Momto2boys973 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2019 11:52 am It goes beyond looking for a record. How many mass shooters had a record? Pretty much not one. And some mass shooters, like the one of Sandy Hooks, didn’t even use their own weapons. They were guns legally purchased by his mother, the one he also killed. So when you purchase a weapon, it’s not just you the one with access to it. So it shouldn’t just be your background being checked, but your household, the people that could have access to your weapon, your knowledge on gun safety and use and the amount of guns you already own.
hockeymom87 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2019 11:05 amHow long do you think it should take? If your record is clean it doesn’t take long. My husband gets a security background check and it’s pretty quickly done. And they look for everything. You give your SSN and it looks for arrests or other crime that could make you ineligible.EarlGrayHot wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2019 9:42 am Well, three days is hardly enough time to do a thorough background check. That is ridiculous.
Call on Walmart to end gun sales
Forum rules
Keep News and Politics about News and Politics.
Do not post full articles from other websites. Always link back to the source
Discuss things respectfully and take into account that each person has a different opinion.
Remember that this is a place for everyone to enjoy. Don’t try and run people off of the site. If you are upset with someone then utilize the foe feature.
Report when things come up.
Personal attacks are against guidelines however attacks need to be directed at a member on the forum for it to be against guidelines. Lying is not against guidelines, it’s hard for us to prove someone even did lie.
Once a topic is locked we consider the issue handled and no longer respond to new reports on the topic.
Keep News and Politics about News and Politics.
Do not post full articles from other websites. Always link back to the source
Discuss things respectfully and take into account that each person has a different opinion.
Remember that this is a place for everyone to enjoy. Don’t try and run people off of the site. If you are upset with someone then utilize the foe feature.
Report when things come up.
Personal attacks are against guidelines however attacks need to be directed at a member on the forum for it to be against guidelines. Lying is not against guidelines, it’s hard for us to prove someone even did lie.
Once a topic is locked we consider the issue handled and no longer respond to new reports on the topic.
-
- Regent
- Posts: 4293
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2018 10:56 pm
Actually, a good number of them had encounters with law enforcement, as well as problems at school. I would support the background checks to include psych history and finding out if anyone at all in the household has a psych history. Another commonality among the shooters is taking psychotropic drugs, which I believe should disqualify anyone from owning a weapon. The number of guns already in the household means nothing, nor does the amount of ammo. How many pairs of shoes do you own, how many floral print blouses? Is it anyone else's business? If I own a gun, and practice with it often, then I will go through a LOT of ammo, especially to someone who knows very little about guns. You don't go to the range and just shoot of 2 or 3 rounds and call it a day.
Expand your thinking
It’s possible to disagree with an article and not respond with a personal attack you know.
Try it.
It’s possible to disagree with an article and not respond with a personal attack you know.
Try it.
-
- Regent
- Posts: 4293
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2018 10:56 pm
Purchasing a gun over the internet still requires a background check at the delivery point, which must be someone who holds an FFL. They do the check, and if you pass, you can pick up the gun. It's not like when you order a gadget off of Amazon, that gets delivered to your doorstep.
Momto2boys973 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2019 12:35 pm Exactly. So obviously backgrounds check are useless. Just like putting a Band-Aid in open heart surgery. Just the illusion that something is being done.
And by using the guns he wasn’t a criminal. He was old enough to carry a gun, he just wasn’t old enough to own one (yeah, very logical ) If the “background check” had included the people in her household that could have access to the gun and mental health being a deterrent to have access to a gun, she wouldn’t have been able to purchase one legally and she didn’t seem the kind to be so desperate to go and get one illegally. If background checks include checking social media and allowing for a waiting period of not 3 days, but of 3 months to see how the person is behaving, if gun ownership was limited to a certain number and types of guns and ammo, then maybe some of these incidents should be stopped. There’s no excuse why Stephen Paddock owned 24 legal weapons that he used to murder people in Las Vegas. ZERO excuses for that. Number of guns owned should be a red flag in any background check.
