The Problem of Universal Background Checks.

[cclaxton]

As mentioned in the other thread discussing 594, there are only a few other states that are likley targets for gun-control via popular initiative.
This was not the NRA's approach.

Wasn't the counter-initiative funded and supported by the NRA? According to national media it was.
Cody

[joshs]

I'm not sure why you've already conceded.

Right. A number of US Senators just lost their seats in part for a "yes" vote on background checks.

[JV_]

The National Polls show overwhelming support for UBC's at about 91% in 2013 polling.

All of the polls on that issue that I've seen were worded in deceitful ways, and many presented data which was not current/accurate.

The question is whether we can accept the inevitable and actually work to get something out of that deal, or follow the failed strategy until it fails again and again.

I have plastic tubs full of newly produced "high capacity" magazines. 15 years ago, that was a pipe dream. I wholeheartedly disagree with your defeatist attitude.

[joshs]

We lost Washington State with 45% on the NRA counter-measure. They won UBC's with 60% of the vote.
The National Polls show overwhelming support for UBC's at about 91% in 2013 polling. Changing that many people's thinking on UBC's is not possible in the next 8 years...and probably not ever. We will lose these votes...it's not a concession...it is a political reality.

The question is whether we can accept the inevitable and actually work to get something out of that deal, or follow the failed strategy until it fails again and again.
Cody

Added Poll: http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-e...ReleaseID=1877

As one would think given the political leanings of the state, Washington actually polled higher than that national average for "support" of background checks, but only 60% actually voted for I594. When most voters have the actual affect of these bills/initiatives explained to them, there is a significant difference in support levels than a poll question that is designed to get a positive response.

[GardoneVT]

Changing that many people's thinking on UBC's is not possible in the next 8 years...and probably not ever. We will lose these votes...it's not a concession...it is a political reality.

So I also believed , five years ago, as I packed my handguns into a locked case at the Illinois border confident the Chicago Machine would never permit lawful carry.

Look at us now. That doesn't mean we should rest and call the fight concluded, but assuming UBCs are a political reality is an unfounded assumption,especially if we do something about it as gun owners.

[joshs]

Wasn't the counter-initiative funded and supported by the NRA? According to national media it was.
Cody

It was funded and supported by Protect Our Gun Rights.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I'll throw out a compromise for fun (a similar approach was used in Oregon way back when to get CCW).

In TX - we have had a hellacious time getting campus carry. So I propose that private sales at organized and advertized gun shows must go through NICS. There will be table and for $5.00 the buyer and seller come up and the seller gets run. The FFL sales are run all the time at the shows. Private sales outside of the shows - no mandated checks.

In the same bill - campus carry is allowed at all college campuses, both public and private, for all CHLs. There can be no institutional rules forbidden such or requiring the CHL holder inform the institution of his or her status. Also, the institution is protected against liability for any CHL action on their campus.

Would you take this deal? Or would you be absolutist against it?

It might save 30 lives in a campus rampage. There are FFL checks already. So - no negotiations, no compromise?

[cclaxton]

I'll throw out a compromise for fun (a similar approach was used in Oregon way back when to get CCW).

In TX - we have had a hellacious time getting campus carry. So I propose that private sales at organized and advertized gun shows must go through NICS. There will be table and for $5.00 the buyer and seller come up and the seller gets run. The FFL sales are run all the time at the shows. Private sales outside of the shows - no mandated checks.

In the same bill - campus carry is allowed at all college campuses, both public and private, for all CHLs. There can be no institutional rules forbidden such or requiring the CHL holder inform the institution of his or her status. Also, the institution is protected against liability for any CHL action on their campus.

Would you take this deal? Or would you be absolutist against it?

It might save 30 lives in a campus rampage. There are FFL checks already. So - no negotiations, no compromise?

Don't live in Texas, but that is exactly the kind of thing that I have been talking about.
Cody

[joshs]

I'll throw out a compromise for fun (a similar approach was used in Oregon way back when to get CCW).

In TX - we have had a hellacious time getting campus carry. So I propose that private sales at organized and advertized gun shows must go through NICS. There will be table and for $5.00 the buyer and seller come up and the seller gets run. The FFL sales are run all the time at the shows. Private sales outside of the shows - no mandated checks.

In the same bill - campus carry is allowed at all college campuses, both public and private, for all CHLs. There can be no institutional rules forbidden such or requiring the CHL holder inform the institution of his or her status. Also, the institution is protected against liability for any CHL action on their campus.

Would you take this deal? Or would you be absolutist against it?

It might save 30 lives in a campus rampage. There are FFL checks already. So - no negotiations, no compromise?

Why, when Texas will likely get campus carry without the compromise?

[GardoneVT]

I'll throw out a compromise for fun (a similar approach was used in Oregon way back when to get CCW).

In TX - we have had a hellacious time getting campus carry. So I propose that private sales at organized and advertized gun shows must go through NICS. There will be table and for $5.00 the buyer and seller come up and the seller gets run. The FFL sales are run all the time at the shows. Private sales outside of the shows - no mandated checks.

In the same bill - campus carry is allowed at all college campuses, both public and private, for all CHLs. There can be no institutional rules forbidden such or requiring the CHL holder inform the institution of his or her status. Also, the institution is protected against liability for any CHL action on their campus.

Would you take this deal? Or would you be absolutist against it?

It might save 30 lives in a campus rampage. There are FFL checks already. So - no negotiations, no compromise?

Absolutist, as in "Hell No".

Because here's what would happen-and ive got some insight being a current college student in a right to carry state. The University Admin will scour the bill text for a loophole, and they'd make a policy saying that while the university wont post a rule, each professor will have individual discretion on permitting armed students into their classes or not.They all will say no except three ex-military associate professors in the Agriculture Department , and the status quo is preserved; while the rights of law abiding citizens are infringed even more.