Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Ron on September 04, 2019, 11:20:23 AM
-
The push is coming to require background checks on person to person gun sales.
Why have I never heard anyone suggest opening nics to all citizens?
I would probably use it if I were doing a sale to someone I didn't know.
-
The left FINALLY (at least, according to reports) has an instance where some murderous nutjob got his gun from a person to person sale.
They know this is the necessary step before registry and confiscation, so OF COURSE they will be grabbing this one with both hands.
-
The push is coming to require background checks on person to person gun sales.
Why have I never heard anyone suggest opening nics to all citizens?
I would probably use it if I were doing a sale to someone I didn't know.
I would love to have NICS available but I'm afraid whatever process that resulted in would also make it mandatory.
-
Why have I never heard anyone suggest opening nics to all citizens?
Because potential employers (or anyone) could do instant background checks on applicants (or anyone) and the left doesn't want that.
-
The left FINALLY (at least, according to reports) has an instance where some murderous nutjob got his gun from a person to person sale.
They know this is the necessary step before registry and confiscation, so OF COURSE they will be grabbing this one with both hands.
Holy Wah! We've had ONE INSTANCE OF A PERSONAL SALE OUT OF 329 MILLION PEOPLE!! We must DO SOMETHING!! If is saves one childs life.....
-
Because potential employers (or anyone) could do instant background checks on applicants (or anyone) and the left doesn't want that.
This.
I think they should prohibited / not prohibited status on driver's licenses, so anyone could do a "background check" with no paper trail... which is defacto gun registration.
-
Can't remember where I saw it (probably here). We should have truly universal background checks. Just put a tag on the driver's license whether or not the person is eligible to purchase a firearm or not. In other words, make the background check universal so it doesn't have to be done every time you buy a gun.
-
Or, we could treat free adults as free adults and not require background checks for anything at any time.
;/
-
Objection: it isn't a loophole, it is an intended feature of a free people embracing their inherent right to self defense.
Don't adopt progressive verbiage.
-
Objection: it isn't a loophole, it is an intended feature of a free people embracing their inherent right to self defense.
Don't adopt progressive verbiage.
Hear! Hear!
-
Can't remember where I saw it (probably here). We should have truly universal background checks. Just put a tag on the driver's license whether or not the person is eligible to purchase a firearm or not. In other words, make the background check universal so it doesn't have to be done every time you buy a gun.
If you're out of jail, you've done your penance. A good bit of those folks are in there for malum prohibitum bullscat anyways.
If you're safe enough to be out and among the masses, a pistol doesn't make you any more dangerous compared to what you could do with a google search, 3D printer, and/or a home depot run.
-
Objection: it isn't a loophole, it is an intended feature of a free people embracing their inherent right to self defense.
Don't adopt progressive verbiage.
I agree with you.
This morning I heard a "right wing" radio personality call it a loophole.
That leads me to believe this will be where the Rino's roll over and show their belly, again.
-
I agree with you.
This morning I heard a "right wing" radio personality call it a loophole.
That leads me to believe this will be where the Rino's roll over and show their belly, again.
It's called controlled opposition for a reason. Here's another applicable term: controlled flight into terrain.
Basically, stop acting like the Republicans, of any flavor, are supposed to be on your side. Their job is not to be on your side; their job is to distract you with meaningless feigned resistance so you never foment an actual viable resistance.
-
I think if the Federal Government could ban all private firearms sales, they'd have already done so in the 1968 GCA, or even just on pre-ban rifles during the '94 AWB.
Granted, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn means that the fed.gov can in theory regulate the sale of anything even if 100% intra-state, on the crappy pretext that it affects items you might have bought in interstate commerce instead.
But I really think we'd have had UBC's or forcing all private sales to go through FFL's already if they thought they could do it, no?
-
^^^Many states, including Washington, now have UBC and all private sales through a FFL. The nose of the camel is already in the tent.
-
If you're out of jail, you've done your penance. A good bit of those folks are in there for malum prohibitum bullscat anyways.
If you're safe enough to be out and among the masses, a pistol doesn't make you any more dangerous compared to what you could do with a google search, 3D printer, and/or a home depot run.