And, as I said, mass shootings are crimes so opportunity. If Adam Lanza, the Columbine kids, the Orlando club shooter, and the Virginia yech shooter didn’t have a ready access to guns, those crimes would most likely not have been committed. Seung-Hui Cho had a history of mental problems, even psychiatric evaluations for suicide threats and he was even able to legally purchase a gun over the internet. So again... how did the “background check” help there?
hockeymom87 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2019 12:20 pmAnd when his mother bought that gun he didn’t have anything that would have came up to stop her from getting it. Him and other using guns that aren’t there’s shows that criminals(and if you use a gun that’s not your a criminal) don’t care about laws.Momto2boys973 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2019 11:52 am It goes beyond looking for a record. How many mass shooters had a record? Pretty much not one. And some mass shooters, like the one of Sandy Hooks, didn’t even use their own weapons. They were guns legally purchased by his mother, the one he also killed. So when you purchase a weapon, it’s not just you the one with access to it. So it shouldn’t just be your background being checked, but your household, the people that could have access to your weapon, your knowledge on gun safety and use and the amount of guns you already own.
Expand your thinking
It’s possible to disagree with an article and not respond with a personal attack you know.
Try it.
It’s possible to disagree with an article and not respond with a personal attack you know.
Try it.
-
- Princess Royal
- Posts: 5642
- Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 9:56 pm
Wow, talking about the ghetto like that is pretty damn racist and bigoted.Ledina60 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2019 5:19 pmLol
Yah , of course- because I live in a Ghetto where people forget to lock their doors and drugs and guns are being sold and stolen .... gosh if better be careful .
Nope.
I live in a peaceful, protected townhome complex where we haven’t ever been broken into.
I’d have a greater chance of being hit by a bus if I’m not looking.
Ummmm
Are you really that scared? Asking for a friend,
Never explain - your friends do not need it and your enemies will not believe you anyway. - Elbert Hubbard
Keep up - Calm Down - Pay Attention
Keep up - Calm Down - Pay Attention
-
- Princess Royal
- Posts: 8796
- Joined: Sun May 27, 2018 5:20 pm
How is Walmart not selling guns anymore going to help anything?
-
- Princess Royal
- Posts: 8796
- Joined: Sun May 27, 2018 5:20 pm
You live in a fantasy world.Ledina60 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2019 5:15 pmThere’s a greater chance of being hit by a bus or fall in the shower than having to defend myself from an intruder.hockeymom87 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2019 3:35 pmI just wanted to clarify since you said a big guy. Plenty of decent people have guns for protection. Teachers, pastors, nurses, doctors, VPs of companies. What would you do if someone broke into your house? How would you protect yourself and your family.
My home is in a very quiet peaceful townhome complex ( owned )and I have sturdy locks and security system. Historically, there have only been a half dozen homes right in town that were robbed over the last decade.
If I lived out in the boondocks, there might be a greater risk. Because that’s where robbers go because the owners are defenseless and tend to forget to lock their homes and cars.
-
- Princess
- Posts: 22626
- Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2018 12:46 pm
His mother and father knew there was something going on with that boy. If he hadn't killed her, she should have been charged. Just like that Florida gun advocate who was shot in the back by her little boy. Negligence and ignorance allowed both.hockeymom87 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2019 12:20 pmAnd when his mother bought that gun he didn’t have anything that would have came up to stop her from getting it. Him and other using guns that aren’t there’s shows that criminals(and if you use a gun that’s not your a criminal) don’t care about laws.Momto2boys973 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2019 11:52 am It goes beyond looking for a record. How many mass shooters had a record? Pretty much not one. And some mass shooters, like the one of Sandy Hooks, didn’t even use their own weapons. They were guns legally purchased by his mother, the one he also killed. So when you purchase a weapon, it’s not just you the one with access to it. So it shouldn’t just be your background being checked, but your household, the people that could have access to your weapon, your knowledge on gun safety and use and the amount of guns you already own.
hockeymom87 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2019 11:05 am
How long do you think it should take? If your record is clean it doesn’t take long. My husband gets a security background check and it’s pretty quickly done. And they look for everything. You give your SSN and it looks for arrests or other crime that could make you ineligible.
