Trump says ‘serious discussions’ taking
place on background checks
by
Yaron Steinbuch
Original Article
Posted By: KatieJo,
8/9/2019 2:14:31 PM
President Trump said Friday that “serious discussions are taking place” among congressional leaders about background checks to keep firearms out of the hands of “mentally ill or deranged people” — though he insisted that the views of the National Rifle Association should be taken into account. “Serious discussions are taking place between House and Senate leadership on meaningful Background Checks,” the president said on Twitter.
Trump relying on good faith negotiations with the D'Rats... The D'Rats looking for more weapons to use against Trump. Dear Mr. President... DO NOT trust these scoundrels!
4 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
Chuzzles 8/9/2019 2:25:53 PM (No. 147409)
I don't know about you guys, but I smell the NYC bubble brained liberal thinking of Javanka behind all of this. If they succeed in getting their way, I hope they understand that not only have they declared open season on all Trump's voters, but they will be booted unceremoniously from the WH. We didn't vote for your daughter Mr. President. We voted for you.
1 person likes this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
trackman999 8/9/2019 2:28:40 PM (No. 147413)
I have never been disappointed by Trump. He plays the left and they fall , every time.
9 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
Wary American 8/9/2019 3:13:19 PM (No. 147457)
I am really tired of all this feces...ALL PEOPLE SHOULD BE CHECKED and CHECKED HARD.
I have been checked, fingerprinted, and now am proficient in the use of my weapons. They are a blast to use and the side benefit of being able to 'protect and defend' my unalienable rights has a deeply calming effect.
7 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
Captain Howdy 8/9/2019 3:52:18 PM (No. 147508)
A few years ago, Tom Coburn had an amendment for a background check that make sense to me.
The buyer would go online and submit info for the background check, if OK would get a clearance
to print and give to the seller, who would verify the number. No other paperwork involved, no excessive
transfer fees, simple. The buyer would have passed a background check making it OK to sell them a
gun. Of course, this would not require the registration of and serial number, make and model etc. which
is what they REALLY want. Just throw this back out there and see if they want a background check, or
do they really want the paperwork trail. We know the answer.....
1 person likes this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
LC Chihuahua 8/9/2019 3:53:43 PM (No. 147514)
Would background checks have prevented either of these guys from purchasing a weapon? I haven't heard anything that indicated either of them had ever committed a crime prior to this. Are we going to restrict guns because they were on the internet running their mouths. What are you going to do when people learn to shut their mouths while on the internet or around other people? Why stop with guns? Are we going to restrict motor vehicles, knives, or any kind of bomb components? How about drug and alcohol tests since they are so linked to violence? How far are you going to takes this? Just because some people are first class butts who are morally ill.
This isn't going to work.
2 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
lakerman1 8/9/2019 4:06:15 PM (No. 147523)
In Pennsylvania, it is legal for me to sell my shotguns or rifles directly to another private party. But if I sell one of my pistols to another individual, the transaction has to take place through a licensed firearms dealer.
The last time I checked, my local firearms dealer charges sixty dollars for the transaction. That sort of requirement for the private sales of long guns would likely turn some buyers and sellers of long guns into law breakers. If the motivation of some leftists is to hinder or stop the privates sales of long guns, they could achieve their goal. It would also establish a registry of sorts, of firearms. (When Canada tried the national registry route a couple of years ago,, even the leftist loons up there ignored the government, and the government gave up.)
The mental illness proposals may be troubling, as well. A wife divorcing her husband too often alleges bad behavior, mental illness, and the like. The change in the firearms law could be easily abused. A person who is prescribed any sort of mental rx could be reported by the pharmacy or prescribing physician, and that could suspend his 2nd amendment rights.
There is potential for great mischief here, hidden under the title of public safety..
4 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
DVC 8/9/2019 4:27:57 PM (No. 147549)
A VERY bad idea. This is how the government creates a total control of all guns. If you cannot legally sell a gun without a government check - that becomes a registry. All guns are then registered to a person, and then re-registered if sold. So, WHEN (not if) they decide to "come and get them", they will have a list of what guns you are supposed to have. Don't come up with them? Prison time. Have some not registered to you?
Prison time.
No, this does NOT fit with ".....shall not be infringed".
3 people like this.
What comprises a "background check" for these purposes? Who is the keeper of this information on virtually every American? Who will have access?
Who defines "mental illness" or "derangement"? The American Psychiatric Association (APA) is demonstrably driven by politics, not science. And who trusts "science" these days, particularly that performed by government or under advocacy financing?
Safeguards? Like we have in FISA courts?
Let's trade away more liberty for security. Eventually we will have neither.
4 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
curious1 8/9/2019 5:00:14 PM (No. 147584)
#8 and 9 are correct. Apparently too many uninformed people think giving government power means it will not be abused. We need to be removing power from the government, since we already have background checks and they did nothing. Since the government can't do the job, why let it keep the power? It's simply an infringement on our rights. As Franklin said, those who would give up some freedom for security deserve neither. And they show way too much trust in government. Ever hear of the recent FISA court lying shenanigans and coup attempt that's on-going, people? That's the government you think can be trusted with power. I say repeal the NFA 1934, GCA 1968 and NFA 1986 - they did nothing but infringe on our rights and kept nobody except government safer. You don't want government bureaucrats or politicians feeling safe and untouchable.
3 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
bad-hair 8/9/2019 5:04:01 PM (No. 147588)
Deranged does not mean stupid. Give me $400 at noon and by 2 AM when the bars close I'll give you your gun. The only background check you'll have to pass is MINE. Oops no gun for you. Try the Feds, their background check is easier than mine.
0 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
Heraclitus 8/9/2019 5:49:44 PM (No. 147624)
I don't like it when someone commits a crime and MY Rights come under threat.
Also, contending with the mentally ill is extremely difficult, as we know all too well over these past several years, with HIPPA laws, and the large number
Let's have some FACTS in these emotion-laden, grandstanding, hearings. And let's not allow them to INFRINGE on us law-abiding Citizens, on OUR Rights!
We must be alert to how totalitarian regimes have found clever ways of labeling their enemies mentally ill and needing treatment. Being a Christian, for example, or the wrong Party, or the wrong ethnicity or race, or the wrong view or beliefs about sexuality, etc. The initial motives may seem okay, even necessary. But in fact they are not. They (politicians or pundits or PC autocrats or anyone else) must not be allowed the power to deem what "mentally ill" means or who is mentally ill.
The Founders tried to construct a system which would limit the power and reach of the Federal Government. They understood human nature.
So here we are again, trying to stem the encroachment of control freak leftwing Democrats. Let's hope that POTUS isn't too eager for an emotion-based attempt to solve a problem rooted in corrupt, evil hearts.
2 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
chumley 8/9/2019 9:56:37 PM (No. 147724)
No power has ever been given to the government that they haven't abused. If the president caves on this infringement on our freedom, get ready for the abuses. I cant believe he would fall for this foolishness after what has happened to him the last two years. If they will go after him like that, what chance do we have?
The government is not your friend.
1 person likes this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "KatieJo"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)
Comments:
I don't like the sound of this, at the very least we should be told what they're up to.