Does Universal Background Checks = Tracking?

Well, that’s interesting because every FFL I have gone go explains what it is the proceeds to tell them a make and number after explaining if it’s a pistol or long gun. Maybe it’s just the ones I’ve been to but on multiple occasions they have done this. Think about it this way, if there isn’t info associated with it then what’s the point in filling out the 4473 to begin with? Either way, they know more than you think. The gun can be tracked to a point. Don’t believe me, ask someone in the atf or law enforcement. How exactly do they come up with that info if nothing is kept?

4thPointOfContact said:

You might consider exactly what information is transmitted to FBI/NICS when a 4473 is called in.
No Manufacturer
No Model number
No Serial Number
No Caliber information

Kinda hard to track anything without that information, isn't it?
The NICS check (as admitted by the ATF) only tracks to the first person the firearm is transferred to and doesn't go beyond that, Federally.

Click to expand...

Well, that’s interesting because every FFL I have gone go explains what it is the proceeds to tell them a make and number after explaining if it’s a pistol or long gun. Maybe it’s just the ones I’ve been to but on multiple occasions they have done this. Think about it this way, if there isn’t info associated with it then what’s the point in filling out the 4473 to begin with? Either way, they know more than you think. The gun can be tracked to a point. Don’t believe me, ask someone in the atf or law enforcement. How exactly do they come up with that info if nothing is kept?

4thPointOfContact said:

You might consider exactly what information is transmitted to FBI/NICS when a 4473 is called in.
No Manufacturer
No Model number
No Serial Number
No Caliber information

Kinda hard to track anything without that information, isn't it?
The NICS check (as admitted by the ATF) only tracks to the first person the firearm is transferred to and doesn't go beyond that, Federally.

Click to expand...

You also kind of contradicted yourself in the same statement. You just said that the 4473 doesn’t have specific info, which you are correct, but then you turn around and say in the same breath that by the atf’s Own admission that it can only be tracked to the original buyer. Well, if nothing is kept as far as records, whether 4473 or not, then how do they know who the first buyer was?

SilentSTalker, The 4473's don't presently go into a database, unless an FFL shuts down and then sends their records to ATF. I am pretty sure that they digitize them then, but not 100% certain of this.

Here is how guns are tracked by ATF: They go first to the manufacturer/importer, who leads them to the distributor, who leads them to the selling FFL, who then produces the 4473. As such, it constitutes "registration" to the first buyer.

As of right now, when you sell to a private party (in a free state) the chain is broken. UBC would require tracking all the way down the chain, thus it requires registration in order to be enforceable.

You sir, are correct. However primitive this system is, it indeed keeps records. If you have ever been an FFL or talked to an FFL you would also know that it’s not uncommon for the atf to come Check the books at any time. They have also been known to copy Said records even tho they are not supposed to. At any rate, there is already a form of registration that exists to a point today. That’s what I’m driving at. I happen to live in one of those free states that don’t track private sales, luckily. I hope you guys see my point. Besides, I, like many, have already been through ridiculous background checks for other reasons, add in NFA items, etc. they know more about us then you guys would like to think. I don’t agree with any of it but it’s hard to run from unless you live i a cabin in Montana and hardly have anything to do with the outside world and pay for everything in cash. With that being said, the current system is crude and the FFL is only required to keep records for a certain amount of time. So even tho they have all the info they probably need at this time it sure doesn’t make it easy. Anything more than the current system tho, imo, would lead to a registration/confiscation scenario unless it was a system like alex, I believe it was, mentioned earlier. I like the idea of his system he describes, but at the end of the day, it still does nothing to curtail anyone obtaining anything illegally. So what’s the point?

Again, you cannot legislate evil out of existence. You cannot at this point, make guns disappear. All anything more than the current system will do is disable honest law abiding people from being able to arm and protect themselves. The criminals will still have them and the illegal gun making market will be booming. So, again I say, what is the point in us giving up anymore rights or adding anything extra to these ridiculous laws already on the books? We DO NOT give up anything else. Period. Assuming they confiscated them all from law abiding people and some idiot with an illegal gun does something crazy horrendous to garner the attention of the media. What are they going to do/ban then? At that point we will have given up our rights for absolutely nothing. I don’t see why it’s so hard for people to grasp this.

