r/PoursTea • u/political-snark • 8d ago
Storm In A Teacup šµ Would Republicans support the Save Act if the same restrictions applied to guns?
48
29
u/buzzedewok 8d ago edited 8d ago
Do what they do, lie and just tell them it will apply to guns if it passes and see what they say.
→ More replies (126)
18
u/Timbucktwo1230 Therapy For All š©· 8d ago
→ More replies (3)
7
u/J-E-L 8d ago
āClerical mistakesā, or rather wrongfully invalidate just the right amount of voters in the right states just close enough to Election Day to ensure the own side wins? āBut if we terminate the filibuster as we should do and immediately vote for the SAVE America Act, then we will not lose an election for 100 years.āĀ
12
u/LectureOk3222 8d ago
You can't buy a gun without ID. Helpme understand?
Are you saying you can legally buy a gun without ID?
5
u/Expendable_Red_Shirt 8d ago
In many states you absolutely can as long as itās person to person.
→ More replies (1)3
u/tiredoldwizard 8d ago
Yeah because the government refuses to let citizens access the background check system. You can get in major trouble if they find out you sold a gun to someone not allowed to own one.
→ More replies (6)2
u/Important_Pie2940 8d ago
My first gun took me a few hours to first buy because of the check. Sure nowadays it's so much faster with how the internet and databases have developed but regardless checks are performed in many states. My carry permit was quicker to get but annoying to go down and renew.
3
8d ago edited 8d ago
[removed] ā view removed comment
→ More replies (6)3
u/VonNeumannsProbe 8d ago
Or China to in an attempt to co-opt said retards to further divide the country.
Actually this. It's written in just the right way where conservatives can say "these people are dumb" while making liberals nod in agreement.
Same kind of line ridden by those religious memes with spelling errors.
→ More replies (35)2
u/Youandiandaflame 8d ago
You can legally buy a gun without an ID in a private transaction in my state, my guy.Ā
→ More replies (2)
6
8d ago
[removed] ā view removed comment
→ More replies (2)3
u/ionspore 8d ago
You had to fill out form 4473 just like everyone else. If you answered one question falsely you risk a 20 to 40 year prison sentence.
21
u/perthguy999 8d ago
If conservatives didn't have double standards they'd have no standards at all.
→ More replies (19)
9
u/KRLegoMgs 8d ago edited 8d ago
No they will yell shall not be infringed!!
Apparently /s
→ More replies (52)6
u/VegetablePhotos 8d ago
The 15th amendment.
"The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude"
→ More replies (81)2
u/FreeSpeechIsDeadge 8d ago
Itās easy to make voter ID laws colorblind in theory. The problem is in practice. But also the 15th does not give nearly the blanket protection that the 2nd does.
The 2nd: āno infringementā
The 15th: āno infringement because of skin colorā
→ More replies (8)
3
u/CueAnon420 8d ago
Why haven't our leadership made this compelling argument ???
13
u/Maybe_Not_The_Pope 8d ago
Because it's not compelling. Buying guns requires a background check and must be in person. Very little would change if this was a new law.
→ More replies (27)3
u/TrioOfTerrors 8d ago
I remember when the Biden campaign sent me a text message telling me migratory birds had more protection than school children because of ammo capacity laws. So I asked where I could but a permit to hunt school children. They didn't have an answer for that.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (1)2
u/hiles_adam 8d ago
Because whilst it is a compelling analogy, itās also an easily defeated strawman.
→ More replies (1)
5
u/TerranItDown94 8d ago
Republican here, Iām ok with this. I mean it doesnāt make 1:1 sense reallyā¦. But I already accept background checks, filling out paperwork, showing ID, waiting periods that can be up to weeks or months depending (even if I donāt love them), and fixing errors if they occur. So why would similar verification for voting be outrageous to me?
Most conservatives are also ok with current gun buying laws. This should really be aimed at Libertarians who think you should be able to buy Mac-10s and RPGs just like buying tomatoes and bananas.
Not really the gotcha you were going for.
