Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Background checks could be gun control deal breaker
yahoo ^ | february 1, 2013 | national constitution center staff

Posted on 02/02/2013 9:52:39 AM PST by lowbridge

The idea of expanded background checks for prospective gun owners is quickly becoming the battleground in Congress for any changes in national weapons control legislation.

March On Washington Source: WikicommonsIn nearly a dozen national polls from varying organizations, an overwhelming large number of people seem in favor of more background checks on gun owners.

A Quinnipiac poll covering three states, Virginia, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, showed that more than 90 percent of those polled favored expanding background checks to people who buy weapons at gun shows.

Last week, Constitution Daily looked at polling questions on guns from nine different sources, including Fox News, NBC, ABC, Pew Research, and Gallup.

On average, 89 percent of those people polled wanted expanded background checks. The background check issue, along with a desire to devote more resources to mental health issues, were the two ideas that had overwhelmingly large support in the polls.

At Wednesday’s gun violence hearings in Washington, the National Rifle Association and a key GOP senator downplayed the significance of expanding background checks.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 113th; awb; banglist; guncontrol; guns; secondamendment
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-57 next last

1 posted on 02/02/2013 9:52:46 AM PST by lowbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

UNIVERSAL BACKGROUND CHECKS = REGISTRATION = CONFISCATION = WAR

What part of this do they oot understand?


2 posted on 02/02/2013 9:58:43 AM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

In California, all sales (save some curio long guns) require background checks and a 10 day waiting period. All handguns registered in this process. In Jan 2014, long guns will need to be registered. All so-called assault weapons already require registration and no new non-compliant models can be purchased.

CA has already had some limited confiscation after registration....... cetain non-compliant assault weapons.

If we get universal background checks, you can bet after the next mass shooting, they will demand registration.


3 posted on 02/02/2013 10:05:09 AM PST by umgud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

The polling companies did not inform the low information voter that a universal background check would have implement universal registration for it to be possible.


4 posted on 02/02/2013 10:08:28 AM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

All sales have to be background checked already in PA. There is no registration and there has been no confiscation.

Federal law prohibits any registration.

If they want to change this law, then they will have a fight on their hands. But as the law is now, all records of background checks are purged.


5 posted on 02/02/2013 10:19:40 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
The polling companies did not inform the low information voter that a universal background check would have implement universal registration for it to be possible.

Why is that?

There is a list of prohibited buyers, not a list of allowed buyers.

6 posted on 02/02/2013 10:21:34 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Red Steel:
The polling companies did not inform the low information voter that a universal background check would have implement universal registration for it to be possible.

FTA:
...more than 90 percent of those polled favored expanding background checks to people who buy weapons at gun shows.

I would add to Red’s comment that based on the article, the low information voters don’t know that background checks are ALREADY done at gun shows. zer0bama and his minions in the drive-by media are lying by misdirection.


7 posted on 02/02/2013 10:22:27 AM PST by Peet (TurboTax: "So simple even a Secretary of the Treasury can use it!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge
90 percent of those polled favored expanding background checks to people who buy weapons at gun shows.

Perhaps, but what difference does it make?

8 posted on 02/02/2013 10:32:37 AM PST by Jeff Chandler (WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
all records of background checks are purged.

And, J. Edgar Hoover didn't keep files on regular Americans who hadn't broken the law. If there is a Form 4473 executed as part of this, the law says the seller has to maintain a copy of this in a fireproof safe for 10 years. Federal law prohibits any registration

Yes, there is a law against it but that has not stopped ATF from visiting gunshops and asking for copies of their Forms 4473 - this is documented.

You are so very trusting of the government that is preparing to enslave you and you don't even know it. You believe they will obey the laws which they have clearly shown they will not. Universal checks requiring paper documentation make registration, through some concocted emergency action, available to the government - they know who has what and that is REGISTRATION.

Registration is just Confiscation unexecuted, again on the pretext of some BS emergency like the police actually did in New Orleans following Katrina even though it was egregiously and patently illegal and proven so afterwards.

