Thoughts on Background Checks for private sales?

yeah, and that 20 minutes is signing, notary notarizing and counter signing a LARGE ream of papers.

And it's not ignorance, you check the licence, you ask if they can buy the gun, and you have complied with the law, unless something tells you not to, then you don't pretty easy.

that you aren't checking out the buyer and finding out who his 3rd grade teacher is, well, that's NOT what the law says.

In Fl you ask for id, if theyhave a FL license and say they aren't a felon, and are allowed to own a gun, that's it. How would you know if someone was lying or telling the truth, there is no way to check. I don't think felons have something on their ID that says they are felons do they?
Obviouslly if a felon wants a gun, he can buy one from the fl gun trader, they almost never even ask for ID. I have posted in their announcements sections, that the only reason someone would pay more for a used gun is that they can't legally buy one in a gun store. It dosen't seem to stop anyone, that site is busier than ever. I actually bought a gun form a very nice guy, near me. He invited me to go shooting with his family who had a 15 acre place near where I live,
He had ID and his wife Kids and several expensive long guns with him, They were going shooting for the weekend on the property. But some of these guys are sleeze bags.
I met one guy who would not even speak, he was head to toe cameo and very shady, no ID. I walked away, I wasted 2 hours driving for nothing, so it's up to you to make the call.

I think that is the best solution. There are things other than gun sales where people want to know your background. Instead of having to pay for a background check every time you're involved in various transactions, it would be better to have a (scarlet) letter on your drivers license or state ID. You have to get a new drivers license if you're convicted of a "Letter" offense.

For gun sales, an F or DV indicator would be sufficient (covers felons, misdemeanor DV convicts, and shows residency). Some other things that could be helpful on the ID would be: DUI (multiple drunk driving convictions), $ (theft/embezzlement convictions), R (rapists), C (crimes against children), etc.

The do gooders would say this violates their privacy. But all these things are public record. Be glad we don't tattoo the letters on their forehead...

I'm sure fake ID's would sprout up though, so the tattoo solution is really better.

Mark, I really hope you aren't being serious. Hard to tell with it being the Internet and all.

Too many complicated issues come about just from requiring a background check. A background check on the surface is viewed a as way to prevent firearms from falling into the hands of prohibited persons. However, requiring a background check implies that some person be held accountable for a specific serial number (s/n for now on) until it’s reported stolen or re-registered. A national database would be needed that can a track firearm’s s/n to a specific living person. Without such a s/n to person and person to s/n relationship, a background check is unenforceable. Said differently, if authorities can’t determine who owns a specific firearm, there is no way to know who needed to get a background check. A whole new crime can come from not having a background check done for anyone that has access to one’s registered firearms even if the person who accesses them is not prohibited. No exceptions for spouse, children, mother, father, etc. Upon the death a registered firearm holder, the firearms would need to be re-transferred or turned in. Background checks may even trigger periodic firearms inspections to make sure a person did not illegally sell a firearm under the table.

Just my opinion,
chuck

Should we also require a background check on someone we wish to sell a car to to make sure they have a clean record and no DUI?
After all, drunk drivers kill more people than guns

steelerdude99 said:

However, requiring a background check implies that some person be held accountable for a specific serial number (s/n for now on) until it’s reported stolen or re-registered.

Click to expand...

Current background checks now =do not= (at least the national NICS check, I can't speak for the states that roll their own) record any information about the gun beyond "Handgun, longgun, other". No make, model or serial number info is presented to NICS.
Another TV myth.

And of course, we all know that criminals would instantly start following this law ...

Here is the problem with any registration law beyond an instant check:

Case in point: The Newtown Conn. School Shooting

The shooter/murderer had a diagnosed mental condition. The guns he used: A SIG, a GLOCK, And an AR15. All of those were registered to his Mother. She had doubtlessly bought them for her son, because his mental condition precluded his purchasing them. I highly doubt substitute-teacher-mom purchased those for herself, and kept them properly locked away from her mentally unstable son. No improved background check would have changed the outcome in any way. She would have passed all the background checks.

mgkdrgn said:

Current background checks now =do not= (at least the national NICS check, I can't speak for the states that roll their own) record any information about the gun beyond "Handgun, longgun, other". No make, model or serial number info is presented to NICS.
Another TV myth.

Click to expand...

mgkdrgn,
Exactly my point. Without a registration database, how do we know if a check was performed when the firearm is obtained?

chuck

Should we also require a background check on someone we wish to sell a car to

Click to expand...

No we should not, but on each car sale a background check is actually run by the dealership on the buyer for new or used car sales. It is required by law for them to do so.

On private personal sales there is no requirement for this. Should there be one, in my opinion YES. Keep all unlicensed drivers off the road, then maybe there would fewer deaths from auto crashes.

On a personal point, my dad at age 82 had his driver lic suppended because of blackout spells and drove his car into oncoming traffic causing a crash. After that he would go out and buy junkers and fix them up to drive. My brother and I for the next 2 years had to go to his house and steal his "car" to keep him off the roads. We had to do this like 4 or 5 times before he passed away. It was a real pain in the backside doing this.

My dad was a good man never in trouble, but even good people do bad things depending on circumstances.

Jim

Skribs said:

I used to think they were a good idea. Then I asked this question here and changed my mind. I can't remember which mod it was (maybe Art?) but there was a very good argument for why background checks AT ALL are a bad idea.

Basically, it boils down to these issues:
1) There is literally NO WAY to enforce regulations on FTF sales, meaning criminals will still be able to get guns that way.
2) Most mass shootings are done by people with no prior criminal record.
3) We are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. So why do we have to prove our innocence every time we buy a constitutionally-guaranteed weapon? Do we have to prove our innocence to prevent search & seizure? Do we have to prove our innocence to write a newspaper article?
4) As with all gun control, block access to guns and they'll use other weapons of opportunity.
5) People who really shouldn't have weapons shouldn't be allowed in public. That's why we have prisons. Stop filling the prisons with people who were arrested for victimless crimes, and start filling them with violent offenders.

Click to expand...

I agree with the above comments - TOTALLY!

No further comment is needed.

USAF_Vet said:

Mark, I really hope you aren't being serious. Hard to tell with it being the Internet and all.

Click to expand...

Actually, I'm mostly serious. I'd give in on the tattoo part, but having a card that indicates your potential disqualifications seems a lot easier than having to check people through a service.

I'm tired of the background check hassles whenever I want to help at school, want to rent something, buy a gun (because I always get a NICS delay), etc. This would be an instant check. All the other checks take time, and some require fingerprints. I've been finger printed so many times I'm getting tired of doing it. Will reduce the pool of "good people" willing to help when they subject you to inconvenient the microscope so often.

Sellers/landlords/schools could then look at the menu of "badness" presented on the card and decide if they want to go through with the transaction.

suemarkp said:

Actually, I'm mostly serious. I'd give in on the tattoo part, but having a card that indicates your potential disqualifications seems a lot easier than having to check people through a service.

I'm tired of the background check hassles whenever I want to help at school, want to rent something, buy a gun (because I always get a NICS delay), etc. This would be an instant check. All the other checks take time, and some require fingerprints. I've been finger printed so many times I'm getting tired of doing it. Will reduce the pool of "good people" willing to help when they subject you to inconvenient the microscope so often.

Sellers/landlords/schools could then look at the menu of "badness" presented on the card and decide if they want to go through with the transaction.

Click to expand...

Well, heck.....

My new computer has a little fingerprint scanner on it. It enters my passwords for me with a quick swipe of a finger. The government could do the same thing - they attach your criminal record to a database that stores your fingerprints and then any instant background check could come up based on a swipe of the finger, just like my passwords do on my computer. Shoot, let's attach your credit report, driver's license numbers, etc... to it too, how convenient that would be!

Or, let's implant a micro-RFID chip under the skin in the back of the hand and one wave of the hand across a scanner could call up your information. Let's make it even power enough that a police officer could carry a scanner that would alert them of the presence of criminal record hits nearby them and during traffic stops before they even get out of the car. Let's expand that so that post mounted scanners on the street could detect the identify of everyone walking by and alert police to the location of those with warrants. Imagine how safe that would make society!

(I am NOT a supporter of any of that.... just sayin' though).

If you buy the gun retail, or completed transfer paperwork when purchased, your name will be the last documented owner forever, unless paperwork is completed when you sell it or for a transfer (unknown to you) sometime down the road, or it's reported stolen. If you sell without a transfer or bill of sale there is a gun in your name that you don't have in your possession. There is little incentive for a current undocumented owner to require transfer documentation upon a FTF sale. And, no telling how many times the gun will change hands and what hands it changes into. But, your door will be the one knocked on if the gun is used in a crime and you'll be the one that will need to point the finger elsewhere. And, absent documentation that redirection of an LE investigation will be based on your word. This all matters to some, not others.

