when my dad passed, he willed me all his (and my granddad's) guns.
wonder how that would work with a universal background check?
wonder how that would work with a universal background check?
Universal Background Checks
- Thread starter Lenny_D
- Start date
oldRoger
US Veteran
If the Feds were to pass a law that private party sales (legal in FL) required a “background check” they would have to set up a means of enforcement. Otherwise what would be the point?
Enforcement would require record keeping, otherwise A could continue to sell to B without complying with the new law.
So how would this work? Let us say that A has a firearm legally in his possession but not registered to him, and if we are to believe the Politicians, more than a 100 million guns are currently floating around in this situation, that is without any registration or record.
If A sells or gives it to B, how would the Feds find out? Unless and until the Feds have a complete registration of every firearm in the country there is no way that they can enforce a “background check” law.
It should be perfectly obvious that unless we can be made agents of .gov, keeping our own bound books and logging every firearm in and out and subject to inspections without notice, the whole idea is unworkable.
And as been pointed out many times it would not have prevented any of the recent mass shootings.
And no, I really don’t care if those of you in NY, CA, and elsewhere put up with this sort of thing, it is in no way a reason for the rest of us to be tyrannized.
Enforcement would require record keeping, otherwise A could continue to sell to B without complying with the new law.
So how would this work? Let us say that A has a firearm legally in his possession but not registered to him, and if we are to believe the Politicians, more than a 100 million guns are currently floating around in this situation, that is without any registration or record.
If A sells or gives it to B, how would the Feds find out? Unless and until the Feds have a complete registration of every firearm in the country there is no way that they can enforce a “background check” law.
It should be perfectly obvious that unless we can be made agents of .gov, keeping our own bound books and logging every firearm in and out and subject to inspections without notice, the whole idea is unworkable.
And as been pointed out many times it would not have prevented any of the recent mass shootings.
And no, I really don’t care if those of you in NY, CA, and elsewhere put up with this sort of thing, it is in no way a reason for the rest of us to be tyrannized.
quneur
Member
If you follow the link in the article and read the bid request, it simply states it is looking for a retrieval system. The article is blowing it out of proportion.
WardenRoss said:
This is a very good question. There is an exemption in place which allows for firearm transactions between direct family members. But here is the kicker; assuming there exists a registry, the original purchaser is on record along with the firearm and the family member is not. If the family member decides to gift or sell the firearm, red flags will be raised since the records will not match. The registered owner will present itself as a straw buyer.
Federal Register/ Vol. 63, No. 210/Friday, October 30, 1998/Rules and Regulations: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/federal-register-october-30-1998-on-nics
"§ 25.8 System safeguards.
(a) Information maintained in the NICS Index is stored electronically for use in an FBI computer environment. The NICS central computer will reside inside a locked room within a secure facility. Access to the facility will be restricted to authorized personnel who have identified themselves and their need for access to a system security officer...."
It goes on to qualify who may access the data. The information recorded general personal information (may/may not include social security no.) and gun type, ie. long gun or handgun.
"§ 25.9 Retention and destruction of records in the system.
(a) The NICS will retain NICS Index records that indicate that receipt of a firearm by the individuals to whom the records pertain would violate Federal or state law. The NICS will retain such records indefinitely, unless they are canceled by the originating agency. In cases where a firearms disability is not permanent, e.g., a disqualifying restraining order, the NICS will automatically purge the pertinent record when it is no longer disqualifying. Unless otherwise removed, records contained in the NCIC and III files that are accessed during a background check will remain in those files in accordance with established policy."
The concern is records are destroyed every 18 months. An audit is done every year and the audit results are stored. It does not say whether the audits are available to the public. My question is does the audit specify policy on how backed up information is treated?
On the form 4473, the ATF is not suppose to record this information but did they reveal their hand? Colorado News and Denver News: The Denver Post
Last edited:
mkk41
US Veteran
If grandson is a crackhead with an arrest record , do you want him to have guns?
If grandson is a crackhead with an arrest record and I know it, it is already a violation of state and Federal law for me to sell or otherwise provide him with a gun.
:roll eyes:No new restrictions needed.
kozmic
Member
If your grand kid is a crackhead then a trip to the woodshed is the first order of business. Then get him the help he needs and then think about transferring (or not) guns to him.
Hypotheticals are what drives the gun-haters. Common sense, historical data and reality is our defense. "What ifs" on this site don't help the cause especially if they are easily debunked by logic and common sense and existing laws.
Just my humble opinion.
Hypotheticals are what drives the gun-haters. Common sense, historical data and reality is our defense. "What ifs" on this site don't help the cause especially if they are easily debunked by logic and common sense and existing laws.
Just my humble opinion.
It appears Pat Toomey and Joe Manchin, amongst others, are jumping ship and going to vote for some form of UBC. Watch closely, and see who puts in amendments to any Bill at the last minute, the usual suspects being Schumer, Durbin, Feinstein, Boxer, etc.
jaykellogg
Absent Comrade
I am for universal background checks for firearms purchases. The word "universal" is pretty well defined, it means everyone. When you get to the point where a burglar has to do a background check on that gun he just stole, let me know. Until that time, I am against background checks that only apply to lawabiding. I do not see any need or benefit to report only sales between law abiding citizens with illegal transfers still off the radar screen. Also, our government has a very poor record of prosecuting people who violate the law the way it is written today.
geoff40
Member
In the aftermath of Sandy Hook, if all we lose on is background checks, we'll be darn lucky. Mass shootings have been our biggest threat for 20 years or more. Hold your breath we don't have another one any time soon.
From what I'm hearing they want background checks on any "commercial" gun sales, and from what I understand that means advertising a firearm for sale. That would eliminate the "for sale" section in our beloved Forum from the way I see it....because the SELLER would have to perform the check and keep documentation of it.
They claim they want "compromise"?? Well, then repeal the ban on selling automatic weapons manufactured after 1986, and require all stated repeal their restrictions on NFA firearms, send it to all states for ratification, THEN I might buy into their proposal.
They claim they want "compromise"?? Well, then repeal the ban on selling automatic weapons manufactured after 1986, and require all stated repeal their restrictions on NFA firearms, send it to all states for ratification, THEN I might buy into their proposal.
jaykellogg
Absent Comrade
cussedemgun
Member
If you aprove UBC, who do you think should run it, the Easter Bunny?
UBC is easier to pass than a per gun user tax.
UBC is not gonna be cheap to set up & operate properly.
To make it truly uniform, ALL guns will have to be registered!
Once in place, I can hear it now, "we need a user fee to off-set the cost".
How 'bout a tax stamp for the gun? You say it can't happen?
You say "once upon a time" the tooth fairy told you it wouldn't happen?
YAH, RIGHT, & we all lived happily ever after.
Seriously, with all the tuff talk, from my cold dead hands, etc. I can't believe there is so many so easily fooled by the idealism offered. TRUE, it would be great if a simple law would prevent the wrong people from having guns, - BUT
WAKEUP FOLKS! this aint no fairy tale world. The only way any guarantee will work is to deny EVERYONE possession
UBC is easier to pass than a per gun user tax.
UBC is not gonna be cheap to set up & operate properly.
To make it truly uniform, ALL guns will have to be registered!
Once in place, I can hear it now, "we need a user fee to off-set the cost".
How 'bout a tax stamp for the gun? You say it can't happen?
You say "once upon a time" the tooth fairy told you it wouldn't happen?
YAH, RIGHT, & we all lived happily ever after.
Seriously, with all the tuff talk, from my cold dead hands, etc. I can't believe there is so many so easily fooled by the idealism offered. TRUE, it would be great if a simple law would prevent the wrong people from having guns, - BUT
WAKEUP FOLKS! this aint no fairy tale world. The only way any guarantee will work is to deny EVERYONE possession
Last edited:
What gets me is the inaccuracy that currently exists on the 4473's. I have purchased guns in many different shops, and believe me there are a lot of clerks that don't know where a S/N is located on various guns, especially older S&W's. I have had to correct quite a few over the years to not list an assembly number.
Since with everything the Government does the "Devil is in the details", and we won't see the details until long after any new law may be passed. I am very concerned, and try to make all the phone calls I can whenever the NRA or my State Assoc. asks me to in order to contact legislators regarding any pending bill.
Since with everything the Government does the "Devil is in the details", and we won't see the details until long after any new law may be passed. I am very concerned, and try to make all the phone calls I can whenever the NRA or my State Assoc. asks me to in order to contact legislators regarding any pending bill.
smokindog
Member
And Uncle Joe is at it again! Can't we somehow get him restricted to the Shady Rest and Hooterville 
Biden mocks gun skeptics: ?We?re going to swoop down with Special Forces folks and gather up every gun in America? | WashingtonExaminer.com
Biden mocks gun skeptics: ?We?re going to swoop down with Special Forces folks and gather up every gun in America? | WashingtonExaminer.com
Almost forgot, add that Warner guy from Virginia, another turncoat. He'd go much further, gone on record as against "hi-cap" magazines.
Last edited:
jaykellogg
Absent Comrade
This could hurt the reelection of some senators. Only a third come up for reelection every two years and they expect some Democratic senators to vote against it. I think I will write to the NC senators and state my position (again).
joeintexas
US Veteran
I guess we really do take our privacy for granted down here, yesterday I walked into my lgs, looked over my new 1911 and walked out 10 minutes later with it.
I suspect any new Fed UBC law will be to close the so-called gunshow loophole.
I'm guessing they can't quite come up with the support for an all private sales law required to go thru an FFL,,yet,,like they just passed in NYS.
The polls generally favor UBC in some form,and most people polled don't understand what the current laws are anyway.
It's a safe vote for a member of Congress according to the polls and that's how most vote on hot button issues like this. They can for ever say they were for and voted for UBC in 2013,blah,blah,blah.
But one requiring all sales at a gunshow to go thru an FFL is a big step nonetheless. The NY style UBC is right behind it .
Further politics and tradgedy could easily push the issue again.
I was very surprised when at the OGCA show last month at the number of people that felt that no form of UBC would ever pass the Congress,,none.
They (being from several different States) felt they were safe from any such intrusion.
Wake up,,,
Just my thoughts,,
I'm guessing they can't quite come up with the support for an all private sales law required to go thru an FFL,,yet,,like they just passed in NYS.
The polls generally favor UBC in some form,and most people polled don't understand what the current laws are anyway.
It's a safe vote for a member of Congress according to the polls and that's how most vote on hot button issues like this. They can for ever say they were for and voted for UBC in 2013,blah,blah,blah.
But one requiring all sales at a gunshow to go thru an FFL is a big step nonetheless. The NY style UBC is right behind it .
Further politics and tradgedy could easily push the issue again.
I was very surprised when at the OGCA show last month at the number of people that felt that no form of UBC would ever pass the Congress,,none.
They (being from several different States) felt they were safe from any such intrusion.
Wake up,,,
Just my thoughts,,
Well my senator, Joe Manchin, has agreed to universal background checks!
He has lost my vote as of right now. I met his uncle, A. James Manchin, and he is a legend here in WVA. Joe isn't like his uncle that is for sure. All I can say is that it is a dark day for the Great State of West Virginia! I am embarrassed so I will not be posting for awhile! Sorry folks. Have a good day.
He has lost my vote as of right now. I met his uncle, A. James Manchin, and he is a legend here in WVA. Joe isn't like his uncle that is for sure. All I can say is that it is a dark day for the Great State of West Virginia! I am embarrassed so I will not be posting for awhile! Sorry folks. Have a good day.Just think about it. In California there's some in government that
want to make it the Law. Buy ammo give a thumb print. But wait they
also want everyone that buys ammo to submit to a background check.
They also want to limit the amount of ammo a person can buy per month.
They want to make it illegal to buy ammo over the internet, plus guns.
Red lights going off. Sorry sir can't sale that ammo to you. Why is that sir.
Report came back you don't own said gun for that cal ammo.
Your under arrest.
The ones that are working on these Bills want this put through the Federal level.
They'll just keep chipping away at our rights till there's none left.
If we all united this includes hunters, outdoor people I mean everyone.
Everyone give a couple dollars a month to the NRA or some other group.
Just think we could raise Billions and put our own people in office.
Hate to say it but most of the people I've talked to won't even do this.
I'm a disabled Vet. Small income but I give money every month, my wife backs me the whole way.
You all stay safe.
want to make it the Law. Buy ammo give a thumb print. But wait they
also want everyone that buys ammo to submit to a background check.
They also want to limit the amount of ammo a person can buy per month.
They want to make it illegal to buy ammo over the internet, plus guns.
Red lights going off. Sorry sir can't sale that ammo to you. Why is that sir.
Report came back you don't own said gun for that cal ammo.
Your under arrest.
The ones that are working on these Bills want this put through the Federal level.
They'll just keep chipping away at our rights till there's none left.
If we all united this includes hunters, outdoor people I mean everyone.
Everyone give a couple dollars a month to the NRA or some other group.
Just think we could raise Billions and put our own people in office.
Hate to say it but most of the people I've talked to won't even do this.
I'm a disabled Vet. Small income but I give money every month, my wife backs me the whole way.
You all stay safe.
Similar threads
- Locked