AlexanderA said:

You would keep the authorization code given to you by the buyer and verified by you through the NICS portal. That way you are protected if the gun is misused and then traced to you (using existing procedures). No new record would be made of the gun.

Click to expand...

What?? If the buyer is issued a code number there will have to be a name associated with it. A code number with no name as to whom it was given is useless and proves nothing. A buyer could give me a code obtained from a friend or family member who had purchased a gun and received a code. How would I know?

AlexanderA, your idea of compromise is the government wants to cut off one of my fingers and the compromise is I get to decide which finger.

Kaybee said:

You go in to a shop, you get a check, if you clear, and they sell you a gun (or not) with no records. Why should there be one? You are a law abiding citizen.

You selling your own gun to a stranger, you guys meet at the shop, he gets a check, you sell him the gun. No record required. Gun shops can make a little money off this but they also offer a safe place to complete the transaction.

Click to expand...

That involves FFL dealers. According to the rules FFL's have to follow, the dealer would have to log the gun into his inventory (enter it into his "bound book") and have the buyer fill out a Form 4473, wherein the gun is described. That exactly is the "backdoor registration" that we're trying to avoid.

Now, if you're proposing a carve-out special procedure in which the dealer doesn't enter the gun into his "bound book," then this doesn't have any advantage over allowing the individuals to have direct access to the NICS portal on their own. (Most dealers would be highly skeptical of doing it that way.)

Anyway, involving a dealer means that the dealer will charge a fee for his services.That fee is likely to be many times more than the nominal fee for the online NICS access.

Walkalong said:

I don't know what a "Quisling" is.

Click to expand...

Quisling = traitor. Vidkun Quisling was the collaborator who led the puppet government of Norway under German occupation in WW2.

Walkalong said:

You continue to say we are going to lose so we need to compromise.

Click to expand...

I've said that there are two conditions: (a) that the political winds have shifted against us, so that we are likely to lose, and (b) that we can get something substantially positive out of the deal. If either of these things isn't true, then it's pointless to talk to the other side.

In other words, we have to continually assess the landscape surrounding gun politics, and at the same time prepare the proposals that we are willing to put on the table, when the time is right. What I see now on the part of the pro-gun side is reactivity, not proactivity. In the long run you can never win if your only tactic is defensive.

stchman said:

I've often wondered what the difference between a Universal Background Check and the current 4473 that is in place right now.

Click to expand...

Simple. The current Form 4473 (and the NICS check that goes with it) applies to purchases from FFL licensed dealers. Universal Background Checks would extend this system to all transfers of guns between unlicensed individuals. Most UBC proposals would have the individuals go through dealers to finalize their transactions (thereby leaving a paper trail that might be de facto registration). What we are discussing here are alternatives to FFL dealer involvement.

George Dickel said:

AlexanderA, your idea of compromise is the government wants to cut off one of my fingers and the compromise is I get to decide which finger.

Click to expand...

No, that's not what I'm saying. I want to see substantial rollback of gun restrictions (particularly those involving the NFA) and I think a non-registration UBC system might be a way to get these rollbacks. They (the antigunners) trade something that they want for something that we want. Or, if they don't deal, they are the ones who would carry the onus of being obstructionists.

George Dickel said:

What?? If the buyer is issued a code number there will have to be a name associated with it. A code number with no name as to whom it was given is useless and proves nothing. A buyer could give me a code obtained from a friend or family member who had purchased a gun and received a code. How would I know?

Click to expand...

I think I explained most of this, in my original suggestion in this thread. Anyway, I'll recap. We have an existing NICS database. A prospective gun buyer would go to an online NICS portal, enter his driver's license information, and, if approved, would be given a unique approval number. (He would charge the dollar or two fee for this service on his credit card.) This approval number would be good for one transaction, and would expire after a couple of days. The buyer would give this approval number, and his driver's license, to the seller, who would verify his identity and then go to the NICS portal, which would confirm that the approval number had been issued to that person. The sale could then proceed. No record would be made of the gun. In fact, there would be nothing to indicate that the sale had even been completed. (The seller's call to the NICS portal would void that approval number for further use.)

