(July 22, 2022 at 2:37 pm)onlinebiker Wrote:(July 22, 2022 at 2:27 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: How would you know they're law-abiding without checking? That's the entire point of the background check.
In other words, you're assuming your conclusion, i.e. circular reasoning.
Your dogmatic faith in background checks rivals the Jebus freak' s faith that they will party with their invisible friend for eternity.
A background check only shows PAST behavior.
It will show you who has been a bad person - and we assume from that they will be bad in the future. Right?
So checking EVERYBODY - (and the vast majority will show up as good to buy guns. Right?) wastes the majority of the law enforcement resource.
It would be far better to simply make it possible for the average person to be able to access a list of potentially bad people.
A background check may only show past behavior, but past behavior is often a good indicator of future behavior. Fun fact: a study of mass shootings from 2014 to 2019 found that 2/3 of mass shootings are linked to domestic violence. Bar people with a history of domestic violence from gun ownership, we’ll likely see less gun violence. And add more things to the stuff to check, things like promotion of political extremism on social media profiles or checking the applicant’s medical records, and I suspect things will go further down.
And on that generally accessible list of potentially bad people, who do you think should be expected to maintain it and what do you expect the people who access it to do about it?
Comparing the Universal Oneness of All Life to Yo Mama since 2010.
![[Image: harmlesskitchen.png]](https://i.postimg.cc/yxR97P23/harmlesskitchen.png)
I was born with the gift of laughter and a sense the world is mad.
![[Image: harmlesskitchen.png]](https://i.postimg.cc/yxR97P23/harmlesskitchen.png)
I was born with the gift of laughter and a sense the world is mad.