Should Private Transactions involve Background checks

Should Private firearms transactions involve a background check?

  • Yes, every transaction should involve a background check.

    Votes: 21 8.9%

  • No. Who I sell a firearm to is my business; this is just another infringement on my rights.

    Votes: 214 91.1%
  • Total voters
    235
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

High Planes Drifter

Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2006
Messages
1,204
Should ALL firearm transactions, including those between private individuals involve background checks? This would mean that if you sold your neighbor/friend/relative/or anyone a firearm, the 2 of you would have to go down to your local gunstore; and he/she would have to submit to a background check. Proponents of this believe that many criminals buy firearms from individuals and that forcing a background check into each and every firearm transaction would reduce the number of guns turning up in criminal hands. We already have to go through an FFL to purchase a firearm from a private owner out of state, and have it shipped to us. Do you believe that local private sales should also have to go through an FFL, closing what the antis refer to as the "Gun Show Loophole"? I'll try to add a poll; lets see if I can get it right.
 
I did a search before posting; I didnt see a discussion involving a poll. If there was one, I ask that the thread be closed.

edited for spelling and grammar.
 
Last edited:
the 2 of you would have to go down to your local gunstore; and he/she would have to submit to a background check
Click to expand...

You don't have to do this now? I guess were lucky here in Ca. because we have been doing this for years :neener:
 
I especially think...

That checks should not apply to trades. I have a gun that I don’t want, you have one that you don’t want, so we swap. Or I go to my dealer with said gun and trade it in for a new one. We each still have a gun, right? How does the fact that it is different change anything. Its just more BS to deter the law abiding for buying a gun, that’s all. Criminals know where to get guns, or where to steal them from, so checks do very little to deter crime.
 
For the record, they have been doing this in Michigan since 1934, and as a crime preventer or solver it hasn't had much impact.

Anyway, the reason the anti-gun crowd wants to make ALL sales subject to a background check is because they know that ONLY Licensed Federal Firearms Dealers (FFL) can make such a check, so that would make ALL sales subject to a #4473 form and be recorded in the dealer's bound book.

They will never be able to confiscate or otherwise control guns until they know who-has-what. Right now there are far more guns is private hands that don't have a paper trail, then those that do... :scrutiny:
 
Interstate Commerce

Lemme see . . .

Constitution is written . . . includes interstate commerce clause . . . states review . . . require amendments to protect rights . . . amendments drawn up, debated, modified, submitted . . . constitution (as amended) is ratified.

Amendments trump constitution.

Second amendment trumps interstate commerce.

Shall not be infringed.

Therefore: NO. You don't get to check my background.

Regulate criminals. Leave the guns alone.
 
This infiringement on personal liberty has been sought by anti-gunner and liberal/socialists for years. The seek it in order to extend government control over the "masses", whom they profess to love but think have too much control over our lives for our own good. :banghead:

Of course some of us in the shooting community support it. Owning weapons doesn't convey smarts, some of our number vote for Democrats too, right? All for our own good of course. :barf:

One supporting argument they use is a (quesionable) poll showing "a majority of gun dealers agree." I doubt that as a fact but many gun shop owners would agree. They are in business to make money, not protect our rights. :mad:

Why would they agree? Follow the money; If they can get all personal sales, swaps, gifts, give aways and inheranices run through their shops they will charge significant fees for handling those transfers. If they succeed, YOU won't be able to give your collection to your son or leave a gun to a grandkid without an expensive "by your leave" bow to the power of the all mighty government and its tax offices. And a fee to the gunshop owner who handles it too. :cuss:
 
Who the flying f... voted yes, and what are they doing here? :cuss:

Private transactions between citizens are nobody's business but the buyer and seller, here!
 
6 votes for yes so far...that resembles the left wing gun owners I see posting here from time to time..you know, the guy that voted for a local Dem representative , that didn't look at the big picture, and was pissed their guy voted for Nanci Pelosy...Duhh...no surprise,lol
 
There used to be a gunstore on the square in Milan, Ohio.

It was run by a bunch of cops. One day, I overheard one of them say that he thought that ALL gun sales should have to be from a gunstore and that ALL private sales should be BANNED. I immediately stopped buying things there. They're now out of business.
 
I had the "NO" button checked and was almost ready to click the "Vote Now" button when I axed myself.,

"Should I get a background check to go to church?"

Should I get background checked to buy a newspaper?

To get into one of those chain link fenced "Free Speech" areas?

I refuse to play with closet anti-BoR types that have infested this forum.

Some Mod should lock this thread.
 
What if private citizens could perform anonymous Brady checks via the 800 number, just like a FFL holder, but without the legal obligation to care one way or another about how the check turned out?

Would you voluntarily use that check?
 
I had the "NO" button checked and was almost ready to click the "Vote Now" button when I axed myself.,

"Should I get a background check to go to church?"

Should I get background checked to buy a newspaper?

To get into one of those chain link fenced "Free Speech" areas?

I refuse to play with closet anti-BoR types that have infested this forum.

Some Mod should lock this thread.

--------------------

Well it sure looks like someone had thier cornflakes peed in this morning.:rolleyes:
 
What if private citizens could perform anonymous Brady checks via the 800 number, just like a FFL holder, but without the legal obligation to care one way or another about how the check turned out?

Would you voluntarily use that check?
Click to expand...

No.
 
For the record, your screen name. It's supposed to be "High Plains Drifter."
----------------------

If it was derived only from the movie, then yes. My screen name was not only derived from the western movie tho. I was a trim/millwork carpenter, and cabinet builder for years. I thought it would be kind of neat to incorperate one of the tools I used into my screen name. Plane, as in block plane.
 
Last edited:
Mods,

Please move this thread to the "I love the NRA and duck hunting forum"

--------------

So, its not ok to ask questions here without being slammed.?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
Private background checks?
Replies
11
Views
738
mainer2013
M
Zaydok Allen
  • Locked
Liability with a private transaction
2
Replies
48
Views
3K
Elkins45
Elkins45
H
  • Locked
Out of state gunshow rifle purchase
Replies
23
Views
1K
Art Eatman
A
B
  • Locked
(PA) Handguns and parts: background check? Documentation?
Replies
1
Views
363
Rumble
R
U
  • Locked
Do we have a Constitutional Right to not have Universal Background Checks?
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
127
Views
6K
Sam1911
S
Back
Top