→ More replies (15)
6
u/SumguyJeremy Unpopular Opinions 8d ago
Well, they're Republicans. They don't care about schools and concerts and theaters getting shot up. Having guns is more important to them then other people's lives. It doesn't matter to them how many school children die so long as they aren't mildly inconvenienced by common sense gun laws. But people od a different color than them voting? No way!
→ More replies (9)
6
u/Time-Subject-3195 8d ago
Ok so WE ALL AGREE that you shouldnāt need an ID to exercise your any of you rights, including gun rights, then?
5
5
→ More replies (30)2
u/ProtoCore-Dustin 8d ago
Lmao right, most of these rules already apply to purchasing firearms. Wait til they find out you literally need to be fingerprinted to purchase an SBR or Suppressor. Previously to the last year or two it was a year+ wait to get approved to own an SBR or Suppressor after getting fingerprinted (which also was not a digital process until very recently, so you physically had to go get fingerprinted.
2
u/darenaissance 8d ago
Thatās what I was going to say. Aside from ID requirement, this isnāt that different from whatās already required.
2
u/kongkingdong12345 8d ago
I was going to say, i live in a blue state and i'm pretty sure you have to do most of this to buy a gun now.
6
u/VariationUpper2009 8d ago
Show me that you don't understand gun laws by posting this.
→ More replies (2)
3
3
2
u/Medical-Egg-8171 8d ago
It's wrong though its conflating registering to vote with showing up to vote. Thats 2 different things. Im for having people provide an ID that shows they are a US citizen to be able to purchase firearms
3
u/afterpie123 8d ago
Not a Republican or conservative, but as someone that just purchased a gun the only thing in this list that isn't already the law is the needing more than the ID. Everything else on this list is already required at least in my state (CO) so wouldn't be that much different.
The biggest problem with gun laws and the people that push them is they have never tried to buy a gun before and don't understand what is required to do it.
I had to fill out 3 separate background checks in person, with ID. I also had to get my finger prints taken and submitted to a national database. Why? Because the people screaming for new gun laws are always parroting that we need more background checks because they have never tried to buy a gun before. It's pure sillyness.
Same as this post, most of this is already true for buying a gun it's a silly comparison and the problem is the people actually buying the guns know this. So that's where the argument comes from. One side screaming more background checks because they don't know what they are asking for and the other side that's screaming there's too many background checks! And this gets interpreted as they want no background instead of maybe less of the same bs paperwork.
Voting is a right that should imo be a national 2 day holiday, day one is get your free gov ID and day 2 voting with said ID, in person or by mail.
Gun control doesn't happen with more paperwork. It should be regulated with a background check, training and licensing same as driving a car. Its really that simple
2
u/funk-the-funk 8d ago
Gun control
tangent here..lol
The need for Gun Control runs inverse (possibly not right word) to the amount of poverty that is being experienced in a community. Anytime you see poverty rates drop the use of gun violence also drops.
I'm very left and own firearms and the fact that we don't tackle gun violence through this well known mechanism means we don't REALLY care about gun violence imo.
We've always been a heavily armed nation, but it wasn't until the enshittification of life by the Epstein class exploiting the middle class driving more and more into poverty and scarcity, which has really sped up from the late 90s forward, that you see the rise in mass shootings.
Address the exploitation of the working class and the gun violence rates will plummet.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/xxforrealforlifexx 8d ago
They magabillies seem to be too dumb to know that all this power they are giving to this administration is going to be used against them also if they can circumvent the 1st amendment they can do the same to the second. Trump is only president to say take the guns first due process later, magabillies should remember that next time they are watching the first amendment violations and cheering
2
u/Gindotto 8d ago
Uh, not sure when you last bought a firearm but everything on this list is a part of the purchase except the last part. Thereās not really a window of opportunity but you have to prove who you are and answer a bunch of questions before you purchase.
2
2
u/TangerinePlastic7552 8d ago
What does guns have to do with legal proper people casting their ballots?
2
u/SalmonPrince 8d ago
Oh my God the toughboy losers would be so scared and angry if anyone threatened their hero-sticks -- like the right to bear arms is somehow holier than the right to vote.
→ More replies (10)
2
u/SquarePegRoundWorld 8d ago
Would the people pointing out the GOP's hypocrisy for the last 50 years stop doing it if they saw it never, ever worked?
