Universal Background Checks

[AuEagle]

Here's something no one has touched on regarding universal/private sale background checks.

Another can of worms this opens is that when one makes a private sale, the buyer & seller are recorded.

What happens when the private seller is deemed a dealer & the atf comes knocking asking why one is selling such a large number of guns?

Just another freedom in jeopardy.

 

[DaveTN]

That could be a problem. But if the ATF wanted to do that pickings would be pretty easy right now. They obviously aren’t going after people doing that.

I don’t think a Federal background check will pass SCOTUS muster. So the question will be, what are the feds going to give the states to get this passed? I don’t think we have any worries unless the Tennessee Legislature is willing to require background checks on private sales.

[AuEagle]

How would it be easy for them if private sales are indeed private?

Maybe I'm missing something???

[DaveTN]

2 minutes ago, AuEagle said:

How would it be easy for them if private sales are indeed private?

Maybe I'm missing something???

Private sales aren’t private; they are advertised on the internet. If they are truly private and not put online; there wouldn’t be any danger of that happening.

[AuEagle]

36 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

Private sales aren’t private; they are advertised on the internet. If they are truly private and not put online; there wouldn’t be any danger of that happening.

I believe the huge majority of private sales aren't on the internet.  Gun shows, friends, shooting club members, etc...

There are many family transactions that are & never should be reported.

 

 

Edited August 20, 2019 by AuEagle

[DaveTN]

36 minutes ago, AuEagle said:

I believe the huge majority of private sales aren't on the internet.  Gun shows, friends, shooting club members, etc...

Then they aren't the low hanging fruit. But yes, if sales are documented and they are running a business; they could have a problem.

36 minutes ago, AuEagle said:

There are many family transactions that are & never should be reported.

I agree. And I don't think background checks will stop any shootings. But I think we are about to find out that most Americans do not agree with us.

[DaveTN]

FOX is reporting President Trump called Wayne LaPierre today and told him universal background checks are off the table. Of course, that has little impact on what the Legislature decides to do.

[Garufa]

9 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

FOX is reporting President Trump called Wayne LaPierre today and told him universal background checks are off the table. Of course, that has little impact on what the Legislature decides to do.

If the House and Senate pass it he will sign.  

[DaveTN]

36 minutes ago, Garufa said:

If the House and Senate pass it he will sign.  

I’m sure he would if it came to that.

[krunchnik]

Scenario:I have a gun for sale-Joe bob wants to buy gun from me so we go to FFL for transfer

Snafu:Joe bob is prohibited from buying due to felony record

Recourse:Now what do I and the FFL have to do-

Do I keep my gun-does the FFL keep a record of Joe Bob-does Jo Bob get pissed off at both of us and try to knife us both-do the cops get called-all good questions that I would bet not one of those snot nosed politicians ever think of.

Universal Background Checks are pure BS

[Garufa]

16 minutes ago, krunchnik said:

Scenario:I have a gun for sale-Joe bob wants to buy gun from me so we go to FFL for transfer

Snafu:Joe bob is prohibited from buying due to felony record

Recourse:Now what do I and the FFL have to do-

Do I keep my gun-does the FFL keep a record of Joe Bob-does Jo Bob get pissed off at both of us and try to knife us both-do the cops get called-all good questions that I would bet not one of those snot nosed politicians ever think of.

Universal Background Checks are pure BS

I don’t know but somebody’s going to be out $50, $75 or maybe $100.  FFL fees are going to skyrocket if UBC is passed.

[Wingshooter]

47 minutes ago, krunchnik said:

Scenario:I have a gun for sale-Joe bob wants to buy gun from me so we go to FFL for transfer

Snafu:Joe bob is prohibited from buying due to felony record

Recourse:Now what do I and the FFL have to do-

Do I keep my gun-does the FFL keep a record of Joe Bob-does Jo Bob get pissed off at both of us and try to knife us both-do the cops get called-all good questions that I would bet not one of those snot nosed politicians ever think of.

Universal Background Checks are pure BS

Probably just confiscate the gun and arrest both parties on weapons charges.

Or...

Even if Joe Bob was denied due to an error, I think Joe Bob would be forever added to “The List” of special “terrorists” for Frienstein and Squad to babysit.

 

On second thought... they’d add us to that list anyway even if we passed the check because that’s why they want UBC.

 

[Chucktshoes]

If the left really wanted universal NICS checks they would push for Trump or any other PotUS to make NICS available to the public for free or for a small nominal fee. Make it free and have it generate a confirmation that the check was done and everyone would use it. When they push for laws to force people to go through FFLs only it becomes apparent that the goal isn’t universal checks but is instead just ratcheting up the degree of difficulty for gun transfers in the hopes of curbing ownership numbers.
 

