XPost: sci.electronics.repair, 24hoursupport.helpdesk, alt.sport   
   .football.pro.sd-chargers   
   XPost: rec.audio.car   
      
   On Wed, 24 Apr 2013 08:48:09 -0400, "(PeteCresswell)"    
   wrote:   
      
   >Per Don Kelly:   
   >>or where this isn't allowed, go to a gun show and   
   >>do it -without any background checks.   
   >   
   >That's the one that bugs me, but nobody in the news media seems to pick   
   >up on it.   
   >   
   >Personally, I'm not so sure that background checks accomplish all that   
   >much.  I'm not rabidly against them.   I could go either way...  OTOH   
   >Bloomberg seems to be for them big time  And whether one approves of him   
   >or not, one must concede that Bloomberg is no dummy.   
      
   Doomberg, no dummy?  The biggest big-government nanny of them all?   
   Good grief! You really don't like your personal freedoms much.   
      
   >But requiring background checks (with all the attendant administrative   
   >overhead) in one venue and not requiring them in another   
   >readily-available venue I find extremely offensive.   
      
   Hint: You've fallen for another lefty lie.  The exact same background   
   checks are required at a gun show as they are in a brick-and-mortar   
   store (and "Internet sales" must go through a local licensed dealer,   
   in any case).   
      
   >Time and money down the drain.   
   >   
   >Either do it right or do away with it.   
      
   Learn something about what you're talking about or don't talk.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)