A relevant tangent: Ammon Bundy is in the news again, at least locally, because he tried to buy an AR-15 and was denied via background check. I can't recall what his final status was when he got out of jail. I'm not sure if it helps or hurts that he told the newspaper he would buy from a private party or else build one (which would also require a background check).
Side note to the tangent - in Idaho, if you have a CCW, you can bypass the background check when buying a gun because Idaho figures they've already done a good enough background check on you. I'll bet real money right now that if UBC goes through at the federal level, they will say that is illegal to do at the state level. I'm pretty sure some other states do the same thing, so I hope they all fight it if UBC comes to pass.
https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/northwest/idaho/article234666967.html
-
Because potential employers (or anyone) could do instant background checks on applicants (or anyone) and the left doesn't want that.
Why would it be any more open to abuse than the background check systems we already have, or that employers are already using?
The system could be designed to require a one-time code that the seller has to get from the buyer. Or some other security measures could be employed.
-
In my part of the world, a couple of small local gun stores have come out in support of universal background checks. Why? They would be ones to do the checks, and as middle man they could charge a nice fee that would be about 100% pure profit for the store. I'm guessing $50 per transaction, like most around here charge to process internet sales.
-
In my part of the world, a couple of small local gun stores have come out in support of universal background checks. Why? They would be ones to do the checks, and as middle man they could charge a nice fee that would be about 100% pure profit for the store. I'm guessing $50 per transaction, like most around here charge to process internet sales.
Yeah, in CA they charged $50-$75 where I lived. It seems to be less than half that in Idaho. There's a ton of little guys that only do transfers for people who buy guns online. Even the local military surplus guy does it, and all he sells are vehicles, no other surplus stuff.
In states where it's still possible to do it, if they pass UBC, I suppose a guy could have a good side gig opening up a NICs check business out of his house. $10 a pop for all comers or something like that.
-
In states where it's still possible to do it, if they pass UBC, I suppose a guy could have a good side gig opening up a NICs check business out of his house. $10 a pop for all comers or something like that.
My understanding is that you need an FFL to be able to run a NICS check.
-
Objection: it isn't a loophole, it is an intended feature of a free people embracing their inherent right to self defense.
Don't adopt progressive verbiage.
I don't remember who or where, but I remember a discussion about the AWB years ago and one of the talking heads on the tube called compliance with the law a loophole.
-
My understanding is that you need an FFL to be able to run a NICS check.
I know. I thought they did away with a lot of those "kitchen table" FFLs by making the process harder, but when I look at local transfer FFLs at the Internet gun sites, there seem to be a lot of residence addresses and businesses like hardware stores and stuff around here.
-
I know. I thought they did away with a lot of those "kitchen table" FFLs by making the process harder, but when I look at local transfer FFLs at the Internet gun sites, there seem to be a lot of residence addresses and businesses like hardware stores and stuff around here.
I thought those were done as well. Guess we were wrong. So, InstaUBC is a possible business franchise opportunity for APS. Who's in? :lol:
-
I think it was in the Clinton years that I lost my FFL: BATF wanted to see a bricks and mortar store dedicated to firearms sales, plus the fee went up from $30/year to $ 300/year. I don't know the current fees and requirements.
-
I thought those were done as well. Guess we were wrong. So, InstaUBC is a possible business franchise opportunity for APS. Who's in? :lol:
Better get your FFL before they replace you with a computer ...
-
It is not a background check. It is a registration scheme. If it were a "background check", all they need to know is whether the person is eligible to purchase a firearm. They want to know what gun, how many, and serial numbers. That is a registration effort.
-
I know. I thought they did away with a lot of those "kitchen table" FFLs by making the process harder, but when I look at local transfer FFLs at the Internet gun sites, there seem to be a lot of residence addresses and businesses like hardware stores and stuff around here.
NH has a ton of kitchen FFLs. A friend of mine had his FFL for his gun coating business that he ran from his basement.
-
It is not a background check. It is a registration scheme. If it were a "background check", all they need to know is whether the person is eligible to purchase a firearm. They want to know what gun, how many, and serial numbers. That is a registration effort.
Yes.
Guns without a paper trail are necessary for the second amendment to deter tyranny.
-
(https://www.msgo.com/data/attachments/195/195323-a058e27404db6cfcb7820ead55158004.jpg)