ngnrd
Member
Right or wrong, good or bad, we currently have laws prohibiting the possession of firearms by certain individuals. And, I believe that most people would concede that, at least in the case of violent criminals, or the mentally disturbed that pose an imminent threat to themselves or others, such prohibitions are warranted. Indeed, such is the impetus of the NICS system already in place for commercial sales of firearms. So, in an effort to keep the guns out of the hands of ne'er-do-well's that would attempt to circumvent the NICS check through private purchases of legal firearms from otherwise law abiding citizens (which I think is a good goal), I would like to discuss the registration and control of those prohibited individuals in regard to private sales of firearms; specifically, some type of marking of State issued ID cards (driver's license, etc.) that would clearly indicate that the card carrier was prohibited to possess firearms.
As the system is imagined, any person lawfully excluded from the right to possess firearms (i.e., convicted of a violent felony or determined to be of such mental state as to be a threat to society at large) would have their State issued ID marked "NO FIREARMS". This would allow those seeking to transfer their firearms through private sale the ability to make a reasonable determination of the legality of such a sale, without putting the burden on the seller, and without infringing on the rights of either party involved in the sale. If you want to sell a firearm, all you would need to do is check an ID. As a buyer, all you would need to do is provide ID that does not indicate that you are prohibited. I don’t see this as any more of an infringement, and certainly no more an inconvenience, than showing ID to write a check at the grocery store, or to rent a car. The burden of proof that the transaction is valid is placed on the buyer, and the seller has a quick method to determine such.
Of course, I am realistic enough to realize that there would be no guaranty that every seller would check the ID of every buyer. And, as far as I know, there is no universal requirement that individuals posses a State issued ID. But, for those that wish to be reasonably assured that they are not transferring their firearms directly to a prohibited person, a quick ID check would be sufficient. And if a buyer either can't, or won’t show ID, any seller of good character would simply cancel the transaction. Sure, an unscrupulous seller could (and by definition, would) ignore this process and transfer a firearm to an unverified person anyway. In fact, there would still be many ways that a prohibited person could come to illegally possess a firearm. This could simply be a tool that could be used to provide a convenient method to provide some level of assurance that private transfers do not circumvent the intent of background checks for commercial sales; a group of honest gun owners policing themselves, per say.
Obviously, this would take some time to fully implement, and I am certainly not advocating that the States recall all ID's to do thorough background checks on everybody. However, whenever any ID's are issued or renewed, they could be easily checked against a list of prohibited persons, and then marked accordingly for any such persons found. So within one renewal cycle, all prohibited persons would have ID's marked as such. And there could be no list created that would provide any indication that any particular individual possesses, or is intending to possess a firearm, and no tracking of the number or types of firearms bought or sold, since essentially everybody would be checked against the “May Not Possess” list. Of course, there would need to be a legitimate system in place to address and correct any false positives.
Truthfully, although I have gone through the NICS check, I’ll freely admit that I don’t know what all that particular background check involves on the other side of the phone. And, maybe under more through scrutiny than I have given it, this would essentially equate to a universal background check, which I would not be in favor of because of the possibility of abuse of the collected data. But, I think it’s a unique enough idea that it’s worth a discussion. I do know that I, as a legal and honorable gun owner, wouldn’t want any of my (formerly owned) firearms to be used in crime simply because I unknowingly sold one to a prohibited person. A system like I have described may provide some reasonable assurance that I am not an unwitting part of the problem, without including me in some database of gun owners (which I’m sure I’m already on at this point).
What say the HighRoader’s? Good? Bad? Not necessary? Not effective? Reasonable? Overbearing? Negative effects I haven't thought of? Let's talk about it.
footnote: This idea spawned from the system in place in Alaska that places "ALCOHOL RESTRICTED" on the driver's licenses of individuals prohibited by the court to purchase alcohol.
As the system is imagined, any person lawfully excluded from the right to possess firearms (i.e., convicted of a violent felony or determined to be of such mental state as to be a threat to society at large) would have their State issued ID marked "NO FIREARMS". This would allow those seeking to transfer their firearms through private sale the ability to make a reasonable determination of the legality of such a sale, without putting the burden on the seller, and without infringing on the rights of either party involved in the sale. If you want to sell a firearm, all you would need to do is check an ID. As a buyer, all you would need to do is provide ID that does not indicate that you are prohibited. I don’t see this as any more of an infringement, and certainly no more an inconvenience, than showing ID to write a check at the grocery store, or to rent a car. The burden of proof that the transaction is valid is placed on the buyer, and the seller has a quick method to determine such.
Of course, I am realistic enough to realize that there would be no guaranty that every seller would check the ID of every buyer. And, as far as I know, there is no universal requirement that individuals posses a State issued ID. But, for those that wish to be reasonably assured that they are not transferring their firearms directly to a prohibited person, a quick ID check would be sufficient. And if a buyer either can't, or won’t show ID, any seller of good character would simply cancel the transaction. Sure, an unscrupulous seller could (and by definition, would) ignore this process and transfer a firearm to an unverified person anyway. In fact, there would still be many ways that a prohibited person could come to illegally possess a firearm. This could simply be a tool that could be used to provide a convenient method to provide some level of assurance that private transfers do not circumvent the intent of background checks for commercial sales; a group of honest gun owners policing themselves, per say.
Obviously, this would take some time to fully implement, and I am certainly not advocating that the States recall all ID's to do thorough background checks on everybody. However, whenever any ID's are issued or renewed, they could be easily checked against a list of prohibited persons, and then marked accordingly for any such persons found. So within one renewal cycle, all prohibited persons would have ID's marked as such. And there could be no list created that would provide any indication that any particular individual possesses, or is intending to possess a firearm, and no tracking of the number or types of firearms bought or sold, since essentially everybody would be checked against the “May Not Possess” list. Of course, there would need to be a legitimate system in place to address and correct any false positives.
Truthfully, although I have gone through the NICS check, I’ll freely admit that I don’t know what all that particular background check involves on the other side of the phone. And, maybe under more through scrutiny than I have given it, this would essentially equate to a universal background check, which I would not be in favor of because of the possibility of abuse of the collected data. But, I think it’s a unique enough idea that it’s worth a discussion. I do know that I, as a legal and honorable gun owner, wouldn’t want any of my (formerly owned) firearms to be used in crime simply because I unknowingly sold one to a prohibited person. A system like I have described may provide some reasonable assurance that I am not an unwitting part of the problem, without including me in some database of gun owners (which I’m sure I’m already on at this point).
What say the HighRoader’s? Good? Bad? Not necessary? Not effective? Reasonable? Overbearing? Negative effects I haven't thought of? Let's talk about it.
footnote: This idea spawned from the system in place in Alaska that places "ALCOHOL RESTRICTED" on the driver's licenses of individuals prohibited by the court to purchase alcohol.