiast, I don't necessarily think this compromise on background checks will be harmful to our 2nd amendment rights. I also don't think it will be a very effective tool to stop folks who aren't legally allowed to purchase firearms from getting one. I am curious to know from those that think enhancing the background check system is a good idea, how long after the law is implemented would you expect to see a reduction in gun crimes?



Last edited by bizguy on 4/10/2013, 12:43 pm; edited 1 time in total

Guest


Guest

I'm for stronger laws for the mentally ill getting ahold of guns. That's the big problem!

Guest


Guest

Dreamsglore wrote:I'm for stronger laws for the mentally ill getting ahold of guns. That's the big problem!

So you want to purchase a gun......

Guest


Guest

Sal wrote:It's a start ...

(CNN) - Sens. Joe Manchin, D-West Virginia, and Patrick J. Toomey, R-Pennsylvania, plan to announce a bipartisan deal on background checks for gun shows and Internet sales at an 11 a.m. press conference today, CNN's Dana Bash has learned.

A Democratic leadership source says the compromise will likely be the first amendment to gun legislation being considered, after the Senate votes to begin the gun debate Thursday.

The breakthrough background check agreement is a key part of gun legislation. Because it has been struck by two senators with strong support from the NRA, they hope to find the 60 votes that will be needed to overcome opposition to pass their amendment

The senate is expected to debate gun legislation for at least two weeks.

Democrats believe as many as a dozen GOP senators will vote with them, making up for the handful of pro-gun Democrats who might vote against beginning debate on the bill.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/04/10/deal-reached-on-background-checks-in-senate/?hpt=hp_t1

Agree with both of those...FL closed the gun show loophole a couple of years ago...

PBulldog2

PBulldog2

Dreamsglore wrote:I'm for stronger laws for the mentally ill getting ahold of guns. That's the big problem!

Again, please define "mentally ill people", Dreams. Please tell us exactly which categories of "mentally ill people" should be unable to purchase a firearm.

Guest


Guest

This bill does nothing to fix the problems that Democrats have said are issues with current gun buying and ownership issues, especially where gun shows and sales to family members are a concern.

Anyone selling less than 5 guns per year at gunshows will still be able to do so without a background check being performed. So, how is this supposed to HELP?

Another knee jerk, feel good stab at taking guns or preventing guns from being sold to law abiding citizens. Criminals will still not be hindered in their ability to get a firearm with this legislation.

Sal

Sal

Bob wrote:I hope it passes just so we don't have to hear about it anymore. The "background check" has gone way past it's 15 minutes of fame.

Get back to me in another few years and show me how it actually did act to curtail gun crime and then I'll be impressed. But not until then.

Kinda hard to accurately tabulate events which are prevented from happening.

We still have murders even tho there are laws against it, ergo we should not have laws against murder.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Sal wrote:
Bob wrote:I hope it passes just so we don't have to hear about it anymore. The "background check" has gone way past it's 15 minutes of fame.

Get back to me in another few years and show me how it actually did act to curtail gun crime and then I'll be impressed. But not until then.



We still have murders even tho there are laws against it, ergo we should not have laws against murder.

I'm not sure when I said "I hope it (the law) passes" that it would be the same thing as me saying "we shouldn't have laws". lol

I truly am not opposed to this change in the law. I don't know if these background checks even address nutjobs. But if they do then it won't effect me. Because although I am insane, I've never been diagnosed as such so it won't prevent me from buying another gun.
And I would imagine there are many undiagnosed nut jobs like me who won't have any problem with the background check since there won't be any background to check.
I will give you this much though, it might prevent some of the nutjobs who have been diagnosed from getting a gun through ordinary channels. But based on what I know about nutjobs (it takes one to know one), most nutjobs will find ways outside the normal channels of obtaining a gun. Especially the nutjobs who are hell bent on doing a mass shooting.
And the same goes for those with criminal records. They'll still be able to obtain guns too.