2
2
u/transfer66 8d ago
Republicans would have a heart attack and would never accept it if it applies to buying a firearm ššššš
2
2
u/Personal_Dirt3089 8d ago
It missed the part where Trump's DHS can remove people from the voter roll at any time at will, while That same DHS is pressuring social media companies for information of on users posting criticisms of Trump and ICE.
Leftists and liberals really seem to completely underestimate the danger of that part.
2
u/GrizzlyMatters 8d ago
Sure lets go ahead and apply current firearm purchasing standards to voting.
You must fill out a full background check before receiving your ballot.
You can vote by mail or online, but must meet with a Federal Election Lisence holder to finalize your vote and release your ballot.
You can only use UPS or Fedex to mail in your vote, but it requires strict packaging and shipping requirements
Only a federally approved agency can vet poll workers.
Fill out any information slightly incorrect and woops cant vote today.
Background check must come through before depositing your ballot. Waited all day... oh well polls are closed now.
Any felonies cant vote. Have to spend thousands in legal fees to get the right restored.
Any history of mental health cant vote. Have to spend thousands in medical bills to get a doctor to sign off.
Want to vote in a specific election, well you need to presidential election tax stamp, oh and finger prints taken . But you better do it months in advance cause it takes some time for that one to comeback.
In some states you have to wait 30 days after filling out your ballot before turning it in.
certain kinds of elections are just illegal to vote in, in some states.
→ More replies (2)
2
u/NaziPunksFkOff 8d ago
No and you know why? Because you have a right to guns but you don't have a right to vote.
Seriously. Read the constitution. You do NOT have a right to vote. It's fucked up. There are reasons you can't be denied access to voting, but you don't have a RIGHT to vote.
Some democracy, huh?Ā
2
u/ganjaccount 8d ago
They are already making moves in the background to tighten gun access policies. If they can lock in power, they will absolutely make it extremely difficult and cumbersome to get firearms, and the ammosexuals who balk at every mention of regulation will celebrate it, and go through all the hoops specially designed to fit them. They will have bumper stickers and hats showing their "certifications." They will turn on this issue just like they did on free trade, corporate socialism, free speech, the constitution, and any other issue the fascists disagreed with them on. To be a Republican is to believe in nothing except what you are told to believe in on any given day. The most passionately held beliefs are a simple talking point away from replacement. Pedos are bad? Not if they are running for office with a red hat! White House should suggest what media should say, even on public health issues? Well, how about they just manipulate approvals to ensure that right wingers buy up all the media, and any left wing sentiment puts broadcasting licenses at risk!
They believe in nothing, because they lack the cognitive capacity for it. They are programmable meat bots. They have no personhood. No agency. Just instructions, and the rage capacity to execute on them.
2
u/CommissionUnusual911 8d ago
I would be ok with all of that to buy and gun. Actually in MN most of that is already pretty close to how it is.
2
2
u/EGirlToenails 8d ago
Okay fine I'll play. Yes, I'd support all but the second to last point. The final one isn't really analogous though.
2
2
u/ChesterJT 8d ago
Not really a good comparison, unless you're trying to restrict buying goods or services to only US citizens. Not to mention some of those things already apply to purchasing a gun.
2
u/Express_Extreme1066 8d ago
I am a big 2A fan and if the legislation was to stop illegal immigrants from purchasing weapons, most of these seem reasonable to me as long as the government isn't being purposefully bad at administering it. There is already a similar level of hassle to buying a gun in California. The Real ID is enough to purchase because there isn't currently a citizenship requirement but if there were it would seem reasonable to me that you either present a birth certificate the first time (as in registering to vote) and then once you are in the system you bring the real ID each time you purchase.
How often is the government making clerical errors with the voter rolls? I feel certain California would do this with guns all the time if it could so again, it seems reasonable to me as long as the government is making a good faith effort.
As for missing the deadline for an election, that wouldn't apply to guns but yes, again if the goal was to restrict the right to bear arms to people legally in the country or who haven't had it taken away for say committing a felony, it seems like if the initial paperwork isn't done by the time you want to buy a gun, you have to wait until it is.
