NRA official urges Mainers to reject background checks on gun sales

[flamin lib]

Last edited Thu Aug 25, 2016, 01:40 PM - Edit history (1)

http://www.pressherald.com/2016/08/24/nra-official-urges-mainers-to-reject-background-checks-on-gun-sales/

The director of the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action on Wednesday urged Mainers to protect their personal freedom from the influence of out-of-state elitists by rejecting a referendum question on background checks for gun sales in November.

Uh, influence from out of state? Isn't the NRA headquartered in Virginia and isn't Cox speaking in Maine? Hasn't the NRA, headquartered in Virginia, contributed almost $40,000 to defeat the proposition?

The background check question – “Do you want to change Maine law to require background checks prior to the transfer of firearms between individuals, with some exceptions for certain circumstances?” – will appear third of the five questions on the state ballot in November.

The legislation would require a background check before the sale or transfer of a gun between two people who are not licensed firearms dealers. They would be required to meet at a licensed dealer, who would conduct a background check on the transferee and complete the sale. Exceptions are included in the proposal for transfers between family members, while the parties are hunting or sport shooting, for emergency self-defense and some other circumstances.
====
“Whether or not you own a gun, Question 3 will be a nightmare for all of you,” Cox said. “It will turn law-abiding citizens into criminals overnight.”

Really? Turn law abiding citizens into criminals? How the hell does that work? Either you are law abiding or you're not. Get a background check and no problem, don't get one and you broke the law, ergo, not law abiding. Have I missed something here?

What alternative universe do these people live in? Oh, I forgot. Liburty and freedumb land. Only in the NRA's mind can this reasoning make sense.

[Hoyt]

1. This is something needed. Gunners are opposed because they like being able to sell to anyone with

a fistfull of cash. I do not see how any reasonable/responsible/law-abiding gun owner could oppose this.

[Waldorf]

2. Turning people into criminals can work easily like this:

"Exceptions are included in the proposal for transfers between family members, while the parties are hunting or sport shooting, for emergency self-defense and some other circumstances."

Friend and I go hunting. He/she uses one of my firearms. Everything is fine with the law.

Following weekend we plan on hunting again. This time I can't make it and he/she asks if they can borrow that same rifle. If I let he/she borrow it a crime has been committed.

To legally do this the two of us now have to go to a licensed dealer, get a background check and pay the transfer fee. After hunting, to get my firearm back legally we have to visit the dealer again, get a background check and pay another transfer fee.

Seems kind of dumb.

[flamin lib]

4. And your problem with this is? Sorry, but to allow wholesale access to guns just to accomodate

a red herring argument like this is absolutely stupid.

[billh58]

3. NRA apologists

say that they are law-abiding and model citizens almost all of the time, except when obeying the law is "inconvenient" like getting a background check or registering a gun.

This is the same mentality that believes it is okay to resort to the "bullet box" when the ballot box doesn't produce the desired right-wing gun nut result.