Coalman
um, not really, many many documented cases reported RIGHT HERE
were the ATF called on a trace, and guess what, they took the name and general description and that was that....

you can take your tinfoil hat off now.....

But, your door will be the one knocked on if the gun is used in a crime and you'll be the one that will need to point the finger elsewhere. And, absent documentation that redirection of an LE investigation will be based on your word. This all matters to some, not others.

Click to expand...

Which is all deliciously worrisome until you realize that absent any PROOF that you were present at or had anything to do with a crime, you're completely clear of any risk.

All you ever need to say is "I sold it." You can add, "...to So-And-So, of Such-And-Such City" if you remember the details. But you really can't be put in jeopardy simply because you once owned a particular gun.

This would lead me to believe that there is no correlation between the availability of firearms and violence.

Click to expand...

Ding! Ding! Ding! Winner!

The only correlation is that where there are more guns, guns are the more common choice of weapon. The USA has the highest firearm suicide rate in the world, but not the highest overall suicide rate; That title belongs to Japan, IIRC. Mexico has 4 times the murder rate of the USA (and theirs is probably underreported at that), but knives and bludgeon-type weapons are most often used.

Violent crime is primarily a socio-economic product. Availability of weapon types only affects what is used, not what is done.

Regarding back ground checks on private sales: NO!

I never require anyone to fill out paperwork when I sale them a gun, and I have sold many, many guns FTF. If someone wants me to fill out a piece of paperwork or snap a pic of my CHL, I don't mind them wanting to cover their butts if its stolen. My .02

I would favor the availability of access to the NICs or some equivalent state data base to do a quick background check on a potential buyer if you choose to on a voluntary basis. In many cases, it would end that sale before it happened simply because it is not required. But as a seller if you feel strongly about it, then you accept the consequences.

Some rebel even with something as simple as a receipt to document a face to face transaction or asking someone to see their ID.

The kid in CT was 20 years old. He could not legally purchase a handgun in my state other than face to face. Makes me even more wary. But to be rather blunt about it, I would not sell any of my firearms to anyone that is not 21 years old or older unless I know them pretty well.

I think there is likely a correlation between firearms and the type of violence committed. Certainly, this guy in CT would find it rather difficult to kill 20 6 and 7 year old children and 6 adults with anything other than a firearm in under 30 minutes.

mg.mikael said:

Somebody's tin-foil hat is abit too tight.

Click to expand...

A few years ago the administration proposed "sharing" background check info with other law enforcement agencies. Do you think this would make it more or less likely that it would end up being stored permanently?

Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk 2

22-rimfire: We already have access to the NICS db. It's called going to an ffl and doing the transaction through them. Also, in CT you need to get some sort of foid card in order to purchase (posses?) a handgun and that requires you to be 21.

Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk 2

Criminals don't care about ID. They just pay more money for the gun, eventually, someone will sell it to them on a local gun trader site.Greed rules, when you see a used glock going for $650.00-$700,with ammo, and it's 10 years old, you have to know the guy is not asking for ID. Why would anyone pay 150 over retail, for anything used. Or these old revolvers all pitted and rusted, for 6 or 7 hundred. They are just throw aways. A charter arms, or rossi revolver for $550, is quite common on FL guntrader. These guys are making a living selling crap to anyone who has the cash.

If someone wants me to fill out a piece of paperwork or snap a pic of my CHL, I don't mind them wanting to cover their butts if its stolen.

Click to expand...

This is important.

There is no requirement in most states to document private sales, and I personally do not for the most part.

However......

If you get the feeling that the person wanting to buy may be prohibited or have nefarious intentions (don't ignore your gut instincts!), there is nothing wrong with telling them you require a bill of sale and/or ID. If they have no problem with that, you can reasonably deduce that they're probably OK. If they balk big time, maybe you ought to reconsider selling.

If you are personally uncomfortable selling a gun without a BG check on the buyer, then put them on consignment at the LGS or pawn shop.

I don't support background checks on private sales in any way, shape or form. But I DO support exercising good judgement. I certainly don't want to be responsible for arming a criminal. Sure, they'll get a gun one way or another. That's a given. I don't want it to be one I sold, though!

Honestly if I could just do the search on my own and not have to pay an FFL a transfer fee I would do it every time. I'd honestly been fine with that. Let private citizens been able to run a check via NICS or in PA PICS, yeah that's not going to be easy to setup at first, but it would be worth it. This isn't about registering transfers or anything like that its about having peace of mind that you know that person isn't prohibited.