Yes. At a mid size gun shop/firing range in the OKC metro area.
SAVE act
- Thread starter PF5
- Start date
It’s legal in Texas to sell a firearm privately without a background check. So—despite what many of us think of the politician himself—Schumer’s point isn’t utterly ridiculous.
Back to my point (let’s give @PF5 a break). If this is the only stance you’re expressing on the SAVE Act, I am left to assume you support it.
One of my kids is shooting trap this year so I gotta figure that out. I gotta feeling that this might be a little more pricey than soccer and basketball.
I did the math on this.
I know that passports take 4-6 weeks from when you submit your application. At least that what they told me when I applied for mine. My all in on the passport has been around $180. If I remember right you can get a cheaper version than what I got but it's only good for Canada and Mexico though.
Looking online low end models for an AR-15 cost around $500. Background checks aren't bad-$15 in Minnesota from the looks of things.
So from a time perspective it's easier to get a gun. Im right across the street from a Bomghars so technically if I wanted to I could get off work tomorrow and be at the range well before dark. To vote, I would have to wait at least a month to register. Minnesota is same day registration so Im not counting the time to go to the courthouse and do all that. The passport took me maybe 20 minutes so probably the same amount of time to fill out the background info.
From a money perspective it's cheaper to vote. $180 vs $515 plus $11.50 for ammo. The catch is for some people $180 is an inconvenience but for others you might as well tell them $20K. Im sure there are cheaper guns out there but my Google search history this evening is probably gonna get me a visit from the FBI (I should add Kash Patel security detail and something about a finding flights to DC or wherever he will be next week to really see what happens).
I really don't put a lot of stock in election fraud. The biggest fraud in my opinion is how we come to those we vote for. I do think an ID to vote isn't much to ask. The additional steps to register seem a bit over the top.
And instantaneous (or nearly so) background check is more difficult than turning in citizenship documents and waiting for an election official to review and approve them?
Make it free and easily accessible and a lot of the argument against it goes away.
And it is 2026. We don't even really need physical cards. What if we did something with facial recognition software where the system scanned your face and verified your identity when going to vote? That would eliminate alot of the hurdles that prevent people from getting id's in the first place and would likely be quicker than current verification systems. It would discourage illegal immigrants from voting and would prevent people from voting at multiple precincts both of which should appease people concerned about illegal voting issues.
dude, common sense is out the window, you have to pick an extreme side.
I do think it would be reasoable to have a free "voter ID" available for that uncommon event of a person not being able to afford or desire a driver's license or other govenrment ID. Would cost the state pennies and get rid of a debate.
One must qualify the background checks.
One must also prove legal residence or strict checks to be approved to carry a firearm if from another country.
Saying it's more difficult to legally obtain voter eligibility than to purchase a firearm is hilariously false propaganda.
That's all I'm saying.
I approve 75%ish of it. There need to be programs in place for the elderly and otherwise disadvantaged to obtain their voter's rights at no cost.
Ammunition for trap gets pretty pricey by itself.
I'm fine with free I'Ds. Problem with that is you have to have some sort of documentation to get one. You would also need the same to register in a face recognition profile. Not overcomable, but there would have to be a process to do so. I'm also fine with that process being free. Even at the cost of 0 it would take some effort. I fear the argument would be that this effort would be too much for some. I still lean towards IDs. I just don't think there will ever be an overwhelming feeling of trust until that requirement is there. Then again, even with the extended rules in place, trust will most likely be weak. Making IDs available/free and required is in my opinion the best but not perfect solution.
All depends on if difficulty is measured by time and effort taken by the citizen or by the number of things looked at by the state.
I think he is making a good point.
A man goes into Wal Mart, walks out an hour later with an AR-15 because the government has taken the time and effort to make it easy by creating an instantaneous check of several items.
Meanwhile, married woman wants to vote but does not have a passport. She has to find and bring multiple documents to an agency and make sure they accept the chain of documents showing her name change.
The SAVE act could require government agencies to create an instantaneous system that verifies citizen name changes by creating a database that matches them up.
But, that would make it easier.
A phone call to NICS “instant check” usually 30-90 second response time within a 1-5 minute call where about 90% are approved.
At least that was true 2018-2019.
Source: My agency at that time was POC for disputed NICs enhanced checks, deferrals and denials….and I was the legal administrator for decisions/legal interpretations of Oklahoma statutes.
Some cases, where there is not a clear green to buy, can take up to 10 days. If NICS doesn’t give an answer back to the seller one way or the other within 3 days, there is a presumption the seller can transfer ownership.
And none of this applies if you’re buying a gun from a non-FFL holder….like if I sold you one of my guns. There? No background check at all. (At least in Oklahoma. There may be state laws in other states that restrict non-FFL transactions).
Last edited:
Again, you have to possess a valid ID 1st before you can purchase a firearm.
It isn't and never will be easier to get a firearm than to register to vote.
And yes the SAVE Act should create a system.
1. You do not have to possess a valid ID before you purchase a firearm in a private, non-FFL sale. You can do so perfectly legally without any ID whatsoever.
2. The SAVE Act clearly doesn’t create a system like NICS as presently drafted.
Would it be a federal offense if you sold it to someone who is prohibited from having it?
Correct, and I clearly stated that it should.
So are you for it or against passage as it is presently proposed WITHOUT such a system?
I'm against the current SAVE Act because there is not enough system in place.
The Schumer meme is still ridiculous.
Similar threads