9 posted on 02/02/2013 10:34:38 AM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

Democrats and RINOS
GOD DENIERS AND CONGENITAL LIARS
ARE REDISTRIBUTE WEALTH INCITERS/
FOR FIRST YOUR MONEY THEN YOUR GUNS
AND BE DEFENSELESS WHEN CROOKS COME

It’s time to get government out of Your face
Your religion and your pocketbook

(The above is designed to be printed up and passed around your precinct and your friends and neighbors as a (index sized) palmcard.


10 posted on 02/02/2013 10:37:59 AM PST by mosesdapoet ("It's a sin to tell a lie", in telling others that , got me my nickname ......Ex Chi" mechanic")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

If your argument is that the gov’t will do what it wants regardless of any law prohibiting registration, then, pardon the phrase, what difference does it make what the law is?


11 posted on 02/02/2013 10:39:45 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

Don’t they already do background checks before a purchase? Isn’t that what the call in for approval is?
I’m not sure what I’m missing. Is there some way around background checks?


12 posted on 02/02/2013 10:42:13 AM PST by Ghost of Philip Marlowe (Prepare for survival.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave; All

If they are caught violating the law by a future administration, they can be punished. “The government” is not universally monolithic.


13 posted on 02/02/2013 10:45:51 AM PST by marktwain (The MSM must die for the Republic to live. Long live the new media!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Ghost of Philip Marlowe

A private citizen who is not in the business of selling firearms may sell a firearm to another private citizen without undergoing a Federal background check. In some states, like PA, all transfers except those within a family, must go through a dealer and be checked.

Anyone who is in the business of selling firearms needs to have a federal license and do checks on all sales, whether they are at a gun show or any other place.


14 posted on 02/02/2013 10:49:52 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Exactly. And if the law says registration is illegal and permits the ATF to access 4473 forms only when a gun is used in a crime, then it is simply not true that background checks = registration.


15 posted on 02/02/2013 10:51:38 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
Not actually. The requirement, any requirement to do a NICS check won't go undocumented. The impetus for that NICS check is a Form 4473 where the seller reviews data and answers to specific questions prior to calling NICS for an okay...I'm saying that any law that requires UNIVERSAL checks will be accompanied by some kind of documentation. It will HAVE to be because how else would the government and ghoul media be able to say whether the next nut who murders people with a gun actually passed some sort of gate. The closest they now have is a Form 4473 and the law states what it states about those. If we allow them to require universal checks, we might as well sew some little yellow "G" patches on all our clothes like the Nazis made the Jews do.

These are the same people that have encouraged the butchering of maybe 50 million unborn souls. Do you think they'd skip a heartbeat in denying you your right to a gun? Go look at that internet picture of the Chinese officer preparing to blow a young girl's brains out while the other good soldiers hold her trying to duck out of the way of the splatter. Those people are no different than many of the liberals in this country today. They are just using words now.

16 posted on 02/02/2013 10:55:42 AM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: mosesdapoet

Substituting the word “they” for the word “crooks” would make this poem equally applicable to government agents, who represent crooks anyway. :(


17 posted on 02/02/2013 10:57:43 AM PST by ez (Laws only apply to little people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Ghost of Philip Marlowe

When you purchase a gun from a dealer. They give you a Form 4473 to fill out which contains pertinent data and questions you have to answer about numerous things. If you answer these correctly and the dealer has no reservations about selling a weapon to you he calls NICS for a clearance/approval. That obtained, he sells you the gun, unless there is a local/state law requiring a waiting period.

In my state, a CCW holder can fill out the Form 4473 and take the gun away right then. I’ve done this multiple times. I’ve saved way over the NICS check cost to pay for the CCW, BTW.


18 posted on 02/02/2013 10:59:12 AM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

So your argument is that the gov’t will gain access to the Form 4473’s on a routine basis and ignore the law regulating their access to this information?


19 posted on 02/02/2013 11:00:49 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

A background check is an infringement, as much as a license or permit requirement. What part of “shall not be infringed” confuses them?


20 posted on 02/02/2013 11:04:30 AM PST by JimRed (Excise the cancer before it kills us; feed &water the Tree of Liberty! TERM LIMITS, NOW & FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave

They are already doing it according to some sources.


21 posted on 02/02/2013 11:05:34 AM PST by ez (Laws only apply to little people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
But as the law is now, all records of background checks are purged.

So they say. And we should believe them because...?

