GOP Senators Eviscerated Over Bill To Keep Gun From Convict

There are all kings of Trump scandals that consume Washington, one of the most impactful coming out of D.C. is a potential breakthrough on GUN SAFETY. The house passing two bills strengthening background checks and closing the loophole relating to that infamous mass murder at a Black Church in Charleston.

It is about time.

The Senate should refuse to pass either of these bills. The one is unconstitutional and the other puts an unnecessary burden on the gun purchaser.

It's something that all members of Congress should have the courage to change.

The Days after the Emmanuel shooting I was there in the community dealing with their pain and loss and America deserves better than this.

Three days is plenty of time to process a background check. Extending it to 10 days is just making excuses for someone not doing their job.

So, you want to have convicted felons to continue to take advantage of The Charleston gun show loophole so, they can kill more Black people, is that what you want to see, that was what happen in this case Steve ?

The burden should be on the gun purchaser to provide the necessary documents and to take a background check to see if that person can qualify to have that weapon or in order to put their hands on a weapon because it would be the gun purchaser, that will use that weapon to protect his family or commit a crime with that weapon, won't it be, Steve.

Why does the FBI need more than 3 days Ron?

To get it right Steve, Did you know that it takes 10 days to get a passport in this country and passports don't kill..

I'm sure that you don't want to have convicted felons to continue to take advantage of The Charleston gun show loophole so, they can kill more Black people in Church or is that what you want to see, that was what happen in this case Steve?

Why are you trying to protect this heathens right to bare arms, Steve?

Ron, why do you call it the "Charleston gun show loophole"?

Because this is how that Heathen got his weapon or weapons from.

NOW BACK TO MY QUESTION STEVE: I'm sure that you don't want to have convicted felons to continue to take advantage of The Charleston gun show loophole so, they can kill more Black people in Church or is that what you want to see, that was what happen in this case Steve?

Due to a longstanding disagreement between the FBI and ATF regarding the definition of “fugitive from justice”—a disqualifying category for firearm sales—there are 2,183 delayed denials from 1999 to 2015 that ATF has not retrieved. In 2010, the FBI referred the issue to the Office of Legal Counsel, which settles disputes between agencies. No verdict has been rendered since.

http://time.com/4512255/charleston-loophol...

Thanks for this link. This is more the reason this Charleston Loophole should be closed.

NOW BACK TO MY QUESTION STEVE: I'm sure that you don't want to have convicted felons to continue to take advantage of The Charleston gun show loophole so, they can kill more Black people in Church or is that what you want to see, that was what happen in this case Steve?

That is more reason why that loophole needs to be closed.

NOW BACK TO MY QUESTION STEVE: I'm sure that you don't want to have convicted felons to continue to take advantage of The Charleston gun show loophole so, they can kill more Black people in Church or is that what you want to see, that was what happen in this case Steve?

That's why the "Charleston loophope is a myth. That's how you anti-gun people work, you don't enforce the laws on the books. The FBI only had to notify the ATT who would then have taken all of Dylann Roof's guns. All you need is to discipline the FBI but instead you pat yourself on the back for sending a bill to the Senate that the Senate won't pass. Go team!

Steve, those murders in Charleston is NO myth. How did Dylann Rooff a convicted felon get his hand on a store bought weapon in the first place if this gun show loophole is a myth?

I see that you still want to protect that gun show loophole.

I'm sure that you don't want to have convicted felons to continue to take advantage of The Charleston gun show loophole so, they can kill more Black people in Church or is that what you want to see, that was what happen in this case Steve?

Steve do you want this Gun loophole closed?

YOUR WORDS: I do not want that new House bill Ron, because:

Steve, I don't want this law neither because The regulation that you are talking and gave me a link to was dated effective on August 26, 1997 and contains that gun show loophole so, Now back to current times Steve.

I am talking about the Bill that both houses just passed to prevent people like you or people like convicted felons Dylann Rooff can't put their hands on a weapon without first passing a new comprehensive background check.

YOUR WORDS: 1. The FBI could have enforced the present law and prevented that shooting. 2. It would prevent domestic abuse victims from timely acquiring a weapon for protection. 3. Because the background check process is already full of false denials.

This bill makes sure that those complaints are corrected and strengthened in these two bills.

So you want things to stay the same, is that right Steve? The same way that permitted Dylann Roof' to get his hands on a weapon because he wanted to start a race war.

And what on earth are you talking about Ron:

"This bill makes sure that those complaints are corrected and strengthened in these two bills."

???

Not only do I want things to stay the same Ron, that's what the Senate wants too.

YOUR WORDS: Not only do I want things to stay the same Ron.

I did not ask you about the Senate.

Are you saying that you want it The same way that permitted a convicted felons Dylann Roof' to continue to take advantage of The Charleston gun show loophole so, they can kill more Black people in Church or is that what you want to see, that was what happen in this case Steve?

"So you want things to stay the same, is that right Steve?" That was your question Ron and since I'm against the PROPOSED law, then obviously I want things to stay the same.

YOUR WORDS: So you want things to stay the same, is that right Steve?" That was your question Ron and since I'm against the PROPOSED law, then obviously I want things to stay the same.

Why would you want to keep a flawed law that permitted a convicted felons Dylann Roof' to continue to take advantage of The Charleston gun show loophole so, they can kill more Black people in Church, you don’t to see change in that law? Since that is what you want to see, that was what happen in this case Steve?

The current law is flawed Ron, but it allows for its flaws to be corrected. The current law flagged me mistakenly as a prohibited person and my recourse was to appeal that determination. I did, and I have not had any problem making gun purchases since. The current law mistakenly didn't flag Dylann Roof as a prohibited person, and the FBI's recourse was to ask the ATF to get the gun back. THE FBI DID NOT DO THAT. If they had done what they should have Dylann Roof would have been disarmed and also subject to a felony for lying on the form when he made the gun purchase.

This new gun law will correct all that but of course you don't want to see that happen, which will make it harder for people like you and Dylann Roof' to continue to take advantage of The Charleston gun show loophole so, they can kill more Black people in Church.

Fear not Steve, that The Charleston gun show loophole will be updated.

How do you know what the new bill corrects Ron? Have you read it? What makes you think your new bill will become law?

YOUR WORDS: How do you know what the new bill corrects Ron?

MY REPLY: Steve, I 'am not against the effort to roll up our sleeves and get to work on this program.

YOU QUESTION: Have you read it?

MY REPLY: Not all of it. Let us read that bill together, take a look at this first part:

Description: H.Amdt. 53 — 116th Congress (2019-2020)
All Information (Except Text)

Amendment allows an individual or a company who contacts NICS, and who was not notified that the transfer is legally permissible within 3 business days of the initial date of contact, to rely on information provided by NICS respecting a transfer for 25 days after the transfer becomes legally permissible.

Purpose:

An amendment numbered 5 printed in Part B of House Report 116-14 to allow an FFL who has contacted NICS, and who was not notified that the transfer is legally permissible within 3 business days of the initial date of contact, to rely on information provided by NICS respecting a transfer for 25 days after the transfer becomes legally permissible.

House Amendment Code:
(A005)

Keep in mind what NICS means - National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS)

YOUR QUESTION: What makes you think your new bill will become law?

Because it is the will of the people.

Steve, do you see, I answered all of your question, one by one.




Because it is the right thing to do. Listen Steve, this bill will prevent this civil war you talk about of senseless murder of Millions of United States citizens. That is something I want to prevent, don't you?