Would Universal Background Checks be acceptable if no firearm information was required?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Basura Blanca said:
Fair enough but that's all the more reason to show them they're talking about a tiny subset of sales/transfers (which I assume is the case).
Click to expand...

Oh, people are being idiotic about this stuff. They are demanding "something." They are impervious to logical explanations or data that shows that there's no "something" that could be done with gun laws to change any of this. Half of them even acknowledge that any effort is basically speculative and hope-against-hope stuff, but they then go back to "we have to do something."

OK, let's find a "something" that is harmless to our rights or is perhaps even marginally useful. A no-record, no-gun-specificity BGC available to private parties... that would qualify, IMO.
 
With the current NICS check, there is no identifying information given about the gun other than longgun or handgun.

No serial numbers given, no make and model given.

The check is on the person, so the firearm info is irrelevant ( other than handgun or long, age restrictions dontcha know )

The biggest hassle I see with a UBC is time and money spent on said check.......then there is the idea that criminals wont bother anyway....
 
tarosean said:
we already have one... Anyone here can choose to transfer a gun through an FFL instead of a FTF sale.
Click to expand...

That's true, although you nearly always have to pay for the privilege. And it does create a 4473 record. A no-fee, no-record system would be better.
 
ATLDave said:
All you can tell from that is that they possessed those guns at one point in the past. As long as private sales are legal and not logged, then the last buyer-from-an-FFL can plausibly say "I sold it."
Click to expand...

Try selling that story to Colonel Bella. I think he would just kill you on the spot for resisting.
 
I say no to more gun control including background checks.

If you want to reduce carnage from these events, take gun control laws off the books and let more good guys carry guns without need for permit, concealment, or anything else. If about 5 people had returned fire, these whole events would have likely resulted in less death.
 
ATLDave said:
That's true, although you nearly always have to pay for the privilege. And it does create a 4473 record. A no-fee, no-record system would be better.
Click to expand...

granted but its always been an option for decades.. (My point)

I prefer to only sell to LTC holders, which is basically the same thing. (Licenses to Carry in TX- mnemonics may vary in your local)..
 
Balrog said:
let more good guys carry guns without need for permit, concealment, or anything else. If about 5 people had returned fire, these whole events would have likely resulted in less death.
Click to expand...

You have to realize that not everyone should be tasked with that nor should they be. Like it or not we are a minority.
 
I have no issue with UBCs. I already do a de facto background check on the few firearms I sell. They either go to friends that I’ve known for quite a few years, or I ask for a GA CWL. (Which is an approved substitute to a NCIC at any FFL.)

My problem with the idea of UBCs is the required FFL, and the fact that the only way it could be enforced is to have a registry. Without any registry, what is going to stop me from selling a gun to someone I know? Any 4473 that I am recorded on before the law, all I’d have to say is it was sold to someone before the law was signed. They couldn’t prove otherwise. My(our) word against theirs. To enforce it to the point where it had some teeth, there would have to be a registry that is automatically updated any time you buy or sale. Otherwise it’s useless.

Wyman
 
tarosean said:
granted but its always been an option for decades.. (My point)

I prefer to only sell to LTC holders, which is basically the same thing. (Licenses to Carry in TX- mnemonics may vary in your local)..
Click to expand...
I wonder if we have dealt with each other? I do alot of private sales around Texas from Carrizo Springs to Amarillo, texasguntrader.com has made me a poor man I'm afraid. I also only prefer to deal with LTC holders.
 
ATLDave said:
Oh, people are being idiotic about this stuff. They are demanding "something." They are impervious to logical explanations or data that shows that there's no "something" that could be done with gun laws to change any of this. Half of them even acknowledge that any effort is basically speculative and hope-against-hope stuff, but they then go back to "we have to do something."

OK, let's find a "something" that is harmless to our rights or is perhaps even marginally useful. A no-record, no-gun-specificity BGC available to private parties... that would qualify, IMO.
Click to expand...

The information in NICS is already supposed to be limited to 6 mos. retention period. I don't believe that that period is honored in 'the swamp'. Of course they can never find any evidence that swamp dwellers did wrong, but that .22lr bolt action you bought they can find in a heartbeat.
 
Does anyone here really believe that UBCs are being proposed because the politicians think it will stop mass shooters?

What happens if the mass shooter to be steals the weapon? What if he already has the gun? If he has no record .... no convictions, he'll come up clear on a nics check now or UBC later, so he gets the gun and ......

The politicians want UBCs as another step to gun bans. The UBC will not work, cannot work, and future psychos shooting people will only cause more unconstitutional incursions into our freedoms.
 
Let's look at it logically. Everyone here knows that a UBC would do nothing to stop the morons who want to become famous. However, the media and certain politicians have convinced the majority of citizens that a UBC law would fix everything. Even Trump is wavering towards this. (ugh)

So, to make the voters happy, a UBC law passes and Americans feel safe again..... until another moron wants to be famous.
So, with the UBC law in place, the same media and politicians convince the public that the UBC law has no teeth without registration. How can we prevent carnage if we don't know where the guns are?

So, step 2 would require registration of ALL firearms, not just new purchases/transfers.

Step 3, we all know what registration leads to. The left knows they can't get what they want in one fell swoop but if they keep taking an inch here and an inch there, total registration and confiscation is just a matter of time.

Now, it is estimated that there are between 300 million and 500 million firearms in the hands of the American people. Good luck getting those registered if/when the day comes. This will open up the black market even more than it is now. The bad guys will still be able to get guns and the good guys will be forced to give them up.

SO, long story short.... a simple law like a UBC is the first step to mandatory turn ins of all firearms in a decade or two. It has history behind it. It we keep giving to make them happy, pretty soon there will be nothing more to give.
 
The Evangelist Cowboy said:
I wonder if we have dealt with each other? I do alot of private sales around Texas from Carrizo Springs to Amarillo, texasguntrader.com has made me a poor man I'm afraid. I also only prefer to deal with LTC holders.
Click to expand...

since I avoid TXguntrader like the plague.. It is unlikely... :)
 
larryh1108 said:
Let's look at it logically. Everyone here knows that a UBC would do nothing to stop the morons who want to become famous. However, the media and certain politicians have convinced the majority of citizens that a UBC law would fix everything. Even Trump is wavering towards this. (ugh)

So, to make the voters happy, a UBC law passes and Americans feel safe again..... until another moron wants to be famous.
So, with the UBC law in place, the same media and politicians convince the public that the UBC law has no teeth without registration. How can we prevent carnage if we don't know where the guns are?

So, step 2 would require registration of ALL firearms, not just new purchases/transfers.

Step 3, we all know what registration leads to. The left knows they can't get what they want in one fell swoop but if they keep taking an inch here and an inch there, total registration and confiscation is just a matter of time.

Now, it is estimated that there are between 300 million and 500 million firearms in the hands of the American people. Good luck getting those registered if/when the day comes. This will open up the black market even more than it is now. The bad guys will still be able to get guns and the good guys will be forced to give them up.

SO, long story short.... a simple law like a UBC is the first step to mandatory turn ins of all firearms in a decade or two. It has history behind it. It we keep giving to make them happy, pretty soon there will be nothing more to give.
Click to expand...
This has been happening for a lot longer than most here think.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sullivan_Act
 
I would not support any federal legislation that would require a UBC, even under the limited circumstances described above. In my opinion, it is an issue that should be left to the states. The Interstate Commerce Clause has already been stretched and abused to the point of ridiculousness, so I'd rather not see if expanded any further into intrastate transactions. I would almost certainly oppose it in my state as well.
 
I'm in favor of making the prohibited person list public, and letting everyone have access to it. Some states are not diligent about forwarding prohibited person info to the system, and that would have to be fixed somehow. Make sure that all the prohibited persons are on the list: felons, people with dishonorable discharges, illegal aliens....
 
No. Not acceptable.
Easy answer is to use NICS. But, that's just a lookup database query, and is only as good as the information in its "black list" (and reported numbers vary from a low of 50% of known prohibited to a high of 68-72%).

But, that's not the point of a UBC, it's a front-door mechanism for disarmament, and rigged to disenfranchise all but the super-rich.
 
Simply put, if gun owners want to keep others from attacking gun rights, they’re going to need to provide an alternative solution and put a plan in place to address it.

Doing nothing won’t work forever.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
‘Universal Background Checks’ – Absolutely Not
2 3
Replies
72
Views
5K
Robert
Robert
M
  • Locked
Changed my mind on universal background checks
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
131
Views
7K
orionengnr
O
SharpDog
  • Locked
The Ghost Gun Issue as a Straw Horse
2 3 4
Replies
97
Views
3K
Pudge
Pudge
L
  • Locked
The illogic of universal background checks.
2 3 4 5
Replies
121
Views
5K
Al Thompson
A
Deanimator
  • Locked
Universal Background Check = Universal Registration.
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Replies
244
Views
9K
GEM
G
Back
Top