Background checks, round two?

It's a non-event. I had to fill out two forms for my last purchase. Entire process took <10 minutes. I'm not concerned about universal background check at all.

PabloJ said:

It's a non-event. I had to fill out two forms for my last purchase. Entire process took <10 minutes. I'm not concerned about universal background check at all.

Click to expand...

Does a nation-wide registry of all firearms/owners concern you? ...because that is what it would take to enforce UBC.

ShooterMcGavin said:

Does a nation-wide registry of all firearms/owners concern you? ...because that is what it would take to enforce UBC.

Click to expand...

Is that really how it's drafted? Thought the term "Universal" meant "all", meaning no private sales with exemptions for such things as family transfers?

Nothing to do but watch it, at this point. With the media frenzy losing steam in the wake of a fairly resounding defeat for gun control, they're fishing for more support in a Senate that has offered little. Their spotlight is dimming.

When they introduce actual legislation, we can kick into high gear and run down specific points of opposition. Until then, we wait... and build up.

Background check for online sales??..... So I need a background check to buy the gun online....and another to take possession from my FFL...?

I swear these people need to not be allowed to draft laws anymore...because they have no idea what they are talking about.

M-Cameron said:

Background check for online sales??..... So I need a background check to buy the gun online....and another to take possession from my FFL...?

I swear these people need to not be allowed to draft laws anymore...because they have no idea what they are talking about.

Click to expand...

Agreed; thought that was already in place given you have to ship to FFL if not in your local market.

They're still trying to push it through to have it die in the House. That was the intention from the get-go. Then it would become club to (theoretically) beat those evil, mean-spirited House Republicans in the 2014 mid-terms.

PabloJ said:

It's a non-event. I'm not concerned about universal background check at all.

Click to expand...

It concerns me in that Congress would be acting outside of its charter. They are allowed to regulate interstate commerce only. That makes it a big event.

It's a non-event. I had to fill out two forms for my last purchase. Entire process took <10 minutes. I'm not concerned about universal background check at all.

Click to expand...

Are you "concerned" about registration (without which this is all a nullity)?

How about the sort of de facto BAN that Chicago instituted merely by refusing to accept any registration forms?

How about having to get a background check if your brother, son, wife, mother or uncle wants to borrow your gun to go hunting or to the range?

Or your shooting buddy of 25 years is thinking about picking up a new ________ CCW for himself. He knows you have one sitting on the top shelf of the gun safe. You're more than happy to loan it to him for a few range trips....oh....their new bill would make you transfer it to him. Then....a few days later....he has to transfer it back to you. $$ spent both ways, trip to the FFL, etc.

Thanks no....I don't need government oversight on what I legally do with any firearm I own.

UBC is already here in some states where you cannot lend out a firearm to your spouse.

Correct me if I'm wrong, I think it is already illegal to lend your pistol to your spouse in New Jersey.

And Illegal in New York if the spouse doesn't have a pistol permit, but the other one does . Unless both spouses have pistol permits with the same pistol listed on both permits.

And Illegal in Illinois if only one spouse has an FOID and the other doesn't.

Maybe Illegal in Massachusetts too if both spouses don't have FID's. (Firearm ID cards.)

Akita1 said:

Is that really how it's drafted? Thought the term "Universal" meant "all", meaning no private sales with exemptions for such things as family transfers?

Click to expand...

You are correct, that is NOT how it is drafted, at least I think. I believe it says nothing about registration, and that's the catch. After they get UBC passed, they will say "ok, now we need to enforce it" as they push a bill through for registration of all firearms throughout the country. That is what it will take, in order to enforce a UBC law. How can you enforce background checks upon transfers without first knowing who has possession of what?

TX1911fan said:

How about having to get a background check if your brother, son, wife, mother or uncle wants to borrow your gun to go hunting or to the range?

Click to expand...

Wanna take it a step further, even... Let's say you are leaving the house and you have a long gun upstairs. Your wife/roommate/friend is staying at home. After you leave the house, possession of the gun has now, technically, been changed to your wife/roommate/friend. It will not be easy (or maybe possible?) to stay within the laws they want, nor will it be financially viable.

Unless the paragraph on a requirement for national record keeping is left out of any bill, I don't see the bill passing. I believe this was the main objection to the bill that was voted down.

