how will expanded backround checks be enforced?

Status
Not open for further replies.
It is not enforceable, except to prevent it from happening at gun shows.

And I do not see it happening, except in the Socialist states of California and NY.

It just happened in New Mexico, one of the most gun friendly states there is, thanks to a complete takeover of state government by rabidly liberal Democrats in the last election. The only exemption is sales between close family members. The law went into effect July 1st. There was also a big push for red flags laws but there were enough members in the senate against it that it didn't make it out of committee. The gov has promised to bring it back in next years session. This state is firmly in the socialist camp as of last January 1st.

The new law caused Walmart to stop selling guns in the state as any dealer was required to do the check and Walmart said they didn't have sufficient staff to deal with it and it would cost too much to comply. Personally I think their management was stupid. A simple sign at each store that said "Fee for background checks-$150" would have solved the problem nicely. If someone insisted they would make money off the deal but I would bet they wouldn't get one taker at that price and they would still be selling guns..
 
Last edited:
Someone uses a gun illegally. The authorities say - where did you get the gun? If you tell us, we might lower the penalties for your crime. Say in a traffic stop a pistol is found by someone who can't own one legally. Well, we will let you off on that if you tell us who sold it to you.

I know a guy who was in line to get into the gun show to sell his Sigma 40. A dude walks up and offers him a much better price. No ID, just cash. He sells it and thinks he did a great thing because he made some more money. Thus, he is the last point known for the gun. If the gun turns up in a crime and traced to him - don't want to be him.

If I sell, it's to a dealer or a known person with a LTC. I've asked before if you get a LTC or other permit/license - haven't you registered yourself?
 
Correct me if I'm wrong but the term I'm hearing from the top is "Meaningful Background Checks", I haven't hear the word "Universal". I'm waiting for details before I get too excited. Red Flag laws worry me more than UBCs.

"Meaningful" is just like "sensible" gun control laws!
In order to have 'meaningful" checks HIPPA laws will have to be violated (HIPPA was created to keep our Medical Info PRIVATE)
So in order to check on past mental health issues guess what??
 
Politicians don’t care whether a law works or not, but how it is perceived by the public! Perception is reality and they want to be seen as “doing something about gun violence.”! UBC has become the new battle cry and it’s touted as a “lifesaver “. The general public has no understanding of the issues and consequences so they believe what they are told. Never mind that doesn’t work, or that there is a hidden agenda.
 
Like most of the gun laws they pass it will just be another useless, unenforceable feel good law.
 
It just happened in New Mexico, one of the most gun friendly states there is, thanks to a complete takeover of state government by rabidly liberal Democrats in the last election. The only exemption is sales between close family members. The law went into effect July 1st. There was also a big push for red flags laws but there were enough members in the senate against it that it didn't make it out of committee. The gov has promised to bring it back in next years session. This state is firmly in the socialist camp as of last January 1st.

The new law caused Walmart to stop selling guns in the state as any dealer was required to do the check and Walmart said they didn't have sufficient staff to deal with it and it would cost too much to comply. Personally I think their management was stupid. A simple sign at each store that said "Fee for background checks-$150" would have solved the problem nicely. If someone insisted they would make money off the deal but I would bet they wouldn't get one taker at that price and they would still be selling guns..

The NM law put a limit of $35 on the background check. So, Walmart decided to bow out, and who can fault them?

At the same time, we are a bifurcated state. A good number of our Sheriffs went on record that they would not enforce this gross infringement, and counties declared themselves "2nd Amendment Sanctuaries". Our Attorney General told them that they must enforce the law, showing his hypocrisy when he has been silent on the number of "Immigrant Sanctuary Cities".

Now, our liberal governor is pushing to expand UBC to include background checks on both buyers AND sellers (???!!!???) as well as beating the drum for Red Flag legislation.

This is Kabuki theater at its very worst. The imposition of unenforceable laws in order to pave the way for more and more restrictions and infringement. Lots and lots of "Enemies, Domestic".
 
There will be some high profile cases to make the point. Then lots of folks will comply. The trace back of crime guns from manufacturers to stores and then to you - can be used. They will ask you where is the gun? You can say the BS of losing it in the river when fishing - expect a charge and the expense of defense.

If you use a gun in self-defense, the question of where you got it, will come up. Lying will screw you.

Thus, the law will activate if you come into contact with the criminal legal system. It's like burying your gun if there is an AWB. Most will stay hidden but if you use yours, you get a gun charge.

Thus, if there is such a law - do you want to use a gun bought by evading the law in a self-defense scenario? The jury might look askance at you.

Once the laws are in effect, the guns that avoided the laws are problematic in usage.
 
neither buyer or seller is likely to tattle on the other. with expanded backround checks both are now criminals.

Uh, how do you know that? Either could be a sting. Even if they're not, if either gets arrested for a crime they could turn on the other in a plea deal.
 
The NM law put a limit of $35 on the background check. So, Walmart decided to bow out, and who can fault them?

At the same time, we are a bifurcated state. A good number of our Sheriffs went on record that they would not enforce this gross infringement, and counties declared themselves "2nd Amendment Sanctuaries". Our Attorney General told them that they must enforce the law, showing his hypocrisy when he has been silent on the number of "Immigrant Sanctuary Cities".

Now, our liberal governor is pushing to expand UBC to include background checks on both buyers AND sellers (???!!!???) as well as beating the drum for Red Flag legislation.

This is Kabuki theater at its very worst. The imposition of unenforceable laws in order to pave the way for more and more restrictions and infringement. Lots and lots of "Enemies, Domestic".

I missed the $35 limit somewhere. I wasn't really upset about Walmart quitting and at that price I don't blame them. I live in one of the counties that the sheriff stated he would make no effort to enforce this farce because it is unenforceable. I'm sure you noticed the demographics between the sheriffs that agreed with the law and the majority that didn't. Come next January these people will be back beating the drum for more laws and with the current crowd in control in Santa Fe we will have them.
 
Machine guns have been registered since 1934. No confiscation .

How is the law enforced? Jail time and a huge fine.

Pennsylvania has had a backround check for handgun for many years. There is a penalties for not following the laws.

Only problem is criminals don't follow the laws.

Criminal not following laws !!!! :what:

We need a law against that !!!!! :cuss:
 
Machine guns have been registered since 1934. No confiscation .

How is the law enforced? Jail time and a huge fine.

Pennsylvania has had a backround check for handgun for many years. There is a penalties for not following the laws.

Only problem is criminals don't follow the laws.
Same in Connecticut. Private sales between Ct permit holders can take place anywhere you choose but all the same state forms have to be filled out and copies sent to the state by the seller and retained by buyer. A phone call to state dept of public safety has to be made at the time of transfer providing permit #s, names and all that jazz. Pretty much the same process as through FFL. All legal gun sales in Ct will result in the state knowing exactly what you own legally.
 
The idea is to create a culture of compliance. They want to shift perception to where having every gun being 'papered' is viewed as normal.
Thanks to the various "Law & Orders" that perception already exists. They do everything they can to create the false impression that New York style racially invidious gun controls are the "norm".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top