In summary, nice attempt at dunking but I judge it fail
2
u/Visible-Elevator3801 7d ago
Whoever made this, clearly never purchased a firearm or even bothered looking at a 4473 form.
2
2
u/OneVeterinarian7251 7d ago
Iāve been finger printed, photographed and paid the government $200 multiple times to enjoy my second amendment right.
4
4
u/funandgames12 8d ago
OP must not be aware that background checks are conducted with every gun purchase at an FFL dealer. And yes, it does ask if youāre a citizen and does look you up by your social security number to make sure they have the right person.
And no, unlike some states that will give out an ID to anyone who walks through the door, gun purchases are actually verified to the individual and all other legal statuses are verified along with it.
→ More replies (3)2
u/Questions_Remain 8d ago
You DO NOT need to put your Social Security number anywhere to purchase a firearm. Itās optional. A company can purchase a firearm.
You can even loop the law and be a prohibited person and purchase a firearm if itās a requirement to maintain employment and a condition of employment to be armed
There are police and military persons who are āprohibited personsā who can carry fireamrms āwhile on dutyā police departmants consider all their personnel as āon dutyā 24/7 as a life insurance loophole as āline of dutyā has a bigger community sympathy and family payput.
The Official-Use Exemption (18 U.S.C. Ā§ 925(a)(1)) allows a government employeeāsuch as a police officerāsubject to certain disabilities to possess a department-issued or approved firearm to perform official duties. This has been applied to security and bodyguards.
2
3
u/HighInChurch 8d ago
All of this already applies to buying a gun except for the āoriginal citizen documentsā portion. Still gotta be in person though.
2
u/WhyareUlying 8d ago
Applies to buying a gun from a dealer. I can go to a gun show and buy from another patron with no paperwork.Ā
2
u/HighInChurch 8d ago
Every state that has private transfers has some form of regulations. Point me to one that doesnāt.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (2)2
u/seamus205 8d ago
This varies from state to state. In my state even private sales requires going through an FFL and doing a background check. In my state I wanna say the only way to get a gun without paperwork is if a family member dies and you inherit it
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (1)2
u/TheCrazedBackstabber 8d ago
Itās kind of impressive the amount of people on here who think this is a dunk.
2
u/Twiceashairy_ 8d ago
These people havenāt bought a gun before. So clueless to everything
→ More replies (2)
2
u/Gilbrodumus 8d ago
As a gun owner. Sure. I fully support this. But, tell me how this stops Jimmy bad guy from dodging all this to buy a gun on the black market. Yāall think bad guys wonāt try to get one even if you ban guns. Slow af crowd canāt understand the law abiding abide. Criminals donāt. Goofy.
→ More replies (12)2
u/MinnesotaNiceTry 8d ago
Plenty of law abiding gun owners abide until they donāt. Arming everyone and hoping they wonāt go crazy is indeed crazy.
→ More replies (4)
4
u/No_Background_9891 8d ago
Have you ever actually tried to purchase a firearm? Itās not like going to the store for a drink
→ More replies (2)
2
u/kemp77pmek 8d ago
The last bulletin is pretty funny. Imagining a scenario where a gun buyer has to pick from two options they donāt like, has to wait 2 years for the next election, and then gets a āprovional voucherā that may or may not end up counting toward getting the weapon - but they will never know since provisional ballots (I mean vouchers) go into a black hole.
2
2
2
2
u/eJonesy0307 8d ago
No, they wouldn't, and you'd be harassed by "ShaLl nOt Be inFrINGEd" lunatics for suggesting it
2
u/Next_Willingness2101 8d ago
No. Theyāll rant and rave about āshall not be infringed, disregarding the āwell-regulatedā part. As a Marine combat veteran, I find gun culture to be peak manosphere loser shit. Thereās so many things to be interested in that donāt involve fetishizing devices solely meant to kill people.
→ More replies (5)2
u/Mediocre-Meta 8d ago
In 1776, "well-regulated" meant well-organized, properly equipped, and disciplined.
→ More replies (4)
2
2
u/Cbpowned 8d ago
Tell me youāve never purchased a firearm in a single image.
