Originally Posted By: SKB
....You can not even see the value of paying a few dollars for a better back ground check. You have no interest in seeing a solution to what is huge problem for all gun owners.

Okay Steve, I cut out the part where you poked fun at me about the fifteen dollars, but would you care to expand on what we get for a few more dollars. As best I can piece together, you said all private transfers should go through an FFL, because that's the way you do it and I'm full of beans. Then, correct me if I'm wrong, you won't do a transfer for me because, I'm not your friend. Did I spin, lie, or distort?

You say I have no interest in a solution, but I have asked you about all of yours going back a few pages. Not much, eh? You repeat on and on about an image problem, but you refuse to agree that the solution is image control. Please explain, how does losing chunks of the gun control battle strengthen the image of the law abiding gun community?

Now, more specifically, why don't you acknowledge the example I gave from the state of Oregon? Why do you insist on returning to the current procedures of an FFL holder in good standing? Does spending more money on background checks mean mandatory digitizing of all FFL records? Can I ask, who would care about the professionalism of an FFL transfer, when all transfers would be subject to criminal penalty if it's not in a de facto registry like my example from Oregon? I admit, it doesn't seem like it, but I try to snip out some of the spin in your comments and try to highlight the apparent points of substance.

Thanks for reading. As you've told me in the past about yourself, how you possibly judge my values and interests?