If I had access to NICS I would use it for every sale simply for my own piece of mind. How many of y’all would do the same without being forced to by law? I’d venture that the vast majority of y’all would. 

[Jeb48]

NY has UBC and if you follow the law as written, you can not even loan a shotgun to a friend to shoot clays without going to an FFL, then back again when they returns it. Obviously no one would do that, but that is how tight (stupid) they wrote the law. Gun shows guns were not allowed to be sold outside anymore but you could still bring them inside to sell without a booth but when you came in with a gun, even if you did not plan to sell it, you had paperwork to fill out and a tag was put on the gun. When you left you had to go through a check out where they would be sure the owner going out was still the owner or you had a tag that it had been transferred with onsite FFL.

Not sure where I originally heard the suggestion but it seems like with the current NICS system they have all the data to make a pass fail system where a phone call from anyone with a minimum of info, like last 4 of SSN and zip code or last name, they could quickly say yes or no. No paperwork needed, no gun information recorded, if the person failed and they thought there was a mistake, you could go to an FFL. Most honest gun sellers would probably make a free phone call to check a sale to an unknown person if no paperwork or $ were required. Dishonest gun sellers would not obey a UBC laws anyway.  A plus/shortcut would be a carry permit could be an automatic approval.

I'm not naive I know the real purpose of UBC is to just make it a pain for gun ownership and a backdoor gun registry.

[DWARREN123]

Just remember politicians are not friends of our Constitution!

[DaveTN]

10 hours ago, krunchnik said:

Scenario:I have a gun for sale-Joe bob wants to buy gun from me so we go to FFL for transfer

Snafu:Joe bob is prohibited from buying due to felony record

Recourse:Now what do I and the FFL have to do-

Do I keep my gun-does the FFL keep a record of Joe Bob-does Jo Bob get pissed off at both of us and try to knife us both-do the cops get called-all good questions that I would bet not one of those snot nosed politicians ever think of.

Universal Background Checks are pure BS

Of course you keep your gun; its yours. There is no transfer.

The dealer charges Joe Bob the fee up front. (Unless you agreed to pay it) So its already paid and Joe Bob (or you) is out of luck.

If Joe Bob is stupid enough to make a scene and the cops are called; he gets cuffed and stuffed.

Both you and the gun store owner have guns. If Joe Bob pulls a knife; I hope you have your ear plugs in, there may be hearing damage.

Universal Background Checks are BS. Unless of course they just kept Joe Bob from buying a gun from you.

I know its not a popular opinion to some here, but as responsible gun owners we have a moral and ethical obligation to do what we can to keep firearms out of the hands of people that would hurt innocent victims. I’m not saying Universal Background checks will do that; I’m saying we have a responsibility to do what we can.

Quote

 

From May 2016...https://www.thetrace.org/2016/05/lie-and-try-prohibited-gun-buying/

In early April, Tennessee became the latest state to enact a “lie and try” law or policy, joining Pennsylvania, California, Colorado, Illinois, Utah, Oregon, and Virginia in doing so. The states currently considering similar measures include Maryland, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Michigan, and New Hampshire.

Chris Scoda, the owner of Advanced Arms Gun Shop in Pittston, tells The Trace that the customer with the outstanding warrant who tried to buy a gun in his shop was a “nice gentleman” as he filled out his background check form. Scoda says he submitted the man’s paperwork for review by the Pennsylvania Instant Check System, which uses state and federal data to screen prospective buyers. According to Scoda, an examiner for the agency quickly flagged the warrant, and notified police, who showed up at his shop to make the arrest.

“Anytime somebody attempts to purchase a firearm unlawfully,” says Scoda, “I think the prosecution of that person is very important.”

 

 

[DaveTN]

10 hours ago, Chucktshoes said:

If the left really wanted universal NICS checks they would push for Trump or any other PotUS to make NICS available to the public for free or for a small nominal fee. Make it free and have it generate a confirmation that the check was done and everyone would use it. When they push for laws to force people to go through FFLs only it becomes apparent that the goal isn’t universal checks but is instead just ratcheting up the degree of difficulty for gun transfers in the hopes of curbing ownership numbers.
 

If I had access to NICS I would use it for every sale simply for my own piece of mind. How many of y’all would do the same without being forced to by law? I’d venture that the vast majority of y’all would. 

