Does Universal Background Checks = Tracking?

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Kaybee, Mar 14, 2018.

?

Does Universal Background Checks = Tracking?

  1. yes

    62 vote(s)
    81.6%
  2. no

    14 vote(s)
    18.4%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Walkalong

    Walkalong Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2006
    Messages:
    67,524
    Location:
    Alabama
    Exactly.
     
    DoubleMag likes this.
  2. SilentStalker

    SilentStalker Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,578
    Location:
    Somewhere in the U.S., London, or Australia
    Well, that’s interesting because every FFL I have gone go explains what it is the proceeds to tell them a make and number after explaining if it’s a pistol or long gun. Maybe it’s just the ones I’ve been to but on multiple occasions they have done this. Think about it this way, if there isn’t info associated with it then what’s the point in filling out the 4473 to begin with? Either way, they know more than you think. The gun can be tracked to a point. Don’t believe me, ask someone in the atf or law enforcement. How exactly do they come up with that info if nothing is kept?
     
  3. SilentStalker

    SilentStalker Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,578
    Location:
    Somewhere in the U.S., London, or Australia
    Well, that’s interesting because every FFL I have gone go explains what it is the proceeds to tell them a make and number after explaining if it’s a pistol or long gun. Maybe it’s just the ones I’ve been to but on multiple occasions they have done this. Think about it this way, if there isn’t info associated with it then what’s the point in filling out the 4473 to begin with? Either way, they know more than you think. The gun can be tracked to a point. Don’t believe me, ask someone in the atf or law enforcement. How exactly do they come up with that info if nothing is kept?
     
  4. SilentStalker

    SilentStalker Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,578
    Location:
    Somewhere in the U.S., London, or Australia
    You also kind of contradicted yourself in the same statement. You just said that the 4473 doesn’t have specific info, which you are correct, but then you turn around and say in the same breath that by the atf’s Own admission that it can only be tracked to the original buyer. Well, if nothing is kept as far as records, whether 4473 or not, then how do they know who the first buyer was?
     
  5. Sistema1927

    Sistema1927 Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2004
    Messages:
    7,260
    Location:
    "Land of (dis)Enchantment"
    SilentSTalker, The 4473's don't presently go into a database, unless an FFL shuts down and then sends their records to ATF. I am pretty sure that they digitize them then, but not 100% certain of this.

    Here is how guns are tracked by ATF: They go first to the manufacturer/importer, who leads them to the distributor, who leads them to the selling FFL, who then produces the 4473. As such, it constitutes "registration" to the first buyer.

    As of right now, when you sell to a private party (in a free state) the chain is broken. UBC would require tracking all the way down the chain, thus it requires registration in order to be enforceable.
     
    DeepSouth likes this.
  6. SilentStalker

    SilentStalker Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,578
    Location:
    Somewhere in the U.S., London, or Australia
    You sir, are correct. However primitive this system is, it indeed keeps records. If you have ever been an FFL or talked to an FFL you would also know that it’s not uncommon for the atf to come Check the books at any time. They have also been known to copy Said records even tho they are not supposed to. At any rate, there is already a form of registration that exists to a point today. That’s what I’m driving at. I happen to live in one of those free states that don’t track private sales, luckily. I hope you guys see my point. Besides, I, like many, have already been through ridiculous background checks for other reasons, add in NFA items, etc. they know more about us then you guys would like to think. I don’t agree with any of it but it’s hard to run from unless you live i a cabin in Montana and hardly have anything to do with the outside world and pay for everything in cash. With that being said, the current system is crude and the FFL is only required to keep records for a certain amount of time. So even tho they have all the info they probably need at this time it sure doesn’t make it easy. Anything more than the current system tho, imo, would lead to a registration/confiscation scenario unless it was a system like alex, I believe it was, mentioned earlier. I like the idea of his system he describes, but at the end of the day, it still does nothing to curtail anyone obtaining anything illegally. So what’s the point?

