Background checks don’t work

Via a tweet from Chuck Petras @Chuck_Petras we have this from Heidi Stevens @HeidiStevens13:

Holy. Shit. What a brilliant, horrifying cover.


My response:

Thank you for pointing out background checks for gun purchases cannot, and do not, make the general population safer. This has been carefully researched and should be made common knowledge. Don’t let people be science deniers:

See also: Background checks.


10 thoughts on “Background checks don’t work

  1. From this the true believers say that the Background checks should be more stringent.
    What does stringent mean in these situations?
    Do they know anyone who is or might be barred from firearm possession?
    Did the applicant ever express anger or frustration about anything?
    Or are they to include Jeanne Dixon and Kreskin in the inquiry?

  2. from a reader who practiced criminal law for more years than he likes to remember.–

    the law influences and controls those who, in general, would be “law abiding” without it. such people know how to control their behavior without being told, or being forced to behave.

    the law has absolutely no influence or control over those who choose to do what they damned well please.

    when the state of israel was formed under the british mandate a gun making industry flourished under the draconian measures of the british. they could not stamp it out.

    in short, criminals will always have guns, and ammunition, and the inclination to use them whenever they damned well please. usually that will entail use against persons who “obey the law.”

    in sum, criminal law has nothing to do with controlling criminals, bullies, or sadistic killers. it controls schlubs. period.

    john jay, former lawyer, not now

  3. What might be useful is to have Prosecutors in Democratic zones of occupation, prosecute and quarantine (jail) violent offenders. They are supposedly a small group. Long jail terms are only expensive if you feel that the innocent lives saved have no value. Crime and violence are lifetime things, so “quarantine” of the violent is a reasonable solution.

    • Indeed, but that only works if the “prosecutors” aren’t on the sides of the criminals — as they are in the Democrat s**t holes we all know about.

  4. So the logic I’m seeing here is they are trying to push “universal background checks“ by showing they don’t really do anything.

    I would ask if they have any self-awareness but I already know that they don’t.

    • Another point to be learned here is that you don’t need guns to protect yourself and other innocent people because the police will protect you with their guns.

  5. Hmm… do lie detectors work? I suspect they only work if the subject believes that they work.

  6. They know perfectly well that background checks only create more government jobs. And mentally train you to submit to their authority.
    Then it’s just a matter of rising fees, and tightening control thru bureaucracy.
    Think IRS.
    We should note that the lower caste criminals pay almost no penalty for their crimes? And the higher caste criminals pay nothing at all.
    Ask one of your commie friends why we should pay attention to the law at all?
    Nobody else is. Especially those that write them.
    We should be thinking along the lines like Michael Collins of Irish fame. It’s all about enforcement. And the lack thereof if you want to be free.

  7. Having worked in a gun shop I do think that background checks do stop some felons from buying guns.

    I can also say that theybare good as the information put into them and they are dependant on DAs, police, etc doing their jobs effectively and aggressively.

    Exhibit A: The Texas church shooter who has a domestic violence conviction and a dishonorable discharge. He was legally able to buy a gun because some AF beurocrats failed to do their job. I guarantee they didn’t suffer any punishment for that.

    Exhibits B-infinity: Every mentally ill, psychotic shooter that was given some deferment,or was not procicuted, or committed and this was never in the system to be denied or put in a faculty and thus free to do harm.

    Every government employee has non consequence for incompetence of failure and that needs to change. If any of these failures lead to such an event they need to suffer for it.

Comments are closed.