Schumer Calls Universal Background Checks Top Priority on Guns

[Madmallard]

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer signaled Democrats will renew a fight to expand background checks for gun purchasers following last week’s mass shooting that killed 17 people at a Florida high school.

"Our No. 1 priority is going to be universal background checks," Schumer of New York said on a conference call Wednesday. That includes ending the exemption for weapons sold at gun shows, he said.

Donald Trump, who campaigned on a promise to protect the rights of gun owners, tweeted yesterday, "Whether we are Republican or Democrat, we must now focus on strengthening Background Checks!" He is scheduled to meet Wednesday with students, parents and teachers who’ve lived through mass shooting incidents, including some from the Florida high school where last week’s killings took place.


Schumer said he wants a broader measure than one written by Texas Senator John Cornyn, a Republican, and Connecticut’s Chris Murphy, a Democrat, which seeks to upgrade reporting by states and federal agencies to the existing system rather than expanding background checks to additional sales channels.

Schumer and Senator Dianne Feinstein have called on Republicans including Trump to back her proposed legislative ban on so-called bump stocks and other rapid-fire attachments for semi-automatic rifles, which were used in the Las Vegas massacre last year where 58 people were killed.

Trump on Tuesday urged a regulatory ban on bump stocks, but Democrats say that could take months to enact and may get tied up in court.

A Quinnipiac poll released Tuesday found 97 percent support for universal background checks, while 67 percent backed a ban on the sale of assault weapons.

Schumer Calls Universal Background Checks Top Priority on Guns

 

[Dr. Evil]

More of this shit? Where Does That "90% of Americans Support Expanded Background Checks" Come From? - The Truth About Guns

BTW, what percentage of sales at a gun show is private individual to private individual because every gun show I've been at you go through a BGC from the vendors.

 

[Grimscale]

I keep reading this song and dance from the Left. "We need universal background checks for gun purchases".

What the fuck is a "universal background check" and how does it differ from the background check WE ALREADY HAVE TO ENDURE to exercise our Rights?

 

[dsdmmat]

I keep reading this song and dance from the Left. "We need universal background checks for gun purchases".

What the fuck is a "universal background check" and how does it differ from the background check WE ALREADY HAVE TO ENDURE to exercise our Rights?

That is code for no private sales anywhere.

 

[Grimscale]

That is code for no private sales anywhere.

Then I guess the State intends on paying for all NICS and transfers?
Can't have a fee on a Right. That's the equivalent of a poll tax.
Can't make people travel miles to visit an FFL if we can't make them travel miles to get a free ID to vote, right? It's the same thing.

 

[Magnus]

Why don’t they just add a simple question to the BGC sheet;

Do you intend to perform a mass shooting? Yes or no, if yes explain below.

 

[dsdmmat]

Then I guess the State intends on paying for all NICS and transfers?
Can't have a fee on a Right. That's the equivalent of a poll tax.
Can't make people travel miles to visit an FFL if we can't make them travel miles to get a free ID to vote, right? It's the same thing.

One would think that would be the case however, we know by example NYSAFE that it is not. Maybe that is another way to attack the SAFE act.

 

[Phritz]

Why don’t they just add a simple question to the BGC sheet;

Do you intend to perform a mass shooting? Yes or no, if yes explain below.

Knowing today's FBI, a "yes" would not disqualify someone, and the investigation will start after the shooting.

 

[camper4lyfe]

I may be in the minority here, but I'm in favor of background checks for private sales. I don't want to be the one to sell a gun to someone that shouldn't have one. Asking "are you legally allowed to own a firearm?" isn't the way to do it. However, there needs to be a system in place for a private sale to perform this without having to go through a FFL to do it.

 

[Modean]

Then I guess the State intends on paying for all NICS and transfers?
Can't have a fee on a Right. That's the equivalent of a poll tax.
Can't make people travel miles to visit an FFL if we can't make them travel miles to get a free ID to vote, right? It's the same thing.

We already do here in NY.

 

[Modean]

That is code for no private sales anywhere.

How precisely could you reasonably achive that? Hell we can’t even prevent private sales of illegal drugs. NY has such a low on the books, but private sales without background checks still happen every day.

 

[Deplorable Me]

but no voter ID required..................

