Would Universal Background Checks be acceptable if no firearm information was required?
- Thread starter Aim1
- Start date
- Status
I’d accept the op proposal as part of a compromise where we get
-constitutional amendment that puts term limit of 10 years on all fed employees and elected officials
-close the border completely. Deport everyone here who isn’t a citizen
-a balanced budget
-repeal of all current gun laws except fopa
-constitutional amendment that puts term limit of 10 years on all fed employees and elected officials
-close the border completely. Deport everyone here who isn’t a citizen
-a balanced budget
-repeal of all current gun laws except fopa
FROGO207
Member
^^^^^Not asking for much are you.
I agree this would be a good start for us.
I agree this would be a good start for us.
The problem with that is that all it takes is an executive branch decision to add a person to the 'no-fly' database for example.
That means that the executive branch can abrogate your rights without judicial review, ie without a warrant.
I think it should require due process and a warrant to take my 2A rights away.
CoalTrain49
Member
Lots of states are POC (point of contact) for the dealer. The FFL doesn't contact NICS, they contact the state and the state contacts NICS. It depends on the state where you live if your name and firearms info goes into a state database. The FBI has access to that information. Nothing is going to change there if a nat'l UBC is passed by congress. For many of us it's already too late to be moaning about registration.
NICS misses about 10% of those who are prohibited to purchase a firearm. Lots of things would have to be changed if NICS is going to work as planned. Right now it's a joke.
Case in point. I have a concealed carry license and I carry. In this state I can walk into a store with a concealed weapon and have to wait 10 days to pick up a new pistol. The state law was recently changed to 10 days. It's happened that I was never given a proceed and the dealer just sold me the pistol anyway. He was able to do that because NICS/FBI ran out of time to get it right. The system is broken and would require millions to be fixed.
Personally I'm not opposed to a UBC but it won't work unless the state runs it and with that you will get registration.
Last edited:
CoalTrain49
Member
Deanimator
Member
Here's my alternative solution: REPEAL ALL FEDERAL GUN CONTROL LAWS.
They will spend millions, just look at what they will spend on Medicare for all, Eliminating Fossil Fuels, Forgiving Student Loans, etc.
BSA1
member
er ,actually all of the above are all or part of all of the Democrat candidates for President platform. In fact they are getting more and more against being able to. Us and own a firearm.
Then why have UBS's?
What is your source of information for that statement?
What am I getting in exchange for surrendering my current right to buy, sell and trade firearms for total Government permission to own a firearm?
Giving a person your name, dob and Social Security number sure makes identity theft easy. In addition with that information a few minutes on Goggle I will also have your address so I can make it one of place I can burglarize to get guns and ammo.
No need for to worry about "gun registration" as you have effectively made the 2nd Amendment as worthless as the paper it is printed on.
What you want is people control.
Last edited:
Mowgli Terry
Member
In this state, Tennessee, it works differently. I go in and to by a modern firearm. The 4473 is completed. Dealer faxes 4473 and data on gun including serial number to the TBI. There is a background check and the number of the firearm is run through the system. On two separate occasions I have been buying a handgun when a Tennessee Bureau of Investigation officer confiscated the firearm as it had been reported stolen on a police report. I had rather the firearm be identified as stolen there rather than on me at some future date. The failure of the system is a failure to report criminal history and stolen firearms. This situation is aggravated by inconsistent reporting locally and owner's not having kept serial numbers. I don't have a problem with this system as I have seen it work. Here, the system works very quickly. Also, it's possible for dealer to run numbers prior to a trade etc. Data is coming to light that several mass shooting involved "legal sales" that were that way due to poor reporting. There are some impressive numbers of people who have been turned down nationally for firearm purchases. Have it your way. Let's shut this down because of gradualism and the potential of abuse. BS
Last edited:
I mean, that’s great internet gun forum blather I guess.
larryh1108
Member
Although this has some merit, I believe that it is the various state laws that have stepped way over the boundaries. The majority of the absurd laws are with the states with the biggest anti-gun government.
Yeah it’s mostly state laws that are determining what’s restricted in any given area as opposed to federal.
huntsman
Member
You want to give more power and credence to a system that’s already exhibiting serious issues? Not to mention a system that could be abused by gun grabbers when the retake power?
I’m against just “doing” something because the mob demands it, this is a raw emotional reaction and that usually means trouble.
Don’t even get me started on using a SS# as an Identifier, it was supposed to be for tax purposes only.
I’m against just “doing” something because the mob demands it, this is a raw emotional reaction and that usually means trouble.
Don’t even get me started on using a SS# as an Identifier, it was supposed to be for tax purposes only.
armedwalleye
Member
So, as a buyer, you'd give your SSN to an unknown seller to call it in? Not me.....
If you think your SSN is not readily available on the web for anyone who wants it, you may want to sit down for some bad news...
Sistema1927
Member
Just say no.
Elkins45
Member
It could be set up so that a potential buyer runs themselves through the system and the system prints out a ‘ticket’ that has the date, buyer’s name, address and a PROCEED instruction, along with a unique verification number. The seller could call up the automated system and verify the number is valid, then simply record that number as proof they had sold the gun legally.
If you bought a gun that had a 4473 after the date the law was enacted and no longer had it in your possession then you would need to have recorded a sale number in association with that gun. You don’t have to remember the buyer’s name and the system never knows what gun he is buying. This isn’t a perfect solution because there would still be a record of every request, but at least the details of the gun itself wouldn’t be attached to it like is the currently the case with the 4473 form.
I hate the idea of eliminating private sales. I hate it even more if they force me to pay an FFL to do the transfer. If they want to make background checks universal then they need to let us peons have access to the system.
BSA1
member
I will ask this question again;
What am I getting in exchange for surrendering my current right to buy, sell and trade firearms for total Government permission to buy, sale, trade and own a firearm?
What am I getting in exchange for surrendering my current right to buy, sell and trade firearms for total Government permission to buy, sale, trade and own a firearm?
Tommygunn
Member
I don’t want a UBC for several reasons, most all ready being stated. The other reason is the fact that if someone runs me, my brother’s records come up due to him stealing my identity and using my name as an alias. I have to have/use a UPIN for the NICS check to keep from getting denied.
George P
member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2018
- Messages
- 7,772
Add in the elimination of the IRS and the 40,000 federal law enforcement agencies all running around uncoordinated with each other.
armedwalleye
Member
True dat, but it's one thing to be one of a million random victims of identity theft; it's something else entirely to serve yourself up.....
Again, the overwhelming likelihood is that you are already being served up to strangers in Romania. At least you'd have a name and a face to go with the counter-party to a FTF sale, as opposed to some Russian cyber-gangster that even the FBI can't touch.
We're very fortunate that the entities that extend credit (or services on credit) have gotten so much better at detecting ID fraud, and "fixing" the problem themselves in terms of not allowing someone to open a cell phone account in your name - or at least catching it soon thereafter. I once had a letter arrive telling me that T-Mobile knew they had opened 3 cell accounts in my name but that weren't mine and to disregard any bills. The bills came two days later! Their fraud detection unit was running ahead of their billing department.
Hardest ID theft issue I ever encountered was someone filing a false tax return "for" me, claiming a refund (something I haven't seen in about 2 decades). Took the IRS forever to clean that up.
We're very fortunate that the entities that extend credit (or services on credit) have gotten so much better at detecting ID fraud, and "fixing" the problem themselves in terms of not allowing someone to open a cell phone account in your name - or at least catching it soon thereafter. I once had a letter arrive telling me that T-Mobile knew they had opened 3 cell accounts in my name but that weren't mine and to disregard any bills. The bills came two days later! Their fraud detection unit was running ahead of their billing department.
Hardest ID theft issue I ever encountered was someone filing a false tax return "for" me, claiming a refund (something I haven't seen in about 2 decades). Took the IRS forever to clean that up.
- Status
Similar threads
