My thoughts on Universal Background Checks, and my compromise.

[Car Ramrod]

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.

 

[avboiler11]

This is a copy/paste from a post I made on SnipersHide last week on this very topic...

Politicians seem to know a new federal AWB is politically DOA. They also know a standard capacity magazine ban is at best a 50/50 proposition, and realistically an arbitrary limit to 10rd will be difficult if not impossible.

So all the leftists and their patsies in the media have latched onto the idea of universal background checks as the "sweet spot" for reducing "gun violence". Of course, these same folks who say 40% of guns are purchased without a background check are either accidentally or purposefully ignorant of the fact that study was exceedingly small in scope, over 20 years old, and actually said "as high as 40%"...and couldn't tell you exactly how many of those 40% purchased without a background check are ever used in the commission of a crime.

Everybody on this board knows that UBC won't actually reduce crime committed with firearms, and will add yet another layer of cost & bureaucracy on law-abiding gun owners. We also know there is no practical way to enforce UBCs without sweeping registration of every existing firearm.

That having been said - if a mechanism was put in place that would allow private intra-state sellers to voluntarily perform a NICS check on buyers via phone or internet, without the need to go to an FFL and pay a transfer fee and with current NICS recordkeeping policies, would you utilize such a mechanism?

Again - we all know such a program (voluntary or mandatory) wouldn't reduce crime, and those on the left would say a voluntary program would be a "massive loophole" needing closed. But recommending such a program would do a few things:

1. Erase the image that gun owners are uncompromising, uncaring "nuts"
2. Show we desire to keep firearms away from those who shouldn't have them
3. Protect the privacy & legality of those who don't wish to participate
4. Put anti-gunners in a position to publicly explain why this middle-of-the-road compromise providing a mechanism for law-abiding gun owners to perform easy, no-cost voluntary background checks (which does not exist today) would somehow be worse than status quo.

I get that some say "Give an inch and they'll take a mile", "It only leads to registration and confiscation", "NO COMPROMISE!", etc.

I say politics is chess not checkers, and we as gun owners need to be as politically savvy as Democrats have become over the last decade at out-maneuvering the right and painting their opposition as unreasonable.

We need to beat them at their own game, and put THEM on the defensive...and I think voluntary checks would satisfy the anti-gunners desire to "DO SOMETHING" post-Newtown, while effectively changing nothing on our end.

Thoughts? I've got my flame suit on...

 

[Bunnykid68]

No more compromise at all, none, zero.

 

[melensdad]

My problem with the Universal Background Check, and the totally BULLs**t 'compromise' in the original post is that there is no carve out exemption for FAMILY MEMBERS to give guns to other family members. Further it becomes a defacto registration bill if it is workable in any way at all.

If I buy a gun for my wife as a gift so she can protect herself then I should not have to go to a FFL to officially 'transfer' the gun to her. Further, in the OP's 'compromise' there is also no exemption for family. So to give a gun to my wife I'd have to have her fill out a bill of sale and I'd have to keep it forever. What if I give guns to my grandkids? What happens when I die and pass on my guns to various family members like nieces, nephews, brothers & sisters, etc? At the most basic level all FAMILY transfers should be exempt.

But that is just ONE example of why I think this is total BS.

NO COMPROMISE. NO U.B.C.

 

[Nakatomi]

Was thinking about this the other day. Not sure a registry would make any difference, there are so many guns out there, the gov would have to pretty much make the assumption that every house had one and go door to door. As for identifying gun owners, all you would need to find 99% of us is just to write an algorithm to sweep credit card bills for guns and ammo purchases. Plus 4473's, facebook posts, NRA membership, etc.

 

[ghostdncr]

No more compromise at all, none, zero.

I'm finished, too. THEY took the gloves off, not me. THEY are actively trying to dismantle the US Constitution, not me. Who's going to stand by and watch them do it one nibble at a time? Not me.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

mine is to require a bill of sale be filled out for every transaction.

And how will you enforce this?

rhino and I trade a pistol for a shotgun. How will you require either party to fill out anything?

people who aren't supposed to purchase firearms would still be doing so even with UBCs.

And just what exactly have you accomplished by this legislation which by your own admission is a policy failure.

Indiana has done this. We tried UBC with handguns from 1974 to 1998.

All handgun transfers had to go through a dealer. I am unaware of a single prosecution of this former misdemeanor. I am unaware of a single arrest or summons issued.

I am personally aware that it was violated many, many times. I would speculate that the compliance rate was less than 1%.

The only thing UBC would do is make the rule of law subject to mockery.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

 

[drillsgt]

And how will you enforce this?

rhino and I trade a pistol for a shotgun. How will you require either party to fill out anything?



