Would you support a Universal Background Check that does NOT record serial numbers?

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Joined
Jan 28, 2008
Messages
21,954
Reaction score
10,298
Location
Tornado Alley
I put this on another forum but just for the sake of discussion I'll drop it here, it seems to fit.

What would you say to having a FOID card like Illinois and some of the other blue states? Here is how it should work in my mind.

1) We apply for a card.
2) They run a background check just like for an NFA weapon.
3) We get a card issued.
4) Then we could go to whatever FFL dealer and find the gun we want.
5) Said FFL dealer calls or logs in and makes sure that FOID card is still valid.
6) Pay money for said gun and leave with it.

No more need for Form 4473s, answering questions, recording make, model or S/N of weapon purchased since background checked out and card is confirmed as still valid. If you think about this it could in all reality do away with the need for NFA as we know it today. It would require that the alphabet agencies share info like they are purportedly going to under Obama's executive order. It would also require that Federal, State and Municipal courts participate in updating the information in the system. The mental health thing is going to be more difficult to do without violating constitutional rights to privacy, but if a court has adjudicated someone as being ineligible that would be covered by the court reporting.

They are going to try and make this mandatory on personal sales too. So there is going to have to be a method for this. It just seems that it would be logical to do away with the repetitive calls to the ATF for a check on every 4473. Also there is no reason in my mind to for any gun specific information to be involved in determining whether someone is eligible to have a gun. Would the ATF need all the resources they do once this is up and running? So a FFL might be more open to doing the check for private individuals if he didn't have as much paperwork to do and the record of the check being performed was kept at the federal level.

They are talking about guns coming in from areas with "lax" gun control being a problem and private sales being a "loophole". Okay if we plug that, and make it an honest and broad true/false, pass/fail condition as to whether a transfer goes through, then what difference does it make whether the transfer is a rifle, shotgun or handgun? .22LR or .50BMG or anything in between? It doesn't! A criminal isn't allowed to have any of them, so if we can affirm one's background it just doesn't matter. Therefore there is no reason to have a registry or ANY recordation of firearm information. How's that for compromise?

Like I said, I don't like this idea at all, but I figure it's coming anyway and what we are likely to get will be far worse.
 

n2sooners

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
1,571
Reaction score
0
Location
Moore
I don't think the federal government has any authority over intrastate commerce so they shouldn't be able to impose mandatory universal background checks. That said, I think trading UBC for eliminating record keeping would be a step in the right direction. But constitutionally, any universal checks would have to be run by the state and not the federal government. I don't support giving up ground, but in this case I think the record keeping is more intrusive than simply running a name with no records kept, so one step back and three forward.
 

ttownokie

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Jan 22, 2013
Messages
146
Reaction score
0
Location
Tulsa
There doesn't have to be an answer, that is trap, we don't need to do anything, responsibility for actions reside solely with individuals and not whatever tool they used. The restrictions we already have in place are unconstitutional, we should be fighting to remove those not just fighting to prevent new ones.
 

ttownokie

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Jan 22, 2013
Messages
146
Reaction score
0
Location
Tulsa
Any kind of a background check includes your full name and social security #. When the time comes for registration then later confiscation, they are not going to care what guns you own. They're just gonna mail you a form to fill out with all gun information. When that info is cross checked with the system that shows you have purchased 8 firearms in the last 2 years and you've only registered 5, the guys in black are gonna come knockin at your front door!

those are the tools who make their money selling as whores for said agencies that would invade someones home. No respect for those contractors. Anyone working for those agencies haven proven themselves willing to compromise on any issue to say just doing my job for a paycheck, screw em, ought to be ashamed of yourself as Americans.
 

WTJ

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Mar 6, 2009
Messages
3,719
Reaction score
0
Location
ORG/BPT/CWF
You bet, just as soon as they start making you go through a background check each time you buy a motor vehicle, a swimming pool, or fill a prescription.
 

abajaj11

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Mar 26, 2008
Messages
1,035
Reaction score
31
Location
Tulsa
I put this on another forum but just for the sake of discussion I'll drop it here, it seems to fit.

What would you say to having a FOID card like Illinois and some of the other blue states? Here is how it should work in my mind.

1) We apply for a card.
2) They run a background check just like for an NFA weapon.
3) We get a card issued.
4) Then we could go to whatever FFL dealer and find the gun we want.
5) Said FFL dealer calls or logs in and makes sure that FOID card is still valid.
6) Pay money for said gun and leave with it.

No more need for Form 4473s, answering questions, recording make, model or S/N of weapon purchased since background checked out and card is confirmed as still valid. If you think about this it could in all reality do away with the need for NFA as we know it today. It would require that the alphabet agencies share info like they are purportedly going to under Obama's executive order. It would also require that Federal, State and Municipal courts participate in updating the information in the system. The mental health thing is going to be more difficult to do without violating constitutional rights to privacy, but if a court has adjudicated someone as being ineligible that would be covered by the court reporting.

They are going to try and make this mandatory on personal sales too. So there is going to have to be a method for this. It just seems that it would be logical to do away with the repetitive calls to the ATF for a check on every 4473. Also there is no reason in my mind to for any gun specific information to be involved in determining whether someone is eligible to have a gun. Would the ATF need all the resources they do once this is up and running? So a FFL might be more open to doing the check for private individuals if he didn't have as much paperwork to do and the record of the check being performed was kept at the federal level.

They are talking about guns coming in from areas with "lax" gun control being a problem and private sales being a "loophole". Okay if we plug that, and make it an honest and broad true/false, pass/fail condition as to whether a transfer goes through, then what difference does it make whether the transfer is a rifle, shotgun or handgun? .22LR or .50BMG or anything in between? It doesn't! A criminal isn't allowed to have any of them, so if we can affirm one's background it just doesn't matter. Therefore there is no reason to have a registry or ANY recordation of firearm information. How's that for compromise?

Like I said, I don't like this idea at all, but I figure it's coming anyway and what we are likely to get will be far worse.
I already have an FOID. It's my citizenship.
If RKBA is a natural right, then the onus is on the government to prove that I have done something so bad I must be stripped from that right in their eyes.
FOID implies that RKBA is no longer a right, but a privilege, becuase the onus will then be on me to prove I am worthy of the FOID.
It's a subtle difference, but important, IMHO. FOID makes RKBA a privilege, not a right.
Once you have an ID card, then it can be denied.
Who decides who gets a card? The local sheriff? Or our friendly federal officer?
If anyone thinks FOID are a good thing, please check this link out:
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=698024

Your question leads to a larger question:
The anti-s are going to put out a bunch of choices...and say pick some.
And we need to say...we pick none.
It's not our fault that newtown happened. we are the good guys. we exercise our rights lawfully. we stop crimes.
Overall violent crime is down. mass killings are declining.
Anyone can take isolated incidents and blow them up.
So, my opinion is : NOt ONE INCH.
:)
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Top Bottom