U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-29-2016, 07:35 PM
 
18,834 posts, read 9,626,388 times
Reputation: 5286

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
huh? The law requiring a background check is enforced, certainly some people circumvent it, but that does not mean the law is not working as intended.
You are kidding right? Otherwise you are either lying or a completely ignorant.

Which one is it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-29-2016, 08:32 PM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
31,032 posts, read 13,584,112 times
Reputation: 22119
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeexplorer View Post
You are kidding right? Otherwise you are either lying or a completely ignorant. Which one is it?
No, I am not kidding how many gun dealers violate the law and sell guns without a background check? I stated that the law can be circumvented, but that does not mean that people do not obey that particular law, so ease up on the accusations I'm not lying nor am I ignorant.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2016, 08:34 PM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
31,032 posts, read 13,584,112 times
Reputation: 22119
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
Originally Posted by BentBow
Nature law of self preservation has been around since the beginning of time. Murder has always meant revenge and theft has always ended in conflict. That is natural law.
With the law against murder, that means murder never happens? One day you will understand what liberty actually is. What was wrong? Felons register to vote every day. The mechanism to make sure they don't cast a vote isn't there in any system, not without voter ID and the magnetic bar they swipe and pops up all the info

Isn't that what I have been saying..... "The feel good law"
If I want to kill you, what is going to stop me? The police? LOL!
It is not like evil announces itself to warn the world, before it strikes
awesome! so let's just not have any laws at all
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2016, 08:44 PM
 
18,834 posts, read 9,626,388 times
Reputation: 5286
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
No, I am not kidding how many gun dealers violate the law and sell guns without a background check? I stated that the law can be circumvented, but that does not mean that people do not obey that particular law, so ease up on the accusations I'm not lying nor am I ignorant.
Do you not know the prosecution rate of background check violation is like ... OK see for yourself.

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/grants/239272.pdf

Of 72,000 violations, punishable by 10 years and $100K fine, only 62 was prosecuted.

That's enforcement? Keep in mind, they got the violators' name, address, birthdays etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2016, 08:53 PM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
31,032 posts, read 13,584,112 times
Reputation: 22119
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeexplorer View Post
Do you not know the prosecution rate of background check violation is like ... OK see for yourself.
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/grants/239272.pdf
Of 72,000 violations, punishable by 10 years and $100K fine, only 62 was prosecuted.
That's enforcement?
BI denials referred to ATF DENI Branch 76,142 100.0% That means in 76,142 cases dealers followed the law and did not allow 76,142 people to purchase a weapon. And no, they do not refer each of those attempted purchases for prosecution, is that what you are claiming needs to be done in order to prove the law is working as intended?

What is it that you don't understand about the effectiveness of a law that caused gun dealers to NOT sell guns to over 70,000 prohibited people, and why don't you think that is significant?

From another source:

"The group cited a 2004 Department of Justice review of enforcement of the Brady Act. The report found that ATF was referring "standard denial" cases to its field offices that "were not likely to be prosecuted." But it also said that historically, federal prosecutors "have been unsuccessful in achieving convictions in many of these cases and consequently have been unwilling to expend their limited resources on prosecuting" them.

The report went on to explain why prosecutors may not want to file charges in certain cases: A person prohibited from buying a gun may have committed a felony that was not violent or was committed many years ago; a prohibited person might be trying to buy a hunting rifle; and it’s difficult to prove that the prohibited person was aware of the prohibition and intentionally lied on his application.

So, there are indications that federal law enforcement authorities could file more criminal charges in cases in which a gun purchase application is denied. But it’s also clear that large numbers of the denials don’t involve any crime at all and some cases are not provable."
U.S. files criminal charges in fraction of gun denial cases, Mayors Against Illegal Guns says | PolitiFact Wisconsin
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2016, 09:01 PM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
66,498 posts, read 33,783,099 times
Reputation: 14240
Originally Posted by BentBow
Natural law of self preservation has been around since the beginning of time. Murder has always meant revenge and theft has always ended in conflict. That is natural law.
With the law against murder, does that mean murder never happens? One day you will understand what liberty actually is. What was wrong? Felons register to vote every day. The mechanism to make sure they don't cast a vote isn't there in any system, not without voter ID and the magnetic bar they swipe and pops up all the info

Isn't that what I have been saying..... "The feel good law"
If I want to kill you, what is going to stop me? The police? LOL!
It is not like evil announces itself to warn the world, before it strikes
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
awesome! so let's just not have any laws at all

It is your own liberty to go as far as one wishes.
The natural laws of mankind, harm and theft, have always been dealt with harshly. But, if you want to throw those to the side, more reason for me to cling to my weapons.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2016, 09:03 PM
 
18,834 posts, read 9,626,388 times
Reputation: 5286
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
BI denials referred to ATF DENI Branch 76,142 100.0% That means in 76,142 cases dealers followed the law and did not allow 76,142 people to purchase a weapon. And no, they do not refer each of those attempted purchases for prosecution, is that what you are claiming needs to be done in order to prove the law is working as intended?

