GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-13-2013, 17:07   #1
Restless28
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Solsbury Hill
Posts: 16,259
The Panic of 2013 Ends Tuesday

Reports are that the Biden committee will announce tougher background checks to prevent guns from ending up in the hands of the mentally ill, a nationwide discussion on mental health, and school safety initiatives.

No restriction on assault weapons or mags or ammo.

Biden has said that his Senate colleagues universally opposed any gun control. So, Obama blames Congress for no restrictions.

I think they knew this was a dog and pony show gamble. If they won, they claim success, if they lose, they blame Congress.

Come Tuesday, those folks that paid $2000 for a $600 DPMS are gonna feel pretty darn stupid. The buyers market will be back by Spring.
Restless28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2013, 17:10   #2
skorper
harborrat
 
skorper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Rustbelt
Posts: 1,801
I don't know about background checks being any tougher, but I fully expect the end result of all this will be requiring background checks on all private sales. That is almost a given.
__________________

I've seen the quiet dead; and I've heard the living moan. This world's no place to live in, but it's home.
skorper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2013, 17:16   #3
jakebrake
cracker
 
jakebrake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: too close to philly
Posts: 7,327
expect the transfer fee to double.

i go through a background check for dhs for my haz mat endorsement. we will end up paying double for a transfer.
__________________
21 clubmember #629 freemasons clubmember # 57
Kalashnikov klub member # 413 black rifle club # 830
The road to Hell is paved with good intent
jakebrake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2013, 17:30   #4
VC-Racing
General Flunky
 
VC-Racing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: S.Fork of The Edisto River, SC
Posts: 2,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by jakebrake View Post
expect the transfer fee to double.

i go through a background check for dhs for my haz mat endorsement. we will end up paying double for a transfer.

That hazmat background is nothing but a money maker for the gov. I can understand paying the full cost if you're just getting it for the 1st time..... But Nooooo, its the same whether its a renewal or not....
__________________
Son, never kick a fresh cow turd on a hot day .. Hank Jr. On "The View".
VC-Racing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2013, 17:34   #5
VC-Racing
General Flunky
 
VC-Racing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: S.Fork of The Edisto River, SC
Posts: 2,220
this was on the NBC nightly news about a hour ago...


http://video.msnbc.msn.com/nightly-n...1434/#50451434
__________________
Son, never kick a fresh cow turd on a hot day .. Hank Jr. On "The View".

Last edited by VC-Racing; 01-13-2013 at 17:38..
VC-Racing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2013, 17:31   #6
Atlas
transmogrifier
 
Atlas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: north of the equator
Posts: 14,864
Quote:
Originally Posted by skorper View Post
I don't know about background checks being any tougher, but I fully expect the end result of all this will be requiring background checks on all private sales. That is almost a given.
And how could background checks on all private sales be enforced unless there is registration of all guns in private hands?
__________________
June 28, 2012: the day the American republic died.

Uncontrolled, unaccountable government spending + Graduated income-tax = SLAVERY
Atlas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2013, 17:39   #7
skorper
harborrat
 
skorper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Rustbelt
Posts: 1,801
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlas View Post
And how could background checks on all private sales be enforced unless there is registration of all guns in private hands?
Very very good question. If, once the new requirement is made known, you go ahead and sell a gun without a transfer, you will be technically breaking the law. How are they going to know? They might not ever know. But if something goes wrong, watch out.
__________________

I've seen the quiet dead; and I've heard the living moan. This world's no place to live in, but it's home.
skorper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2013, 19:01   #8
HexHead
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 4,818
Quote:
Originally Posted by skorper View Post
Very very good question. If, once the new requirement is made known, you go ahead and sell a gun without a transfer, you will be technically breaking the law. How are they going to know? They might not ever know. But if something goes wrong, watch out.
Expect ATF undercover sting buys, just like the DEA does with drug dealers.
HexHead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2013, 17:40   #9
TBO
CLM Number 122
Why so serious?
 
TBO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: NRA Life Member
Posts: 43,670
Blog Entries: 1


Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlas View Post
And how could background checks on all private sales be enforced unless there is registration of all guns in private hands?
Enforced when caught, like most other laws.
__________________
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."

