Background checks as main focus?

[jkfletcher]

W.H. gun push narrows to background checks - Reid J. Epstein and John Bresnahan - POLITICO.com

Maybe they've heard the voices about rejecting bans and decided not to waste their time on something they know they can't outright win, and just decided to go the back way to unofficial registration for confiscation at a later date. At risk of sounding like a broken record, keep fighting it because it just might be working

 

[poptab]

and who is gonna pay for all these background checks?

 

[NathanJefferson]

They want universal background checks as a way to implement stealth registration. This type of legislation cannot be allowed to pass.

 

[fallenangel1]

Would you rather backgrounds checks or sweeping bans??

 

[Kirk Freeman]

False choice. As background checks will lead to sweeping bans.

 

[JRPLANE]

False choice. As background checks will lead to sweeping bans.

Amen brother

 

[Bunnykid68]

False choice. As background checks will lead to sweeping bans.

QFT and FTW

 

[indymike]

If this passes, this will sure line the pockets of the FFLs of the world. Having to meet at a dealer for every private transaction would be a pain in the ass and really sting private sales.

If they pass this, they should also implement something like an OPTIONAL background check card that is a photo ID permit to do private sales and has to be renewed online every so often to make sure no felonies, domestic battery convictions, etc.

I know lots of reasonable people ask to see an LTCH when they do private sales for this very reason. To protect themselves when they make a sale...it certainly makes me feel better to see one when I sell.

 

[fallenangel1]

Ive had bad experiences with delays when purchasing and have now been waiting since early Nov for my LCH to come in. I just figure most legitimate gun enthusiast have an LCH and therefore wouldn't have to deal with check's every time they purchase something new. So having maditory background checks doesn't sound all that horrible to me. As for private sales there may be a bit of paper work, one where an FFL fills it out or if its private party only you can put the buyers LCH # on the form to bypass having to go to a dealer.

I know some people don't want the government knowing anything about what they own or how many and that's fine that you fell that way. I just don't see this as being that big of a deal, on the surface. Then again that's how things happen, they take our rights away a little bit at a time and then before you know it you have to have checks and pay extra fees to purchase ammo or something even more ludicrous.

 

[NathanJefferson]

False choice. As background checks will lead to sweeping bans.

Double amen! We need to keep waking people up to the reality!

I don't know how many people I've had to explain this to over the past few weeks in a conversation similar to this:
"I don't mind if they ban assault weapons, I only have a pistol"
"A revolver?"
"no."
"They want to ban you magazines and register your gun."
"No they don't, they are just going after those EBRs!"
"NOPE!" Then I proceed to show them the proposed bill.

Same goes for several Fudds I know, since they have different proposals to ban punmp action shotguns, all shotguns with magazines over X number and your tube fed .22s!


Next they are ok with UBC.
"So you want to register your guns?"
"**** No! I'll never do that"
"And you are for UBC? Hows that work?"
BECAUSE 9 FEDERAL AGENCIES ARE PROVIDED AND KEEP ALL NICS CHECK DETAILS! (not to mention that even though there are laws saying the FBI needs to delete NICS data, I highly doubt it's 'completely gone' from their system too...)



ENFORCE THE LAWS ON THE BOOKS, DON"T MAKE NEW ONES!

 

[bwframe]

"Background Check " is the same code wording as "Gun Show Loophole."

 

[Lex Concord]

We should have legal access to RPGs, Claymores, & Cordite, and possibly community-held artillery.

I'd settle (for now) for manufacture, sale, and possession of MGs being legal again.

 

[Stschil]

False choice. As background checks will lead to sweeping bans.

Agreed!

I've floated this before, and believe it to be correct:

Aren't Private Sales a matter for the States?

The way I understand it, the .gov has claimed Interstate Commerce and the Supremacy Clause as the justification for NFA '34, GCA '68, and GCA '86, which is the only way USSC could swallow and accept them.

however, used merchandise is not subject to Federal Jurisdiction if the transferred within the State of Original purchase so long as both the seller and buyer are residents of that State

Am I correct in this line of thinking?

 

[poptab]

We should have legal access to RPGs, Claymores, & Cordite, and possibly community-held artillery.

I'd settle (for now) for manufacture, sale, and possession of MGs being legal again.

Well your just crazy. Think of the children man.

amidoingitright?

 

[NathanJefferson]

We should have legal access to RPGs, Claymores, & Cordite, and possibly community-held artillery.

I'd settle (for now) for manufacture, sale, and possession of MGs being legal again.

Well with proper permits and training you can get explosives, it is highly restricted, but not BANNED. MGs are BANNED. They want to BAN semi-autos.

Or they just want to create a database to track what guns you have, ammo you purchase and when you wipe your ***.

 

[Robert Richardson]

Just how would they enforce univeral background checks between private individuals?

 

[Bunnykid68]

Just how would they enforce univeral background checks between private individuals?

Actually be kind of easy, set up a bunch of stings and start hauling people in, it would make most people scared to do private sales except with friends and family. But, even friends and family have been known to turn on people for a reward.

 

[digitalphoenix]

Would you rather backgrounds checks or sweeping bans??

NO COMPROMISE.

 

[RobertaX]

Agreed!

I've floated this before, and believe it to be correct:

Aren't Private Sales a matter for the States?
[snip]...however, used merchandise is not subject to Federal Jurisdiction if the transferred within the State of Original purchase so long as both the seller and buyer are residents of that State

Am I correct in this line of thinking?

Nope. If your gun ever moved in interstate commerce -- or if it could affect it in any way (you selling your gun to someone means he won't buy a new one made in MA or MD, for example) -- then under Wickard v. Filburn, the Feds have a stake via the Commerce Clause.

Isn't that special?

Sadly, I lost all my guns except some very old revolvers in a terrible canoe accident recently. It's a real pity. I don't know why I had the assault weapon in there, or all the standard-capacity magazines, either.

 

[bwframe]

Actually be kind of easy, set up a bunch of stings and start hauling people in, it would make most people scared to do private sales except with friends and family. But, even friends and family have been known to turn on people for a reward.

Yep, that would be a breeze for them. Not to mention, lots of ways to get creative. Imagine every LEO out there listing a username in every classifieds section of every publication. Buying and selling for a bounty/bonus whatever you want to call it. No one could be trusted.