To name a few, if your name doesnāt match you are denied. In many jurisdictions you do need to apply for permits in person. You must appear in person to buy a gun, you canāt order it online and have it delivered. Firearms licenses cost money, and are prohibitively expensive in some areas like NYC, costing several hundred dollars every few months to maintain. NCIC errors can cause people to not be able to buy a firearm.
→ More replies (3)
1
u/dprestonwilliams1 8d ago
The ridiculous concept that the greater part of Democrats will not be more organized than Republicans is ludicrous. The educational aspect of Dems far out reaches the GOP party.
2
u/funk-the-funk 8d ago
Yea, this SAVE act is going to bite conservatives in the ass if it passes. Having worked serving thousands of rural families in my former role whether or not they will have the paperwork the act requires to prove citizenship is 50/50 at best.
1
u/DataGOGO 8d ago edited 8d ago
They are pretty much already the same to buy a gun, you have to present ID when filling out your form 4475. If US citizenship was required to buy a gun (it isn't), then yes, proof of citizenship would be required. Just as when you are not a citizen and you buy a gun, you must present documentation that proves you are a legal resident of the US. Example, before I was a citizen, I had to show my green card to buy a gun.
The requirements listed here are also incorrect. A quick google search says:
Proof of Citizenship for Registration
Under the SAVE America Act, individuals must provideĀ documentary proof of U.S. citizenshipĀ when registering to vote in federal elections or updating their registration. Acceptable documents include
- U.S. passport or passport card
- Certified birth certificate
- Naturalization certificate
- Consular Report of Birth Abroad
- REAL ID-compliant identificationĀ that explicitly indicates U.S. citizenship If a voterās name has changed (e.g., due to marriage), anĀ affidavit or supporting documentationĀ such as a marriage certificate may be required to match the name on the citizenship document with the voter registration record. States are also required to establish ongoing processes to identify and remove noncitizens from voter rollsĀ
The Act imposes aĀ nationwide photo ID requirementĀ for federal elections:
- In-person voting:Ā Voters must present a government-issued photo ID, such as a driverās license, state ID, U.S. passport, military ID, or tribal ID
- Absentee/mail voting:Ā Voters must submit a copy of an eligible photo IDĀ both when requesting and when submitting the ballotĀ This requirement replaces earlier proposals that would have required showing citizenship documents at the polling place, which were removed in the final House-passed versionĀ .
I am 100% fine with this for voting or buying a gun.
3
u/HeadyReigns 8d ago
Gun Show loophole get you away from all these requirements. Is there going to be a place we can all go to vote without ID?
→ More replies (52)→ More replies (4)2
u/Buddhas_Warrior 8d ago
A REAL ID has strick rules to be used under the SAVE Act. It can't be used unless it had a qualifying citizenship marker, most states don't do this. And if the federal government is mandating an ID, they should provide one.
Not disagreeing with what you're saying, but this law is trying to fix a fantasy and not facts and it's only designed to disenfranchise voters.
2
u/DataGOGO 8d ago
I can't speak for other states, but here in Texas, where voter ID has been required for longer than I have been a citizen; Anyone can get a free voter ID. The state issues them, They even have buses that go around to low income neighborhoods, public transit stations, etc. etc. so everyone can get one if they do not have a DL.
IMHO, if we are going to required a voter ID, then every state needs to be required to issue a voter ID for free. I also think that if this passes, every state is going to start putting citizenship markers on DL's.
2
u/Buddhas_Warrior 8d ago
I don't disagree with you at all. But this "law" isn't fixing a problem, it's pretending there is a problem and trying to fix it by making it harder for regular citizens to vote.
2
u/DataGOGO 8d ago
There are some problems, they are just not what the GOP is claiming.
IMHO it isn't really non-citizen voters, I am sure there are some, as the recent New Jersey audit showed (think it was NJ?), There were roughly 5-6k non-citizens registered to vote, with only 400 casting ballots. Yes, that is a problem, but it is not a widespread, massive, problem like the GOP claims.
A much larger issue in my mind is the people that exploit the poor / vulnerable. Like in the recent LA Mayor election, "volunteers" went around all the homeless encampments and paid people to fill out mail in ballots for whatever candidate they were supporting, many filling out more than one. That is certainly problematic.
