Define source, Fit?

(01-25-2017 12:49 PM)South Carolina Duke Wrote:  Define source, Fit?

Where the guns are coming from.

(01-25-2017 12:39 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:35 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  Sending in the feds to fix a city's problems without them asking for help is a very radical solution that can cause more problems than its worth.

Really?

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-histo...to-alabama

There are a few rare instances of this, but in every situation I have found, the city and state leadership was defying federal laws. Mostly during the forced end to segregation when many of the Southern States fought against it at the highest levels of government.

Not exactly the same situation here.

Or could be views at exactly that. Especially seeing how this is mostly gang related and influenced by illegals within the gang culture. Sanctuary Citues are doing exactly what you described the Southern States ,... not adhearing to Fed Law

(01-25-2017 12:47 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:40 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:36 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:30 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:25 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  "illegal straw purchases"

Should there be consequences for the sellers in these illegal straw purchases and should there be consequences?

Only if the seller is proven to be a psychic because that's the only way they would be able to determine the true intent of someone who otherwise would be a legal gun buyer.

So what exactly does a seller need to do before he can sell a gun?

We have gone over the process with you multiple times so I'm not going to waste my time when you obviously have no true desire to learn and are only trying to derail yet another topic. The information you seek is readily available on the internet.

Your refusal to answer what exactly a seller has to do to sell a weapon tells me that the answer is absolutely nothing.

Sellers of guns have to do absolutely nothing in order to sell guns to people. Those guns end up in the hands of criminals. There is your problem.

If Trump truly wants to take care of the problem in Chicago, then he should start at the source where there is no consequences for sellers who sell guns.

Step one, you need to check your individual state law. Some states have specific requirements.

Where I live, you don't have to do anything if you want to risk going to jail for 10 years or suffer other legal headaches.

The requirement for a private party face-to-face transaction is that it needs to be to a legal resident of the state that you live in, and you have to have no reason to believe that the buyer is not legal to purchase, own or possess a firearm.

How do you do that? First, ask to see either a valid drivers license or a resident concealed carry permit for the state that you live in. Doing so likely verifies the residency requirement as well as the age requirement (21 for handguns). Second, ask the potential buyer about their legal status with regards to firearms. You can go so far as to have them sign a bill of sale that represents that they are legal to own and purchase a firearm, etc. - that is just a CYA

For law-abiding citizens, the goal is to limit liability and to make sure that they've checked the appropriate boxes to be able to sell and transfer a piece of personal property that they have the right to do so pursuant to the second amendment to the United States Constitution.

(01-25-2017 12:47 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:40 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:36 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:30 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:25 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  "illegal straw purchases"

Should there be consequences for the sellers in these illegal straw purchases and should there be consequences?

Only if the seller is proven to be a psychic because that's the only way they would be able to determine the true intent of someone who otherwise would be a legal gun buyer.

So what exactly does a seller need to do before he can sell a gun?

We have gone over the process with you multiple times so I'm not going to waste my time when you obviously have no true desire to learn and are only trying to derail yet another topic. The information you seek is readily available on the internet.

Your refusal to answer what exactly a seller has to do to sell a weapon tells me that the answer is absolutely nothing.

Sellers of guns have to do absolutely nothing in order to sell guns to people. Those guns end up in the hands of criminals. There is your problem.

If Trump truly wants to take care of the problem in Chicago, then he should start at the source where there is no consequences for sellers who sell guns.

<Sigh>

I would make a comment about your ignorance but I know that we have covered the process for purchasing a gun with you multiple times so you aren't ignorant, you are just using your thread derailing troll persona today instead of your racebaiting troll persona.

But since I already bitchslapped you in another thread I'll stay in "Bitchslap Fit" mode for just a little while longer.

Here is a link to the ATF's Q&A page concerning the NICS system and process

https://www.atf.gov/qa-category/national...ystem-nics

Here's an article where the author goes through the process
http://www.marketplace.org/2013/02/07/bu...es-buy-gun


Neither were written slowly in crayon so you may have trouble figuring them out. If you sound out the hard words maybe you'll eventually get it.

