- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Apparently, there is a contract regarding who can and who can't incur expenses. The details should be spelled out there.
Since the argument is civil, as opposed to criminal, and it’s being heard in a civil court, I don’t believe morality plays a part. Of course, we can’t look into their hearts. Maybe one of them did intentionally screw the other - or it’s simply an honest disagreement. We don’t know.
Good question. I can’t remember the source, but I recall it being quite credible to me. After all when you consider all the private sales done at gun shows, between family members, on craigslist, with your neighbor, and so on, I think you’d find quite a few guns trading hands without a background check.
You and I have discussed private sales at gun shows before. You don’t think it happens much, if at all. Having bought a gun at a gun show, I think it happens all the time.
In any case, and no matter what the percentages actually are, I’d like every single purchaser of a gun to be required to go through a background check, no matter how that purchase occurs.