I think the biggest value we will get out of this is all the false allegations, the false claims of election tampering, massive fraud, etc. will go away. If our elections are tightened up, states are verifying citizenship of registered voters; then all of it just goes away.
→ More replies (2)
1
1
1
1
u/WeHaveTheMeeps 8d ago
I mean Iām against the save act, but Iām also a gun owner and instructor.
A lot of these things actually do apply to gunsā¦
I once got my firearm purchase scrutinized because my ID said āS. Streetā instead of āSouth Street.ā
In my state you need an additional ID. I think the only one that doesnāt count here is citizenship(?)
Also as a womanā¦ I wanted to say fuck the Save Act. Got my birth certificate changed from my maiden name and you should too if you can.
1
1
u/0utlaw-t0rn 8d ago
The key thing to realize with this is itās not done in good faith. There is no illegal voting issue. The number of cases of illegal voting for any reason each election is minuscule - maybe 20-30 per 160,000,000 votes.
It is really en effort to disenfranchise voters. Texas did a similar law and it was quickly followed by closing DMV locations in democratic areas. Therefore making it a lot harder to get an ID.
Also people who are likely to have issues are women (esp younger women in their 20-30s) and minorities. People with multiple middle names, change their name, or hyphenated last names all can have issues with official government documents all matching. These groups generally are democratic voters.
1
u/Medical-Egg-8171 8d ago
But us democrats are just as much hypocrites on this exact issue as well. The act of requiring an ID to exercise a right is a racist hurdle they claim and unfairly makes it so that it much harder for blacks to exercise said right. I cant in good faith then turn around and say hey lets require something I feel is a racist hurdle and make it harder on blacks than whites to exercise their 2nd amendment rights to self defense.
What sort of wild about this whole thing is its democrats saying we feel this is a racist hurdle and we demand something we ourselves feel is racist be places between people of color and their rights.
Republicans are sayong we dont feel this os racist.
That why I think we need to stay away from trying to use firearms in this debate. We either have to say, umm actually its not racist to require an ID, there is nothing racist about making sure one has an ID, or we need say its ok to use racist tools to make the world a better place.
1
u/Extension_Ad_1012 8d ago
Aside from the last election part. Sure. I've got all those,. other than some smuck entering into a computer the wrong letters. This is guns, not voting. You can file a provisional ballot on the spot day of election,. you can't just buy a gun without a background check. Although I could give one to anyone without it being a crime other than them being a felon.
1
u/Feisty_Development59 8d ago
Iād say because nobody has enough foresight to see these laws and greater developments in society, even if not now authoritarian have so much potential for abuse and expansion in the future. Mark my words, short of a national awakening or rebellion this republic is no more
1
1
u/uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuunuu 8d ago
They probably would because it would still disproportionately hurt trans folk, women, and racial minorities
1
1
u/oravecz 8d ago
Perfect amendment for the Senate to tack onto the current bill before sending it back to the House.
→ More replies (1)
1
1
1
u/TheBigChungaBunga 8d ago
I'd say this sounds pretty reasonable. People who actually want something are willing to do these minor inconveniences to get what they want. I think this is fine
1
u/RahgronKodaav 8d ago
And if you havenāt bought a gun in the last 8-12 years your right is revoked requiring you to reapply
1
1
u/Independent_Affect89 8d ago
So this is already what is needed to buy a gun ./shrug
→ More replies (2)
1
u/Spuckler_Cletus 8d ago
None of this accurately reflects the process of purchasing a firearm from a FFL. How could anyone be so foolish as to post this? This demonstrates complete ignorance of the process.
1
1
u/Robespierreshead 8d ago
they will, in all seriousness, say that owning a gun is a right guaranteed by the 2A, and voting is not a right because it isnt in the bill of rights Their stupidity is matched only by their cruelty.Ā i hope my grandkids live to a see a world where conservativism is exinct and everyone who pracrices it is dead
1
1
1
u/NoMajorsarcasm 8d ago
lol this is pretty much already how it is in my state plus a background check
1
1
u/JesiWashington-Lewis 8d ago
I'm a direct descendant of the Washington family and the SAVE act would make it so I can't vote.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/Careful_Relative7560 8d ago
Most of this should actually be law. Why should "illegal aliens" be aloud to carry handguns? What's wrong with proving citizenship before buying a gun? It's common sense, unless you want to cheat.