(01-25-2017 12:55 PM)South Carolina Duke Wrote:  Or could be views at exactly that. Especially seeing how this is mostly gang related and influenced by illegals within the gang culture. Sanctuary Citues are doing exactly what you described the Southern States ,... not adhearing to Fed Law

Arguing that the gang culture of Chicago is the same thing as the Governor of Mississippi blocking a federal law forcing integration in public universities is pointless.

Even Chicago knows they have a crime problem. It's not like Emmanuel sits there and encourages the gang violence to continue.

Also, most Sanctuary cities catch and release because of prison overcrowding. They simply don't have the facilities nor the man power to handle every undocumented immigrant that crosses into their cities.

(01-25-2017 01:14 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:47 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:40 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:36 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:30 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  Only if the seller is proven to be a psychic because that's the only way they would be able to determine the true intent of someone who otherwise would be a legal gun buyer.

So what exactly does a seller need to do before he can sell a gun?

We have gone over the process with you multiple times so I'm not going to waste my time when you obviously have no true desire to learn and are only trying to derail yet another topic. The information you seek is readily available on the internet.

Your refusal to answer what exactly a seller has to do to sell a weapon tells me that the answer is absolutely nothing.

Sellers of guns have to do absolutely nothing in order to sell guns to people. Those guns end up in the hands of criminals. There is your problem.

If Trump truly wants to take care of the problem in Chicago, then he should start at the source where there is no consequences for sellers who sell guns.

Step one, you need to check your individual state law. Some states have specific requirements.

Where I live, you don't have to do anything if you want to risk going to jail for 10 years or suffer other legal headaches.

The requirement for a private party face-to-face transaction is that it needs to be to a legal resident of the state that you live in, and you have to have no reason to believe that the buyer is not legal to purchase, own or possess a firearm.

How do you do that? First, ask to see either a valid drivers license or a resident concealed carry permit for the state that you live in. Doing so likely verifies the residency requirement as well as the age requirement (21 for handguns). Second, ask the potential buyer about their legal status with regards to firearms. You can go so far as to have them sign a bill of sale that represents that they are legal to own and purchase a firearm, etc. - that is just a CYA

For law-abiding citizens, the goal is to limit liability and to make sure that they've checked the appropriate boxes to be able to sell and transfer a piece of personal property that they have the right to do so pursuant to the second amendment to the United States Constitution.

Why not pass a law that says that anyone who has a criminal record requires some kind of code on their id. Gun sellers have to ask for ID and if they see the code, they cannot sell the gun to them without penalty.

This way, gun sellers can still sell their guns but they don't have to worry about selling their firearm to someone with a criminal record. This wouldn't stop straw sales 100% but it might put a significant dent in it.

(01-25-2017 07:41 AM)pcm0103 Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 07:38 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Everything he says is just a statement until it's not. It's refreshing.

Yes it is. Because what happens when he doesn't do it? You guys are here praising him like he is the second coming of Christ! As a black man I need the killing to stop. I don't need statements. He has made a bold one. Don't just say it do it. Chicago needs help. So sent the feds now.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

True but as a Black man you're also aware I am sure that the previous president was a Black man and he didn't do squat.

I am of the opinion that the Chicago administration is letting these massacres occur is because of two things. They feel that the more gang bangers do it each other out there will be less crime. To a degree that is true but Number Two: If only the gang bangers were offing themselves that would be a good strategy but that's not the case. Innocent folks and many kids are being killed on purpose and by stray bullets.

Blame Oblunder for not doing anything for eight years not the man who has been in office for five days.

I forgot to add: The Chicago administration is a racist administration but Blacks don't see it. That's number three.

Federal Law is Fed Law. Try to pick and choose all you want but you lose the arguments

(01-25-2017 01:31 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 01:14 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:47 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:40 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:36 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  So what exactly does a seller need to do before he can sell a gun?

We have gone over the process with you multiple times so I'm not going to waste my time when you obviously have no true desire to learn and are only trying to derail yet another topic. The information you seek is readily available on the internet.

Your refusal to answer what exactly a seller has to do to sell a weapon tells me that the answer is absolutely nothing.