"If you have integrity, nothing else matters. If you don't have integrity, nothing else matters".

"A person who won't reason has no advantage over one who can't reason."

"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored."

“Ignorance is a lot like alcohol: the more you have of it, the less you are able to see its effect on you.”


Originally Posted by Rooster Rugburn:
Didn't the whole sheepdog thing actually start right here on Glock Talk? A bunch of wannabees bought a bunch of T-shirts and took an oath to defend those who won't defend themselves?
TBO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2013, 17:53   #10
Atlas
transmogrifier
 
Atlas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: north of the equator
Posts: 14,864
Quote:
Originally Posted by skorper View Post
Very very good question. If, once the new requirement is made known, you go ahead and sell a gun without a transfer, you will be technically breaking the law. How are they going to know? They might not ever know. But if something goes wrong, watch out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBO View Post
Enforced when caught, like most other laws.
If the administration can put that over (for now) in the midst of all this anti-gun hysteria I'll be amazed.
__________________
June 28, 2012: the day the American republic died.

Uncontrolled, unaccountable government spending + Graduated income-tax = SLAVERY
Atlas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2013, 07:54   #11
mattenglish
Registered User
 
mattenglish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 7
Enforced when caught

Quote:
Originally Posted by TBO View Post
Enforced when caught, like most other laws.
Correct...if your former gun gets traced back, perhaps after being involved in a crime, and you had not performed the appropriate registration of transfer...you get busted.

I'm a minimalist regarding gov't regulation, but i feel the private sale registration along w/ improving the fed database to include wackos will go along way in getting Libs off the backs of law abiding citizens.

....it does state "a WELL REGULATED militia"
mattenglish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2013, 08:17   #12
DaGump
CLM Number 158
Enigma
 
DaGump's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Land of Confusion
Posts: 710


Quote:
Originally Posted by mattenglish View Post

....it does state "a WELL REGULATED militia"
It does say "well regulated," and based on your argument you don't have a clue what that phrase means. Please educate yourself, then explain how federal registrations and assault weapons bans would keep a militia in good working order.
__________________
"Place your clothes and weapons where you can find them in the dark."
"You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having both at once."
"If it can't be expressed in figures, it is not science; it is opinion."
-Lazarus Long
DaGump is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2013, 10:29   #13
iDivideByZero
Padawan
 
iDivideByZero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Blacksburg, VA
Posts: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattenglish View Post
... I'm a minimalist regarding gov't regulation, but i feel the private sale registration along w/ improving the fed database to include wackos will go along way in getting Libs off the backs of law abiding citizens.

....it does state "a WELL REGULATED militia"
First off, the universal background checks solve nothing. They place burden on law abiding citizens, and are blatant invasion of privacy. They will allow the government to track gun ownership of law abiding citizens, while doing nothing to regulate illicit sales or crime.

Secondly, the entire principle of our country's foundation is the protection of individual rights. We live in a republic, not a democracy. Regardless if 99.9% of people want something, if it violates that remaining 0.1% of the population's rights then it is illegal. Even if the government passes a law, and they are actively violating the constitution, it is illegal. Rights have to be fought for from time to time. To willingly relinquish your freedom to appease a group of people is foolish.

The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Period end of story. The founding fathers were clear about their meaning and intentions with the Bill of Rights. They wrote correspondence to one another, and they published letters in newspapers. You should spend a little time reading some of that material. Constitutional law is a very interesting subject, and you can really never know too much about it. In the end you'll only have the rights and freedom you are willing to fight for.
__________________
If 'con' is the opposite of 'pro,' is 'congress' the opposite of 'progress?' - Philosoraptor

Last edited by iDivideByZero; 01-20-2013 at 13:19..
iDivideByZero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2013, 12:39   #14
G29Reload
Tread Lightly
 
G29Reload's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 11,174
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattenglish View Post
Correct...if your former gun gets traced back, perhaps after being involved in a crime, and you had not performed the appropriate registration of transfer...you get busted.
A receipt would handle that. I sold the weapon on date X…


Quote:
Originally Posted by mattenglish View Post
I'm a minimalist regarding gov't regulation,
No, you're not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattenglish View Post
but i feel the private sale registration along w/ improving the fed database
Your feelings have nothing to do with my rights.

