herrwalther
Member
- Joined
- May 1, 2013
- Messages
- 8,136
Expect a new wave of universal background checks to spin up over this one. Just what gun grabbers have been wanting.
Yes, UBCs are going to be hard to stop. That of course doesn't mean we shouldn't fight them, we should, but they may get them one of these days and if they do all the gun owner whiners and closet antis will tell us we told you so, we should have just given in. Meh, the heck with them, they'll still be whining about the next fight as well.A UBC law will be hard to fight with this vivid instance.
Yeah, but they were Power Poles!Do you know why the Volga Rivermen used Poles to propel their barges against the current?
They tried Romanians but they wilted
I'm beginning to look at all this through the prism of confiscation. Confiscation was once something that was not discussed in polite company; now it's on every politician's lips on the antigun side.We've gone all in on the "you'll get nothing and like it" strategy. Unfortunately, I think we're about to have a hard landing from that. We've also lost the messaging war - the efficacy of gun control is now assumed by most people and virtually all media. The only question, in their minds, is whether the profits of the gun industry are worth victims' lives.
Our counter-strategy must be to propose a background check system that does not create a de facto registry. Decouple the buyer/seller from the gun itself. The only way to do this is to bypass the existing FFL dealer structure. (FFL dealers would howl because the traditionally-structured UBC is an additional source of revenue for them.)
To me, this illustrates the futility of background checks. There will always be alternative sources for guns, and if the background checks close one door, an undocumented alternative will be used.
What seems likely to me is that background checks will make the process more expensive or unpleasant, thereby reducing the number of owners who will put up with the bureaucracy and increasing, not decreasing criminal acts.
The background check is supposed to be about the fitness of the buyer to own a firearm, not an opportunity to register who owns what possessions.
If it were merely a check of the individual's fitness then few would object to full ans accurate background checks... .
And prison overcrowding. Have to make room for for the truly evil, like the plastic straw offenders.
The antis have been after that from the beginning, they are just finally admitting it to the general public.I'm beginning to look at all this through the prism of confiscation.
If that is indeed what the law requires how did Law Enforcement learn so quickly that he was denied years ago?
So one question would be for private sellers, is how do I keep from selling a gun to Felon Bob? Do you personally feel comfortable with "dont' ask, don't tell"? Because if Felon Bob uses your/his gun, and the police come knocking, you're gonna be in a world of crap. Not just from the local law enforcement but from civil litigation.
One way around this is to use a system already in place.. demand your buyers have a CCP.
Pretty sure denied goes into a separate db than the proceeds that are deleted.. considering the fact that you have 3 days and appeals, etc.
In addition, since the 4473 has to be on file for 20yrs. I am quite certain they contacted the original purchaser and shoved a microscope up his/her you know what.
I fail to see how this helps the UBC arguement....seems to me it solidifies the fact that people who want a firearm, but are PROHIBITED under federal law...will still get firearms.
The fact it was a private sale does NOT change the fact he was PROHIBITED from acquiring a firearm under federal law
There are ways to have universal background checks without registration. One way would be for sellers to have direct access to the state agency doing the checking (or federal NICS), such as what we have here in Virginia on a voluntary basis. No record of the gun is kept. Something like that could be made mandatory.
But, for such alternate systems to be considered, they would have to be proposed by the pro-gun side. Sadly, that's not going to happen as long as the gun community takes the stance of stonewall opposition to everything.