Posted on 02/03/2013 9:43:35 AM PST by TurboZamboni
Among comments to my last piece, “Lautenberg gun show bill as bad as expected,” several were from well-meaning gun owners who honestly questioned why S. 843 – ostensibly submitted to close the “gun show loophole” – is really so bad.
A typical and knowledgeable comment went like this:
“I am a very pro-gun person. I own a couple of rifles and I will never support any [‘assault weapon’ ban]. I don't even support the ‘86 [McClure-Volkmer] automatic ban. But background checks should be required for any and every sale. If that means transferring it at the dealer, then fine.
"But any kind of government-kept record of who owns what I am strongly opposed to. Make the bill less ridiculous and get rid of all of the registration clauses and I will not oppose it.”
While reasonable and well-intentioned, the argument contains a presumption which, unfortunately, rarely pertains in politics: It presumes the intentions of the bill are honest. Below are the main three reasons why legislation purporting to require “background checks” is unacceptable.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
“Background check - YES”
WHY?
I’m buying a gun. What the hell reason do you have to interfere? Get a warrant or get out of my way!
To clarify, it takes 60 days or more in NJ to get your FID card initially. After you have your FID card, it is lifetime, the background check at the gun store takes less than 30 minutes as in Texas. This is for long guns. For handguns you must get a permit for every purchase from your local police. This can take a day or a few weeks. Both have been true for me. With permit, the background check at gun store takes less than 30 minutes. This has been my experience for buying firearms in NJ the last couple of years.
Background check means everyone has a profile in the sytem.
That is not acceptable because it means registration, the first step of confiscation.
A No Buy List for illegals, felons and those declared dangerously mentally ill is the solution. The list would not be that large. The mentally ill no buy individuals cannot be simply deemed so by some bureaucrat.
What the government really wants is an extensive FBI file on every citizen including political profile. That is NOT ACCEPTABLE, EVER.
By the way, the FBI has known my background because of my father-in-law for the past 40+ years. He was in the weapons industry.
Background check captures a felon, narrowing his weapon procurement to the cartel underground. It does not capture the law abiding in any manner, or your purchase. It does not register your name, or your newly purchased gun.
Otherwise, felons have the same privileges as you do. Make them have to feel their way through the high risk alleys, in dark, damp places, before they can get a gun from a guy who might break their neck after selling them a gun.
Simple.
Ah, the old “what have you got to hide?” principle.
Fail.
There’s this thing alongside the 2nd Amendment called the 4th Amendment. It basically says that if there isn’t any indication of wrongdoing (to a sufficient degree a judge can adjudicate thereon) then the government has to stay the heck out of someone’s private affairs and dealings. To wit: if I’m buying a gun in a perfectly normal manner which is legitimate in nigh unto all cases, you (ie.: the government) has no business interfering with a “guilty until proven innocent” approach.
Jobs are contingent on clearing a background check, so it seems our names are already in the system. Liability risk for gun sellers would be as severe as for employers, companies and corporations, without the background check, it seems to me.
Registration is a bridge too far, of invasive information collection, but the BC is probably here to stay.
What other rights would you deny me? My felony was carrying a concealed gun in Illinois.
I didn't even knowingly break the law. I had been out shooting (legal), slipped the pistol in my heavy coat pocket and promptly forgot it was there. The next day, it was still there when I hung my coat at a restaurant, waitress saw it, called the cops and at age 57, after a $1500 fine, $2500 lawyer fee, 18 months probation, I was a convicted felon.
Sorry, that is not what I had in mind.
Of course I would not include that.
Yes the left is making a mockary of “the law”.
Experienced “criteria creep” myself firsthand.
It can happen at the local(county level) in addition to state and federal.
Mine was at the county level. There are plenty of little tyrants out there.
If the seller wants to run a background check, fine.
“Background check - YES”
That is still asking permission and qualifying under government rules that they can and do intend to change.
Did you ask permission by receiving a background check to excercise any of your other rights, such as your 1st Amendment right to post here on FR? Didn’t think so.
“Background check captures a felon, narrowing his weapon procurement to the cartel underground. It does not capture the law abiding in any manner, or your purchase. It does not register your name, or your newly purchased gun.”
Yes, it does register your name and for some States it captures the serial number, make and model of what you bought, furhter adding to the illegal database of gun owners. It also captures buyers through 4473 forms being sttored for 20 years. The federal government on multiple occasions admitted to keeping those records.
A felon gets a gun anytime he wants one. Every teenaged gangbanger on the street has one.
It DOES capture law abiding people. Thousands every year are denied weapons purchases until they go through all kinds of hoops to straighten out the legal mess that causes.
You are a hopeless liberal.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.