306/232
But I'm still the winner! They lied! They cheated! They stole the election!
But I'm still the winner! They lied! They cheated! They stole the election!
-
- Princess
- Posts: 22626
- Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2018 12:46 pm
Ledina60 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2019 12:59 pm Here’s a big guy with a gun - the kind I don’t want to shop with at Walmart or anywhere else.
http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/page/27/ ... %29endif-A
He looks ridiculous. Carrying like that could get him killed. All it takes is a guy, regardless of size, who's quicker to take one of those guns and pop him dead. Open carry is just dumb to me.hockeymom87 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2019 12:41 pmI know about people of Walmart. The have skinny mesh head looking people on it too. I was commenting on how you always seem to bring someone’s wait into something. That or their lack of education and the south.Ledina60 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2019 12:26 pm
Yahhttp://www.peopleofwalmart.com/page/4/?m=vod-s ... %29endif-A
[A/quote]
I get the feeling some people I know would terrify you, even though they are some of the most generous people with big hearts.
306/232
But I'm still the winner! They lied! They cheated! They stole the election!
But I'm still the winner! They lied! They cheated! They stole the election!
-
- Princess
- Posts: 22626
- Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2018 12:46 pm
With a concealed carry permit, one doesn't need to wait. But at the same time, a woman who's in that position has options if she'd just choose to take them. And what woman doesn't have access to kitchen knives or anti-freeze? Hurt me and vengeance is mine, sadly. I don't back down.
306/232
But I'm still the winner! They lied! They cheated! They stole the election!
But I'm still the winner! They lied! They cheated! They stole the election!
-
- Princess
- Posts: 22626
- Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2018 12:46 pm
True. However, there are those few of us who would fight back with the resources available to us.Momto2boys973 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2019 4:59 pm If you’re in that desperate need and you’re willing to do something about it, there are resources to help you. That’s not an excuse to sell guns as if they were pantyhose. You can get to a safe place.
And seriously? You don’t sound like someone who knows anything about gun use at all. Do you think it’s as easy as “just point the hole towards the bad guy and pull!!”? Do you k ow anything about abuse? An abused woman who hasn’t had the courage to leave probably wouldn’t be able to kill the bastard if she had a gun. Most likely, she’ll end up hesitating, giving him a chance to take the gun away from her and either shooting or beating the crap out of her. A person with a gun who’s not willing it to use it without a second though puts themselves in more danger than an unarmed person. And the vast majority of people aren’t that quick-draw-McGraw.
306/232
But I'm still the winner! They lied! They cheated! They stole the election!
But I'm still the winner! They lied! They cheated! They stole the election!
-
- Princess
- Posts: 22626
- Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2018 12:46 pm
Do what? That's...Ledina60 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2019 5:15 pmThere’s a greater chance of being hit by a bus or fall in the shower than having to defend myself from an intruder.hockeymom87 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2019 3:35 pmI just wanted to clarify since you said a big guy. Plenty of decent people have guns for protection. Teachers, pastors, nurses, doctors, VPs of companies. What would you do if someone broke into your house? How would you protect yourself and your family.
My home is in a very quiet peaceful townhome complex ( owned )and I have sturdy locks and security system. Historically, there have only been a half dozen homes right in town that were robbed over the last decade.
If I lived out in the boondocks, there might be a greater risk. Because that’s where robbers go because the owners are defenseless and tend to forget to lock their homes and cars.
306/232
But I'm still the winner! They lied! They cheated! They stole the election!
But I'm still the winner! They lied! They cheated! They stole the election!