Senate rejects expanded background checks

[uncle money bags]

Correct. There be the problem. My opinion is that I am all for more stringent back ground checks. Now, you get denied ownership thru a dealer then you shouldnt own a gun. Simple. They want to regulate the transaction of this said person from buying privately by forcing the good guys to register and forfeit their rights to keep him denied....No bueno.

define, "more stringent".

 

[ASP785]

A small victory in a large war.

 

[bettingpython]

Background checks don't need to be more stringent... the law is already pretty clear who can and can not own guns.

 

[ASP785]

Background checks don't need to be more stringent... the law is already pretty clear who can and can not own guns.

Enforcement of the law is where the ambiguity is at.

 

[younggundavid]

They have such a desire to know who has guns.... why..... why..... unless their end desire is to someday come and get them...

 

[uncle money bags]

Background checks don't need to be more stringent... the law is already pretty clear who can and can not own guns.

Enforcement of the law is where the ambiguity is at.

you guys are blocking my entrapment setup!

 

[Relentless]

Isn't this "registration" too? The .gov would then have a list of all the licenses wouldnt they? When it comes time to come and take the guns, they will know where to go. They would not have list of what you own, but does it not make sense to assume that those with the licenses have guns? That is not okay in my book. Our rights have been lost in baby steps. This would have been another step in the WRONG direction.

No, I meant it as in if you have it on your license you can't own a gun.

 

[Right-On-Target]

I saw Barak's 5 year old fit today on TV. Looks like he'll have to deal with the will of the American people, and will not get his own way - for now anyway.

 

[Spata]

 

[okwarren]