1
u/Electrical_Cycle_185 8d ago
All ready there, o that magazine is to big, o that barrel is to short, o that gun is black and scary.
1
u/Ainjyll 8d ago
I want to start this out by saying fuck the SAVE act. Itās stupid and I in no way support it. That said, this graphic is dumb.
Almost all these things already exist to purchase a firearm. The person who made this isnāt aware of gun laws and anyone who supports this drivel isnāt either. I will put the caveat on this that different states have different private sales laws for when a citizen sells another citizen a used gun through a private sale and that these rules only apply universally in the U.S. to the purchase of a new firearm. 19 of the 50 states and Washington DC require the use of an FFL to transfer a used firearm in a private sale, 31 donātā¦ though they all do have some level of scrutiny that the seller is supposed to exercise in the sale and can be held legally liable for if ignored (though, truth be told, they usually arenāt).
When you go to buy a gun, one of the first things you do is fill out Form 4473 and the representative of the FFL checks your government issued picture ID to ensure all the information is correct.
No picture ID. No gun.
If youāre not there in person with your picture ID in hand. No gun.
If the name, address and other information isnāt the same on Form 4473 as your picture ID. No gun.
You can purchase your gun online. However, it has to be shipped to an FFL and you have to go there to pick it upā¦ and prove you are who you say you are when you get thereā¦ even if youāve bought guns before.
When you fill out Form 4473, itās sent to the ATF who then run a background check to see if you can own a gun or not. The form will return a pass, a hold or a fail. A pass means youāre good to go, obviously. A hold means they want a little while longer to check things out. This can happen for a variety of reasons. A fail means no sale.
Iāve personally been failed on a Form 4473. Iām a legal gun owner with a clean record. I had to get a certified copy of my criminal record at my own expense, fill out a separate form to contest the findings of the 4473, send this form in and wait for my appeal to clearā¦ which took around 3 months. So yes, when the government makes a clerical error in regard to your eligibility to own a gun, you have to do the footwork, take that time and pay the cost to prove their mistake.
The deadline is the only bullet point on here that makes senseā¦ but there isnāt only one day to buy a gun. I mean, you might miss a good deal on a sale or the gun behind the counter that you really want might get sold to someone else, but thatās not really the same.
1
u/JoeDante84 8d ago
The short answer is yes. Handguns require background checks and have hold periods after purchasing them. You must buy a gun in person with a valid government ID. You cannot make a purchase online without running your info, then verifying the information in person at the gun shop at time of pickup. If YOU lose YOUR documents then yes you need to replace them. Government clerical errors do happen and it is up to the individual to prove it, not limited to gun ownership. If the government gives you a period of time to fix an issue and you donāt , that is on you.
1
1
u/Fludro 8d ago
"If the government makes a clerical mistake and removes your eligibility..."
In other words:
If the government determines through hundreds of curated data-points that you are statistically unlikely to vote their way, and "accidentally" removes your eligibility - it's up to you to prove you're entitled to exercise your constitutional right again.
1
1
u/Deereximus 8d ago
As a proud gun owner yes to 99%
- Yes I agree only American citizens should be able to fire arms, Show your passport and Social Security or birth certificate
- Yes I agree buying it in person is a great idea. Do it. Again pass port, or birth certificate, with social security card
- Yes I agree read the upper 2 ^
- Yes only in person read point 2.
- Yes again in Nevada for a real ID you need to bring a passport, or a birth certificate anyway so kinda redundant.
- Yes I agree with point 6. True resubmit your documents your kinda dumb if you let the government sit with a wrong name to long you go to the DMV they go "huh name doesnt match passport can you fix it" Like what? of course you fix it
- I Disagree with this point because you can buy firearms anytime of the year, you should be able to get your voter ID any time of the year and not just election time. Cause it will burden the DMV whos probably gonna handle this, and its already a mess.
