Background checks have been used as a method of "registration". A few years ago the US Congress with held funding in order to make the ATF destroy the records regarding the sale of guns. Seems the ATF were archiving all names and gun sales for a period of time. This was against the Constitution and the rules of operation set by Congress. If you think this won't (or isn't happening right now), I have some land to sell cheap about 250 mile south of Key West. As to harsher penalties - if they would enforce the ones they have (against the Attorney General also) it would be a bigger help than making new ones.
I don't understand what a more "stringent" background check is? Do they only do "light" background checks right now? These are just a bunch of feel good words for pansy asses IMO
My acceptable solution is to remove or repeal any past restrictions or infringements.
we have let these people push us to far already.
everytime something bad happens, they try and make new laws, and we let them push us just a little bit farther. SBR, suppressors, aow. and other nfa items. this is one of their pushes that we have somehow learned to live with. i agree with most of you. it is time we pushed back. they introduce a new law, we beat that law down, and a current gun law with it. if every time they try to enact a new law, they lose ground on gun control, they will eventually stop trying to put out new laws.
we push back, we push back hard, do not stop until every one of these stupid laws are gone.
thats as far as i am willing to compromise.
Well I don't know about the rest of you, but if they take another inch...
I'M GUNNA START SHOOTING PEO.....
Man I cant even say it. I know its what all the cool kids on INGO are saying these days, but I just cant get it out.
Such a failure.
I should have known it would derail into a barrage of "not a damn thing".
I dont disagree, our goal is not to compromise, but they will want SOMETHING. Congress may very well be incapable of passing ANYTHING, which is all we can hope for, but I am more interested in what people could actually live with. We are talking amongst ourselves, not in a negotiation with the other side. If we had to chose "X new rules" or "Feinstein's AWB Ban" what would "X new rules" be?
Obviously there are is a lot of emphasis on what might happen, or what could happen, but in all likelihood it will come down to a compromise. If we have to accept new legislation, what could you live with?
I could live with a practical way to perform NICS checks for private parties, provided it was not required by law, but provided as an option to vette out buyers who shouldnt be buying. Personally, I would actually feel comfortable doing transactions on Armslist or similar sites if I could check someone out. The check would in some way have to be mutual, and it would have to be free.
I would also like to see existing laws enforced to a much stricter degree to prevent sudo dealers who are selling stacks of new guns as a "private party". If you are operating a business, you should have an FFL. I would also support better contribution of mental health records, as long as it was court ordered. Among those records I would also include things like court ordered anger management. Lastly, I would support an improvement to NICS so that when someone was denied (not delayed, but denied) that it would notify the local police immediately. If that person was already being monitored by local LEOs, that information could be helpful.