And just what exactly have you accomplished by this legislation which by your own admission is a policy failure.

Indiana has done this. We tried UBC with handguns from 1974 to 1998.

All handgun transfers had to go through a dealer. I am unaware of a single prosecution of this former misdemeanor. I am unaware of a single arrest or summons issued.

I am personally aware that it was violated many, many times. I would speculate that the compliance rate was less than 1%.

The only thing UBC would do is make the rule of law subject to mockery.

Michigan still does this with handguns and the registration has never been used to solve a crime but it's institutionalized within the State Police and they don't want to give it up even though it's the local PD's that have to do the work. MI has been trying to get rid of this for the last couple of years but the LEOs are blocking it. That whole not wanting to give up power thing, just like the fight to get shall-issue passed.

 

[87iroc]

If you look at it from the standpoint that 'something' will probably pass no matter how much we scream in an effort for the political gamesmanship to go on in DC....we screamed and screamed about healthcare and it still passed. GOP in the house will probably cave in an effort to attempt to not be labeled baby killers(even though they will still be labeled as baby killers for not doing enough)...

Anyway...my thought is if something passes....a LTCH exempts you from UBC's....and family members are exempted(of course...they can point to Newtown and say that shouldn't apply)...

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

We do not negotiate with terrorists and we do not negotiate with socialists. And for the same reason.

 

[Willie]

Maybe stepping on toes but the gun shows I have been to there are more "gun collectors" and "private parties" selling guns than dealers. Some of these "collectors" have more guns displayed than the dealers. For someone not "in the gun business" they do a lot of business. The Libs want to "close the gun show loop hole" so make it that any gun sold within the confines of a gun show subject to background checks. Leave private sales outside the confines of the gun show alone.

I know - "don't give an inch", etc, but something is going to happen and this would be the least intrusive.

Flame away....

 

[JeremiahJohnson]

Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I'll compromise to keep the peace when people behave themselves. However, when totally in the right and being bullied and called names I'm just less inclined to give. My pissed-off meter pegged about two months ago. I regularly tell my reps specifically no - no - and no. No AWB. No UBC. No Magazine Restrictions.

 

[g.mccormick]

Anyway...my thought is if something passes....a LTCH exempts you from UBC's....and family members are exempted(of course...they can point to Newtown and say that shouldn't apply)...

Newtown should not even enter into the conversation. That piece of crap murdered and stole. His mom did not give/sell him the weapons.

 

[traderdan]

Maybe stepping on toes but the gun shows I have been to there are more "gun collectors" and "private parties" selling guns than dealers. Some of these "collectors" have more guns displayed than the dealers. For someone not "in the gun business" they do a lot of business. The Libs want to "close the gun show loop hole" so make it that any gun sold within the confines of a gun show subject to background checks. Leave private sales outside the confines of the gun show alone.

I know - "don't give an inch", etc, but something is going to happen and this would be the least intrusive.

Flame away....

Why accept the idea that "something is going to happen"?It is time to push back the other direction.I will NOT accept any part of these "common sense" ideas promoted by those who hate our freedoms. What could possibly be wrong with a free man selling his possessions in a free market in any situation available?

 

[traderdan]

We do not negotiate with terrorists and we do not negotiate with socialists. And for the same reason.

VERY clear logical reasoning!

 

[Kirk Freeman]

The Libs want to "close the gun show loop hole" so make it that any gun sold within the confines of a gun show subject to background checks. Leave private sales outside the confines of the gun show alone.

I believe you are operating under a misunderstanding of what the UBC proposals include.

All sales, inside and outside, gun shows are within the purview of UBC proposals.

Let's ask the residents of Colorado what happens when you give up on UBCs and see what happens next.

Indiana has done this. Our UBC for handguns was a complete and dismal failure. NO need to repeat the stupidty because of feelings.

 

[Scutter01]

Compromise, as we know, means that both sides "give up a little". When you sit down to compromise that which you already have, you've already lost.

NO MORE COMPROMISES. NOT. ONE. MORE. INCH.

 

[Willie]

I believe you are operating under a misunderstanding of what the UBC proposals include.

All sales, inside and outside, gun shows are within the purview of UBC proposals.

Let's ask the residents of Colorado what happens when you give up on UBCs and see what happens next.

Indiana has done this. Our UBC for handguns was a complete and dismal failure. NO need to repeat the stupidty because of feelings.

Not talking about UBCs at all, just checks within the gun shows themselves no matter who is selling. These "collectors" are sure selling a lot of guns to not be "in the gun business".

 

[eldirector]

How about "No"?

Let's force the "other side" to compromise for a change. I'm tired of giving away my freedom for nothing. I want MORE of my freedom back, not less and less.