What is it that you don't understand about the effectiveness of a law that caused gun dealers to NOT sell guns to over 70,000 prohibited people, and why don't you think that is significant?

From another source:

"The group cited a 2004 Department of Justice review of enforcement of the Brady Act. The report found that ATF was referring "standard denial" cases to its field offices that "were not likely to be prosecuted." But it also said that historically, federal prosecutors "have been unsuccessful in achieving convictions in many of these cases and consequently have been unwilling to expend their limited resources on prosecuting" them.

The report went on to explain why prosecutors may not want to file charges in certain cases: A person prohibited from buying a gun may have committed a felony that was not violent or was committed many years ago; a prohibited person might be trying to buy a hunting rifle; and it’s difficult to prove that the prohibited person was aware of the prohibition and intentionally lied on his application.

So, there are indications that federal law enforcement authorities could file more criminal charges in cases in which a gun purchase application is denied. But it’s also clear that large numbers of the denials don’t involve any crime at all and some cases are not provable."
U.S. files criminal charges in fraction of gun denial cases, Mayors Against Illegal Guns says | PolitiFact Wisconsin

So the law just mean jack squat to the Democrats?

I didn't know I couldn't murder someone, so I shouldn't be prosecuted? I thought that Hilary Standard only applied to the Clintons and now it applies to all BGC violators?

Have you personally filled out a 4473 Form to buy a firearm? How much proof do they need? They got the violator's signature on the form!!!

On the other hand, if you say only 62 cases could be prosecuted with the LEO's best effort, I would say the BGC is a giant crap because it has a success rate of 0.001% or 1 in 100,000 and a false positive rate of 99.91%!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2016, 09:25 PM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
31,032 posts, read 13,584,112 times
Reputation: 22119
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeexplorer View Post
So the law just mean jack squat to the Democrats?
I didn't know I couldn't murder someone, so I shouldn't be prosecuted? I thought that Hilary Standard only applied to the Clintons and now it applies to all BGC violators?
Have you personally filled out a 4473 Form to buy a firearm? How much proof do they need? They got the violator's signature on the form!!!
On the other hand, if you say only 62 cases could be prosecuted with the LEO's best effort, I would say the BGC is a giant crap because it has a success rate of 0.001% or 1 in 100,000 and a false positive rate of 99.91%!
You didn't read a thing that I said, did you? That's ok though, have a good evening
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2016, 09:40 PM
 
18,834 posts, read 9,626,388 times
Reputation: 5286
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
You didn't read a thing that I said, did you? That's ok though, have a good evening
I'd appreciate that you provide your specific rebuttal rather than some meaningless one-liner.

If you didn't think I read your post, then point out which part I missed. This way we can have a good discussion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-30-2016, 12:12 AM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
31,032 posts, read 13,584,112 times
Reputation: 22119
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeexplorer View Post
I'd appreciate that you provide your specific rebuttal rather than some meaningless one-liner. If you didn't think I read your post, then point out which part I missed. This way we can have a good discussion.
Think about it, you have to prove that the person who was denied knew that they were a prohibited person and that's not always easy because laws have changed over the years, in fact at one time a felon could own a long gun. And there are 40 + states where your gun rights can be restored, but there is very little reciprocity with other states. So what happens if a person has their gun rights automatically restored 5 years after they get out of prison in Texas tries to buy a gun in California? It's a hot mess, and the vast majority of those 72,000 are not clear cut cases of gangsters trying to buy guns because real criminals are usually savvy enough not to try to buy a gun from a dealer, so how many of these cases do you really think should be prosecuted? I knew an old guy in Reno who tried to buy a gun and was denied because he had spent a few months in jail for a stolen car when he was 18. He was never told it was a felony and somehow had legally been able to buy guns from dealers for over 40 years before he was denied. ATF questioned him and claimed they were going to prosecute him but finally dropped the case when they couldn't find his old arrest records which would have been required to prove that it was a felony charge. Quite frankly most of those cases would probably be close to impossible to prosecute and in many cases, like the elderly man in Reno there would be no justice served by putting a man in prison because he made a mistake a half a century earlier.

I don't know where you want to go with this or what you want to argue. I think background checks serve a purpose but we all know you can get guns without a background check. You seem to want to 'prove' to me that background checks are a failure because the vast majority of denied applications are not prosecuted. I don't see us coming to a meeting of the minds over this, do you?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top