Joss Delage

Background checks for private gun sales - please help me understand

18 posts in this topic

All,

What are the cons to a "universal background check"? What I'm talking about here would be that individuals would have access to an online version of the same tool the dealers use - no more no less.

My thoughts is that it seems like a reasonable thing to do. Although I oppose restrictions on gun types, ammo, and magazines, I don't think we should be able to sell guns to people who shouldn't have them, be they criminals or crazies. With this said, I've never owned a gun in my life, and before adopting this position for good I would like to understand this issue as well as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, when I hear "universal background check", I envision something like that:


- Joe Public wants to sell his AR-15
- Jane Doe wants to buy it, and brings to Joe her driving license and SS card.
- Joe checks that the picture matches and that the names on the 2 cards match. He then goes online to www.universalbackgroundcheck.gov.
- There he enters the SS number and the driving license number.
- The servers on the other sides make sure the 2 numbers correspond to the same person. They then check again their database of criminals and crazies.
- Thirty seconds later Joe gets a green light, and maybe a confirmation email. He gives Jane his AR-15, she gives him money.
- The end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds right.


I'm also thinking that there are, or could easily be, firearms whose only legitimate use would be of a military nature and so citizens that want them would have to undergo a more thorough check, as well as renew their licensing every X amount of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I couldn't understand why anyone would be against a background check. From conversations on other forums, I understand the current system of background checks at dealers has resulted in a kind of backdoor registration where firearms can easily be traced to their owners. That might be legit, but it explains why many people oppose a universal background check.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Precisely. The leading gun control legislators like Diane Feinstein are against gun ownership entirely. One thing they do understand is that outright confiscation is dirty, hard work, and impractical. They have found more pragmatic methods of soft confiscation via creeping infringements that intend to divide and marginalize their opposition. Concrete proposals include lowering magazine capacities(NY is now down to 7), defining semi autos as assault weapons, defining cosmetic features as "military style," providing exceptions for hunters while expanding controls, excise taxes on ammunition, and banning not only sale but any transfer of affected items(generational confiscation). Point being, I would rather not give an inch to them.

It would be a pleasure to seriously discuss and propose registration, background checks, etc in a country that is not peppered with legislators intent on subverting the 2nd amendment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems that gun right defenders would have an opportunity to pick up the ball and propose a universal background check law that would be a true, limited background check law, and supercede the other federal encroachments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It seems that gun right defenders would have an opportunity to pick up the ball and propose a universal background check law that would be a true, limited background check law, and supercede the other federal encroachments.

Government is like Santa Clause. He knows when you are sleeping, he knows when you're awake. He knows if you've been bad or good so be good for goodness sake. Pay your taxes, swallow the pap and swill and do not complain to bitterly. Be a Good Citizen, now move along....

ruveyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It seems that gun right defenders would have an opportunity to pick up the ball and propose a universal background check law that would be a true, limited background check law, and supercede the other federal encroachments.

The problem is that yielding any ground on gun-control will be aggressively exploited by the leftists as one more step in the creeping direction of gun bans.

I think it's similar to how while marginally raising taxes on everyone might help in balancing the budget, still raising taxes should be resisted on principle because we should never yield anything to leftists who would view it as another successful little step towards statism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
- Joe Public wants to sell his AR-15

I'm not sure why specifically you mentioned the AR-15, but just in case you are falling for some of the popular misconceptions pertaining to this firearm, this is worth mentioning:

http://www.nssf.org/msr/facts.cfm

  • AR-15-style rifles are no more powerful than other hunting rifles of the same caliber and in most cases are chambered in calibers less powerful than common big-game hunting cartridges like the 30-06 Springfield and .300 Win. Mag.

AR-15's are no more deadly than any traditional wood stock semi-auto deer rifle. AR-15's just look "dangerous" to people because they superficially resemble the guns used by the military in movies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Precisely. The leading gun control legislators like Diane Feinstein are against gun ownership entirely. One thing they do understand is that outright confiscation is dirty, hard work, and impractical. They have found more pragmatic methods of soft confiscation via creeping infringements that intend to divide and marginalize their opposition. Concrete proposals include lowering magazine capacities(NY is now down to 7), defining semi autos as assault weapons, defining cosmetic features as "military style," providing exceptions for hunters while expanding controls, excise taxes on ammunition, and banning not only sale but any transfer of affected items(generational confiscation). Point being, I would rather not give an inch to them.

