INGO'ers REQUIRE background checks??

[Jeremiah]

That's right. Just like in those old Bronson movies.

no just like in the 1920's

 

[RobbyMaQ]

Question? How is it ok for background checks on dealer purchases, but not ok for ANY purchases? Should it not be one or the other? (background check for everyone, or background check for no one)
I felt 'why should dealers be singled out?'... if a background check is required for them, why not everyone? I was certainly not for 'registration' and all with a new background check system... fbi is only told handgun or long gun... any 'tracing' needs to be done through the dealer... while I realize it is possible, it is not instantaneous... nor recorded in a national database. Yet I see posts stating that my voting 'yes' equates me to some liberal who wishes to abolish guns entirely

 

[jbombelli]

Question? How is it ok for background checks on dealer purchases, but not ok for ANY purchases? Should it not be one or the other? (background check for everyone, or background check for no one)
I felt 'why should dealers be singled out?'... if a background check is required for them, why not everyone? I was certainly not for 'registration' and all with a new background check system... fbi is only told handgun or long gun... any 'tracing' needs to be done through the dealer... while I realize it is possible, it is not instantaneous... nor recorded in a national database. Yet I see posts stating that my voting 'yes' equates me to some liberal who wishes to abolish guns entirely

I'll ask you, too. How do you make this work without mandatory registration with 100% compliance?

How would the government know if I sold you a firearm and didn't do the background check, if they didn't have records of every single gun owner in the country, and what guns they own?

 

[RobbyMaQ]

I'll ask you, too. How do you make this work without mandatory registration with 100% compliance?

How would the government know if I sold you a firearm and didn't do the background check, if they didn't have records of every single gun owner in the country, and what guns they own?

I'm just asking...
I'd assume if someone was caught in a crime with a gun, they'd fess up to whomever they bought it from. If that was a dealer, the dealer would check his records and say 'he passed the background check' and it would be moot.
How would this be any different from an individual purchase if background checks using nics was necessary in any transaction?

 

[donballz]

I wouldn't object to instituting checks for all gun show tables and similar situations (holding a public sale of a variety of guns).

Making every single transaction go through and FFL is going to create a lot of problems I think. Increased staffing, delays. If I had an LGS, I would just stop doing them or you wouldn't have time to focus on your business! And then all private sales would be either shut down or run through the one really expensive guy who is still doing them.

 

[jbombelli]

I'm just asking...
I'd assume if someone was caught in a crime with a gun, they'd fess up to whomever they bought it from. If that was a dealer, the dealer would check his records and say 'he passed the background check' and it would be moot.
How would this be any different from an individual purchase if background checks using nics was necessary in any transaction?

"I didn't make the call because he didn't buy it from me."

"I bought it before the background checks."

"I sold it before the background checks."

Without 100% registration, how do you prove otherwise?

Everybody needs to understand that without 100% registration and full compliance, this won't work.

It simply won't work.

 

[RobbyMaQ]

Case # or something to be recorded from Nics?
I don't know... I guess I am too new. Since I got into guns, ffl's is all I have known to exist. To me the NICS seems to protect the gun shop more than anything... I guess I'd like to think that long term such a 'universal' (not obama's 'universal') background check would create a more responsible gun culture... Not much different than many here who want to see pinks and DL's when doing a transaction to make sure they are 'selling to the right person'.

 

[Jordan]

If I were to sell to someone in the classified section, a background check would be nice for peace of mind - but this is offset by the fact that if I wanted to sell a gun to my cousin or best friend and had to pay my LGS to run a check, wait for clearance, etc... I would be pissed. I do not support mandated universal background checks. However a system in place to allow for voluntary checks without the need of a dealer would be compelling.

 

[RobbyMaQ]

Yeah... I'd like to think that I should know if a family member is a felon or not... then again you get into 'defining family' lol

 

[jbombelli]

Case # or something to be recorded from Nics?
I don't know... I guess I am too new. Since I got into guns, ffl's is all I have known to exist. To me the NICS seems to protect the gun shop more than anything... I guess I'd like to think that long term such a 'universal' (not obama's 'universal') background check would create a more responsible gun culture... Not much different than many here who want to see pinks and DL's when doing a transaction to make sure they are 'selling to the right person'.

What if I don't make that call, or do the background check? Where would the case # come from? What NICS info? If I don't call them, they don't get any info. None of my guns is registered to anybody (we don't do that here), so without registering them and requiring regular reporting of who owns what, there's no way they could know if I sold one to somebody.