So the bottom line is, it will be like sticking a finger or two in the dyke. That might stop a few drops of water here and there. And that's okay by me.
But there sure has been a lot of whoop-de-doo and falderal over what amounts to sticking a couple of fingers in the dyke.







Guest


Guest

Who is this dyke and why are you molesting her...?



You lock your doors when you leave the house....I've see you do so.

Why bother..? It only keeps the honest people out, and if a criminal wants access, they will find a way.

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

William wrote:Who is this dyke and why are you molesting her...?



You lock your doors when you leave the house....I've see you do so.

Why bother..? It only keeps the honest people out, and if a criminal wants access, they will find a way.

This is so surreal that you are not gonna believe it. I just got off the phone with the princess. And immediately looked at the thread.
She had just told me that she accidentally went off and left both her doors unlocked. Had just got home and discovered it. Was afraid someone had gone in while she was gone and she was looking for stuff that was missing.
And this is what I told her (it was only minutes ago so I can almost repeat it verbatim).
"Of course it's a good idea to check and make sure the doors are locked. But if we're realistic about it, we would probably have to do it (leave it unlocked) a thousand times before it leads to someone opening the door and committing a burglary so don't worry".

I'm not telling you this as an argument to keep doors unlocked or to not pass this law. Only because it was such a coincidence that you posted this at the same time I just had that conversation.




Last edited by Bob on 4/10/2013, 3:32 pm; edited 1 time in total

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

Here's the bottom line on this for me. It's very similar to the aftermath of 9/11.

1. They hijacked airliners and crashed them into the WTC and Pentagon

2. As a result, we started frisking little old ladies at the airport.
-----------------------

1. They slaughtered adults in a movie theater and children in a school.

2. As a result, we toughen up the background check to buy guns.
-----------------------

I'm not opposed to either change. But I'm not naive enough to believe that either is gonna make much difference.



Guest


Guest

Bob wrote:
William wrote:Who is this dyke and why are you molesting her...?



You lock your doors when you leave the house....I've see you do so.

Why bother..? It only keeps the honest people out, and if a criminal wants access, they will find a way.

This is so surreal that you are not gonna believe it. I just got off the phone with the princess. And immediately looked at the thread.
She had just told me that she accidentally went off and left both her doors unlocked. Had just got home and discovered it. Was afraid someone had gone in while she was gone and was looking for stuff that was missing.
And this is what I told her (it was only minutes ago so I can almost repeat it verbatim).
"Of course it's a good idea to check and make sure the doors are locked. But if we're realistic about it, we would probably have to do it (leave it unlocked) a thousand times before it leads to someone opening the door and committing a burglary so don't worry".

I'm not telling you this as an argument to keep doors unlocked or to not pass this law. Only because it was such a coincidence that you posted this at the same time I just had that conversation.

.........................................

It's a God thing dude. LOL.

Synchronicity rocks.


Guest


Guest

Bob wrote:Here's the bottom line on this for me. It's very similar to the aftermath of 9/11.

1. They hijacked airliners and crashed them into the WTC and Pentagon

2. As a result, we started frisking little old ladies at the airport.
-----------------------

1. They slaughtered adults in a movie theater and children in a school.

2. As a result, we toughen up the background check to buy guns.
-----------------------

I'm not opposed to either change. But I'm not naive enough to believe that either is gonna make much difference.




One reason would be that some of the states/cities that have the strongest gun control laws would look like the failures they are....

Guest


Guest

There's nothing more embarrassing than a failed city.

Guest


Guest

PBulldog2 wrote:
Dreamsglore wrote:I'm for stronger laws for the mentally ill getting ahold of guns. That's the big problem!

Again, please define "mentally ill people", Dreams. Please tell us exactly which categories of "mentally ill people" should be unable to purchase a firearm.


All of them!

Guest


Guest

Dreamsglore wrote:
PBulldog2 wrote:
Dreamsglore wrote:I'm for stronger laws for the mentally ill getting ahold of guns. That's the big problem!