It would be a pleasure to seriously discuss and propose registration, background checks, etc in a country that is not peppered with legislators intent on subverting the 2nd amendment.

Well said and exactly. You cannot discuss this with someone who would view said discussion as an opportunity for political exploitation. There is no negotiation with these people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It seems that gun right defenders would have an opportunity to pick up the ball and propose a universal background check law that would be a true, limited background check law, and supercede the other federal encroachments.

The problem is that yielding any ground on gun-control will be aggressively exploited by the leftists as one more step in the creeping direction of gun bans.

I think it's similar to how while marginally raising taxes on everyone might help in balancing the budget, still raising taxes should be resisted on principle because we should never yield anything to leftists who would view it as another successful little step towards statism.

Gradualism is the perfect political weapon against those who don't think in principles. It's disgustingly effective in bringing a nation of compromisers to socialism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stiil if the right was drafting the law, they would be in a position to correct the creep of the past laws - i.e., the fact that the dealers' background check amounts to a registry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stiil if the right was drafting the law, they would be in a position to correct the creep of the past laws - i.e., the fact that the dealers' background check amounts to a registry.

Is there anything inherently unconstitutional about such a registry? I don't see it forbidden anywhere in the bill of rights unless you hold the private ownership of fire arms falls under individual privacy.

ruveyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it's just a different thing, and a more intrusive one. Many gun owners who are hostile to a registry would be OK about a background check as long as it doesn't amount to a backdoor registry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The progressives are already talking about gun registration in connection with a national ID. A list of allowed gun owners -- as opposed to a list of those determined to be ineligible, like felons and obvious psychotics -- quickly becomes a tool for the progressives' form of government social controls by preventative law and bureaucratic permissions, as opposed to the principle that citizens are free and have an unquestioned right to do what they want except where limited in what they cannot do because it would be a violation of rights.

You cannot assume they will be "reasonable". They call all their regulations "reasonable". Anything the government does at this point will by tyrannical and intrusive, much like banning guns for people with severe mental health problems will be exploited to persecute political enemies, making snitches out of doctors and holding doctors legally liable for anything done they did not foresee and report -- like the old Soviet system of controlling people through fear of snitches who are not even required to tell the truth. It makes everyone afraid and looking over his shoulder -- and afraid to talk to his own doctor. Prominent gun control progressives at Harvard are already calling the "gun culture" -- consisting of millions of innocent people -- a "public health problem" to be dealt with accordingly. Advocacy of individual rights is regarded as equivalent to a "disease" to be "cured" and a sign of "terrorism".

There is no authority in the Constitution for the government to maintain a list of names and addresses of people owning guns or anything else. In this post-Constitutional phase of government a list of gun owners would be a list of targets assembled in advance for confiscation when they can get away with it on a large scale, and bureaucratic harassment in the meantime. Don't trust them on anything. Me-tooing Republicans who can't even speak coherently against Obama to the press are no help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why specifically you mentioned the AR-15, but just in case you are falling for some of the popular misconceptions pertaining to this firearm, this is worth mentioning:

http://www.nssf.org/msr/facts.cfm

  • AR-15-style rifles are no more powerful than other hunting rifles of the same caliber and in most cases are chambered in calibers less powerful than common big-game hunting cartridges like the 30-06 Springfield and .300 Win. Mag.

AR-15's are no more deadly than any traditional wood stock semi-auto deer rifle. AR-15's just look "dangerous" to people because they superficially resemble the guns used by the military in movies.

The video of the Jessie Duff gun demonstration on Hannity shows the AR-15 in comparison with a few others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Prominent gun control progressives at Harvard are already calling the "gun culture" -- consisting of millions of innocent people -- a "public health problem" to be dealt with accordingly.

According to the CDC, we average ~275 deaths due to error in US hospitals, ever day.

According to the FBI, there were ~323 murders involving riffles in the US in 2011.

The FBI also claims we had 496 bludgeoned to death with hammers and clubs in 2011.

Advocacy of individual rights is regarded as equivalent to a "disease" to be "cured" and a sign of "terrorism".

Off to Texas, then, the only state whose spirit and geography might allow it to pull out of this quickly decaying union.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even more simplistic than grand government intrusion is this, "Give me your DOB, address and SSN for the sale of portable property between private individuals. I promise I will not abuse your personal information in any way."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites