I see the point you were making now. For some reason I got stuck on one point and then replied......
Universal Background Checks for gun purchases
- Thread starter Minuteman
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast
Member Benefits:
No ad networks! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
I see the point you were making now. For some reason I got stuck on one point and then replied......
Minuteman, I agree with your well stated position. I am not opposed to an FFL making a call to verify that I am not a felon when I buy a gun. Right now, that system keeps most of the bad guys out of gun stores. I'd hate to see a time when a bad guy (read convicted felon) could walk into a gun store and buy a firearm without any sort of check. The lines are already too long! 
And I also agree with some of the other posts... Since I already have carry permits from other states (sadly not MD since I'm not of the anointed class... yeah, I'm jealous) and I have received a bunch of training, have a few certifications and a spotless record as far as the law is concerned, and have bought more than a few regulated firearms in the last decade, it seems silly (well, ridiculous and insulting) that I had to purchase yet another permit just to buy another handgun.
We certainly don't need more laws. We do, however, need to enforce ALL the laws we have now, like mandatory sentences for the use of a firearm in the commission of a crime. Every single time. And hopefully we can amend some of the laws we have now to be less restrictive on law abiding citizens.
And I also agree with some of the other posts... Since I already have carry permits from other states (sadly not MD since I'm not of the anointed class... yeah, I'm jealous) and I have received a bunch of training, have a few certifications and a spotless record as far as the law is concerned, and have bought more than a few regulated firearms in the last decade, it seems silly (well, ridiculous and insulting) that I had to purchase yet another permit just to buy another handgun.
We certainly don't need more laws. We do, however, need to enforce ALL the laws we have now, like mandatory sentences for the use of a firearm in the commission of a crime. Every single time. And hopefully we can amend some of the laws we have now to be less restrictive on law abiding citizens.
The worst part of the universal background check schemes, is it requires the registration of every gun you buy, to you,which is the 1st step that the powers that be need to confiscate them when they feel the need arises. Eventually they will require you to register every gun you own, so that they can track them, and then want to be able to come and check to make sure you have not transfered them without a background check. I would almost support it if there was a system set up were anybody could enter a person's info and it would kick back what they were prohibited from doing like child care, gun ownership, driving, etc.
Absolutely. This is the main reason to oppose 'universal background checks'.
Most people I know either only sell to friends, or ask to see a voter registration card as a very low level measure to see if they are a felon. That's not ideal, we can do a lot better; but agree, it shouldn't require 'registration'.
I don't think any of us want criminals being sold guns over the counter, so for that reason, a background check is reasonable and warranted. I'm not speaking to private sales. I think the law in this arena were it is now is generally working; we could do some tweaking to make it a bit more user friendly for the law-abiding folks who already have guns.
pcfixer
Ultimate Member
https://www.atf.gov/qa-category/national-instant-criminal-background-check-system-nics
As I understand the NRA, the government would like to save the information submitted by the FFL for the purchase and or transfer of a firearm. This would be a data base for registration. Registration = Confiscation.
Neither is Constitutional and both are a morality issue.
Stand up for Freedom. Registration is the prerequisite to confiscation, which is the prerequisite to dictatorship and extermination.
"Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American… [T]he 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
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20150626/ny-data-reveals-futility-of-gun-registration-laws
As I understand the NRA, the government would like to save the information submitted by the FFL for the purchase and or transfer of a firearm. This would be a data base for registration. Registration = Confiscation.
Neither is Constitutional and both are a morality issue.
Stand up for Freedom. Registration is the prerequisite to confiscation, which is the prerequisite to dictatorship and extermination.
"Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American… [T]he 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
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20150626/ny-data-reveals-futility-of-gun-registration-laws
That's not how it works in most states. It's more insidious. It identifies you as a gun owner, whether you have one or one hundred guns. It's not gun registration, it's person registration. We are betting that the request record is deleted from whatever database in NICS after the query.
Maryland just enshrines that query for all time. Or until the database crashes. Or the Chinese steal it...
I agree, it happens with every time you have to have your data entered into an ammo or powder log also. They wil never believe the boating mishaps that everybody talks about. The best we can do in the long run is fight back against these actions. Any handguns that you that have that were acquired before 1996 or long guns that were private sales without paperwork are the first ones that you will need to lose to the world, before they start asking questions about what you own.
Last edited:
Robert2888
Active Member
I am against any and all laws dealing with firearms including background checks. I will take my chances as long as I have a fair shot.
jessebogan
Active Member
- Feb 25, 2012
- 503
Universal back ground checks mean you will need to get government permission to sell or otherwise dispose of YOUR property. You will need "permission" to exercise an "Unalienable" RIGHT. That converts your RIGHT to something other than a right. A "privilege" is not a right.It is "Permission" GRANTED by the government. If we allow our rights to be converted to privileges, perhaps we don't deserve rights.
kcbrown
Super Genius
- Jun 16, 2012
- 1,393
Drugs that have complete prohibitions on them, such as crack cocaine, have no legal acquisition path. And yet, not only do criminals manage to get their hands on those drugs, they have built and maintain a thriving and lucrative market for them, so much so that the trillions the government has spent in its attempt to enforce its prohibitions has not made a significant dent in that market, much less shut it down altogether. This has been the case for so long that quite a few people (many of them the very same people who argue in favor of bans on firearms) advocate for lifting the bans.
If criminals cannot steal the weapons from those who legally own them, they'll import them. If they can't import them, they'll manufacture them. The experience with the drug trade proves that criminals will not be deterred in acquiring whatever they truly wish to acquire, and will manufacture it themselves if they must. Funny how people who don't give a shit about the law tend to do whatever they want, isn't it?
No, the "thinking" used by those who favor background checks is no more rational than that used by those who favor "gun free" zones.
The sphinx
Ultimate Member
We have UBC in DE (with some exceptions for family members and CCDW license holders) but nothing has changed. Just a feel good law is all.
pcfixer
Ultimate Member
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/sorry-mandatory-gun-registration-is-constitutional/
All of this will depend on the next election, President and possibly 6-8 Republican senators. Who will get to choose the next 2 or more supreme court
justices'.
Like many states have done already, and 90% of those "Will not Comply".
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2015/07/daniel-zimmerman/contest-entry-i-will-not-comply/
Next question is "Who will try and enforce those laws?"
Don H
Ultimate Member
The guy that shot my sister in-law got 30 years for the murder, 3 years for killing the family dog and nothing for using a stolen handgun. There's the problem.
Don H
Ultimate Member
Where required Voters ID card are free and can be obtained at many government agencies and should not be a burden to any voter.
In MD the HQL costs up to $200 and there's lots of hoops to jump through. Many people (like me) refuse to do so and forfeit their rights.
bitterkenny
Meh
I believe there is some rational thinking.
It's conscience manipulation and pandering, pure and simple. Taking advantage of various highly publicized shootings, one side created the Republican/NRA boogyman that's blocking a so-called panacea. It's yet another talking point that every Liberal Democrat parrots to hide their failures and get/stay in power and it's also easy meme and rallying cry for the uninformed to get behind.
Brooklyn
I stand with John Locke.
UBC does not have to lead to registration. But for that to happen we have to make our own proposal. And for that to happen WD have to stop pretending its pre 1934
There are ways to to UBC that do not require any record of purchase and in fact will render any attempt to compile such a record physically impossible. .
Perhaps someday out side will be ready to bring the proposal forward.. perhaps not.
There are ways to to UBC that do not require any record of purchase and in fact will render any attempt to compile such a record physically impossible. .
Perhaps someday out side will be ready to bring the proposal forward.. perhaps not.
pcfixer
Ultimate Member
You could be correct. BUT.
Not sure what you think about NRA. I was under the impression UBC were to be done thru NICS with record of that data kept in database.
kcbrown
Super Genius
- Jun 16, 2012
- 1,393
There is no form of UBC that does not lead to registration of the PURCHASER. There are indeed forms that do not lead to registration of the firearm, but that doesn't help when the person is known to have a firearm.
Regardless, there is no form of UBC that actually does anything worthwhile. Even if we acquiesce on this, I guarantee we'll get nothing truly worthwhile in exchange for it. See, e.g., how well FOPA has actually "protected" firearm owners when they actually needed that protection. The only federal legislation that would be worth a damn will be impossible to get. It would be like asking the Republicans to get behind a strong gay marriage protection bill in exchange for some social program or other. Not gonna happen.
The anti-RKBA crowd is opposed to firearms on religious grounds in the same way that many Republicans are opposed to gay marriage. It is a central component of their position, one they will not give up precisely BECAUSE they are religiously wed to it.
Regardless, legislation that is passed and which empowers the citizenry can just as easily be rescinded. All it takes is a temporary political shift. So at best you'd be buying a little time. Without the backing of the courts, such legislation will be worthless in the end. This is in stark contrast to legislation such as the Civil Rights Act, which FOLLOWED judicial support for those rights.
No, our situation is very different, and we'd better start figuring that out.
(Sent with Tapatalk, so apologies for the lackluster formatting)
Last edited:
I am interested to know how the request for a UBC can be made such that saving it as an piece of data is physically impossible?