1. It's none of the government's business where my firearms are. Ever.

2. A private sale registration scheme is worthless unless .gov knows where all the weapons are to start with. If not, that is unless to say there is immediate, universal house to house search and seizure, the pre-existing 300 MILLION weapons could continue to exchange hands without the government knowing about it. Any weapon encountered by LE would be indeterminate as to how many people have owned it and how many times its changed hands (or when) except for the original owner and current possessor if the ATF were in possession of a 4473 and the gun, the one of 300 MILLION, were manufactured before the start of said registration.

3. Ask the Canadians how theirs is working. It's not.

WTF does having a record of weapon (lets say, for example, a 4473 exists, as it does now. That's a form of a registration. How does that stop a crime?) Truth: Registration only aids later confiscation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattenglish View Post
along w/ improving the fed database to include wackos will go along way in getting Libs off the backs of law abiding citizens.
Libs will never get off our backs until all weapons are confiscated. They live to harass and attempt all forms of regulation, most of which is ineffective and meaningless. They're control freaks. Are you really so gullible, Mr Chamberlain, to believe they'd ever be satisfied?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattenglish View Post

....it does state "a WELL REGULATED militia"
In the parlance of the day, well regulated meant well-practiced. So as far as I'm concerned, it means target ranges are protected too. They did not at ALL mean government regulation.
__________________
Avenge me...AVENGE ME!
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_z2d4IxltHJ...on%26Fence.png
G29Reload is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2013, 12:37   #15
F350
Senior Member
 
F350's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Colorado Western Slope
Posts: 1,823
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlas
And how could background checks on all private sales be enforced unless there is registration of all guns in private hands?
\
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBO View Post
Enforced when caught, like most other laws.
OK, let's say the universal background check goes into effect. I buy a gun from a buddy that he has had for years without a check. You "catch" me with it the next day. How ya gonna know I haven't had it for years unless there is universal registration?
F350 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2013, 18:18   #16
.264 magnum
CLM Number 121
Charter Lifetime Member
 
.264 magnum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Dallas TX
Posts: 16,661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlas View Post
And how could background checks on all private sales be enforced unless there is registration of all guns in private hands?
Precisely.
__________________
The Gonzales Flag - "Come and Take It!"
.264 magnum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2013, 11:21   #17
Roger1079
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: South FL
Posts: 1,751
There won't be any buyers remorse here. Picked up a couple hi cap glock and pmags. Also picked up a Saiga 12 and a Scar 16. Paid less than retail for both. The panic just gave me the kick in the butt to actually spend the cash on stuff I wanted anyway.
Roger1079 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2013, 18:18   #18
racerford
Senior Member
 
racerford's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: DFW area
Posts: 4,906


Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlas View Post
And how could background checks on all private sales be enforced unless there is registration of all guns in private hands?
Same way they enforce the ban on felons possessing firearms. They opportunistically catch someone and prosecute, maybe if they don't have anything else. Or maybe in this case, through sting operations at gun shows, and personal ads.
racerford is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2013, 13:40   #19
tslex
Senior Member
 
tslex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,219
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlas View Post
And how could background checks on all private sales be enforced unless there is registration of all guns in private hands?
This.

The problem with background checks being expanded to private sales (leaving aside for a moment whether you think background checks of any sort for any sale to anyone are an infringement of the 2dA) is that there can be no regulation of private sales without registration, either retroactive or on a rolling forward basis.

Establishing "universal background checks" is at least a more honest description than "closing the gun show loophole" (which doesn't exist: http://suburbansheepdog.blogspot.com/2012/12/drift.html) but never imagine it is some small thing. It is not, it is a BIG deal and will make the grabbers' next step next time all the easier to accomplish.
tslex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2013, 17:13   #20
TeoK
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 16
"The problem with background checks being expanded to private sales ... is that there can be no regulation of private sales without registration, either retroactive or on a rolling forward basis."

