search
top

Misplaced Words or True Intent?

It’s not hard to see why tin foil hats are becoming quite the fashion statement in today’s political climate. Whether they started out with a purpose of making as many gun owners as possible into felons, that’s what the current so-called “background check” proposals do.

Today, we have another example of a peculiar choice of words from Obama that makes it appear as though his intent is to effectively shut down gun shows instead of simply pushing a supposed “background check” for gun sales bill. As Great Satan, Inc. highlights, Obama’s speech today called for background checks before a person even enters a gun show. A policy like that would effectively close down some of our biggest gathering places.

It’s not unreasonable to think that this is the goal since Bloomberg has made gun shows a target of such extreme regulation proposals as recently as 2010.

Anti-gun advocates like to say that we’re paranoid to think that they are really trying to go after our entire gun culture, yet it seems to me that we’re just remarkably well-informed and that we pay very close attention to the publicly announce plans of our opponents.

12 Responses to “Misplaced Words or True Intent?”

  1. Perhaps we should have background checks before someone runs for high public office like the Presidency. Usually the mainstream media take this upon themselves to do but never really got around to doing it in the case of Mr. Obama.

    I still want to know his GPA at both Occidental College and Columbia University. How are we to know he is The Smartest Man in the World if we don’t have that information?

    • Jim says:

      If I remember correctly they did this for Algore and Kerry the Traitor so as to show they were smarter than W. Oops W had better grades, guess they won’t be doing that again.

  2. Sebastian and all,

    I’m not sure if you saw this, but I think this is brilliant in explaining the hidden caveats to the background check system as being pushed by the GC crowd. It’s a good read. Enjoy. I know I did.

    http://free2beinamerica2.wordpress.com/2013/03/27/criminals-safe-from-background-checks/

    • So sorry! I meant to address this to Bitter, first, and then all…!

      • Zermoid says:

        Would this decision not also make all forms of background checks illegal as well? Because if you do commit a crime with a gun they use the 4472 data on file at the FFL dealer to find out who owns the gun, thus incriminating yourself. Right?

  3. Andy says:

    I got a background check before the gun show. It’s represented by my carry permit. Strangely, I’m not allowed to carry there, though .

    • Zermoid says:

      THAT has always seemed absurd to me, a group of gun enthusiasts, who say they support the 2nd amendment, baring you from exercising it.

      I’m personally surprised the Anti’s haven’t used that as proof that gunnies even favor a ban on firearms…….

  4. HSR47 says:

    You know….

    If we stipulate that the whole background check and FFL systems are constitutional, then what would be so bad about shifting the background check from the point of sale to the point of entry?

    Think about it: it would make purchasing guns at a gun show smoother, and it could very well eliminate bottlenecks in the system. It would also have a side benefit: gun show promoters would have increased incentive to keep the junk (airsoft, jewelry, jerky, toy helicopters, etc.) out of gun shows. Some of that BS is getting way out of hand; at the last show in Oaks, there was a vender with a refridgerated glass-front meat case.

    Realistically though, we all know that isn’t how it would work, and so we must fight against it tooth, fang, and claw.

    • Zermoid says:

      A “GUN SHOW” should be limited to guns, accessories and related items, period. I didn’t pay to see toys and housewares! Now Toy guns or gun jewelry would be OK, but anything not related to guns or their use should be barred.

      • Andy says:

        Barred by whom? It’s a capitalistic enterprise, feel free to vote with your money. Else, you’re calling on the power of the state to impose restrictions on the freedoms of that enterprise.

        If the rock jewelry table helps the show producer meet costs, so be it. I find a bag of tasty jerky while browsing assorted weaponry to be quite satisfying, myself.

  5. Zermoid says:

    Biggest problem is the delay it would cause getting into a gun show, an “Instant Check” around here usually takes about 10 minutes, plus time to fill out the paperwork beforehand. Multiply that by thousands of people and it would be really slow to do.

    But I do agree that a background check before entering a show would be great from a security and all standpoint. Knowing there is no one with a criminal record hovering over your wares would be a big load off of exhibitor’s minds.

  6. Dyspeptic Curmudgeon says:

    Let’s see. For a background check you have to show government issued ID. This should also apply to other situations involving persons who might well not be entitled to attend at/ be involved in / vote…

    Oh WAIT!…

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Quote of the Day - Kelly Grayson (3/29/2013) - The Minuteman - [...] These people don't care about safety, violence or the rest of it. ¬†They merely hate firearms, the people who…
  2. SayUncle » Obama: You should have to go through a background check just to go to a gun show - [...] Ok, then. How about background checks to vote, speak freely, or peaceably assemble? [...]
top