NICS vs. USSC

[kwelz]

Ok it is looking like the USSC is probably going to come down on our side. While we all know this won't have much of an immediate impact on current gun laws it will open the door for us to challenge a lot of Unconstitutional laws.

Now obviously there is a wide range of opinions here on some of the laws. Some people think any restriction on arms is wrong. I fall into the "ANyting short of Destructive Devices" crowd. Meaning that anything a normal Infantryman can carry short of explosives should be legal without restrictions.

So is the NICS check a restriction? It does not permit an individual from purchasing a firearm unless they have committed a criminal act that causes them to lose thier rights.

I am well aware of the problems with the system, some people get delayed every time, others get denied when they should not.
But assuming the problems with the NICS system are solved, would this be a reasonable system to have in place. It helps(AT LEAST A LITTLE) keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

So when the USSC affirms the Individual right to Own a firearms would the NICS system be perhaps the only thing we should leave alone after it is cleaned up?

 

[strat81]

But assuming the problems with the NICS system are solved, would this be a reasonable system to have in place. It helps(AT LEAST A LITTLE) keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

Assuming a man-made system run by government employees to be problem-free would be a bad assumption.

 

[kwelz]

Fair enough. But I am talking best cause scenario here. We can discuss the issues involving the system and making it work right another time.

 

[Piedmont Plinker]

Hmm- I don't mind background checks if they're free and instant.
Waiting periods, I agree, are bad.
I say keep NICS.
(funny, when I saw this thread I thought you were talking about intelligence agencies)

 

[Standing Wolf]

I don't mind background checks if they're free and instant.

How about background checks before we can buy books? How about background checks before we can hop on the internet? How about background checks before we can go to church? How about background checks before...?

 

[WayneConrad]

Standing Wolf, nicely said.

 

[kwelz]

I am sorry but I believe a Criminal gives up any rights once he commits a crime. And while I know there are people who feel even criminals should get thier rights back when they get out of jail, I am not one of those people.

It is an interesting and possibly dangerous divide within our cause.

A criminal has proven thier inability to conform to the rules that we as society have placed upon ourselves. Therefor they have proven they are not responsible enough to own a firearm. Owning a firearm is a Right yes, but it is also a responsibility and one that I take very seriously. Owning a book does not carry with it the same responsibilities. Nore does using the internet. All people are born equal but there are concequences of the choices we make in life. Losing your rights is a consequence of commiting some crimes. The NICS system is a way to make sure those specific people have a harder time harming others after they have proven they will try.

Of course I think that our Criminal justice system is pretty messed up. But once again that is another discussion.

 

[El Tejon]

The background check is an infringement for three reasons:

1. It is a prior restraint to the exercise of a fundamental right.

2. It shifts the burden to the citize to prove that he is worthy to exercise a right.

3. It is the abolishment of the presumption of innocence.