I don't understand why. Buyer and seller meet at gun shop (FFL). The FFL holder runs a NICS check on the buyer. If the buyer is legal, he pays the private seller the agreed-upon price, the cost of the background check, and a little more for the FFL holder's time: $10 for the NICS and maybe another $15 to the FFL holder. That's $25 for peace of mind, and adds considerable inconvenience to criminals and just a little inconvenience for law-abiding citizens. Also, the law could and should be written so that the FFL holder and the feds cannot retain identifying information after the transaction is complete.
TeoK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2013, 17:17   #21
bill123
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 560
but what's the BFD about taking a little more time to meet at an FFL to make sure we don't sell our guns to criminals or insane people?

That's funny.
Criminals get their guns from burglary. Insane people voted for Obama and don't want guns anyway. They are afraid of life

Really want to protect people ? Bring back vehicle inspection. Make sure you can't get insurance just for the day you get the license plates. Hell, abortion kills more children then anything. But, we can't talk about that, can we

Last edited by bill123; 01-14-2013 at 17:19..
bill123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2013, 17:25   #22
Atlas
transmogrifier
 
Atlas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: north of the equator
Posts: 14,864
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeoK View Post
"I honestly don't care about [private sales background checks]. It isn't a big deal, we do it here. Take 2 seconds and doesn't cost anything. This is a compromise we should be willing to make to avoid any awb or mag ban."

I couldn't agree much more except that we should not call it a "compromise." We should have gotten out ahead of the issue over the universal background check and insisted upon it as responsible gun owners. The cost and specific procedures are negotiable, but what's the BFD about taking a little more time to meet at an FFL to make sure we don't sell our guns to criminals or insane people?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeoK View Post
"The problem with background checks being expanded to private sales ... is that there can be no regulation of private sales without registration, either retroactive or on a rolling forward basis."

I don't understand why. Buyer and seller meet at gun shop (FFL). The FFL holder runs a NICS check on the buyer. If the buyer is legal, he pays the private seller the agreed-upon price, the cost of the background check, and a little more for the FFL holder's time: $10 for the NICS and maybe another $15 to the FFL holder. That's $25 for peace of mind, and adds considerable inconvenience to criminals and just a little inconvenience for law-abiding citizens. Also, the law could and should be written so that the FFL holder and the feds cannot retain identifying information after the transaction is complete.
If universal background checks are imposed (the requirement for background checks for ANY person-to-person transfer of a firearm) the antis will simply bide their time until a high-profile crime happens in which a firearm is used which was transfered without a check...

Then they'll use it to ram retroactive registration down our throats.
__________________
June 28, 2012: the day the American republic died.

Uncontrolled, unaccountable government spending + Graduated income-tax = SLAVERY

Last edited by Atlas; 01-14-2013 at 17:25..
Atlas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2013, 17:33   #23
cesaros
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: next to USMC03Grunt
Posts: 867
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeoK View Post
I don't understand why. Buyer and seller meet at gun shop (FFL). The FFL holder runs a NICS check on the buyer. If the buyer is legal, he pays the private seller the agreed-upon price, the cost of the background check, and a little more for the FFL holder's time: $10 for the NICS and maybe another $15 to the FFL holder. That's $25 for peace of mind, and adds considerable inconvenience to criminals .
Considerable Inconvenience for criminals?

So this honor system, how does that stop someone from just exchanging a gun for cash in the privacy of his own residence?
__________________
The 1st and 2nd Amendments:

The pen IS mightier than the sword; but when you run out of ink, I will be ready with plenty of ammo.
cesaros is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2013, 18:57   #24
1911austin
Senior Member
 
1911austin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 1,138


Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlas View Post
And how could background checks on all private sales be enforced unless there is registration of all guns in private hands?
Exactly.
__________________
"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men."-- Samuel Adams
1911austin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 16:37   #25
akroguy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 628
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlas View Post
And how could background checks on all private sales be enforced unless there is registration of all guns in private hands?
EXACTLY. It's unsustainable.
__________________
G19, G17, G36, G21SF, M4, Mosins, M1, 1903A3's.

The Second Amendment: giving teeth to the remaining 26.
Cogito, ergo armatus sum.
akroguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 -6. The time now is 16:47.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,464
409 Members
1,055 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42