Senate nears gun debate, background checks pivotal

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • worf Mcallen, TX
    April 9, 2013 8:37 a.m.

    One old man:

    It seems Obama is fear mongering, not the NRA. There are bigger fish for him to fry.

  • Tolstoy salt lake, UT
    April 8, 2013 12:46 p.m.

    While I do have concerns with the way reeds bill is currently written and think that there needs to be the same privacy protections in place as there is with the current back ground checks before passing I think the level of paranoia on this thread goes way beyond healthy reason.

  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    April 8, 2013 10:16 a.m.

    When you think of a national registry and have a perspective of the holocaust, it didn't start with getting people out of the ghettos and putting them on a train. It started with the despot and his nationalistic people that got laws that required certain individuals to register and put an innocent star on their arm, etc. It was benign, at first. We just want to recognize them as an important part of the community as bankers, jewelers, business people and a historic people. There was no malice at first. It was just a national registry for certain people.

    Dachau and those places were low key areas. Designing people took over and fear became a reality but after it was too late.

    People soon lost their individual freedoms. One step at a time is all it took for certain individuals. Powerful people took hold of a whole country and made laws that didn't have an order but were arbitrary and capricious and isolated one type of people.

    Having lived in countries where the Presidents declared martial law and weapons were banned, people buried or hid them. They didn't have registry for good people who registered benignly.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    April 8, 2013 10:03 a.m.

    Does anyone actually believe these new laws will do any good? That criminals will now suddenly all fall in line and obey these laws? "Yes, but this time we really mean it with THESE laws, right"?

  • John A Johanson Murray, UT
    April 8, 2013 7:35 a.m.

    No reasonable person would think that government would do anything like using backround checks for a gun registry would they? Wake up people the left wants to know exactly where all (non-criminals) guns are at every moment, as there is no way of knowing where criminals guns are because they don't bother to go through normal channels anyway. All of this gungrab stuff is just a smoke screen to further the agenda of already out of constrol left, the founding fathers knew in their wisdom that once you disarm the people a tyrranical government (see Obama)would easily be able to hold on to power!!!

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    April 8, 2013 6:01 a.m.

    "obama has only been in office since 2008"

    Cant argue there. Can you tell me what legislation that he has pushed to "confiscate your guns"?

  • Bob Dobbs Salt Lake City USA, UT
    April 7, 2013 11:38 p.m.

    We are currently seeing another hysterical response from the Left. I watched 60 Minutes earlier tonight... What theater! Whether parents or actors, I wonder who paid those people. Bloomberg maybe? Several of the women had enough make-up on to sink a boat. It was obviously well rehearsed and was designed, of course, to manipulate people emotionally - the tactic of every good propagandist. The ignorance expressed about firearms would have been entertaining if it wasn't so pathetic. The media hype about Newtown is such an obviously orchestrated attempt to destroy the safeguards of the Bill of Rights. None of the measures proposed by the anti- second amendment folks would have stopped the slaughter of 20 children and 6 adults. Unfortunately, the pseudo-compassionate among the American populace will probably fall for it.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    April 7, 2013 11:22 p.m.

    The only ones debating guns are the corrupt leaders.

  • Tolstoy salt lake, UT
    April 7, 2013 11:09 p.m.

    "That means only an about 1% where denied"
    "It does fit in with the governments agenda to restrict the 99% because of the one perecent"

    So only 1% where denied the ability to by a gun because of background checks but it is the governments way of. Restricting the other 99%? How does that make sense?

  • HS Fan Salt Lake City, UT
    April 7, 2013 7:49 p.m.

    Republican's once again setting themselves up on the wrong side of an issue. They lost the 2012 election because of the women and minority vote. Now they want to alinate the white middle class voter who wants to see some common sense legislation. No matter what you think about the effectiveness of background checks the American public wants it done. If Rebpublicans block this they'll lose a lot of those suburban white collar voters in 2014. It used to be Republicans did not know how to lead when they got in power, now they don't even know how to re-gain it.

  • the truth Holladay, UT
    April 7, 2013 4:56 p.m.

    We do not need to wait for Obama.

    Obama's team is pressuring states like Colorado to pass more onerous gun control laws.

    It has happened during katrina, making impossible for people to protect their own property.

    Billionaires like Bloomberg and Soros, are spending millions on getting gun laws passed at the state and local level.

    Leftest billionaires who believe they knew was is best for everyone else.

    Guns are already being taken away NOW from citizens for very terrible reasons.

    School Children are being indoctrinated against guns.