Agreed. We can’t do a background check, buy why couldn’t we enter the information and get a simple “Yes” or “No”.

But as you say the goal isn’t to do background checks and keep bad people from getting guns. I believe, the goal is for Republicans to be able to say they are doing everything they can, and for Democrats to do everything they can to stop any gun sale.

[gregintenn]

17 hours ago, DaveTN said:

I’m sure he would if it came to that.

I don't share your certainty. It appears to me that someone has conveyed the fact to Trump that he's toast in the upcoming election if he pizzez off the gun crowd. I think he's smart enough to listen.

Now after the election, I'd say all bets are off.

Edited August 21, 2019 by gregintenn

[Trekbike]

I think KNOW there would be much less "general population" support for Universal Background Checks if the correct name for the proposal would be used.    As most gun owners know, the proper name is "Federal Firearm Registration".      I despise the conniving political and media lowlifes.

[DaveTN]

1 hour ago, gregintenn said:

I don't share your certainty. It appears to me that someone has conveyed the fact to Trump that he's toast in the upcoming election if he pizzez off the gun crowd. I think he's smart enough to listen.

Now after the election, I'd say all bets are off.

I hope we don’t have to find out, but I don’t think he would lose enough votes to matter if it was voted in by Congress and he signed it. But if Congress voted in a bill on background checks and he shot it down; stick a fork in him he done. But I don’t think there is going to be a Federal Universal Background check bill. I don’t think it would pass muster with the SCOTUS. I think there will be a push for each state to implement it. (Apply what they already have to all sales)

But that’s just my WAG; who knows.

The last election was won on the economy & Jobs, if Trump wins again it will be because of the economy & Jobs. If he loses it will be over immigration. Guns will have zero impact on this election.

[Omega]

19 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

I hope we don’t have to find out, but I don’t think he would lose enough votes to matter if it was voted in by Congress and he signed it. But if Congress voted in a bill on background checks and he shot it down; stick a fork in him he done. But I don’t think there is going to be a Federal Universal Background check bill. I don’t think it would pass muster with the SCOTUS. I think there will be a push for each state to implement it. (Apply what they already have to all sales)

But that’s just my WAG; who knows.

The last election was won on the economy & Jobs, if Trump wins again it will be because of the economy & Jobs. If he loses it will be over immigration. Guns will have zero impact on this election.

Not sure I'd agree, if he killed an anti gun bill who would he be done with?  I hope most are not single issue voters, but there are enough that are to make a difference.  None of the things he has done will win any of the hard left voters, and maybe he will get some of the centrist Dems, and definitely will win votes from those that just couldn't vote for him last time.  I mean, who doesn't want a strong economy and low unemployment?  He will win no votes implementing universal background checks, but he may lose some, so..which way do you think he will go?

[E4 No More]

1 hour ago, Omega said:

Not sure I'd agree, if he killed an anti gun bill who would he be done with?  I hope most are not single issue voters, but there are enough that are to make a difference.  None of the things he has done will win any of the hard left voters, and maybe he will get some of the centrist Dems, and definitely will win votes from those that just couldn't vote for him last time.  I mean, who doesn't want a strong economy and low unemployment?  He will win no votes implementing universal background checks, but he may lose some, so..which way do you think he will go?

Bill Maher

[DaveTN]

54 minutes ago, E4 No More said:

Bill Maher

& the MSM

[gregintenn]

58 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

& the MSM

....and the entire Democrat party!

[Wingshooter]

4 hours ago, DaveTN said:

I hope we don’t have to find out, but I don’t think he would lose enough votes to matter if it was voted in by Congress and he signed it. But if Congress voted in a bill on background checks and he shot it down; stick a fork in him he done. But I don’t think there is going to be a Federal Universal Background check bill. I don’t think it would pass muster with the SCOTUS. I think there will be a push for each state to implement it. (Apply what they already have to all sales)

But that’s just my WAG; who knows.

The last election was won on the economy & Jobs, if Trump wins again it will be because of the economy & Jobs. If he loses it will be over immigration. Guns will have zero impact on this election.

Hmm... I can’t say I agree with the last sentence. Nothing fires up the base like the prospect of 2A infringement. He needs his base to be fired up FOR him on election day. I for one would lose a lot of my motivation for Trump if he backs down on protecting the 2A whereas right now I’m all in to give him another term. I know I'm not alone. I’m certainly not a single issue voter, but guns are part of the foundation. If he blurs the lines between himself and the dems in a big way on guns, then he’s toast IMO

Edited August 21, 2019 by Wingshooter