I understand there are some young people who don't agree with me. What's more concerning to me is that there are older people who should know better who are bought into the idea that background checks will fix it. For example, the OP who dismissed my concerns as "wanting to argue".No, and no. My point is that we spend far too much time trying to convince our own side that background checks and red flag laws just aren't that effective while I see little evidence that we're doing enough to educate voters.
Witness how the initiative process in some states resulted in a majority of the voters actually approving some pretty draconian gun restrictions while at the same time, in spite of our side's efforts to lobby our state legislators (and overwhelm them with evidence), they continue to draft, and pass, more and more gun control laws.
For every red state that passes a feel-good "Second Amendment Sancturary" bill or some type of bill to limit further restrictions, three or four states are coming up with additional restrictions. Clearly all our preaching to the choir hasn't worked, and our efforts to educate the voters are falling on deaf ears.
What should be more concerning to you all, as I mentioned before, the new gun owners (remember the pandemic gun-buying frenzy by first-time gun buyers?) are jumping through all the hoops to purchase firearms through licensed dealers, and for the most part have accepted the waiting periods, background investigations, redundant documentation and monumental paperwork hassles as normal. Beyond that, polling and surveys reflect that the general public has a favorable opinion of both background checks and red flag laws. Not so much waiting periods, but the fact is, the new wave of gun owners as well as then entire non gun-owning population approves of both these concepts.
One of the problems is that there is truly no way to quantify whether or not, or how many, homicides by firearms and criminal shooting incidents are actually prevented by UBCs and red flag laws. We only find out about the failures, and really, all that does is increase the push for additional restrictions. Every now and then it does come out that some miscreant wanted to shoot his ex-girlfriend, shoot up his former workplace or school, but didn't pass a background check for a purchase and wasn't enough of a criminal to steal a gun, buy a gun on the black market or couldn't figure out how to do a private sale (if legal in the state concerned). This then gets touted by some elected official, administrator, police chief or sheriff as a success of these types of laws.
So, the other side argues that these regulations work (and to the uninitiated, it all sounds perfectly logical), but we have no real way of documenting how they don't work -- without making it look like the laws and regulations need to be increased or tightened up. Finally, even if we could empirically prove that some of these laws actually do more harm than good, our lazy electorate will still believe that "it's doing something," which is better than doing nothing, because face it, Americans cannot understand that most of the time, the best laws are the least number of laws. Our system for too many years has operated on the principle that our leaders have to generate more laws, sign more laws in order to have the appearance of being good leaders.
Even though I detest Neil Young's politics, I remember that song, "Teach Your Children Well." Some things are starting to seem inevitable though, as we've created what has to be the most stupid electorate in the world. How else can one explain how The Squad keeps picking up new members?
Background checks
- Thread starter Axis II
- Start date
- Status
I understand there are some young people who don't agree with me. What's more concerning to me is that there are older people who should know better who are bought into the idea that background checks will fix it. For example, the OP who dismissed my concerns as "wanting to argue".
dogtown tom
Member
1. We don't have "de facto registration. Period. What your state decides to do does not apply to the rest of the country.
2. The "big picture" is federal law, which currently does not permit registration of Title I firearms.
3. "Texas glasses" ? Try on "The Overwhelming Majority of States" eyewear and you'll see that gun registration isn't "de facto" by a long shot.
Yeah, sure.
Last edited:
dogtown tom
Member
No sir, they aren't stupid.
Its not ATF, but the FBI.
They don't see squat because NICS is prohibited by federal law from keeping records of transactions beyond the business day when the status changed to proceed.
You get delayed because when your name is queried, multiple records are returned. One of those records is a person with the same or similiar name who IS a prohibited person. NICS can delay your transfer until they resolve that or on the Brady date. (three business days, beginning the next business day, excluding holidays, weekends or days state offices are not open)
You don't list your state. If you live in a state where a state firearm permit serves as an exemption to NICS....get one.
If not, look into opening a Voluntary Appeal File. The FBI will give you a UPIN. This is where you let FBI NICS keep your "file" open and your Unique PIN is used during the NICS check. That should eliminate most if not all of your delays.
DustyGmt
Member
It's amazing how many people have already resigned to a registry because they believe it already exists. Try convincing them otherwise. Kind of leads one to believe it might not be all that hard to implement one since so many people already believe there is one, I was one of them, I just assumed this was the case for some years in my early twenties.
I've heard it many times over the years, as recently as last week. Guy was talking about his son wanting to sell a gun that he (the father) had purchased and said that he would rather he didn't because the gun was in his name. I tried to explain it to him as far as my understanding of the issue but he was like "nope, I filled out the paperwork from a dealer, it's registered in my name". He thought I was not understanding him.
Last edited:
Nope, just the ones who end up harming themselves or others when not on their meds. Antidepressants and anxiety meds are a
Man we can tell someone has no life…
Yeah, i drove out there and fixed it. I didn’t knowingly break any laws there internet lawyer.
I’m not talking about special needs, etc. I’m talking this guy doing what he did and when he was admitted to the ER he began demanding to see a certain worker who had no clue who he was. We are thinking this was some sort of stalker type stuff. Thats why i said he was crazy. When he would just stare at the door and not answer any questions and violently ask for said female thats a little more than your average situation.
plainsdrifter
Member
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2021
- Messages
- 606
No offense but I don't believe they don't keep track of recent gun buys.
Jim Watson
Member
A 4473 and a bound book recording my name and the gun I bought, required to be retained by the dealer and subject to examination by the government sure sounds like registration to me. It just isn’t central registration.
dogtown tom
Member
How many people still think the "contiguous state restriction" is still in effect for rifles and shotguns?
Although that restriction disappeared in 1986, it hasn't stopped people from believing it.
Elkins45
Member
It’s not very good registration because I own several guns that appear in no bound book, or at least not with my name associated with them.
So you're cool with this guy stalking this woman as long as he doesn't have a gun? I can't imagine you really believe that's the solution.
My understanding [some w/better knowledge correct me], but those paper records are now being copied/digitized, with 24/7 ATF access.
Such access/storage is digitally searchable in a heartbeat -- depending on electronic access protocols.
Again, those w/ better insight as to actuals please chime in.
Such access/storage is digitally searchable in a heartbeat -- depending on electronic access protocols.
Again, those w/ better insight as to actuals please chime in.
dogtown tom
Member
Recording the sale of a firearm from a licensed dealer to a buyer isn't "registration" of that gun to the buyer. As the Form 4473 title says "Firearm Transaction Record". You can buy a gun from me today, give it to your nephew next week and no notice, record or permission is required from the government.
Gun registration is where the government requires that each subsequent sale, gift, trade or other transfer be documented from the current possessor to a new or different possessor.
dogtown tom
Member
Not sure how you came to that conclusion. No law permits "24/7 ATF access". In fact, ATF is limited to one compliance inspection of a dealers records per year.
If there is a bonafide criminal investigation or firearm trace request for a specific firearm....only that firearm record is involved.
If you think ATF can just knock on an FFL's door at 2am you are woefully misinformed.
Yeah, by the dealer.
The electronic storage of Form 4473's has been allowed for over a decade. That electronic storage is AT THE DEALERS PREMISES, not at ATF.
Now guys....
I asked (twice) for better data/knowledge from those 1st-hand knowledge, and included references as available
Please be dispassionate and polite.
then again.....
www.gunowners.org
politely debunk if/as better 1st-hand knowledge might be available
I asked (twice) for better data/knowledge from those 1st-hand knowledge, and included references as available
Please be dispassionate and polite.
then again.....
ATF Has Nearly 1 BILLION Records in a Registry | GOA
Schumer Proposes to Reward ATF for Breaking Registry Prohibition Today, GOA needs you to take action to stop ATF from continuing to build out a national gun registry. GOA’s Prior Investigation into ATF’s Registry Back in November of 2021, GOA uncovered internal documents showing that ATF had...
politely debunk if/as better 1st-hand knowledge might be available
Last edited:
Jim Watson
Member
This is, as the grabbers themselves say, "just the first step."
I would be concerned if they should trace a "crime gun" to me as the retail purchaser and start asking what I had done with it.
dogtown tom
Member
Well. it was a first step taken in 1968. A half century later and that second step hasn't landed.
I get about 6-8 firearm traces a year. If you weren't the one pulling the trigger you have little to worry about.
If the trace leads to your 4473, the dealer faxes it in and LE may pay you a visit. If you sold/traded/gifted the gun and know where or who it went to you tell them. If you don't remember you tell them that.
I'm convinced that the only real reason to do a firearm trace is to catch the dealer doing something wrong or finding a recordkeeping error. Of the 100+ trace requests I've had I know of zero crimes being solved.
Elkins45
Member
As would I, but only if the gun had been used to murder someone I knew or had interacted with in the past.
If a gun I bought on a 4473 but subsequently traded or sold ended up beside a dead liquor store clerk 50 miles away it would take a lot more than the 4473 to put me in jail. The fact I don’t have a history of crime, wasn’t in the area, didn’t leave any physical evidence at the scene, etc. still matters to both investigators and juries. Pinning a robbery/murder of a stranger on a retired science teacher isn’t an easy task for even the laziest or most corrupt prosecutor.
There was about a 10 year period in my gun collecting history where I bought several guns from an FFL but subsequently sold or traded them in private sales. I don’t lie awake at night worrying about whether those transactions will come back to bite me. I’ll cross that bridge if I come to it.
dogtown tom
Member
Then again...... that GOA "article" has been debunked every time it gets repeated.Now guys....
I asked (twice) for better data/knowledge from those 1st-hand knowledge, and included references as available
Please be dispassionate and polite.
then again.....
ATF Has Nearly 1 BILLION Records in a Registry | GOA
Schumer Proposes to Reward ATF for Breaking Registry Prohibition Today, GOA needs you to take action to stop ATF from continuing to build out a national gun registry. GOA’s Prior Investigation into ATF’s Registry Back in November of 2021, GOA uncovered internal documents showing that ATF had...
politely debunk if/as better 1st-hand knowledge might be available
ATF only gets a dealers firearm records when he goes out of business. Up until last year we could destroy any that were older than twenty years old. So the ATF never got them.
When those out of business records arrive in Martinsburg the first page is scanned and the actual 4473 is stored in a trailer/shipping comntainer in the parking lot.
When a trace requests comes in, the NTC clerk can view the microfiche scan, then goes out in the parking lot with a flashlight to search for the actual form.
If the dealer is still in business, they don't have anything to scan because ATF NTC doesn't have that form. Think for a second on the efficiency of a recordkeeping system where each dealer stores his own records and not ATF. ATF gets the moth eaten 4473's that may be decades old. That there.......ain't the foundation for an accurate registration system. It's literally decades old contact info.
But, but, but ......registration!!! If there was a centralized registry of firearms and their owners, ATF NTC wouldn't need to call me or email me when they needed a trace run. Would they?
Out of business records are OLD. As there is no federal registration that tracks a firearm after that initial Form 4473 is completed, ATF has no damn idea what a buyer has done with that gun.
6 pages of arguing and rehashing the topic of background checks and registration seems like more than enough for this go around.y thanks to those who try to use real world experience and citation of fact to support their argument. But, let's call it a day.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked