This story is closed for comments. Comments on WRAL.com news stories are accepted and moderated between the hours of 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. Monday through Friday.

Oldest First
  • 1911A1 Feb 14, 7:11 p.m.

    Doing something just to do something is wasting time and money.

  • junkmail5 Feb 14, 7:02 p.m.

    On point. Do you honestly think criminals are buying their illegal guns from legitimate sellers?-Chapel Hill Conservative

    I know for a fact they are.

    I've bought and sold a fair number of weapons, as have friends. A know personally of a number of cases where if you actually ask the buyer to sign a bill of sale swearing they are legal to buy, they cancel the purchase.

    It's happened to me, it's happened to others.

    So yes, this would stop that from happening in all the cases where the seller doesn't ask- which is most of them.

    As further evidence, over 30,000 felons were stopped by the EXISTING background check trying to buy from FFLs. Despite them knowing that's not legal.

    Criminals are pretty dumb. So yes, a simple thing like a background check will, FOR A FACT, deny them a significant source of weapons they are currently using.

    It's not a total solution, but an improvement over today,and with no real cost (NICS already is up and running) and no infringement to legal buyers

  • Chapel Hill Conservative Feb 14, 6:50 p.m.

    "If background checks were required for private sale, all those private sellers vanish as sources for those felons. It won't _solve_ the problem, but it would improve it." - junkmail5

    On point. Do you honestly think criminals are buying their illegal guns from legitimate sellers? The people selling the criminals the guns are criminals themselves. Have you ever heard the term black market?

    Any solutions to actually preventing any gun related crimes would be negligible at best. Now, if you can show where a legitimately licensed FFL gun dealer is knowingly selling to these criminals, then you might have a case. Otherwise, illegally buying or selling a gun is just that... illegal. There are already laws that deal with that. They just need to be enforced.

    And if a criminal thinks there's too much of a risk in buying from any given seller, he'll simply move on to one he feels comfortable with. These registration barriers won't stop him. They won't even do much to slow him down.

  • junkmail5 Feb 14, 6:18 p.m.

    Yeah, because criminals will be more than happy to go through a background check before buying a gun on the local street corner with their illegally obtained drug/ mugging money.
    Chapel Hill Conservative

    This totally misses the point.

    Right now, today, SELLERS who want to follow the law can sell long guns to anybody who they don't have reason to think can't have the gun.

    So there's lots of private sellers for felons to buy from just by keeping their mouths shut. And they do. I've run into some myself.

    If background checks were required for private sale, all those private sellers vanish as sources for those felons.

    It won't _solve_ the problem, but it would improve it.

  • Ex-Republican Feb 14, 5:55 p.m.

    " . . . even with that, there’s no evidence I know of that anybody’s been burglarized as a result of it. And I don't expect there will be."

    Two problems:
    1."there's no evidence that I know of". Bussian is not omniscient. There may be many instances of this. How do you think guns get on the black market?

    2. "I don't expect there will be." I don't expect my house to catch on fire but there's always a good possibility it will. That's why have insurance.

    Why take the chance?

  • Mr. Middle of the Road Feb 14, 5:37 p.m.

    This is the first prez. who wants to confiscate guns against the 2nd Amendment. Homeland security has named law abiding Citizens as potential home grown Terrorists, if they are Veterans, Christians, Constitutionalists,believe in the Bill of Rights etc. in other words American CITIZENS. But they declared the War on Terror is over against Enemies such as Jihadists. Now we will have Drones over America, but FAA says they will not be equipped with Hellfire Missles..don't you feel better now? If they can confiscate the Guns, they will have America right where they want us. Helpless to the whims of Criminals and tyrants.
    seenbetterdaze

    I think you have been watching too much television.

  • GravyPig Feb 14, 5:26 p.m.

    "yes, gravypig several crimes...google it"

    I saw after my post that there were some crimes. While it is public record, it was very foolish for them to print that info. If those effected by this are able, I would suggest they sue the news outlet that printed that info. Public record is one thing, making public record that public is just plain dumb.

  • beachboater Feb 14, 4:54 p.m.

    There was probably not a problem until all this news coverage. Now the crooks know that they can find the information and do what they do best with the info.

    I do not think gun owners info should be public.

  • The Yoda Feb 14, 4:53 p.m.

    Again, it is my personal opinion. How many politicians ever fear the armed citizens comparing to an unbiased News Outlet? says Da Toy Maker

    If we had an unbiased news outlet in this country I might agree with you. We have a 90% Liberal/Progressive Media and a 10% Conservative Media.

  • jawsofsteel Feb 14, 4:53 p.m.

    I can promise you that having gun information public will definitely increase the odds for people of ill will. You are basically giving information to someone so that when you go to work and think your home is safe, they are now armed with the information to go in and steal your weapons leaving not only you defenseless but your neighbors could be the next target.

  • Ripcord Feb 14, 4:51 p.m.

    "But to be fair, as the result of the so gun confiscation in Australia, do the people loose their freedom? Do they loose their democracy? Right to vote? Loose their land? Property?"

    Since guns were their private property wasn't their legally owned property confiscated? The ownership of firearms violated no one else's rights, so isn't the confiscation of that property a violation of property rights? And don't they have a right to use deadly force in self defense? They already lost a big chunk of their democracy when they allowed the government to have this much power over them.

  • Da Toy Maker Feb 14, 4:46 p.m.

    "...how about we focus on the problem. People are the problem. The mental health system in this country is pathetically inadequate. Fix the people, and your so-called gun "problem" will fix itself.
    millerbri66"

    How are we going to fix it? We are broke! Who will pay for the care?

  • bombayrunner Feb 14, 4:40 p.m.

    bet we cannot find where all the guns are registered for the agents protecting the president and others.

  • Da Toy Maker Feb 14, 4:35 p.m.

    " ...And what do you do as a citizen? Picket the government? That'll show them!
    smcallah"

    smcallah:

    You and I have different idea of what is truly powerful. I personally believe the most powerful thing we have in the US is not the Right to Bear Arm but it is the power of the OPEN Media! How many powerful politicians are brought down the News Media? Yes. Outrage from people does have tremendous effect. Again, it is my personal opinion. How many politicians ever fear the armed citizens comparing to an unbiased News Outlet?

    Peace!

  • wanderer Feb 14, 4:30 p.m.

    @raleighindependent - sorry but it was more than one person. Also, the police department argued the same thing about how it endangered people more than helped.

  • ripetomatoes Feb 14, 4:29 p.m.

    Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom? Congress shall have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American ... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the People." — Tench Coxe, 1788 fishon

    I will stand beside you to fight for this belief.

  • smcallah Feb 14, 4:24 p.m.

    "But you track the sale of a gun from a law-abiding citizen to a potential criminal if the the sale was reported in the first place."

    Potential criminal? Everyone is a potential criminal. That's such a loaded statement.

    And even if we knew Person A sold Person B a gun, and that gun was used in a crime, we have NO IDEA that gun was used in a crime unless it was left at the scene.

    Real life is not like CSI. Guns are only traced to their bullets if the police have both the gun and the bullets fired from them. And that only works if the bullet is mostly intact.

    The serial number of the gun is not on the bullets, so unless you have a suspect and can get a warrant, you are not going to know that this person's gun was used in the crime. And then you'd only know if the person actually shot the gun.

    BTW, I agree somewhat with universal background checks, if they're cheap or free, and easy.

    But they won't solve what you think they'll solve.

  • seenbetterdaze Feb 14, 4:23 p.m.

    This is the first prez. who wants to confiscate guns against the 2nd Amendment. Homeland security has named law abiding Citizens as potential home grown Terrorists, if they are Veterans, Christians, Constitutionalists,believe in the Bill of Rights etc. in other words American CITIZENS. But they declared the War on Terror is over against Enemies such as Jihadists. Now we will have Drones over America, but FAA says they will not be equipped with Hellfire Missles..don't you feel better now? If they can confiscate the Guns, they will have America right where they want us. Helpless to the whims of Criminals and tyrants.

  • smcallah Feb 14, 4:19 p.m.

    "But to be fair, as the result of the so gun confiscation in Australia, do the people loose their freedom? Do they loose their democracy? Right to vote? Loose their land? Property?"

    But to be fair, do things always 100% remain the same? Do we know what will happen in Australia 10 years from now? 20? 50? 100? 200? Without the government fearing a real backlash from the people, they can enact just about anything that they can agree on. And what do you do as a citizen? Picket the government? That'll show them!

  • The Deadhead Feb 14, 4:17 p.m.

    drivers' license plate numbers are not public record. I can't waltz into DMV and request the name & info of a license plate.

  • beachmama Feb 14, 4:14 p.m.

    Offshore

    I feel the same way about people that want to tell me what to do with my body. I think they are free to believe and do what they want with their own body, but have no right to tell me. I also fee that way about gay marriage. To let people live in the way they see fit, is no business of mine unless they are harming me.

  • bombayrunner Feb 14, 4:01 p.m.

    the problem is that when they published these things in New York no one knew that level of detail was public ... so there was a outcry.

  • Offshore Feb 14, 3:58 p.m.

    Didn't that war hero sniper get shot last week? He had a gun and he still died. Why? Cause he went shooting with a crazy person. What chance to you have of living when a crazy person with a gun lives next door?
    corey3rd2

    Well, there you go. The same chance you live next to a "crazy person" (nice generalization) Just because your neighbor owns a gun doesn't make him crazy. He might even use it to help you out, then again, your probably one of "those" neighbors nobody relates to (cause they think you're crazy)(see, anyone can wave the generalization brush)

  • millerbri66 Feb 14, 3:56 p.m.

    Gotta love fear mongers. Instead of focusing on a symptom....yes....guns are ONLY a symptom......how about we focus on the problem. People are the problem. The mental health system in this country is pathetically inadequate. Fix the people, and your so-called gun "problem" will fix itself.

  • Offshore Feb 14, 3:54 p.m.

    I have concluded I will never be scared enough to be a Republican. I've been told by so many that I would come around as I grew older. Government, homosexuals, atheists, immigrants, minorities, poor people... what are they not scared of? Save It

    CrumpsBr0ther nailed it, I never had a problem with any of your "hit list" of people. What I do have a problem with is the self-righteous like yourself shoving your opinions/ideals down everyone elses throat.

  • RM24 Feb 14, 3:54 p.m.

    And FYI that Herod name was Chris Kyle! You should at least remember the name when referring to a man who spent nearly his entire life protecting your freedoms

  • RM24 Feb 14, 3:52 p.m.

    . What chance to you have of living when a crazy person with a gun lives next door?
    corey3rd2

    I wouldn't break in his home and I wouldn't go out shooting with him. And if he threatens you or anyone report it! Don't ignore those signs! But what determines a person to be "crazy" again? I expect everyone's definition is different

  • Goalieman Feb 14, 3:49 p.m.

    For all those people saying it would be safer to have a registry of who are gun owners, why not just put a chip in everyone and keep up with where they are and have been? It's not the guns that kill, it's the people!

    Would those that want to know if I have a permit for a gun, would you want me to know where you are all the time?

  • Da Toy Maker Feb 14, 3:49 p.m.

    "
    You need to educate yourself. The gun registration law that was implemented in Australia was the first necessary step in identifying who owned weapons. Once the registry was in place they confiscated the weapons. Without the registry they wouldn't have been able to do it.
    Ripcord"

    But to be fair, as the result of the so gun confiscation in Australia, do the people loose their freedom? Do they loose their democracy? Right to vote? Loose their land? Property?

    Don't get me wrong, I personally think our right to bear arm is great. I could see other point of views too: If our government and its arm forces are turned against the people, we don't really have a lot of chance, do we?

  • RadioDJ Feb 14, 3:46 p.m.

    Boo! Now run out and buy 7 more guns to protect yourself.

  • millerbri66 Feb 14, 3:46 p.m.

    "How do you know (we) aren't letting Leftists and Marxists arm themselves so they can come and TAKE more tax money from you to redistribute? hahahahahahahahahahahahaha....." - Gork

    You have a point. Obama did arm many of the Mexican cartel members. Would you be so kind as to point me to the public database showing who has those weapons?-
    Chapel Hill Conservative

    Really? You -really- believe the Cartels needed Obama in order to arm themselves however they see fit? I suggest you come out of your bubble sometime soon and breath some fresh air son.

  • RadioDJ Feb 14, 3:46 p.m.

    Are our legislators EVER going to work on anything to improve the JOBS they all RAN THEIR CAMPAIGNS ON? Every sign alongside the road up here was all about "More Jobs" "Better Jobs" "Jobs Jobs Jobs". And yet, not one single thing has been debated or passed other than social engeneering bills, the far right agenda on everything, and nothing done to improve the economy here at all. NC will end up having much higher unemployment than it does now, and much worse than the rest of the US. What a bunch of {insert word here}.

  • Da Toy Maker Feb 14, 3:39 p.m.

    OK. In NC, one doesn't need CCW permit to buy and own long gun(s), right? Doesn't this mean a residence might or might not have long gun(s) without being on the said registry, right? I guess it is safe to assume the resident(s) having ccw permit will definitely have gun(s) but not the other way around.

    The criminal(s) most likely already has(have) gun. What is to stop the criminal to shoot first assuming the resident(s) has (have)gun?

    I like the idea of allowing law abiding citizens to own gun(s) and do more to reduce availability of guns to criminal if it is all possible. Oh well, one could always dreams, right?

    Peace!

  • RM24 Feb 14, 3:34 p.m.

    You have a point. Obama did arm many of the Mexican cartel members. Would you be so kind as to point me to the public database showing who has those weapons?
    Chapel Hill Conservative
    February 14, 2013 2:40 p.m.

    Don't u remember Obama didn't know that was going on! Hahaha.

  • RM24 Feb 14, 3:33 p.m.

    Why make things less open? Other property records are public, why should guns be any different?
    27228
    February 14, 2013 2:29 p.m.
    Report abuse

    Sure, why anything right? Just throw in income info and credit ratings! Let it all out! And while your at it print a report that shows homosexual and heterosexual households also! I mean why should anything be private!

  • Mr. Middle of the Road Feb 14, 3:31 p.m.

    Now that gun prices are going up and up, having the data available is like telling would be thieves where to go look for guns to steal. that way they can make their way into the black market
    rand321

    But I thought the very idea that there might be a gun around was supposed to scare off the bad guys? Now we are saying that it will draw crime? So if bad guys think there is a gun on the premises they will break in and if they think there is not a gun on the premises they will break in? I think I see why gun nerds are so paranoid! Now I am scared!!

  • RM24 Feb 14, 3:30 p.m.

    Because CRIMINALS register their weapons

    But law-abiding citizens do. But when law-abiding citizens sell their weapons in a private sale to someone claiming to be a "law-abiding citizen", you just may have given your gun away to someone that would kill you in your sleep.
    ALL HAIL ME
    February 14, 2013 2:31 p.m.
    Report abuse

    And these reports have nothing to do with this. Doesn't stop or prevent it. Doesn't track it.

  • Chapel Hill Conservative Feb 14, 3:29 p.m.

    "He is asking for ALL sales. Public, private, dealer, whatever, if a gun is sold there should be a background check." - GravyPig

    Yeah, because criminals will be more than happy to go through a background check before buying a gun on the local street corner with their illegally obtained drug/ mugging money.

  • DoingMyBest Feb 14, 3:29 p.m.

    "What? you won't tell me? I guess you're ashamed, huh? Junkmail"

    How much time do you steal from your employer to blog all day?

  • junkmail5 Feb 14, 3:28 p.m.

    Why make things less open? Other property records are public, why should guns be any different?
    27228

    You are confused.

    These are not property records.

    Nothing in the records tells you who owns what.

    It'd help if you understood the topic before discussing it further.

  • smcallah Feb 14, 3:25 p.m.

    "Oh no, I registered my car and that's the first step to confiscation! Wait, was that a black helicopter I just heard?"

    Oh no, owning and driving a car is not a declared right in the Bill of Rights of the Constitution!

    Tell me, which other of your guaranteed rights in the Bill of Rights do you register and pay taxes and fees for? I'll be waiting.

  • crouch1010 Feb 14, 3:24 p.m.

    "This bill is actually is aimed at the theft of guns," said bill sponsor Sen. Stan Bingham, R-Davidson. He said there's been a "public outcry" from gun owners concerned they could be targeted by thieves." Well if a gun owner has this type of concern, they should sell their gun(s) and avoid the embarrassment. This is in total contradiction to those who argue that guns reduce crime. Which is it? All the flip flopping is a major mental embarrassment. Some people want to pass bills that covers un-founded fears and neglect a lot of things that reflect real world realities.

  • Reformed Liberal Feb 14, 3:23 p.m.

    "I couldn't agree with you more Paul. This factor, to many of us, Left and Right, who own guns, is a red flag. You cannot register the guns illegally owned by criminals, so what exactly IS the point?"

    But you track the sale of a gun from a law-abiding citizen to a potential criminal if the the sale was reported in the first place.

  • Chapel Hill Conservative Feb 14, 3:21 p.m.

    "That is just the point, law enforcement tries to trace back weapons that they confinscate due to a crime that was committed." - beachmama

    And there it is. The registration process (again... only done by law abiding gun owners) did nothing to help prevent that crime you speak of. If a gun is stolen from a lawful owner and is reported as stolen, does registering that gun and making it's lawful owner's info public do anything whatsoever to prevent the criminal from breaking the law in the first place? Btw, there are already laws on the books for those who buy guns on the behalf of known criminals. Why not simply enforce existing laws? What good will burdening/ harassing those who already follow the law accomplish?

    Shouldn't any and all gun laws out there be aimed at preventing crimes committed with guns rather than dealing with after the fact?

  • smcallah Feb 14, 3:18 p.m.

    "It would enhance our safety more if there was a required background check for all firearm purchases and a national registry of who owns these."

    Spoken like a person that doesn't know what it takes to get a concealed carry permit that is being referred to in this article.

    First you must take an 8 hour class on gun safety and NC concealed carry law, pass a written test, and a shooting proficiency test.

    Then you must take the certificate you received from your class to your county sheriff, who will then fingerprint you, and then submit your information to an SBI background check, an FBI NICS background check, and request hospital records in case you have been in the hospital for a mental problem.

    Then only after you pass that do you have a concealed carry permit issued to you.

    Can you name what is unsafe about any of that, and why it would need to be public knowledge of where the people who have these live? The people that need to know, law enforcement, already know who has them.

  • Come On_Seriously Feb 14, 3:16 p.m.

    josephlawrence- still trying to push this Fox News propaganda story?

    "Thanks to a section of the Obamacare bill...check out Senate Amendment 3276, Section 2716, Part C-... It pretty much puts the stops... to regulate, register and control firearms in this nation. Don't take my word for it-read the section."

    OK- you may want to read it yourself- http://www.healthcare.gov/law/full/patient-protection.pdf

    Section 2716 'PROHIBITION ON DISCRIMINATION IN FAVOR OF HIGHLY COMPENSATED INDIVIDUALS.' Part C-2nd Amendment Rights, 1) a wellness program may not require disclosure of a lawfully stored, owned, or used gun, 2) and 3) state that there is no authorization under the ACA to collect or maintain records of gun storage, use, or ownership, and 4) states that a premium may not be increased or denied due to gun ownership.

    In other words, it limits health programs from collecting data or increasing rates due to gun ownership and absolutely doesn't say what you and Fox keep trying to push.

  • chuck1947 Feb 14, 3:11 p.m.

    It is a double-edged sword. If a crook wants a gun, he would like to know wwere to go. Likewise, if he just wants cash or a flat screen, he would like to know who is not armed. Surveys of jailed homebreakers show that the worst fear is to break into a home you think is empty and hear someone lock and load some type of firearm. Most of my neighbors are armed and we shoot together and go to ranges often as a group so there is no stigma associated with it. Our unarmed neighbors are mostly elderly or single people who have never been mugged. One unarmed young lady called on be to get rid of a rapid dog. Animal control warmed me of the possible legal problems of firing in the city limits. Next time I will not bother to call them.

  • JennyB Feb 14, 3:11 p.m.

    This is dumb.

  • junkmail5 Feb 14, 3:10 p.m.

    They're saying the same thing about Barrycare- Crumps Brother

    No, they're not.

    http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ftpdocs/120xx/doc12040/01-06-ppaca_repeal.pdf

    CBO estimated that repealing Obamacare would INCREASE the deficit by 230 billion.

    (HR2 was the bill to repeal it)

    “[T]he effect of H.R. 2 on federal deficits as a result of changes in direct spending and revenues is likely to be an increase in the vicinity of $230 billion, plus or minus the effects of technical and economic changes to CBO’s and JCT’s projections for that period.”

    It pretty much puts the stops to all the noise and efforts of Obama et.al., to regulate, register and control firearms in this nation. Don't take my word for it---read the section..
    josephlawrence43

    It does no such thing. I corrected you 2 days ago, and you're still repeating this lie? Why?

    it prevents medical care people from asking about or logging gun ownership. That's it.

  • RM24 Feb 14, 2:58 p.m.

    Oh no, I registered my car and that's the first step to confiscation! Wait, was that a black helicopter I just heard?
    raleighindependent
    February 14, 2013 1:53 p.m.
    Report abuse
    That's just so the government can't collect taxes on it. Now if you miss a payment or 2 it's the bank that's gonna take it!

Oldest First