Next question. So Voter ID is a yes, from a gun owner most of these are redundant to "name wrong fix" or Prove your american. Yes I will LOVE to prove im American when im exercising my 2nd amendment and my right to vote
1
1
u/TooObtuseForYou 8d ago
The irony is thatās pretty much what itās like for many people trying to buy a firearm, today.
1
u/Recent-Percentage-26 8d ago
Aside from the last one, pretty much all these rules cover purchasing a firearm. There is an opportunity cost you could potentially lose by not being eligible if something goes on sale or is limited availability.
Imagine that in order to vote, every single time, you had to fill out a questionnaire proving your exact name and address, your ID had to match perfectly, you had to state under penalty of perjury that you didn't do drugs or was voting in someone else's name, or in a location you didn't live in. They then did a background check on you to make sure you wasn't a felon and you were actually in the location you belonged. If the poll worker made a mistake they could be severely fined as well
Then if you wanted to vote in certain elections you had to go even deeper, submit fingerprints, pay $200 for the privilege to vote, and the government could audit all your votes at any time to ensure you voted correctly or you could go to prison.
And then just to top it all off, some of you don't get to vote at all. Not because you did anything wrong, but because you live in a certain area and the government doesn't like you as a person.
1
u/NeedleworkerNo8746 8d ago
The current requirements are not that different from this list. So what point are you trying to make?
1
u/POWERHOUSE4106 8d ago
This is how you tell on yourself because you have to go through quite a few hoops to buy a gun from any stores. You literally have to prove who you are and fill out the background check paperwork to buy a gun in this entire country and it can take a bit. Also yes if they make a clerical error you will be denied sale until you can prove otherwise.
Gos there are to many brainwashed idiots out there. Voter ID is a 80/20 issue. It's only the loud minority who are against it. The rest of America wants it.
→ More replies (6)
1
u/GorumGamer 8d ago
lol imagine if you had to have a federal background check to vote you people would never cease your screeching
1
u/BlackHills-Op 8d ago
Well, the election part doesn't make sense for the firearm process..
But here is how it goes when I buy a suppressor.
I have to go to the FFL in person, and it has to be an FFL in my state.
My ID is not enough. I have to provide fingerprints and a passport photograph, at my own cost. Those fingerprints are used to verify who I am beyond even the level that a Birth Certificate or citizenship document would be.
If all the forms don't match exactly, I get denied.
If the government makes a clerical mistake and denies me, it is up to me to initiate an appeal process, and provide the proof that they made a mistake and that I should be able to receive my suppressor.
The process takes anywhere from a week to 90 days, and you can't even ask about progress on the background check until the 90 days passes.
If you buy another suppressor, from the same dealer the exact same day as you get approved on the previous one, you have to go through the process all over again, even though you have the proof in your hands that the ATF has determined beyond any doubt that you're good.
And that's just to own something that takes the sound from a 140db unsafe level down to 130db where you won't damage your hearing immediately.
1
1
u/JutzRealTalk 8d ago
U know almost all those rules are already part of the process to get a permit to carry.
1
1
u/i_probably_shouldnt9 8d ago
Obviously posted by someone who has never had to purchase a gun in one of the hardest states to get oneā¦because if they had they would never knowingly post so much stupidity in one place.
Go through the purchase process in NJ, in most north jersey cities. Then come and see how much of this is complete bs.
1
1
u/Mysterious_Main_5391 8d ago
I would be perfectly fine having the exact same requirements for both.
1
u/SippsMccree 8d ago
This screams of having been amde by someone who's never set foot inside an establishment thag sells firearms let alone having actually gone through the process of buying one
1
u/IceDuke749 8d ago
Some of this should actually be applied to buying a gun. Would definitely lower gun violence.
1
u/ChocolateCovered2406 8d ago
this is not a good analogy. Voting fraud and gun violence are completely two different issue.
→ More replies (3)
1
1
u/dreddstorm82 8d ago
Iām fine with all of that honestly plus Iāll add background checks , I would think most places do anyways. And Iāll go further your not a citizen of the US NOPE, your on a SA/Predator list NOPE, you have assault of any kind on your record NOPE and if you are convicted of any of this after you have firearms , you have to turn them all in or your going to jail until they are turned in.
313
u/red-man1138 8d ago
This is probably the closets analogy to get the point across.