    Again, you cannot legislate evil out of existence. You cannot at this point, make guns disappear. All anything more than the current system will do is disable honest law abiding people from being able to arm and protect themselves. The criminals will still have them and the illegal gun making market will be booming. So, again I say, what is the point in us giving up anymore rights or adding anything extra to these ridiculous laws already on the books? We DO NOT give up anything else. Period. Assuming they confiscated them all from law abiding people and some idiot with an illegal gun does something crazy horrendous to garner the attention of the media. What are they going to do/ban then? At that point we will have given up our rights for absolutely nothing. I don’t see why it’s so hard for people to grasp this.
     
    Last edited: Mar 15, 2018
  7. George Dickel

    George Dickel Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    985
    Location:
    Florida
    What?? If the buyer is issued a code number there will have to be a name associated with it. A code number with no name as to whom it was given is useless and proves nothing. A buyer could give me a code obtained from a friend or family member who had purchased a gun and received a code. How would I know?
     
  8. George Dickel

    George Dickel Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    985
    Location:
    Florida
    AlexanderA, your idea of compromise is the government wants to cut off one of my fingers and the compromise is I get to decide which finger.
     
    Walkalong and Deanimator like this.
  9. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    7,795
    Location:
    Virginia
    That involves FFL dealers. According to the rules FFL's have to follow, the dealer would have to log the gun into his inventory (enter it into his "bound book") and have the buyer fill out a Form 4473, wherein the gun is described. That exactly is the "backdoor registration" that we're trying to avoid.

    Now, if you're proposing a carve-out special procedure in which the dealer doesn't enter the gun into his "bound book," then this doesn't have any advantage over allowing the individuals to have direct access to the NICS portal on their own. (Most dealers would be highly skeptical of doing it that way.)

    Anyway, involving a dealer means that the dealer will charge a fee for his services.That fee is likely to be many times more than the nominal fee for the online NICS access.
     
  10. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    7,795
    Location:
    Virginia
    Quisling = traitor. Vidkun Quisling was the collaborator who led the puppet government of Norway under German occupation in WW2.
    I've said that there are two conditions: (a) that the political winds have shifted against us, so that we are likely to lose, and (b) that we can get something substantially positive out of the deal. If either of these things isn't true, then it's pointless to talk to the other side.

    In other words, we have to continually assess the landscape surrounding gun politics, and at the same time prepare the proposals that we are willing to put on the table, when the time is right. What I see now on the part of the pro-gun side is reactivity, not proactivity. In the long run you can never win if your only tactic is defensive.
     
    Last edited: Mar 15, 2018
  11. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    7,795
    Location:
    Virginia
    Simple. The current Form 4473 (and the NICS check that goes with it) applies to purchases from FFL licensed dealers. Universal Background Checks would extend this system to all transfers of guns between unlicensed individuals. Most UBC proposals would have the individuals go through dealers to finalize their transactions (thereby leaving a paper trail that might be de facto registration). What we are discussing here are alternatives to FFL dealer involvement.
     
  12. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    7,795
    Location:
    Virginia
    No, that's not what I'm saying. I want to see substantial rollback of gun restrictions (particularly those involving the NFA) and I think a non-registration UBC system might be a way to get these rollbacks. They (the antigunners) trade something that they want for something that we want. Or, if they don't deal, they are the ones who would carry the onus of being obstructionists.
    I think I explained most of this, in my original suggestion in this thread. Anyway, I'll recap. We have an existing NICS database. A prospective gun buyer would go to an online NICS portal, enter his driver's license information, and, if approved, would be given a unique approval number. (He would charge the dollar or two fee for this service on his credit card.) This approval number would be good for one transaction, and would expire after a couple of days. The buyer would give this approval number, and his driver's license, to the seller, who would verify his identity and then go to the NICS portal, which would confirm that the approval number had been issued to that person. The sale could then proceed. No record would be made of the gun. In fact, there would be nothing to indicate that the sale had even been completed. (The seller's call to the NICS portal would void that approval number for further use.)
     