Dealers have to keep records of every gun they sell. If the BATFE comes in to check those records, and they're missing guns with no records of the sales, they get in loads of trouble. Sometimes they even go to prison. Requiring this of individuals would amount to full registration. It would have to, otherwise they would never know if you kept records or not because they wouldn't know what you had or didn't have.

 

[merotek]

Whats the harm in a back ground check? I say do it!

 

[Meister]

Whats the harm in a back ground check? I say do it!

Because a private sale between 2 people in the same state isn't within the federal government's jurisdiction. It's a state responsibility.

Allowing the government to control your everyday life isn't how the government was set up to operate. Small government is the answer. Enforce the laws on the books before you go and try to add more. A little common sense goes a long way.

 

[halfmileharry]

NOPE!
ONLY if the BadGuys/Criminals/Mentally dangerous/ have a tatoo on their forehead so we know which ones not to sell to.
I don't see a high percentage of success but wish there were magic wands available to weed out the "NO SALES"

 

[jbombelli]

Whats the harm in a back ground check? I say do it!

No.


Now what?

 

[IndyDave1776]

Because a private sale between 2 people in the same state isn't within the federal government's jurisdiction. It's a state responsibility.

Allowing the government to control your everyday life isn't how the government was set up to operate. Small government is the answer. Enforce the laws on the books before you go and try to add more. A little common sense goes a long way.

Excellent post, but I am starting to believe it is an exercise in futility. There are some people incapable of understanding the difference between what is constitutional and what is 'reasonable' to their notion of right and proper, and are further incapable of understanding unintended consequences, like giving the feds a really good head start to start kicking in doors one of these days.

 

[merotek]

There's a difference between wanting background checks and not wanting to go to jail because you accidentally ran afoul of the law against selling a firearm to a known felon.

I disagree. It may take a different poll to see the truth, but I think you are implying that they only ask to see LTCH before a private sale to ensure they do not break a law.

I submit that the majority of the folks who ask to see a LTCH before a private sale do so because they have the common sense to know that not everyone should be able to go out and purchase a firearm.

I whole heartedly believe in the second amendment and our right to be free of "Big Brother", however the fact remains that there are individuals, who have through their own personal actions, forfeited that right.

If only 80% of private sales are done by individuals that are responsible enough to ask for a LTCH, than 20% of them *could be going to evil men with a proven track record of foul intentions.

 

[Smokepole]

I believe most gunowners want more background checks. Anything for that warm fuzzy feeling Big Brother can give you.

I don't buy that. I believe that most gun owners are well up on the Constitution and DON'T want more background checks. Especially at the individual level. Most don't mind the background check and suffer them because they are there, but will balk at drilling them down to the everyday personal level. Especially when you consider that it is one more point of contact for the Gubmint to start building lists of the populace. Especially a segment that it most always seeks to control.

And if I am selling to an individual I am asking for ID and LTCH to do my own check.

So for me, I voted no. But only because there wasn't an option for HELL NO ! ! ! ! ! ! !

 

[Smokepole]

I disagree. It may take a different poll to see the truth, but I think you are implying that they only ask to see LTCH before a private sale to ensure they do not break a law.

I submit that the majority of the folks who ask to see a LTCH before a private sale do so because they have the common sense to know that not everyone should be able to go out and purchase a firearm.

I whole heartedly believe in the second amendment and our right to be free of "Big Brother", however the fact remains that there are individuals, who have through their own personal actions, forfeited that right.

If only 80% of private sales are done by individuals that are responsible enough to ask for a LTCH, than 20% of them *could be going to evil men with a proven track record of foul intentions.

So, where do you stand on expanding the background check piece? You have probably answered on a previous page, but i didn't read all of them.

 

[HICKMAN]

funny how so many say NO, but then require someone show them an LTCH during a sale, therefore using the current background check system...

 

[88E30M50]

And what if somebody decided not to comply? How would the government know if I sold you a gun and you didn't have the piece of paper, or I didn't make the phone call?

Who cares what the government would or would not know. They would have no role in this idea. It would simply be providing a means for an average person to verify the buyer of his gun is not a felon. The whole idea is to build some capability that is outside of the federal government or at least goes far enough outside of firearm ownership as to make any attempt to determine who owns a gun impossible.

The idea is simply to find a way to verify a person is a proper person without it being linked to any possible way that could be used to develop a gun registration.