DeepSouth said:

The obvious problem to that is the millions of people (mostly older) that simply don’t do technology. Heck, I’m not even yet 40 and I don’t know what a block chain is, nor do I care. And your suggestion is for me to trust and use it as a requirement for selling a gun.

It’s a good question because their is no good answer.

Click to expand...

Using such a system would require no more technical knowledge than it takes to post here.

denton said:

Using such a system would require no more technical knowledge than it takes to post here.

Click to expand...

So my mother wouldn’t do it without assistance, my father in law either, none of my remaining grandparents, my dad MIGHT.... more likely he’d just say that’s a stupid law and not comply.

Can I do it from my phone/iPad, because I don’t have a computer anymore.. is so what if my phone gets stolen? Will they have access to all that information if they’ve looked over my shoulder and saw my passcode?

See the problem?

SilentStalker said:

Again, you cannot legislate evil out of existence.

Click to expand...

The debate over gun control reveals a fundamental difference between the conservative and the progressive temperament. The former realizes that the capacity for evil exists within every person, and that it always will. The latter believes that evil is something that can be eliminated by government coercion. Thus the advocacy for limitless federal power that is neither possible nor desirable.

SilentStalker said:

Assuming they confiscated them all from law abiding people and some idiot with an illegal gun does something crazy horrendous to garner the attention of the media. What are they going to do/ban then? At that point we will have given up our rights for absolutely nothing. I don’t see why it’s so hard for people to grasp this.

Click to expand...

Hoping the "crocodile will eat me last" is a poor survival plan, and a worse code for living.

Immediate impulses to stave off pain or danger are often less important than the long-term consequences of running from the fray. Neither history nor experience suggests that mollifying aggressors is helpful.

DeepSouth said:

So my mother wouldn’t do it without assistance, my father in law either, none of my remaining grandparents, my dad MIGHT.... more likely he’d just say that’s a stupid law and not comply.

Can I do it from my phone/iPad, because I don’t have a computer anymore.. is so what if my phone gets stolen? Will they have access to all that information if they’ve looked over my shoulder and saw my passcode?

See the problem?

Click to expand...

All legitimate issues, but easily resolved.

denton said:

All legitimate issues, but easily resolved.

Click to expand...

Maybe, but the amount of people that simply wouldn’t do because they don’t know how would be in the millions.

DeepSouth said:

Maybe, but the amount of people that simply wouldn’t do because they don’t know how would be in the millions.

Click to expand...

Many millions more would REFUSE to do it because they knew to a certainty that it's a sham and a trap.

Should Universal Background Checks also be required for journalists, religious groups and public speakers?

drunkenpoacher said:

Should Universal Background Checks also be required for journalists, religious groups and public speakers?

Click to expand...

Enemies of the 2nd Amendment are usually enemies of the 1st as well.

Deanimator said:

Enemies of the 2nd Amendment are usually enemies of the 1st as well.

Click to expand...

And many are just useful idiots being lead by others.

As a person who completes private sales on occasion, I wouldn’t mind having a system where private citizens could have access to the NICS database. The details of how that could be done while maintaining privacy would need to be worked out, of course, but they aren’t insurmountable. A voluntary system...

In terms of a FFL based UBC system, of course this is just a step toward requiring a registry. How can one prove a gun was transferred illegally unless they knew who possessed it at the time the law was passed? Otherwise everyone could just lie and say “I bought/sold it before the law took effect.”

If you fill out a 4473 to buy a weapon there is a list and a trail. The ones the communists want to track are the ones where you buy an old revolver from a neighbor widow who's husband passed. When the original purchaser of the piece dies the trail can go cold quickly depending on how their firearm was sold given away.

Did NFA '34 stop the criminal use of firearms?

Did the GCA '68 stop the criminal use of firearms?

Did NICS stop criminal use of firearms?

Will UBC stop the criminal use of firearms?

No, No, No, and No.

Be free men, refuse to have your rights infringed, and just say NO!