    Universal background checks will make it illegal to inherit gun, and make you a felon if you can not prove ownership.

    This is all about disarming the citizens.

    This is all about control.

    Any reasonable person can see that and all that is happening, you must be living in denial to not.

  • Elcapitan Ivins, UT
    April 7, 2013 4:34 p.m.

    Ir's the old left wing "feel good" thing surfacing it's head again. Gun registration does no good, it only makes the left feel good. Criminals are not involved with gun registrtation.

    I wish congress would get on with the really important jobs they have to do and let justice do it's job with criminals. Our justice system is broken.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    April 7, 2013 4:32 p.m.

    Background checks pivotal?

    Where Obama's background check? How about Nancy, Harry, etc?

  • Mark B Eureka, CA
    April 7, 2013 3:25 p.m.

    Back to History Class. Obama took office in 1/20/09. JB's point is that other legislation has not resulted in gun confiscation, and isn't proposed this time, either.

  • ute alumni paradise, UT
    April 7, 2013 3:12 p.m.

    joe blown,

    obama has only been in office since 2008

  • Moderate Salt Lake City, UT
    April 7, 2013 2:17 p.m.

    Why are you worried about gun registration? You don't think the government already knows about your gun? If you're going to be paranoid, go all in -- I'm sure the Feds already know your exact bullet count as well.

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    April 7, 2013 1:58 p.m.

    Lets see. The National Instant Criminal Background Check System went into use in 1998.

    What is taking the Government so long to start confiscating our guns?

    Lets get moving here folks. We have conspiracy theory's to validate.

  • mohokat Ogden, UT
    April 7, 2013 11:23 a.m.

    @ old man You my friend are obssessed with the NRA. I refer you back to april 4 in the article ACLU concerned with Harry Reids gun legislation. Both are darlings of the left. One quote of the ACLU from that article "The second concern is this could be the first step toward making a national gun registry, which the ACLU would oppose for privacy reasons". That is from the ACLU not the NRA.

    From Sen. Lees editorial (which if I recall you bad mouthed) "The only way to make a universal background-check system come close to working is to create a national database capturing ownership information of every single gun in the country.
    To track all the gun sales, you first have to track all the guns. Otherwise it won't work.
    And this is the crux of the problem.
    The federal government has no right to surveil innocent citizens exercising their constitutional rights". Now again why would a corrupt government want a gun registry?

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    April 7, 2013 10:55 a.m.

    There are few more nonsensical, paranoid, and fear-mongering comments than the BIG LIE: "Universal background checks" is code for "universal gun REGISTRATION" which is the real goal of the gun ban crowd.

    False! False! False!

    People who spout that have simply been deluded by the NRA fear mongering propaganda.

  • jayhawker kearns, UT
    April 7, 2013 10:51 a.m.

    "Justice Department figures show that from 1994 when the system began through 2010, 118 million would-be gun buyers were checked and 2.1 million were denied firearms". That means that only an about 1% were denied, for whatever reason, the right to purchase a firearm. I wonder what dollar cost this program is to the tax payers, and if throwing more money at it will gleam an benefit? Someones going to say "If one life is saved it will be worth it". I say that's pure speculation and meaningless, but it does fit perfectly in with the governments agenda of restricting 99% of the people because of the other 1%.

  • DN Subscriber 2 SLC, UT
    April 7, 2013 9:56 a.m.

    "Universal background checks" is code for "universal gun REGISTRATION" which is the real goal of the gun ban crowd.

    They need to have a list of all guns and gun owners before they can embark on their ultimate goal of gun confiscation. For those who might deny that and dismiss it as "crazy talk" remember Sen. Feinstein's 1995 statement "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them . . . Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in, I would have done it."

    Criminals simply do not obey laws, and will steal guns or use fake ID or get straw purchasers to buy guns for them, (as they do now!) so background checks are worthless to stop crime.

    For criminals stupid enough to be caught by a background check, the failure to prosecute any but a tiny handful prove that the goal is not disarming criminals and prosecuting them, but to disarm law abiding citizens.

    I am counting on our two Senators to stand strong and oppose every version of "universal gun registration!"

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    April 7, 2013 9:46 a.m.

    Guns don't kill people, people kill people.---That's why we need background checks on people.

  • mohokat Ogden, UT
    April 7, 2013 9:26 a.m.

    What they want is Gun Registry. That way the next time a trajedy occurs they are ready for "with the help of a confused dumbed down public" Confiscation. " disarm the people - that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." (George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 380)