11 comments for “Toon: Who is against criminal background checks?

  1. Robert Lauten
    April 25, 2013 at 8:10 pm

    “In March, PoliceOne conducted the most comprehensive survey ever of American law enforcement officers’ opinions on the topic gripping the nation’s attention in recent weeks: gun control.”

    “More than 15,000 verified law enforcement professionals took part in the survey, which aimed to bring together the thoughts and opinions of the only professional group devoted to limiting and defeating gun violence as part of their sworn responsibility.”

    “Totaling just shy of 30 questions, the survey allowed officers across the United States to share their perspectives on issues spanning from gun control and gun violence to gun rights.”

    “Top Line Takeaways
    Breaking down the results, it’s important to note that 70 percent of respondents are field-level law enforcers — those who are face-to-face in the fight against violent crime on a daily basis — not office-bound, non-sworn administrators or perpetually-campaigning elected officials.”

  2. Carl Overmyer
    April 25, 2013 at 10:20 pm

    What nobody wants to talk about in the NICS program are all the false denials and the complete lack of any type of redress. Once you are on the list, your screwed. There is NO due process to regain your Rights.

    Since inception NICS has stopped 1,800,000 from purchasing because of NICS, in total. How many of those felons went to jail?

    In 2010 there were 72,600 denials from NICS with an astounding 62 felony cases pursued and out of those only 44 actually made it into full fledged prosecutions. That’s just totally pathetic and unacceptable on any level. Where is the outrage over criminals getting away with felonies? Where is the outrage that the AG’s office is asleep at the wheel, or too busy covering their own asses from Congressional investigation.

    I have major problems with NICS and the other databases that are held, legally or otherwise by the Justice Dept. and their sub-agencies, like BATFE, FBI, DEA, etc. NICS and the purchase records of all buyers was legislated by Congress to be destroyed upon completion of the transaction, so there would be no database list of firearms owners, but they decided at the agency level NOT to destroy those records.

    So as a firearms owner, you really expect me to have full faith & trust that the Dept of Justice is going to abide by any laws or restrictions when it comes to firearms at this point? Really?

    The bills pending before both Congress and in Sacramento have nothing to do with public safety, they are all about centralizing power with the state. If you liked the pictures of Watertown just wait, it’s coming to a neighborhood near you… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Gi9RH1QbXU

    When only the govt has arms, you have a police state. If you don’t think that’s the end game for all of this, then you are hiding your head in the sand.

    • April 26, 2013 at 3:44 pm

      Carl — if you have an assault rifle and a small merry band of friends and you decide to defend your liberty by taking arms against the government, just how long do you think you’d last? I’m guessing 30 minutes. Look at Ruby Ridge, Waco to see how well that turned out. As far as Boston/Watertown goes, my cousin said no one had a problem with staying indoors and the result was positive. They caught the guy.

  3. April 26, 2013 at 9:17 am

    This cartoon isn’t about taking guns away. It’s about criminal background checks before sales. Do you have any comments on that?

  4. Ltpar
    April 26, 2013 at 10:37 am

    I support background checks on people who buy firearms and California is the strictest in the nation. For the price we pay to have the background done, it would be nice to get a card or certificate from the State, good for a year. That way if we made additional purchases a new background investigation would not have to be done or paid for.

    On Carrying Concealed Weapons, I am not in favor of every citizen packing a .44 magnum because unlike “Dirty Harry,” most do not know how to use it or under what conditions you can shoot a person. The present System in Orange County of citizens having to justify their reason to carry to the Sheriff, seems appropriate. At the same time, I still see to many politicians on the list who have absolutely no reason to be carrying a gun.

  5. Carl Overmyer
    April 26, 2013 at 10:39 am

    Only my first five paragraphs addressed the background checks…directly even.

  6. Carl Overmyer
    April 26, 2013 at 3:49 pm

    That still isn’t addressing the faults in the background check system we have now, is it?

    As for Boston/Watertown, not everyone was happy about the treatment or the way the day went down. I will say it did turn out getting the results almost everyone wanted. I can think of at least one person who wasn’t happy about it, but his opinion isn’t of any concern to me at the moment.

  7. Carl Overmyer
    April 26, 2013 at 4:21 pm

    Sorry Dan,
    I see the blog still isn’t working like the old days. The above was directed at your comment to mine. It just didn’t insert itself where I thought it would.

    And just to state my opinion, I am not now, nor have I ever said it was acceptable to take up arms against the govt. I just want to make that crystal clear.
    HOWEVER that certainly doesn’t change the definition of a police state does it?

  8. Thomas Anthony Gordon
    April 28, 2013 at 10:01 pm

    Democrat Senators Baccus, Begich, Pryor, Heitkamp and Reid voted against it as well.

  9. MikeM128
    April 29, 2013 at 5:14 pm

    I am against cops carrying guns. They fire over 100 rounds into a vehicle without killing the occupants. Obviously they are not trained to properly handle a fire arm.

    Nobody should carry a gun without proper safety training and demonstrate the ability to use that gun in a proper manner.

    As for background checks, I as a registered gun wacko, I am all for a system of checking the background of a potential sale as long as it is not stored in a database for the purposes of taking away our rights later.

    Unfortunately there are those that want to keep all of that data and store it for other needs. As we have seen with the media posting gun owners addresses, that is not what we want.

    Common Sense just can’t happen with our corrupt system.

  10. junior
    April 29, 2013 at 11:07 pm

    It’s mainly about deterrence Dan.

Comments are closed.