Bishop says tighter gun laws will help build culture of life

[Sporkbeard]

Weak. They already have background checks. More gun control laws are not needed… and IMO they outta loosen the laws that are on the books.

You’re a gun owner ya ? Guess we can’t trust ya to be law abidding.

So we can’t trust any gun owner to be law abiding?

 

[Tigg]

A-bishop-said-it-so-it’s-right … a-bishop-said-it-so-it’s-right … It is difficult to debate with someone who holds this perspective. One would have thought the sex abuse crisis would have demonstrated that bishops too can make mistakes.

I have repeatedly tried to get you or anyone else to identify the moral question involved here but without success. If this is a moral issue then surely someone should be able to explain what moral choices are before us. Is it a sin to own (e.g.) an AR-15? Is it a sin to oppose the laws that Bishop Blair supports? If my beliefs are sinful then you have a moral obligation to correct my error so I can mend my sinful ways. How am I sinning? … and if my position is not sinful then where is the moral issue?

My comments are either valid or invalid and challenging the reason I make them is irrelevant. My nature may be as evil, self-serving, and vicious as you could image but it would have no effect on the strength or weakness of my argument.

Ender

You have consistently stated this on many threads, and yet no one has been able to counter your unflawed logic.

 

[Tigg]

Such specific issues are not a matter of faith and morals. Still, bishops are called to go beyond actual doctrine and help faithful Catholics apply doctrine in their lives and in their society.

Then more specifics are called for other than that we should “ ‘change hatred into love, vengeance into forgiveness, war into peace.’” And I would like to ask the good bishop how my inability to defend my own life could possibly promote the culture of life and how Catholic doctrine could be applied to such inability. If I am not free to defend my life or the lives of my family from evil intent, does this not discount my fundamental right to it?

 

[Brendan]

Poll: 9 in 10 Americans support background checks

I started opposing it when I read the firearms transfer rules.

My son is a Scout, and I am one of the ASM’s for the troop. With this new law, it would have been a Federal felony for me to let a Scout use my single shot, bolt action .22 on a supervised public rifle range to work on the Rifle Merit badge, even with myself and State DNR officials watching the boy. You could only lend firearms to direct family members.

If it was just background checks on gun sales, I think it would have passed. I would have supported it. But it was the other junk in their that I had to oppose.

But I was not willing to support becoming a felon just because my Scouts are working on a merit badge.

That is why I found that ‘90% support’ number a bit interesting. I wonder what the polls would have said in regards to a Scout being able to use a borrowed rifle on a public rifle range under adult supervision.

Do you think that 90% of the American public would have supported that being a Federal felony?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Of course.

I do not support Wayne La Pierre’s idea as some kind of panacea.

The point is that +Morlino correctly identified the root cause and said that legislation would not be a cure for this, nor will psychologists, nor will turning schools into fortresses. Those are all futile.

Restoring God to the center of our existence, as a society, and acknowledging that the devil exists and we have a duty, as a society to resist the devil. That will ultimately fix it.

Lord knows, I wish that I heard more of that. The people of Madison should recognize what a blessing they have with their shepherd.

Restoring God to the center is placing on faith in Him, and not of ourselves armed with guns.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Weak. They already have background checks. More gun control laws are not needed… and IMO they outta loosen the laws that are on the books.

You’re a gun owner ya ? Guess we can’t trust ya to be law abidding.

There are no background checks for private sales, which is the cause of attention on gun shows. So, they have background checks, but not in all instances.

I am law abiding and have no qualms about any of these type changes. I purchased a gun a week ago. The background check was no problem for me, and I see it as a small inconvenience, or sacrifice made for the sake of society.

 

[SamH]

Do you think that 90% of the American public would have supported that being a Federal felony?

I support background checks - that doesn’t mean I support ths bill. Most people have no idea that background checks are required at gun shows and that weapons sold over the internet are transferred to FFL dealers that conduct a background check before the weapon is sold.

Gun Broker - one of the largest online gun sales websites

gunbroker.com/User/HowToBuy.aspx

Can I buy here?

You must Register with us to bid on or sell items. Registration is free, safe, and private. We do not share your registration information with any third party without your consent and we do not send you junk email. Privacy Policy.