Also, Colorado Democrats allowed revision to their CO bill to satisfy some of the objections here, e.g. no checks on transfers to immediate family members, provision for loaning gun in hunting season, etc. If the Senate added the changes made in CO, to the federal bill, there could be enough support for the bill to pass. (I hope not)

Mike

Allowing Congress to mandate a Federal background check for private transfers = ceding to them the unconstitutional power to regulate intra-state commerce. "Acting outside their charter" indeed.

MRH said:

Unless the paragraph on a requirement for national record keeping is left out of any bill, I don't see the bill passing. I believe this was the main objection to the bill that was voted down.

Also, Colorado Democrats allowed revision to their CO bill to satisfy some of the objections here, e.g. no checks on transfers to immediate family members, provision for loaning gun in hunting season, etc. If the Senate added the changes made in CO, to the federal bill, there could be enough support for the bill to pass. (I hope not)

Mike

Click to expand...

I have heard that according to the law, if you loan a gun during hunting season, and it is held/returned at a time outside of hunting season, a felony has been committed. Check for yourself before taking my word for it. I saw a Youtube video that said that, so take a look around.

Also, the provision for family members doesn't help if I have a friend visit my house and I want to go out to the store while they stay at home. That is a gun "transfer", and probably will become a felony.

...How does the family member provision prevent someone providing a firearm to their brother who is a violent felon? Oh yeah, we already have a law against that

More lies and shrill talk from the rabble rousers and muck rakers, nothing to see here move on.
Of course UBC will have to evolve into universal registration if it is to work.
They say the last bill made registration a crime but after it passes and there is another tragic mass shooting they will come needing another tool because they can't be sure of who is getting background checks until they know who has the guns.

Are you just trolling PabloJ? my last purchase I filled out 1 form and waited 3 weeks for the BG check to go through. Would that make it unacceptable to you?

I live in CO, this wont matter to me one bit since they are illegal now anyway. I still oppose it because I can still move somewhere where I have the right to sell my personal property.

Any way you wrap spoiled/dead meat, it still stinks; worse the second time around.

No UBC, not now, not ever!

MErl said:

Are you just trolling PabloJ? my last purchase I filled out 1 form and waited 3 weeks for the BG check to go through. Would that make it unacceptable to you?

I live in CO, this wont matter to me one bit since they are illegal now anyway. I still oppose it because I can still move somewhere where I have the right to sell my personal property.

Click to expand...

MErl, thanks for thinking outside the box and supporting us that don't live in the peoples' republik of CO!

PabloJ said:

It's a non-event. I had to fill out two forms for my last purchase. Entire process took <10 minutes. I'm not concerned about universal background check at all.

Click to expand...

Death by a thousand cuts....

No new gun control PERIOD

On-line sales referred to in-state private-party Armslist type transactions. It didn't change the current process when ordering a gun from an out of state FFL holder, shipping to your local FFL and executing the transfer there.

If they actually removed the "On-line sales" restrictions, you'd only be restricted from private sales at "gun shows" that fit their technical definition (i.e. You would have to walk across the street to the neighboring "arts and crafts show", or whatever, to complete the transaction without a background check). And you'd still be able to buy and sell guns with other private parties within your state that you contact on-line or otherwise. You would also be able to use your CCW License in lieu of a background check for face-to-face transactions at any FFL gun store in the country (e.g. I could drive to Wyoming and legally buy a gun and bring it home to Colorado).

And I don't know where you guys are getting your information, but by all accounts there wasn't anything in the failed bill that created a national registry, however it did make it a felony to create one.

mrvco said:

On-line sales referred to in-state private-party Armslist type transactions. It didn't change the current process when ordering a gun from an out of state FFL holder, shipping to your local FFL and executing the transfer there.

If they actually removed the "On-line sales" restrictions, you'd only be restricted from private sales at "gun shows" that fit their technical definition (i.e. You would have to walk across the street to the neighboring "arts and crafts show", or whatever, to complete the transaction without a background check). And you'd still be able to buy and sell guns with other private parties within your state that you contact on-line or otherwise. You would also be able to use your CCW License in lieu of a background check for face-to-face transactions at any FFL gun store in the country (e.g. I could drive to Wyoming and legally buy a gun and bring it home to Colorado).

And I don't know where you guys are getting your information, but by all accounts there wasn't anything in the failed bill that created a national registry, however it did make it a felony to create one.

Click to expand...

I agree with the bolded part. However...

How do you enforce the UBC law without a registration list of all firearms/owners? Is there another way that I have not thought of?