These idiot libs keep saying 90% of the American people want universal background checks! Where the hell are they getting this number? I didnt vote on any poll! So sick of these idiots!

They keep saying enough and the rest of the idiots will believe it and begin spread the false information as well.

From various sources, gun owners are anywhere from 37% to around 50% of the population. The US population is around 312 million people. The NRA membership is less than 5 million. Do the math, around 6% of the population is a member of the NRA.

90% sounds high until you look at the data. Even if 90% is way to high, anything over 50% still looks like it could be right.

I actually saw the poll. It had 4 options, none of which was "none of the above." The question was "What would you most likely support?" The options were background checks, magazine limits, universal registration, and confiscation. It was a "loaded" poll designed to obtain just such results. I've already e-mailed my congressman about this, and suggest you do the same.

edited to add: and the actual result was 87%

The number is probably closer to 40 or 50%, but the only reason those people want them is because they have no idea what a universal background check is.... They fail to realize that the only way to enforce it is through a national gun registration, or the honor system.... which we all know who goes by the honor system.

There will still be no background checks done for stolen guns, guns traded illegally, and loaned guns....

does the Senate have the 60 votes for this latest peice of poof bill that Manchin and Toomey have come up with?

Its nice how they work a "deal" , don't tell us about it and then bring it up for a vote the very next day

this is NOT how gov't is supposed to work

anyway, it still has to pass the House as well and I know they don't have those votes...do they?

Uninformed populace, it always comes back to the same thing. It is precisely WHY we are WHERE we are.

Ha I know I am not for the UBC

well they got 68 votes today
so the bill moves forward for a full vote in the Sentate

part of this bill allows a doctor to turn you in to the gov for any reason he or she thinks you don't need guns WITHOUT telling you about it.

Does anyone know for sure what's in the current version of the bill? Will having a valid CHL allow one to bypass the check? Would an FFL have to process the paperwork?

I don't see anything directly wrong with the "IDEA" of universal background checks. I can actually see a degree of benefit (or at least peace of mind) that would come from it.

My issue is entirely in the execution of the concept. There are so many issues with it's execution that it's near useless.

The first and biggest issue is the requirement that an FFL do the background check. This simply increases cost of the transaction because the FFL holder wants to be paid.

Second, and falling close on the tail of the first is that the NICS check allows for their B/S delay process making the potential sale take substantially longer.

Third, and arguably could/should fall into the first place is that NICS is SUPPOSED to destroy information after a period of time, but if I am not mistaken didn't Osama just issue an executive order requiring the information to be maintained?

An overview of the background check bill by Toomey and Manchin. Please listen to this audio by Tom Gresham.

http://guntalk.libsyn.com/guntalk-2013-04-14-part-a

The dems want it to pass so they can neglect to enforce it and then several months down the line somebody will conviniently go on a killing spree and there will be some kind of records that he still obtained a firearm even though he should not be alllowed by their standards. Then they will try to make stricter laws. Thats the kind of sceeming I expect from them.

Gun-control advocates describe the proposed legislation as “common sense” and something we need to do for the victims of Newtown. Of course, it won’t do anything at all to prevent another such episode. I believe most people really don’t understand what the Second Amendment is about and they don’t care that Washington continues to marginalize our Constitution. Until lately, I have been somewhat ambivalent about the measure. On one hand, I oppose any further erosion of my freedoms. On the other hand, if I sell a gun to a stranger now, I have no way of knowing if he might be a criminal or someone who really shouldn’t have a gun for some reason. The NRA has been beaten up unmercifully by the press and the Administration and I thought if they went along with the idea, they might appear more credible to the public in future debates. In some ways the proposal seemed harmless enough and if politicians needed to pass some more useless feel-good legislation, maybe they would leave us alone for a while.

But the devil is in the details. This little bit of legislation is a greater threat to our liberties than banning so-called "assault rifles" or high-capacity magazines. In the future, if I want to sell a gun to someone else, I will have to find a gun dealer and pay a fee to submit the paperwork and wait for the background check to be completed. That’s presuming we can go through the NICS. If not, there’s no guessing how long the wait might be. The next issue is how the Federal government will know if all sales are going through the required background check. That’s easy, just check the database to see if the sale was made legally. What database? The one they will have to set up to ensure compliance with the new law. Current law says they can’t keep permanent records of background checks. Does anyone really believe that now? When a new sale is made, the ATF and/or FBI will want to know where the seller got the gun and if it was purchased in accordance with the law. The only way to know that is to show a chain of custody, which requires a database. What about guns we already own? They will have to be included in the database to make the system work. Perhaps instead of “universal background check” this should be called “universal registration.” If all our guns are registered, surely there will have to be a fee for the privilege of registering them. Law enforcement officials may have to inspect individual collections from time to time to ensure everything is in order. What might happen after a future mass shooting and another round of gun-violence hysteria? Certain guns may have to banned or confiscated in the name of public safety and gun owners may have to be watched as potential threats to society. That’s not too hard to do with the database. We all know what comes next.

22bb, thanks for the link to the overview of the Toomey/Manchin bill. There is no doubt the Senate feels compelled to "do something" in response to the Newtown shootings. Let's hope the final outcome looks more like the Toomey/Manchin bill than the Schumer bill.

Am I correct that the final version of the bill has not even been released yet?

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/04...protection-act/

And this:

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/04...n-registration/

From second link:


“Having backed off from attempting to ban semi-automatic rifles and standard capacity magazines, the last hope President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Reid, and Senator Feinstein have at imposing more gun control on law-abiding Americans is their so-called ‘Universal Background Check’ scheme,” NFOA President Wesley Dickinson stated. Carefully examining the language of the ‘background check’ bills considered by the Senate, despite disingenuously benign claims, reveals that politicians aim to make it a 5-year felony to:

Leave town for more than 7 days, and leave your wife, partner, or roommate at home with your guns;

Lend a gun to a friend to take shooting or to go hunting;

Loan a gun to your mother if she lives at a different residence;

Hand a gun to someone at a gun club which is not a shooting range;

Teach someone to shoot on your own land, if you hand them the gun; or

Fail to report a gun as lost or stolen within 24 hours, even if you are on a hunting trip deep in the woods and are unable to do so.

papa45, I respectfully agree with you 100%.

They can't even control illegal drug sales. What makes them think they could enforce universal background checks without registration.... See where this is going?

<ToungInCheek>
The only way it would work is if they give background checks to EVERYONE....
don't panic

wait for it,

wait for it....

when you pass the background check you get a conceal permit and free government surplus ammo from the DEA, DHS and Customs as they seem to have an excessive amount of ready to go ammo.

</ToungInCheek>
Really just stop messing with the second ammendment.
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED is pretty simple isn't it!
The second ammendment people, doesnt mean us people in a libtards mind.
Liberalism is truly a sickness.

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.