Since there is a slim chance of a full blown AWB going through, the next things that will be tried for are compromising on Universal Background Checks and a magazine capacity ban.
Some people may say, "I think UBC are a fair compromise. There is no reason I wouldn't pass one, and it's not that big of a deal."
There are a couple reasons I am against UBCs. Not considering that it would basically be registration, and that inevitably leads to confiscation. If you are forced to go to a dealer to transfer the purchase, trade, gifting, etc of a firearm; will the .gov regulate the fees that a dealer or FFL can/will charge? Since ALL legal transactions must now go through a dealer I don't see anything stopping them from charging $20, $30, $75, etc for the transfer, especially if the .gov mandates a fee/charge for the service. Next thing you know, the whole private market has been killed because it is no longer cost effective to buy anything because of transfer fees. You also have the inconvenience of finding a dealer with the same hours of your availability. That's not a huge issue, but an issue nonetheless.
If a compromise has to be made, mine is to require a bill of sale be filled out for every transaction. It would essentially be a 4473, but with no call to NICS and the paperwork would stay with the buyer/seller. The buyer would answer the same questions as if buying from a dealer and provide their name, DL#, birth date, etc. The buyer would be stating they are a proper person and able to legally purchase/possess a firearm. This would fulfill the obligation of the seller, without creating a national registration.
A lot of people already require bills of sale, so I think this to be a reasonable, fair compromise. It won't do anything to disrupt the current market and people who aren't supposed to purchase firearms would still be doing so even with UBCs.
Some people may say, "I think UBC are a fair compromise. There is no reason I wouldn't pass one, and it's not that big of a deal."
There are a couple reasons I am against UBCs. Not considering that it would basically be registration, and that inevitably leads to confiscation. If you are forced to go to a dealer to transfer the purchase, trade, gifting, etc of a firearm; will the .gov regulate the fees that a dealer or FFL can/will charge? Since ALL legal transactions must now go through a dealer I don't see anything stopping them from charging $20, $30, $75, etc for the transfer, especially if the .gov mandates a fee/charge for the service. Next thing you know, the whole private market has been killed because it is no longer cost effective to buy anything because of transfer fees. You also have the inconvenience of finding a dealer with the same hours of your availability. That's not a huge issue, but an issue nonetheless.
If a compromise has to be made, mine is to require a bill of sale be filled out for every transaction. It would essentially be a 4473, but with no call to NICS and the paperwork would stay with the buyer/seller. The buyer would answer the same questions as if buying from a dealer and provide their name, DL#, birth date, etc. The buyer would be stating they are a proper person and able to legally purchase/possess a firearm. This would fulfill the obligation of the seller, without creating a national registration.
A lot of people already require bills of sale, so I think this to be a reasonable, fair compromise. It won't do anything to disrupt the current market and people who aren't supposed to purchase firearms would still be doing so even with UBCs.