Anyone who is legally allowed to own firearms, ammunition, knives, and gun accessories is allowed to buy or sell them here. It is your responsibility to be in compliance with all Federal, state, and local laws when using this site.

You do not have to be a licensed dealer to buy a firearm. **If you are not a licensed firearm dealer (also called an FFL Holder), you must make arrangements with an FFL Holder in your state to receive the item and transfer it to you. **Virtually anyone who is involved in the sale or distribution of firearms is an FFL Holder, including gun shops. You must make arrangements with your FFL Holder before placing a bid on an item. By contacting the FFL Holder before bidding, the buyer can verify that all state and federal laws will be observed. For most firearms, the buyer must be able to pass a background check.

GunBroker.com has compiled a list of FFL Holders who are willing to manage the legal transfer of firearms to unlicensed persons.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I support background checks - that doesn’t mean I support ths bill. Most people have no idea that background checks are required at gun shows and that weapons sold over the internet are transferred to FFL dealers that conduct a background check before the weapon is sold.

Gun Broker - one of the largest online gun sales websites

gunbroker.com/User/HowToBuy.aspx

CNN just did a story on purchasing at gun shows. No IDs, much less background checks were needed. The young man purchased 3 pistols and an AR15.

There are private sales taking place between visitors, and not necessarily vendors.

 

[SamH]

CNN just did a story on purchasing at gun shows. No IDs, much less background checks were needed. The young man purchased 3 pistols and an AR15.

There are private sales taking place between visitors, and not necessarily vendors.

How many crimes did that young man commit?

 

[Brendan]

I support background checks - that doesn’t mean I support ths bill. ]

Likewise. Here in MI, we have background checks for handguns. You go in a get a what is effectively an approval to purchase card that involves a background check. That card is required to purchase a handgun, even for private sales. A CPL also suffices as it is an even more in depth background check. I didn’t have a problem with that.

It was all the other stuff in the bill that lost my support.

I mean really? You can’t lend a 22 to a Scout on a supervised public range to work on a merit badge without becoming a Federal Felon?? Unless they are an immediate family member that is. For all the other boys, forget it.

And I can’t imagine what would have happened to shooting sports at summer camp.

And hunter ed in our state also involves supervised range time, do they remove any actual firearms training from hunter ed, just so the instructors don’t get charged with a felony crime?

This was a REALLY bad bill.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

How many crimes did that young man commit?

None. But answering that question overlooks that gun sales took place at several gun shows without any background checks.

The same could have happened for any criminal.

 

[scipio337]

Likewise. Here in MI, we have background checks for handguns. You go in a get a what is effectively an approval to purchase card that involves a background check. That card is required to purchase a handgun, even for private sales. A CPL also suffices as it is an even more in depth background check. I didn’t have a problem with that.

It was all the other stuff in the bill that lost my support.

I mean really? You can’t lend a 22 to a Scout on a supervised public range to work on a merit badge without becoming a Federal Felon?? Unless they are an immediate family member that is. For all the other boys, forget it.

And I can’t imagine what would have happened to shooting sports at summer camp.

And hunter ed in our state also involves supervised range time, do they remove any actual firearms training from hunter ed, just so the instructors don’t get charged with a felony crime?

This was a REALLY bad bill.

I’ve bought several guns on gunbroker, at gun shows, and I don’t think I’ve ever NOT had a background check. Methinks you would have to search pretty hard to find a vendor at a gun show who didn’t hold an FFL (and therfore require a NIST check).

It’s that silliness about “you may borrower a firearm from a family member up to 48 hours” and private transfers between family members. My father in law (Vietnam combat vet) has given several guns to me and my stepson. The legislation would have allowed the transaction, provided he could prove that he was the owner of the gun.

How would he provide proof that he was the owner of a gun he purchased 40 years ago? Or one that was passed down from his father??

It was silly, and I’m glad it’s gone.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I’ve bought several guns on gunbroker, at gun shows, and I don’t think I’ve ever NOT had a background check. Methinks you would have to search pretty hard to find a vendor at a gun show who didn’t hold an FFL (and therfore require a NIST check).

When CNN sent a young man in to several gun shows, the AR15 he purchased was carried by a seller that had taped a sign to the gun, ‘for sale.’ The seller wasn’t a vendor. The pistols purchased were from vendors. No background checks.

