GOA gets that Universal Background checks will lead to Registration...

Status
Not open for further replies.

abajaj11

Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2009
Messages
189
PLease read message from GOA below. Gun Owners of America gets it. Now its time to convince the folks in the NRA and in Congress, Please consider focusing on Universal Background Checks and its danger when you talk to your Congressmen and senators.
From GOA:
________________________________________
Obama Goes Nuts and Offers Anti-gunners Wish List. Most of his crazy proposals are so extreme, only a few of his initiatives pose serious threat.

Surrounded by child-props, Barack Obama yesterday proposed a semi-automatic ban so extreme that it could potentially outlaw up to 50% of all long guns in circulation and up to 80% of all handguns.
Originally, Obama's allies had announced they would reintroduce the 1994 ban on commonly-owned, defensive firearms. That was until they found out that they would look like fools, since that semi-auto ban was largely the law of Connecticut on the day the Newtown shooting occurred -- and didn't cover Adam Lanza's AR-15. After that, gun grabbers just kept adding more and more guns until they would register (or ban) a huge percentage of the defensive guns in existence.
So where are we now?
Obama's crazy gun ban is now being denounced by many Democrats. And, although you don't "pop the cork" until Congress adjourns, it will probably take the magazine ban down the toilet with it.
This means that gun owners' focus must now shift to the part of Obama's agenda which poses the most danger because it is most likely to move: the requirement that the government approve every gun transfer in America -- the so-called universal background check.
All of you know why this is a problem. But how do you explain it so simply that even a congressman can understand? Let's take a crack at that:

ONE: THE FBI'S "SECRET LIST" WHICH IS BEING USED TO BAR AMERICANS FROM OWNING GUNS IS INSIDIOUS
The FBI’s database currently contains the names of more than 150,000 veterans. They served their country honorably. They did nothing wrong. But, because they sought counseling for a traumatic experience while risking their lives for America, they have had their constitutional rights summarily revoked, with no due process whatsoever.
You want to know something else? The "secret list" could soon include tens of millions of Americans -- including soldiers, police, and fire fighters -- with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder, and even post-partem depression. This would be achieved under the 23 anti-gun "executive actions" that Obama announced yesterday.

TWO: THE FBI REFUSES TO ENSURE US THAT IT ISN'T TURNING ITS "SECRET LIST" INTO A NATIONAL GUN REGISTRY
Our legislative counsel drafted the Smith amendment in 1998 to prohibit the FBI from using the Brady Check system to tax gun buyers or put their names into a gun registry. But the FBI refuses to tell us -- or even to tell U.S. Senators -- how (or whether) it is complying with the Smith amendment. Why in the world should we give the FBI more authority and more names if it abuses the authority it already has?
This is the inherent problem with any background check, where gun buyers’ names are given to a government bureaucrat. Is there any way to make sure that once a name is entered into a computer, that it doesn’t stay there permanently?
This concern is especially valid, considering how federal agents are already skirting the laws against gun owner registration. Several dealers around the country have informed GOA that the ATF is increasingly going into gun shops and just xeroxing all of the 4473's, giving them the names of every gun owner who purchased a gun through that shop -- and setting up the basis for a national registration system.
This is illegal under the 1986 McClure-Volkmer law, but that has apparently not stopped it from being done. If every gun in America has to go through a dealer, this will create a mechanism to compile a list of every gun owner in America. And, as we have seen with New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, who has just been legislatively handed such a list, when that happens, the talk immediately turns to “confiscation."

THREE: AS A RESULT, REQUIRING GOVERNMENT APPROVAL OF EVERY GUN OWNER IN AMERICA WOULD DO NOTHING BUT CREATE A PLATFORM FOR NATIONAL GUN REGISTRATION AND CONFISCATION.
As alluded to above, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo now has a comprehensive gun registry. This is the most dangerous thing that New York legislators could have done -- as Cuomo has made it clear he’s considering gun confiscation of lawfully-owned firearms.
“I don’t think legitimate sportsmen are going to say, ‘I need an assault weapon to go hunting,’” Cuomo said. “Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option. Permitting could be an option -- keep your gun but permit it.”
How nice. He’ll let gun owners “permit” their guns for now -- so that, presumably, they can be confiscated later, just as certain defensive weapons were confiscated in New York City during the Mayor David Dinkins administration in 1991.

FOUR: THE FBI REFUSES TO COMPLY WITH THE LAW GUARANTEEING THE RIGHTS OF LEGITIMATE PURCHASERS
The Brady Law requires that the FBI correct erroneous denials of firearms purchases. And it requires that it reply, initially, within five days. According to attorneys familiar with the problem, the FBI NEVER, EVER, EVER complies with the law. In fact, it increasingly tells aggrieved legitimate purchasers to "sue us" -- at a potential cost of tens of thousands of dollars.

FIVE: EVEN UNDER CURRENT LAW, THE BRADY SYSTEM HAS BROKEN DOWN REPEATEDLY
Since its inception, the FBI’s computer systems have often gone offline for hours at a time -- sometimes for days. And when it fails on weekends, it results in the virtual blackout of gun sales at gun shows across the country.
According to gun laws expert Alan Korwin, "With the NICS computer out of commission, the only place you could legally buy a firearm -- in the whole country -- was from a private individual, since all dealers were locked out of business by the FBI’s computer problem."
Of course, now the President wants to eliminate that last bastion of freedom!
Recently, the FBI’s system went down on Black Friday, angering many gun dealers and gun buyers around the country. “It means we can’t sell no damn guns,” said Rick Lozier, a manager at Van Raymond Outfitters in Maine. “If we can’t call it in, we can’t sell a gun. It’s cost us some money.”

The bottom line: Our goal is to insure that Obama's politicized dog-and-pony show doesn't produce one word of new gun law. Not a single word.
And the biggest danger right now is universal background checks -- which would create a platform for national registration and confiscation.
We would note that, in addition, Obama is attempting to illegally enact gun control through unlawful and unconstitutional "executive actions." Click here to read about these.
ACTION: Click here to contact your senators and congressman. Urge them to oppose the universal background check because it is a platform for national firearms registration and confiscation.
________________________________________
Please do not reply directly to this message, as your reply will bounce back as undeliverable.
Please forward this e-mail to friends and family
Gun Owners of America
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102
Springfield, VA 22151 703-321-8585
 
Last edited:
Yeah I got that. I think a group of aggrieved folks need to bring the FBI's non corrections to court as a collective. Strength in numbers.
 
I posted this on another thread,,,,,,,

We gun owners make a lot of our own problems by not being responsible . If I could have a way to verify that a private sale I was making was to a person that could legally own a firearm ,I'd have no problem doing that.....

I'd like to see a situation where the seller could have a number to call and verify the buyer was able to buy a firearm. I wouldn't have a problem if this had a minimal cost ($5-$10) You received a reference number to verify your call.

No need to to file the firearm info ,just that the buyer was verified. The buyer and seller(if they came to a agreement) would privately swap sales info.
This wouldn't even indicate a sale but only a check of eligibility of a possible purchase.

any opinion?
 
I posted this on another thread,,,,,,,

We gun owners make a lot of our own problems by not being responsible . If I could have a way to verify that a private sale I was making was to a person that could legally own a firearm ,I'd have no problem doing that.....

I'd like to see a situation where the seller could have a number to call and verify the buyer was able to buy a firearm. I wouldn't have a problem if this had a minimal cost ($5-$10) You received a reference number to verify your call.

No need to to file the firearm info ,just that the buyer was verified. The buyer and seller(if they came to a agreement) would privately swap sales info.
This wouldn't even indicate a sale but only a check of eligibility of a possible purchase.

any opinion?
Well, lets say I wish to buy a gun from you. You don't me, I don't know you.

Using the information the FBI NICS presently requires to conduct an FFL background check as a starting point, would you really expect me to give you that same information? Remember, I don't know you.
 
I posted this on another thread,,,,,,,

We gun owners make a lot of our own problems by not being responsible . If I could have a way to verify that a private sale I was making was to a person that could legally own a firearm ,I'd have no problem doing that.....

I'd like to see a situation where the seller could have a number to call and verify the buyer was able to buy a firearm. I wouldn't have a problem if this had a minimal cost ($5-$10) You received a reference number to verify your call.

No need to to file the firearm info ,just that the buyer was verified. The buyer and seller(if they came to a agreement) would privately swap sales info.
This wouldn't even indicate a sale but only a check of eligibility of a possible purchase.

any opinion?
No one wants to sell firearms to criminals or the dangerously insane.
However, mandating background checks on ALL sales is very dangerous for law abiding citizens.
suppose you wanted to sell a firearm to someone in a face to face transaction. If the feds did not KNOW you had the firearm to begin with, how would they be able to monitor that you were following the law by performing the background check on the buyer?
They would need to know who has what, so that if a firearm is sold, they can monitor if the law was broken.
Knowing who has what...is registration.

Firearms registration always leads to confiscation.
Once Congress passes the REQUIREMENT that a universal background check is required on ALL sales, I doubt that POTUS will hesitate long before issuing an executive order mandating all folks register their guns.
and such an EO would likely be held up, because it is the ONLY way to monitor his law that Congress passed.
So, please consider opposing any law by Congress that requires that ALL sales follow a background check.
:)
 
"Now its time to convince the folks in the NRA and in Congress"

What makes you think the NRA needs convincing?
Good question....as a long time annual NRA member who recently upgraded to lifetime member status and also paid for annual membership for 4 new members of the NRA, I sincerely hope they will NOT GIVE AN INCH. I also know they are our best hope since they have the max clout on Capitol Hill compared to GOa or SAF. I have not heard a public statement from the NRA regarding the potential evil side effects of universal background checks though GOA just released an excellent statement.

Call me paranoid but i think that the folks in Congress who are 'A' rated NRA types may be asking the NRA to let them pass something and that something I fear may be universal background checks.
I want the NRA to not give an inch, as well as our folks in Congress.
I have emailed the NRA as best as I could, but I don't really have a contact there except for the general form to NRA ILA.
I hope others reading this also consider contacting the NRA any way they can.

Much more important, when I contact my senators and congressman every week, as part of operation gun rights (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=694966&highlight=operation+gun+rights) I always mention that I am strongly opposed to Universal Background checks and tell the aides why. Please consider doing the same.
:)
 
We went through all this in 1967/1968 when the NRA was the only game in town. I was there. Folks came up with the idea of a national "good guy" card, allowing unlimited purchase.

It was pointed out then that for all practical purposes, registration of people is as good as registration of firearms, should confiscation come to the government's agenda.
 
We went through all this in 1967/1968 when the NRA was the only game in town. I was there. Folks came up with the idea of a national "good guy" card, allowing unlimited purchase.

It was pointed out then that for all practical purposes, registration of people is as good as registration of firearms, should confiscation come to the government's agenda.
Good... I did not know that.. and it is good folks like you are here to remind us of what happened in the past and why it was a bad idea.
I am constantly amazed at how many folk who are pro-gun think it is natural that the government should maintain a registry of all firearms and who owns what.
I try to tell them 2A is to protect us against a potential tyrannical power with a central standing army...and providing a list of who owns what to the feds is like asking the fox to guard the hen house.
:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top