  13. denton

    denton Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    1,837
    Using such a system would require no more technical knowledge than it takes to post here.
     
    AlexanderA likes this.
  14. Kaybee

    Kaybee Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2017
    Messages:
    406
    The more I think about possible solutions the more I realize it doesn't matter because the forces behind these protests are coming for all guns no matter what solution is offered.
     
  15. DeepSouth
    • Contributing Member

    DeepSouth Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,894
    Location:
    Heart of Dixie
    So my mother wouldn’t do it without assistance, my father in law either, none of my remaining grandparents, my dad MIGHT.... more likely he’d just say that’s a stupid law and not comply.

    Can I do it from my phone/iPad, because I don’t have a computer anymore.. is so what if my phone gets stolen? Will they have access to all that information if they’ve looked over my shoulder and saw my passcode?

    See the problem?
     
    Deanimator likes this.
  16. yokel

    yokel Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    1,235
    The debate over gun control reveals a fundamental difference between the conservative and the progressive temperament. The former realizes that the capacity for evil exists within every person, and that it always will. The latter believes that evil is something that can be eliminated by government coercion. Thus the advocacy for limitless federal power that is neither possible nor desirable.


    Hoping the "crocodile will eat me last" is a poor survival plan, and a worse code for living.

    Immediate impulses to stave off pain or danger are often less important than the long-term consequences of running from the fray. Neither history nor experience suggests that mollifying aggressors is helpful.
     
    DoubleMag, Deanimator and Kaybee like this.
  17. denton

    denton Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    1,837
    All legitimate issues, but easily resolved.
     
  18. DeepSouth
    • Contributing Member

    DeepSouth Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,894
    Location:
    Heart of Dixie
    Maybe, but the amount of people that simply wouldn’t do because they don’t know how would be in the millions.
     
  19. Deanimator

    Deanimator Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2006
    Messages:
    12,672
    Location:
    Rocky River, Ohio
    Many millions more would REFUSE to do it because they knew to a certainty that it's a sham and a trap.
     
    DeepSouth likes this.
  20. Fine Figure of a Man

    Fine Figure of a Man Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2011
    Messages:
    3,876
    Location:
    Iowa
    Should Universal Background Checks also be required for journalists, religious groups and public speakers?
     
    denton and DoubleMag like this.
  21. Deanimator

    Deanimator Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2006
    Messages:
    12,672
    Location:
    Rocky River, Ohio
    Enemies of the 2nd Amendment are usually enemies of the 1st as well.
     
  22. Fine Figure of a Man

    Fine Figure of a Man Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2011
    Messages:
    3,876
    Location:
    Iowa
    And many are just useful idiots being lead by others.
     
  23. Elkins45

    Elkins45 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2009
    Messages:
    5,891
    Location:
    Northern KY
    As a person who completes private sales on occasion, I wouldn’t mind having a system where private citizens could have access to the NICS database. The details of how that could be done while maintaining privacy would need to be worked out, of course, but they aren’t insurmountable. A voluntary system...

    In terms of a FFL based UBC system, of course this is just a step toward requiring a registry. How can one prove a gun was transferred illegally unless they knew who possessed it at the time the law was passed? Otherwise everyone could just lie and say “I bought/sold it before the law took effect.”
     
  24. sarge83

    sarge83 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2003
    Messages:
    738
    Location:
    Kentucky
    If you fill out a 4473 to buy a weapon there is a list and a trail. The ones the communists want to track are the ones where you buy an old revolver from a neighbor widow who's husband passed. When the original purchaser of the piece dies the trail can go cold quickly depending on how their firearm was sold given away.
     
  25. Sistema1927

    Sistema1927 Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2004
    Messages:
    7,260
    Location:
    "Land of (dis)Enchantment"
    Did NFA '34 stop the criminal use of firearms?

    Did the GCA '68 stop the criminal use of firearms?

    Did NICS stop criminal use of firearms?

    Will UBC stop the criminal use of firearms?

    No, No, No, and No.

    Be free men, refuse to have your rights infringed, and just say NO!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice