Posted on 08/11/2019 7:19:55 PM PDT by SanchoP
If you wish to think of it that way, I’m fine with it.
I don’t believe I misrepresented anything there.
I get delayed every time I go through a check. I have never been denied but it has taken up to four days for my check to come back. I have been told it is because I have a clearance, but I don’t know for certain. Nobody I have asked knows and in my view, that is a problem. That is one of the reasons I got my CHL, to bypass the not so instant background check. It happens to many people and I suspect some just say screw it and end up not buying the weapon that they want/need. I suppose a woman being stalked by some violent and crazy ex should just relax and wait days? There are also law abiding people wrongly on the prohibited list. Good luck getting your name off of that. The question should be why do I have to wait one second to exercise a Constitutional right? How long should I be forced to wait to speak? What forms should I have to submit to gubmint to be cleared to attend church?
Uh...my bad. Replied to wrong post. I thought I was defending my opinion that Crenshaw’s service and disability made him immune from criticism on this topic. The peremptory nature of his statement on Red Flag seems to confirm that, IMHO.
You might google “red flag law abuse”. Objections to Red Flag laws are universal; even Mother Jones doesn’t want them.
When I purchased my last weapons, it took two weeks to get clearance. That was in ‘92.
Was talking to some guys on Saturday, and they mentioned it took them about 20 minutes to get cleared.
Different places probably still take different amounts of time.
The scenario about the woman needing a gun is a tough one, but I’d advise women to have a weapon during normal circumstances so that when relationships change, they’ll have access to a gun.
When I go in to get my vehicle serviced, I have to wait. If the check is live online these days, thirty minutes to an hour isn’t so bad.
If it’s days, the onus is on them to clean up the process.
Thanks for the mention of those things.
Mother Jones? That’s surprising...
Perhaps it’s their off the grid folks who influenced that.
You can think that if you want but we have the laws in place and they are not being followed. Reality now is many are not getting help. We have people who are unable to function living on the streets and others shooting random people.
People who are mentally unstable enough to be a danger to themselves and others do need to be locked up for treatment. T
Checking your vehicle is not a Constitutional right. Owning a weapon is. Any delay is unacceptable unless you think it would be a good idea for the gubmint to make you wait a few days to exercise your free speech right to post a reply to somebody. BTW, the check is NEVER 30 minutes for me, it is always days and I am not a prohibited person. I also have a security clearance which means the gubmint knows more about me than I do at any given moment and that makes the whole thing even more stupid. Why should I be OK with waiting 3 or 4 days every time I decide to buy a weapon? The checks accomplish nothign outside of hassling honest people. If you judge by the amount of prosecutions pursued for criminals who try to buy guns, hassling law abiding citizens is exactly what the gubmint designed these checks to do.
https://freebeacon.com/issues/prosecutions-lying-gun-background-checks-fall-new-low/
“The report shows that, between 2008 and 2015, the FBI denied 556,496 gun purchases following background checks. During that time period, the report shows that only 254 false statements were even considered for prosecution, amounting to a 0.04 percent prosecution rate.”
Actually Mike DeWine (R-Gov-OH) is talking like that. He is pressing legislation in Ohio that will lock up dangerous people.
He stated that 93% of mental patients are not dangerous, focus on the ones that are. Pretty sure you can easily find it in a search.
Violent non-mental animals, need to be in prison....long term. Thr NRA has been saying this forever.
It's painfully obvious that our government can't protect us or ensure our safety under any circumstances.
I’m sure you think you’ve really proven something here.
It really doesn’t register with me like it does with you.
Over 500,000 people were denied the ability to purchase a weapon for cause, and this doesn’t mean anything to you. It tells me 500,000 guns did not get into the hands of people who had proven themselves unable to make decent decisions in their private lives.
I guess we’re even.
I agree with that.
I encourage folks who are clear of things to prevent it, to own weapons, learn safety practices and how to use them, and go to the range.
Anyone who can, should also conceal carry.
I’d love to see Trump facilitate national carry, with full reciprocity across all state lines.
Have you considered that perhaps the majority of these denials are honest citizens who were erroneously denied? Maybe only the 250 the feds considered prosecuting were actually prohibited persons and the rest were law abiding people wrongly denied? We will never know because the feds don’t care enough about their own laws to actually investigate and enforce these denials as they are charged with doing. Even if these denials were all criminals that means that a half million crimes went unpunished. How many more crimes did these people commit when they should have been in jail? I’m not as happy about that as you apparently are. The point I thinking this makes is why pass more laws if the government doesn’t choose to enforce the ones we already have?
amen
I don’t consider that they are all normal people being denied anyway.
I do know some folks are on the no-fly list by accident, so I’m not going to state that none of them wind up in a gun denial category erroneously.
The incidence of it can’t be all but 250 people though, or the system would be classified as unacceptable. Suits would wind up taking the system down, or improving it.
Being in prison or even jail is generally only a portion of a person’s sentence. They are sentenced to x number of years of which they are required to spend a portion in jail or prison.
Once they are released, they remain on parole for varying amounts of time.
I do not know if the parole portion is also reduced along with time in jail/prison for good behavior. I know of one case where it didn’t.
So no, the idea that folks should be put in jail, then allowed to buy guns, isn’t exactly how it works. And I think it works that way for good reason.
If a guy has been a gang member or convicted of using weapons during a crime, I’m all for them being denied gun rights as long a it can be managed.
I don’t know the exact laws on the books concerning applications to own a weapon. Do they prescribe large penalties for someone applying who isn’t qualified? Are the laws just there to make sure unqualified people don’t get one, or is it supposed to be punitive also?
It’s possible that it wasn’t punitive.
You’d be surprised how hard it is to remember exactly what the guidelines are concerning your ability to own weapons, after twenty - forty years pass by.
Some gun purchasers may present to purchase a weapon, stating up front they aren’t sure if they are allowed to or not.
They may be run to clarify the issue.
Not sure about this. Just tossing it out there.
The fact is we don’t know the status of those who were denied because the feds only considered less than 1/2 percent. The penalty for lying on the 4473 is harsh, up to 10 years in prison. You would think that would be worth the feds looking into but you’d be wrong. Apparently, the feds are only interested in hassling law abiding people. They are demonstrably not interested in enforcing these laws as they are charged with doing. They just don’t have the time to do their job, but they have plenty of time to hassle law abiding citizens.
I can’t argue with that. If the penalties are what you say they are, your thoughts are not far off base at all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.