Sellers of guns have to do absolutely nothing in order to sell guns to people. Those guns end up in the hands of criminals. There is your problem.

If Trump truly wants to take care of the problem in Chicago, then he should start at the source where there is no consequences for sellers who sell guns.

Step one, you need to check your individual state law. Some states have specific requirements.

Where I live, you don't have to do anything if you want to risk going to jail for 10 years or suffer other legal headaches.

The requirement for a private party face-to-face transaction is that it needs to be to a legal resident of the state that you live in, and you have to have no reason to believe that the buyer is not legal to purchase, own or possess a firearm.

How do you do that? First, ask to see either a valid drivers license or a resident concealed carry permit for the state that you live in. Doing so likely verifies the residency requirement as well as the age requirement (21 for handguns). Second, ask the potential buyer about their legal status with regards to firearms. You can go so far as to have them sign a bill of sale that represents that they are legal to own and purchase a firearm, etc. - that is just a CYA

For law-abiding citizens, the goal is to limit liability and to make sure that they've checked the appropriate boxes to be able to sell and transfer a piece of personal property that they have the right to do so pursuant to the second amendment to the United States Constitution.

Why not pass a law that says that anyone who has a criminal record requires some kind of code on their id. Gun sellers have to ask for ID and if they see the code, they cannot sell the gun to them without penalty.

This way, gun sellers can still sell their guns but they don't have to worry about selling their firearm to someone with a criminal record. This wouldn't stop straw sales 100% but it might put a significant dent in it.

What you proposed wouldn't stop straw purchases at all because the people making the straw purchases for the criminals DON'T HAVE A CRIMINAL RECORD!!!!

Good God man educate yourself about an effin' topic before you try to come up with solutions. It would be good for both you and the board because A. you wouldn't look like an ill-informed idiot and B. we wouldn't have to waste our time reading and correcting your ill-informed, idiotic posts.

This is a perfect example of why we disregard anything you leftists have to say about guns. We do so because you simply have no idea what you are talking about yet you think you have all the answers.

(01-25-2017 01:35 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 01:31 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 01:14 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:47 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:40 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  We have gone over the process with you multiple times so I'm not going to waste my time when you obviously have no true desire to learn and are only trying to derail yet another topic. The information you seek is readily available on the internet.

Your refusal to answer what exactly a seller has to do to sell a weapon tells me that the answer is absolutely nothing.

Sellers of guns have to do absolutely nothing in order to sell guns to people. Those guns end up in the hands of criminals. There is your problem.

If Trump truly wants to take care of the problem in Chicago, then he should start at the source where there is no consequences for sellers who sell guns.

Step one, you need to check your individual state law. Some states have specific requirements.

Where I live, you don't have to do anything if you want to risk going to jail for 10 years or suffer other legal headaches.

The requirement for a private party face-to-face transaction is that it needs to be to a legal resident of the state that you live in, and you have to have no reason to believe that the buyer is not legal to purchase, own or possess a firearm.

How do you do that? First, ask to see either a valid drivers license or a resident concealed carry permit for the state that you live in. Doing so likely verifies the residency requirement as well as the age requirement (21 for handguns). Second, ask the potential buyer about their legal status with regards to firearms. You can go so far as to have them sign a bill of sale that represents that they are legal to own and purchase a firearm, etc. - that is just a CYA

For law-abiding citizens, the goal is to limit liability and to make sure that they've checked the appropriate boxes to be able to sell and transfer a piece of personal property that they have the right to do so pursuant to the second amendment to the United States Constitution.

Why not pass a law that says that anyone who has a criminal record requires some kind of code on their id. Gun sellers have to ask for ID and if they see the code, they cannot sell the gun to them without penalty.

This way, gun sellers can still sell their guns but they don't have to worry about selling their firearm to someone with a criminal record. This wouldn't stop straw sales 100% but it might put a significant dent in it.

What you proposed wouldn't stop straw purchases at all because the people making the straw purchases for the criminals DON'T HAVE A CRIMINAL RECORD!!!!

Good God man educate yourself about an effin' topic before you try to come up with solutions. It would be good for both you and the board because A. you wouldn't look like an ill-informed idiot and B. we wouldn't have to waste our time reading and correcting your ill-informed, idiotic posts.

This is a perfect example of why we disregard anything you leftists have to say about guns. We do so because you simply have no idea what you are talking about yet you think you have all the answers.

Please go back to the part where I said this would not stop all straw purchases. However, it would stop anyone with a criminal record from being able to purchase a weapon from a law abiding citizen.

Aren't you the one's who always say that gun owners are law abiding citizens? If gun owners are all law abiding citizens like you claim, they wouldn't buy a gun and sell it to a criminal.

(01-25-2017 01:39 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 01:35 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 01:31 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 01:14 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:47 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Your refusal to answer what exactly a seller has to do to sell a weapon tells me that the answer is absolutely nothing.

Sellers of guns have to do absolutely nothing in order to sell guns to people. Those guns end up in the hands of criminals. There is your problem.

If Trump truly wants to take care of the problem in Chicago, then he should start at the source where there is no consequences for sellers who sell guns.

Step one, you need to check your individual state law. Some states have specific requirements.

Where I live, you don't have to do anything if you want to risk going to jail for 10 years or suffer other legal headaches.

The requirement for a private party face-to-face transaction is that it needs to be to a legal resident of the state that you live in, and you have to have no reason to believe that the buyer is not legal to purchase, own or possess a firearm.

How do you do that? First, ask to see either a valid drivers license or a resident concealed carry permit for the state that you live in. Doing so likely verifies the residency requirement as well as the age requirement (21 for handguns). Second, ask the potential buyer about their legal status with regards to firearms. You can go so far as to have them sign a bill of sale that represents that they are legal to own and purchase a firearm, etc. - that is just a CYA

For law-abiding citizens, the goal is to limit liability and to make sure that they've checked the appropriate boxes to be able to sell and transfer a piece of personal property that they have the right to do so pursuant to the second amendment to the United States Constitution.

Why not pass a law that says that anyone who has a criminal record requires some kind of code on their id. Gun sellers have to ask for ID and if they see the code, they cannot sell the gun to them without penalty.

This way, gun sellers can still sell their guns but they don't have to worry about selling their firearm to someone with a criminal record. This wouldn't stop straw sales 100% but it might put a significant dent in it.

What you proposed wouldn't stop straw purchases at all because the people making the straw purchases for the criminals DON'T HAVE A CRIMINAL RECORD!!!!

Good God man educate yourself about an effin' topic before you try to come up with solutions. It would be good for both you and the board because A. you wouldn't look like an ill-informed idiot and B. we wouldn't have to waste our time reading and correcting your ill-informed, idiotic posts.

This is a perfect example of why we disregard anything you leftists have to say about guns. We do so because you simply have no idea what you are talking about yet you think you have all the answers.

Please go back to the part where I said this would not stop all straw purchases. However, it would stop anyone with a criminal record from being able to purchase a weapon from a law abiding citizen.

Aren't you the one's who always say that gun owners are law abiding citizens? If gun owners are all law abiding citizens like you claim, they wouldn't buy a gun and sell it to a criminal.

Your proposal wouldn't stop ANY straw purchases.

You want a starting point in your education? Start with learning what a straw purchase is.


Again, before you offer any solutions I suggest you educate yourself about the subject because right about now you are coming off as either a complete and total moron or a troll who is being purposely ignorant.

(01-25-2017 12:47 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:40 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:36 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:30 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:25 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  "illegal straw purchases"

Should there be consequences for the sellers in these illegal straw purchases and should there be consequences?

Only if the seller is proven to be a psychic because that's the only way they would be able to determine the true intent of someone who otherwise would be a legal gun buyer.

So what exactly does a seller need to do before he can sell a gun?

We have gone over the process with you multiple times so I'm not going to waste my time when you obviously have no true desire to learn and are only trying to derail yet another topic. The information you seek is readily available on the internet.

Your refusal to answer what exactly a seller has to do to sell a weapon tells me that the answer is absolutely nothing.

