Non FFL Background Checks

[DaveTN]

I don’t want to see background checks, but since that are all the politicians can get; they will continue to go for it.

If they were serious about background checks they would be free, and they would be done at local state offices. Oh wait, you can’t have guns in most state facilities, so that won’t work.

Felons are easy to weed out, but how are the mentally ill and people with mental problems going to get in a database? I don’t see even the liberal gun haters going along with that. (Too many of them would be in that database)

[bersaguy]

I think in most of the mass shootings to date in the more modern times the mentally ill person killed family members that owned the weapons and then took the weapons out to commit most of the shootings so there is really no way to prevent that unless the parents of that person makes sure they cannot gain access to the weapons which again is a major hurdle to overcome..........jmho 

   Also there have been people that provided warning that they were mentally troubled such as the Colorado theater shooter who sent letters the Psychologist at the college and I think she either failed to act or got the letters to late. Can't remember? But he purchased all the guns and ammo and passed all back ground checks. The Shooter in Arizona that shot all those folks including that little girl and Gabby Gifford also passed back ground check and purchased the guns and ammo used. Back ground checks did not prevent either one of those shootings or even turn on any warning lights.................jmho

Edited July 4, 2014 by bersaguy

[JWKilgore]

But what about knives, axes, cars, gas and sharp poles? Once you open the door saying this is ok then they will move on the next and soon you will be asking the gooberment for permission to take your poop.... 

Slippery Slope fallacy. All those other items have other completely non-ranged-weapon based purposes.

 

 

I would not have a problem with background checks but for the fact that they want the serial number and description of the firearms. This is not checking out purchasers records. This is forming the ground work for a gun registry one day.

I feel the same way, and this is the exact reason for my proposal! Open the TICS/NICS so that anyone may sign up for an account and run a background check. Not a required system, an optional system. The system could be accessed from a web interface or a smartphone app. You would type a TN DL number into the web interface; the smart phone app would only require scanning the barcode on the back of TN driving licenses.

 

I would not support a proposal that required entering any form of weapon information. All I need to know is whether the buyer may legally own a gun. The type of weapon is irrelevant to the transaction.

 

Why does someone that has been convicted of a felony not have the right to protect themselves and their families?

Any "right" is only yours as long as you can protect it for yourself, or society can protect it for you. If you don't believe me, go to Los Angeles, and tell the local police that you have the right to keep and bear arms. You can even show them your TN carry permit. See how long society will protect your "right". Then, assuming you aren't in jail at this point, find the biggest, meanest, cartel thug you can then call him a [insert ethnic/homophobic slur of choice]. Then tell him you have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and that society protects that right for you. Then come back here and let us know how it went.

 

In our current society, people who have committed a crime bad enough to be considered a "felony" have proven that they are incapable of following the rules of society. If you don't follow the rules of society, society isn't willing to allow you to keep your rights. Among other, you lose the rights to freedom of movement (i.e., not being a prisoner), voting, and the keeping and bearing arms. 

Edited July 6, 2014 by JWKilgore

[tnhawk]

Didn't they waive that right when they decided to break the law?

I have been convicted of breaking traffic laws in the past, but after paying a penality, I'm still legally allowed to drive.

[DaveTN]

I have been convicted of breaking traffic laws in the past, but after paying a penality, I'm still legally allowed to drive.

Yes, but if you break traffic laws continually you can gain habitual offender status. You can even gain felony habitual offender status. See how that works? It’s a progression that weeds out those that are not responsible enough to drive a car.

But anyway, the felony ban thing has been argued to death on this forum; the bottom line is that the state of Tennessee is one of the toughest states I have heard of on it. If your crime is drug or violence related not even a full pardon will get your rights back. And if you are caught as a felon in possession it’s pretty much guaranteed prison time from what I understand.

[Clod Stomper]

I have been convicted of breaking traffic laws in the past, but after paying a penality, I'm still legally allowed to drive.

And therein lies one problem (of many). Driving is treated as more of a right than owning a firearm. Even when licenses are suspended or revoked, it's usually only temporary.

Not directed at you, btw, tnhawk.

But if someone is too dangerous to own a gun, they shouldn't be outside of a prison, let alone driving around an even more lethal weapon.

[JayC]

Unneccesary, unconstitutional, and false positive prone TICS needs to go away.

Yup. Abolish the unneccesary TICS altogether and go with NICS... like just about every other state.