Will Trump Destroy the Republican Party?

[leibowde84]

An effective background check isn't possible for us ordinary citizens.
If I want to check on a new worker, I hire a private detective to do it.
He has access to databases where I'm not allowed.

And to expand upon the "gun show exemption", this is an anti-gun "dog whistle",
ie, a way of making private sales sound like a commercial & systematic method
to evade the law. Government doesn't provide us with the means to check, so
it would be ridiculous to require it.
You want compromse? You need more than making an unrealistic demand,.
Advocate for our ability to vet a buyer too. Then we'll talk.

Caution:
Objects in post's claims will appear snippier than they are.

Oh, I agree. If background checks are not accessible then it is unreasonable to require them.

I personally don't see the necessity for private gun sales. If you can't sell prescription drugs or alcohol privately without a license, you shouldn't be able to sell guns privately.

 

[Revoltingest]

I personally don't see the necessity for private gun sales.

Of course you don't.....no guns to buy or sell, eh?
But for many of us, private sales are useful...as with cars, machine tools, Hawaiian shirts, go boards, art works, etc, etc.

If you can't sell prescription drugs or alcohol privately without a license, you shouldn't be able to sell guns privately.

Cars & alcohol are arguably more dangerous than either, yet those are sold privately.
You might want to live in a world where government controls every such thing, but I'd rather not.
A little extra danger is a small price to pay for not being under Uncle Sam's thumb 24-7.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

An effective background check isn't possible for us ordinary citizens.
If I want to check on a new worker, I hire a private detective to do it.
He has access to databases where I'm not allowed.

And to expand upon the "gun show exemption", this is an anti-gun "dog whistle",
ie, a way of making private sales sound like a commercial & systematic method
to evade the law. Government doesn't provide us with the means to check, so
it would be ridiculous to require it.
You want compromse? You need more than making an unrealistic demand,.
Advocate for our ability to vet a buyer too. Then we'll talk.

Caution:
Objects in post's claims will appear snippier than they are.

"If I want to check on a new worker, I hire a private detective to do it."

Then you may like the way Montana handles background checks, as a private citizen I can actually pay about 15 bucks and check anyone's background with the state website. But Montana does have privacy right laws pertaining to background checks and after a certain time frame (rumor is 7 years), as I understand it, the amount of information is restricted, especially for employment matters (of course major crimes are handled differently). Most employers around here use a third party that knows the laws so that they don't violate them. Around here, hiring a private detective could backfire, unless they know Montana laws.

I actually agree with the Montana way of doing this, as people need a second chance to become a productive part of society, or else they just go back to crime and nothing is solved. If their crime was not a major crime, they have no repeated criminal history, and have stayed clean for several years, then the past is the past.

I am not sure what the laws are pertaining to guns in Montana, I would expect something less stringent, given how much we love our guns in this sate. I don't buy guns and don't care to own a gun, so I don't follow this aspect too closely. My brother on the other hand, is armed for WW 3, and hunts with his rifle and small cannon strapped to his wist.

 

[Revoltingest]

"If I want to check on a new worker, I hire a private detective to do it."

Then you may like the way Montana handles background checks, as a private citizen I can actually pay about 15 bucks and check anyone's background with the state website. But Montana does have privacy right laws pertaining to background checks and after a certain time frame (rumor is 7 years), as I understand it, the amount of information is restricted, especially for employment matters (of course major crimes are handled differently). Most employers around here use a third party that knows the laws so that they don't violate them. Around here, hiring a private detective could backfire, unless they know Montana laws.

I actually agree with the Montana way of doing this, as people need a second chance to become a productive part of society, or else they just go back to crime and nothing is solved. If their crime was not a major crime, they have no repeated criminal history, and have stayed clean for several years, then the past is the past.

I am not sure what the laws are pertaining to guns in Montana, I would expect something less stringent, given how much we love our guns in this sate. I don't buy guns and don't care to own a gun, so I don't follow this aspect too closely. My brother on the other hand, is armed for WW 3, and hunts with his rifle and small cannon strapped to his wist.

As I understand it, a quality background check cannot rely upon a single database.
Errors & different kinds of problems require diverse sources.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

As I understand it, a quality background check cannot rely upon a single database.
Errors & different kinds of problems require diverse sources.

That makes sense.