Sellers of guns have to do absolutely nothing in order to sell guns to people. Those guns end up in the hands of criminals. There is your problem.

If Trump truly wants to take care of the problem in Chicago, then he should start at the source where there is no consequences for sellers who sell guns.

You are leaving a very important element out of this. Criminals that have no business having a gun/weapon will be prosecuted on federal charges. Something that isn't/wasn't done for a long time. Did we have this many murders in Chicago before Oblunder? I don't know, it's an honest question.

As a dude who is moderate and doesn't really drink the Kool Aid of either of the two major parties, I find this thread interesting.

Republicans want smaller government and less government interference. If Obama had tried to send in the feds to Chicago to clean things up, it would have been labeled a waste of taxpayer money, labeled government overreach, and Obama would have been accused of favoring problems in his hometown of Chicago while ignoring the same problems in other cities. However, when Trump does this he is some kind of savior who is fixing the failures of the past President? It really isn't logical thinking.

This is Chicago's problem. I don't want my taxpayer money going toward it. The good people of Illinois can figure out how to get their own house in order like they should have years ago. If my tax money is going to go to drug/gang problems, there are plenty of smaller cities across my own state that could use the money to combat drugs and gangs. Now that is how smaller government should work. Tax as little as you have to tax and empower local governments to do what is best for themselves.

It might not be important to you Husky but I'll bet you all the law abiding citizens that HAVE to live in crime ridden neighborhoods in Chicago welcome ANYONE coming in to fix the Emmanual racist administration.

(01-25-2017 02:57 PM)UConnHusky Wrote:  As a dude who is moderate and doesn't really drink the Kool Aid of either of the two major parties, I find this thread interesting.

Republicans want smaller government and less government interference. If Obama had tried to send in the feds to Chicago to clean things up, it would have been labeled a waste of taxpayer money, labeled government overreach, and Obama would have been accused of favoring problems in his hometown of Chicago while ignoring the same problems in other cities. However, when Trump does this he is some kind of savior who is fixing the failures of the past President? It really isn't logical thinking.

This is Chicago's problem. I don't want my taxpayer money going toward it. The good people of Illinois can figure out how to get their own house in order like they should have years ago. If my tax money is going to go to drug/gang problems, there are plenty of smaller cities across my own state that could use the money to combat drugs and gangs. Now that is how smaller government should work. Tax as little as you have to tax and empower local governments to do what is best for themselves.

The fed's went in because a state would not let a college student in a building. Maybe it's more important to send in the fed's when a state will not stop the killing of people.

(01-25-2017 01:54 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:47 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:40 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:36 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 12:30 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  Only if the seller is proven to be a psychic because that's the only way they would be able to determine the true intent of someone who otherwise would be a legal gun buyer.

So what exactly does a seller need to do before he can sell a gun?

We have gone over the process with you multiple times so I'm not going to waste my time when you obviously have no true desire to learn and are only trying to derail yet another topic. The information you seek is readily available on the internet.

Your refusal to answer what exactly a seller has to do to sell a weapon tells me that the answer is absolutely nothing.

Sellers of guns have to do absolutely nothing in order to sell guns to people. Those guns end up in the hands of criminals. There is your problem.

If Trump truly wants to take care of the problem in Chicago, then he should start at the source where there is no consequences for sellers who sell guns.

You are leaving a very important element out of this. Criminals that have no business having a gun/weapon will be prosecuted on federal charges. Something that isn't/wasn't done for a long time. Did we have this many murders in Chicago before Oblunder? I don't know, it's an honest question.

I realize this and I don't have a problem with it. I was simply asking if they were going to do more than just that.

Fit, I can only hope that they do and I think they will.

(01-25-2017 03:00 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  It might not be important to you Husky but I'll bet you all the law abiding citizens that HAVE to live in crime ridden neighborhoods in Chicago welcome ANYONE coming in to fix the Emmanual racist administration.

It is important to me, but not enough to spend national taxpayer money on it. It sets the precedent that the federal government is responsible for local crime management, and they are not.

Wanting to spend federal money on fixing crime at a local level is, to a decent extent, a liberal type of approach. That is the irony here.