Again, please define "mentally ill people", Dreams. Please tell us exactly which categories of "mentally ill people" should be unable to purchase a firearm.


All of them!
Starting with yourself?

Guest


Guest

Dreamsglore wrote:I'm for stronger laws for the mentally ill getting ahold of guns. That's the big problem!

Looks Like They Have a Deal in the Senate on Strengthening Background Checks 9k=

I see..... So now you want to give firearms to the mentally disturbed... like yourself.

*****ROFLMAO*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7r_SfdOr3E

Laughing

Guest


Guest

Damaged Eagle wrote:
Dreamsglore wrote:I'm for stronger laws for the mentally ill getting ahold of guns. That's the big problem!

Looks Like They Have a Deal in the Senate on Strengthening Background Checks 9k=

I see..... So now you want to give firearms to the mentally disturbed... like yourself.

*****ROFLMAO*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7r_SfdOr3E

Laughing

If you're not posting dumb pictures, you're making childish responses? Life must be pretty boring on that farm? Maybe that's why you turned to family members to get your jollies?

Guest


Guest

Dreamsglore wrote:
Damaged Eagle wrote:
Dreamsglore wrote:I'm for stronger laws for the mentally ill getting ahold of guns. That's the big problem!

I see..... So now you want to give firearms to the mentally disturbed... like yourself.

*****ROFLMAO*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7r_SfdOr3E

Laughing

If you're not posting dumb pictures, you're making childish responses? Life must be pretty boring on that farm? Maybe that's why you turned to family members to get your jollies?

Looks Like They Have a Deal in the Senate on Strengthening Background Checks Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR7A5XYWqkfUFP0po8NxT-HvzFKTc9QIzqZHaXSRH0IncchLYa3

You're the one making stupid statements Rocky now go read your Gideon's Bible...

*****ROFLMAO*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nucSvl7VXVM

Laughing

Guest


Guest

Damaged Eagle wrote:
Dreamsglore wrote:
Damaged Eagle wrote:
Dreamsglore wrote:I'm for stronger laws for the mentally ill getting ahold of guns. That's the big problem!

I see..... So now you want to give firearms to the mentally disturbed... like yourself.

*****ROFLMAO*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7r_SfdOr3E

Laughing

If you're not posting dumb pictures, you're making childish responses? Life must be pretty boring on that farm? Maybe that's why you turned to family members to get your jollies?

I'm making stupid statements for saying the mentally ill need background checks? Really? LOL!

Looks Like They Have a Deal in the Senate on Strengthening Background Checks Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR7A5XYWqkfUFP0po8NxT-HvzFKTc9QIzqZHaXSRH0IncchLYa3

You're the one making stupid statements Rocky now go read your Gideon's Bible...

*****ROFLMAO*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nucSvl7VXVM

Laughing

Guest


Guest

Dreamsglore wrote:
Dreamsglore wrote:
Dreamsglore wrote:I'm for stronger laws for the mentally ill getting ahold of guns. That's the big problem!

If you're not posting dumb pictures, you're making childish responses? Life must be pretty boring on that farm? Maybe that's why you turned to family members to get your jollies?

I'm making stupid statements for saying the mentally ill need background checks? Really? LOL!


Looks Like They Have a Deal in the Senate on Strengthening Background Checks 9k=

That's not how you're first stupid comment reads idiot. It reads like you want to make guns more available to the mentally ill... like yourself.

What is this some sort of new supposedly enlightened progressive liberal Fast & Furious idea? Let's make more guns available to the mentally ill so we can use that to rescind the 2nd Amendment when it all backfires on us. Is that how your brain works? Because it wouldn't surprise me a bit with all the other mental deficiencies that you have.

After all you are...

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9JEPeeohYs

Laughing

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » Looks Like They Have a Deal in the Senate on Strengthening Background Checks

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum