FBI-NICS Prepping For UBC's

[mugsy]

Bad idea...real bad
Itll drive gun sales under tha radar...resist the force, theryre working on you...

Well, the system as is is an "under the radar" system with no possibility of getting a BG check without filling out the current 4473. A simplified 4473-lite with no requirement for the weapon to be listed and limited to no record keeping would be a good thing. I'd support it as a voluntary option only. I do not however discount the concerns of those who say that an existing voluntary system could be the basis for a future call for mandatory checks -- but control advocates are already calling for that

 

[tRidiot]

I don't see any possibility it will be a "no record keeping" type of system, either, however.


Does anybody really think their whole plan (the antis, that is) is to give us the "option" to run background checks on people? Seriously? Like... "Oh, yeah, here, we want to make it easier for you guys to do things safely if you're concerned about a sale."

And yet... we're not allowed to run a check on a serial number to see if a gun pops up as stolen before we buy it? That makes sense?




Right.

 

[CAR-AR-M16]

I could also see ATF looking at the number of these "private transactions" you do in a certain time period and then going after you for dealing in firearms without a license.

 

[Glocktogo]

When given a choice between efficacy and control, the .gov will ALWAYS go for Option #2.

 

[mugsy]

I could also see ATF looking at the number of these "private transactions" you do in a certain time period and then going after you for dealing in firearms without a license.

That's true. ^^^^^^^
I'm already surprised at the number of "private collectors" at gun shows who have more guns than half the FFLs and are mostly selling not trading - yet little to no BATFE action. I assume it's because they have assessed most of them as low risk, sort of technical violations.

 

[mugsy]

I don't see any possibility it will be a "no record keeping" type of system, either, however.


Does anybody really think their whole plan (the antis, that is) is to give us the "option" to run background checks on people? Seriously? Like... "Oh, yeah, here, we want to make it easier for you guys to do things safely if you're concerned about a sale."

And yet... we're not allowed to run a check on a serial number to see if a gun pops up as stolen before we buy it? That makes sense?




Right.

You guys are harshing my pipe-dream!

 

[Fredkrueger100]

This could be a slippery slope that would eventually require all private sales to use the NICS. The gun information would not be known but information on the potential buyer could be recorded.

I think that is why the government is doing it. It's all part of the plan. The government is hard at work trying to figure out ways to set us up. And the American people are too dumb to do anything about it. We will all just sit back and watch this once great country erode away into socialism/communism.

 

[Catt57]

It's like the internet, nothing is every really lost. Someone, somewhere, will hang onto that information regardless of any intent or laws to the contrary.

 

[mightymouse]

Okay, I did two transfers today. When asked by the NICS person for "type of transaction", I replied, as I do in this type of situation, with "transfer of handgun", which heretofore was always accepted. But, today I was told that "transfer of handgun" (or long gun) was not an option. My options were: "sale", "private sale", or "return". So, I replied, "sale of handgun" and went on with the transfer.
I was discussing this with the guy I did the second transfer for, and I decided to again try "transfer of handgun" when asked for type of transaction. I was again told--by a different NICS person this time--that "transfer..." wasn't an option, and that "sale", "private sale" and "return" were my three options. So, I replied, "sale of handgun" and finished the transfer.
So, it is now possible for private sales in Oklahoma to go thru NICS via an FFL.

 

[twoguns?]

Okay, I did two transfers today. When asked by the NICS person for "type of transaction", I replied, as I do in this type of situation, with "transfer of handgun", which heretofore was always accepted. But, today I was told that "transfer of handgun" (or long gun) was not an option. My options were: "sale", "private sale", or "return". So, I replied, "sale of handgun" and went on with the transfer.
I was discussing this with the guy I did the second transfer for, and I decided to again try "transfer of handgun" when asked for type of transaction. I was again told--by a different NICS person this time--that "transfer..." wasn't an option, and that "sale", "private sale" and "return" were my three options. So, I replied, "sale" and finished the transfer.
So, it is now possible for private sales in Oklahoma to go thru NICS via an FFL.

So, one you notified of a handgun and one you didn't?