 

[SmallGameAddict]

Why don’t they just add a simple question to the BGC sheet;

Do you intend to perform a mass shooting? Yes or no, if yes explain below.

Lmao. Now that's funny

 

[GOPerfect]

I am not a fan of these checks. I find it to be a serious intrusion of personal information. Not to mention a direct violation of other Rights.

In saying that, if I were these Political Elite, I would be embarrassed if I could not figure out a plan that actually worked.

They make me ill.

 

[holdover]

I may be in the minority here, but I'm in favor of background checks for private sales. I don't want to be the one to sell a gun to someone that shouldn't have one. Asking "are you legally allowed to own a firearm?" isn't the way to do it. However, there needs to be a system in place for a private sale to perform this without having to go through a FFL to do it.

Once you open that door , You cant close it . There are far to many ways to abuse those kinds of laws . Within ten years it will be a requirement to get clearance from a shrink before you can purchase one , and of course you have to pay them up front and Im sure insurance company's are not going to cover it.

Regardless of its true intent, Its going to be used to deny people of their rights. If that's not an infringement I don't know what is.

 

[SmallGameAddict]

I am not a fan of these checks. I find it to be a serious intrusion of personal information. Not to mention a direct violation of other Rights.

In saying that, if I were these Political Elite, I would be embarrassed if I could not figure out a plan that actually worked.

They make me ill.

All these geniuses, sitting in their think tanks, are never going to come up with a plan to prevent the next murder, of anyone.

 

[GOPerfect]

Once you open that door , You cant close it . There are far to many ways to abuse those kinds of laws . Within ten years it will be a requirement to get clearance from a shrink before you can purchase one , and of course you have to pay them up front and Im sure insurance company's are not going to cover it.

Regardless of its true intent, Its going to be used to deny people of their rights. If that's not an infringement I don't know what is.

Trees through the Forest.

 

[Dr. Evil]

I may be in the minority here, but I'm in favor of background checks for private sales. I don't want to be the one to sell a gun to someone that shouldn't have one. Asking "are you legally allowed to own a firearm?" isn't the way to do it. However, there needs to be a system in place for a private sale to perform this without having to go through a FFL to do it.

What about having to do a BGC when you sell or transfer a firearm to your kid? How'd that sit with you? Give them an inch and they think they're a ruler.

 

[camper4lyfe]

What about having to do a BGC when you sell or transfer a firearm to your kid? How'd that sit with you? Give them an inch and they think they're a ruler.

Even the crap act allows transfer between immediate family without a BGC. That sort of thing is fine. It’s sales between strangers that make me uneasy. Granted, I have no intention of ever selling any of my guns, so it’s a non-issue for me.

But as I said, there’s no system in place to facilitate this.

 

[Dr. Evil]

Even the crap act allows transfer between immediate family without a BGC. That sort of thing is fine. It’s sales between strangers that make me uneasy. Granted, I have no intention of ever selling any of my guns, so it’s a non-issue for me.

But as I said, there’s no system in place to facilitate this.

And you don't think that eventually it will morph into BGC between immediate family? Also, do you have any idea how many if any mass shooters had a gun handed down from a family member that was used to kill innocent people? I don't but I would think it is minuscule if at all.

 

[SmallGameAddict]

And you don't think that eventually it will morph into BGC between immediate family? Also, do you have any idea how many if any mass shooters had a gun handed down from a family member that was used to kill innocent people? I don't but I would think it is minuscule if at all.

I think they will try to morph it into universal registration, sooner or later

 

[gun_slinger_boy]

Even the crap act allows transfer between immediate family without a BGC. That sort of thing is fine. It’s sales between strangers that make me uneasy. Granted, I have no intention of ever selling any of my guns, so it’s a non-issue for me.

But as I said, there’s no system in place to facilitate this.

If you don't want to sell your guns to strangers fine but there shouldn't be a law that prevents others from doing it. The whole "don't want to be the one to sell a gun to someone that shouldn't have one" thing is silly. By that reasoning no one should sell guns to anyone ever. There's simply no way to tell if the person will do something down the line even if they pass a background check. This kind of thinking is akin to the guy who recently cut his AR in half.

 

[free_world]

the writing is on the wall. it won't stop until it's all gone.

And if your lucky.."if you like your shotgun... you can keep your shotgun"