I am going to say it - I like the idea of universal NICS checks

[bushmaster1313]

I also think it important to separate the proposed universal NICS check from other more onerous legislative proposals.

P.S., I am a member of the NRA, cherish my right to keep and bear arms, own a NJ legal XM-15 E2S that I want to keep, and I can hit a 6 inch target at 100 yards with my .357 Magnum revolver.

 

[JVaughn]

Good Lord man, why?! This is how total registration starts, which always leads eventually to confiscation. It's like saying its ok to censor some speech or ban just one religion.

 

[rbernie]

I think it foolish to like something that has demonstrated ZERO impact on any gun related crime statistic. I further think it horribly selfish to like any restriction on other folks ability to buy a gun that, by the DoJs own statistics, imposes an incorrect block on more than ten thousand folk ever year. And that's the number that successfully appeal instead of just walking away....

For shame.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Well, I'm getting used to the fair weather "allies" here, so this is not too surprising.

 

[MOHunter]

You are Toast on this Forum!!! Many have come before you and got lambasted! ha ha ha Get on your flame proof underwear!

 

[Leanwolf]

So you believe that no worker peasant or serf in the United States should be allowed to sell his or her private property to another worker peasant or serf, without getting the permission of Big Brother and Big Nanny in D.C., huh?

Of course it can only follow that you believe anyone who would violate the dictate, should be sent to prison ... or killed by Big Brother's enforcers' guns, should he or she "make a furtive move" when being arrested.

L.W.

 

[SuperNaut]

You and the Brady Campaign makes three.

 

[M-Cameron]

I am going to say it - I like the idea of universal NICS checks

I am going to ask a serious question.......Why do you support Universal NICS checks?

 

[mberoose]

You know, you could always do what a lot of people do when selling a long gun privately - just require a pistol permit, even if the law doesn't.

To me, that's a far more acceptable personal insurance plan than the alternative of NICS checks every time, even though I don't believe in either. At the end of the day the law specifically stipulates you cannot KNOWINGLY sell to an ineligible person.

Not for nothin, but there's really no room to budge if you value your 2A rights...we know the agenda, we know the intent, we know the endgame. Give them an inch....etc. May not happen tomorrow, or 5 years down the road, but its been made crystal clear what the ultimate goal is.

 

[sig228]

I hope you still like the idea when you have to pay an FFL to do a transfer to one of your own family members.

 

[kimbershot]

buying in a lgs as a ct resident--my pistol permit was golden. didn't have any wait periods but i did have to fill out the fed and state paperwork. the dealer then called the state cops to get an approval and then the transaction was completed. state cops, dealer and i got paperwork describing the deal (registration).

in sc, my new state, i went through the procedures to obtain my permit. when i buy a gun at my lgs, i fill out the 4473, show my permit and drivers lic. give them the $$ and walk out with said gun an sales receipt.

retail purchases create a paper trail--to what extent, depends on the state.

i don't do private sales unless it's with a friend. i've sold via consignment or via gunbroker, as i just don't want to deal with strangers or assume any liability of selling to a crazy.

 

[Hunt480]

I am going to say it-your fearsome confused!!! or somethin?

 

[chipcom]

Make it transparent (no criteria added willy-nilly in secret, like Presidential kill lists and no-fly lists), ensure there is a fair appeals process, independent oversight and fund it adequately and I might consider it. Otherwise, fogedaboudit.

 

[Adam the Gnome]

Didn't that lunatic STEAL the guns he used? So none of this will ever prevent that from happening.
If anything we should get a safe from the gubbermint. Best gun control around, like leash laws!

 

[KAS1981]

Like all gun control laws, it might sound good on the surface.

However, universal background checks still would not prevent the illegal sale of arms between private parties.

It's already illegal to sell a gun to somebody you know isn't legal to own one. Criminals selling guns to other criminals don't care about that, they still do it. So why would they care about a background check requirement?

Sure, universal background checks might stop a few honest guys like me from unknowingly selling a gun to a bad guy, but it wont even come close to curbing the majority of illegal private sales.

 

[EBK]

Not just no But hell no

Why should I have to go througha third party to sell my own property?

 

[tyeo098]

I belong to a separate forum where there is a lot of camaraderie between members of the local area. We all know each other and vouch for each other regularly. We are all collectors, hunters, target shooters.

55 Million gun owners did not commit a crime today. Or yesterday.

You have a better chance of winning the lottery 4 consecutive times.

 

[ZeSpectre]

bushmaster1313

You are in NJ so I'm going to cut you a little slack and I'm being serious, not snide, when I say this. You, in NJ, have no idea just how badly NJ is a "nanny state", how much it regulates and controls and coddles and swaddles it's "citizens".

They don't trust you to pump your own gasoline for crying out loud.

Anyone brought up in that environment is going to recoil in terror at the notion that everyone should have an UN-infringed right to buy firearms....and then we'll deal with those who demonstrate their incompetence AFTER they've done something wrong. And if they've already done something wrong on a scale that they should be restricted from owning firearms....well then I wonder how they can be trusted in society at all and what they are doing out on the streets.

Yes, some people will get hurt doing it that way but nobody ever said freedom was safe and we sure won't waste all this time/money/effort trying to operate a department of "pre-crime".

 

[bushmaster1313]

I am going to ask a serious question.......Why do you support Universal NICS checks?

Serious answer. If we assume the correctness of laws that prohibit psychotics and violent felons from having guns, a universal NICS check is the proper, and I believe Constitutional, way to promote the goal of such laws.

Serious comment: The check has to be quick, cheap, no hassle, and the data cannot be used for wrong purposes. But in the same way that we say that the gun rights of law abiding citizens should not be denied because of what criminals might do if we have guns, we should not argue against background checks because of what might be done with the data.

Another serious comment: If someone believes that nobody should be prohibited from having a gun no matter how many violent felonies they have committed, you would be right to resist universal background checks.

The following was a fair and well reasoned post, except that we can't pump our own gas to protect the jobs of the gas station attendants.

bushmaster1313

You are in NJ so I'm going to cut you a little slack and I'm being serious, not snide, when I say this. You, in NJ, have no idea just how badly NJ is a "nanny state", how much it regulates and controls and coddles and swaddles it's "citizens".

They don't trust you to pump your own gasoline for crying out loud.

Anyone brought up in that environment is going to recoil in terror at the notion that everyone should have an UN-infringed right to buy firearms....and then we'll deal with those who demonstrate their incompetence AFTER they've done something wrong.

Yes, some people will get hurt doing it that way but nobody ever said freedom was safe and we sure won't waste all this time/money/effort trying to operate a department of "pre-crime".

 

[browneu]

Here we go again.

No its a terrible idea. How does this prevent straw purchases? How does this prevent someone stealing my guns?

Did I say no? No.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2

 

[bowserb]

I kind of agree with bushy13. I don't do many sales, but if I do I like the idea of a paper trail that proves I no longer own that gun--a third party trail. When I sold my G19, I wanted to use an ffl, but the ffl didn't want to do it. I have a bill of sale with Dr license, signature and address, but there is no third party as a witness.


Please excuse typos. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk.

 

[tyeo098]

This will not affect the crack dealer who slaps down drug money for a full auto AK.
It will only burden the law-abiding.

Criminals, by nature, will break this law.

Want to be paranoid that you're not selling to a criminal? Co-sign your gun.
All else fails... Both the Tech and AZ shooters PASSED their background checks. Newtown shooter stole his.

 

[bushmaster1313]

How does this prevent straw purchases?

It lets the police conduct sting operations more easily.

How does this prevent someone stealing my guns?

Makes it harder to sell a stolen gun.

 

[tyeo098]

It lets the police conduct sting operations more easily.

But it does not prevent straw purchases

Makes it harder to sell a stolen gun.

Not if I simply say "want to buy a gun?" and exchange cash for gun. You seriously think criminals who steal a gun are going to follow the law and go to an FFL to have it transferred?

 

[M-Cameron]

Serious answer. If we assume the correctness of laws that prohibit psychotics and violent felons from having guns, a universal NICS check is the proper, and I believe Constitutional, way to promote the goal of such laws.

Serious comment: The check has to be quick, cheap, no hassle, and the data cannot be used for wrong purposes. But in the same way that we say that the gun rights of lw abiding citizens should not be denied because of what criminals might do if we have guns, we should not argue against background checks because of what might be done with the data.

Another serious comment: If someone believes that nobody should be prohibited from having a gun no matter how many violent felonies they have committed, you would be right to resist universal background checks.

I am going to say right now, i dont believe people convicted of VIOLENT Felonies or people with mental illness who exhibit signs of self harm or harm towards others should be allowed to own firearms.

that being said, people with felonies are already legally barred from owning guns....and selling a gun to someone you believe to be barred is already a crime....but yet they are still getting guns.

as we all know, criminals do not obey the law.....what makes you think they are going to all of a sudden start getting background checks now?

a criminal isnt going to pay 'legal' market prices for a gun......they are going to buy a stolen gun for MUCH cheaper.

hell, i am a law abiding citizen who runs pretty much on the straight and narrow......and i have absolutely no doubt that i could have an 'illegal' gun in my hands with a couple phone calls.....if i can get one that easily....just imagine how easily someone who runs in illicit circles can get one.

the fact is, in order for this to have ANY effect...you would need to register 100% of guns. and as we all know, registration leads to confiscation.

now i do agree, NICS should be made available for public use(whether it be run through the local PD or other means).....but it in no sense should be made mandatory, all that will do would make it more of a hassle for legal gun owners to do business.