At one of the gun shows, the young man was turned down by a vendor that requested ID.

 

[Brendan]

I’ve bought several guns on gunbroker, at gun shows, and I don’t think I’ve ever NOT had a background check.

I have purchased firearms without a background check.

A co-worker of mine had a single shot, bolt action Cricket 22 and a single shot, break action .410, that his kids had outgrown. He knew that I was involved in Scouting and could use them

Now granted, we both knew each other had a CPL, and under MI law if a background check was required, all we would have had to do was show each other our CPL’s, as those involve an FBI check complete with fingerprints.

But those were the only ones I have ever done.

I would not have objected if something similar was all that the legislation involved. But those lending rules were beyond ‘silly’ they were positively insane.

That is why I would LOVE to see a poll on what percentage of Americans would like to see Scouts who borrow a 22 on a supervised range to work on their merit badges be charged with federal felony firearms violations.

THAT would be the true gauge of American support for the contents of the Senate Bill. Not the ‘90%’ figure being bandied about. That simply gauges American support for background checks, which is quite distinct form American support for that particular bill.

 

[scipio337]

When CNN sent a young man in to several gun shows, the AR15 he purchased was carried by a seller that had taped a sign to the gun, ‘for sale.’ The seller wasn’t a vendor. The pistols purchased were from vendors. No background checks.

At one of the gun shows, the young man was turned down by a vendor that requested ID.

Source? I know CNN has no editorial slant:

politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/04/17/does-gun-lobby-trump-public-opinion/

But out of the “several gun shows” he was sent to, how many times was he asked for his information for a background check?

 

[SamH]

The legislation would have allowed the transaction, provided he could prove that he was the owner of the gun.

How would he provide proof that he was the owner of a gun he purchased 40 years ago? Or one that was passed down from his father??

It was silly, and I’m glad it’s gone.

Agreed. I own firearms that I bought 5 to 20 years ago that I have nothing to “prove” I own. Just like I can’t “prove” I own my TVs or lawnmowers, I can’t even prove I own the cloths I am wearing.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Source? I know CNN has no editorial slant:

politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/04/17/does-gun-lobby-trump-public-opinion/

But out of the “several gun shows” he was sent to, how many times was he asked for his information for a background check?

Source? CNN. I saw it on the news, before the Boston story broke. I hope you’re not saying I’d make something up?

It showed a young man approach several vendors, and he actually purchased 3 semi automatic pistols. It was a non vendor carrying an AR15, on a sling, with a for sale sign hanging on it. They went to the man’s car, where he provided magazines, case, etc.

Regardless of ‘slants,’ it was hidden camera purchases.

There was one vendor that refused a transaction when the young man said he couldn’t produce an ID. If there were more, it wasn’t shown. But, 3 semi automatics, and an AR15, speaks pretty loudly about ease of purchasing. The same could be available for criminals, but they don’t carry cameras.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Source?

Martin Savidge shows how easy it is to buy guns at gunshows – no questions asked!

The link provides the video story they ran a few days ago. They stated there were 3 instances where the sellers requested ID, and refused the sale.

 

[SamH]

Source? CNN. I saw it on the news, before the Boston story broke. I hope you’re not saying I’d make something up?

It showed a young man approach several vendors, and he actually purchased 3 semi automatic pistols. It was a non vendor carrying an AR15, on a sling, with a for sale sign hanging on it. They went to the man’s car, where he provided magazines, case, etc.

Regardless of ‘slants,’ it was hidden camera purchases.

There was one vendor that refused a transaction when the young man said he couldn’t produce an ID. If there were more, it wasn’t shown. But, 3 semi automatics, and an AR15, speaks pretty loudly about ease of purchasing. The same could be available for criminals, but they don’t carry cameras.

Except criminals don’t usually pay full price for things like firearms. Why do that when you can steal them for free?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Except criminals don’t usually pay full price for things like firearms. Why do that when you can steal them for free?

How many does ‘don’t usually’ cover? Are you saying that criminals wouldn’t take advantage of a private sale to gain a gun?

The shooter that killed the first responders, with an AR15, purchased that gun through a straw purchase.