22 posted on 02/02/2013 11:07:28 AM PST by JimRed (Excise the cancer before it kills us; feed &water the Tree of Liberty! TERM LIMITS, NOW & FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave

My point is that thety have shown they have no compunction that an ATF could walk into a gun store, say in Arizona, and ask to review the Forms. They have done this and it has been reported here.. Luckily more experienced employees did not comply because it is illegal, but they (government) TRIED!

Obama and his administration, BTW he controls ATF, DHS, TSA, et al, ignore the immigration laws on a daily basis.

Obama and his administration ignored Federal Bankruptcy Law in robbing the premium bond holders in GM.

Obama and his administration ignored Federal Law in directing BP to establish a damage fund of $10B and pay claims before any fault or legal action had been taken.

Obama and his administration ignored the Constitution regarding his submission of a federal budget, blah blah blah blah blah.....blah....

Do I have to go on?


23 posted on 02/02/2013 11:08:09 AM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
There is a list of prohibited buyers, not a list of allowed buyers.

Anyone who cannot be trusted to own and carry arms should not be running around loose!

24 posted on 02/02/2013 11:10:36 AM PST by JimRed (Excise the cancer before it kills us; feed &water the Tree of Liberty! TERM LIMITS, NOW & FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

Show me even a single gun which has been used in a mass shooting purchased at a gun show.

They can go F themselves.


25 posted on 02/02/2013 11:13:03 AM PST by Red in Blue PA (When Injustice becomes Law, Resistance Becomes Duty.-Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

The only way to enforce universal background checks is through gun registration. I’m sure thats what Barry and company are aiming for. I cannot imagine it getting through Congress. If it did everyone would just ignore it anyway.


26 posted on 02/02/2013 11:16:10 AM PST by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JimRed

See my earlier post. If you believe the ATF or other gov’t agencies are violating the law already, then what difference does it make what the law is?

You are on a different plane.


27 posted on 02/02/2013 11:22:15 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave

Hi Dave...

I am puzzled by your comment about federal law preventing registration.

A few years ago I had a couple weapons ripped off, needed to file police report, insurance claim and so on...

As I was traveling I simply called the retail outlet where I had purchased them a year or two prior and they were able to look up my serial numbers, etc.

To my understanding (I could be wrong) they used my background check records to do so...does that sound unlikely to you?


28 posted on 02/02/2013 11:24:27 AM PST by Fightin Whitey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Georgia Girl 2
The only way to enforce universal background checks is through gun registration.

Huh? We have background checks today on all sales from dealers. They check against a list of prohibited people. They don't need registration to do this. You make no sense.

29 posted on 02/02/2013 11:25:17 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Fightin Whitey

The records of the sale remain with the dealer. They can be access by law enforcement only for legitimate purposes, like a weapon recovered in a crime.

The records do not go to a centralized place. They are not computerized. They are not available to the gov’t to use as it sees fit.

On the other end of the phone, the information from the FBI background check is purged. No record is kept of the names being queried. No permanent records, no computerization, not access to gov’t agencies. Nothing exists after the check is complete.


30 posted on 02/02/2013 11:31:02 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave

If the feds have any access to 4473 after the check has been approved or denied, then it’s registration. Those forms are supposed to be destroyed.


31 posted on 02/02/2013 11:33:28 AM PST by andyk (I have sworn...eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave

I take your word for it, though it seems odd that a big retailer would sit with thousands of purchase records on hand.

Also, though I know you are giving the facts, I also know that some branch of law enforcement could cook up reasons to look into almost anything.

Here’s my real question, however: for all these years I have considered it advantageous to purchase from private parties, precisely because there would be NO records to be accessed.

So is that supposed advantage far overstated?

Thanks much Dave...


32 posted on 02/02/2013 11:47:25 AM PST by Fightin Whitey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: andyk
Those forms are supposed to be destroyed.

What do you mean? That all of the federal firearms licensees are breaking the law by keeping these forms?

33 posted on 02/02/2013 11:54:23 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Fightin Whitey

It’s definitely an advantage. But not an option in my state.

I think the main point is that having an “undocumented” weapon in a confiscation scenario would be an advantage. But if we get to the point where the gov’t is going to all FFLs and confiscating their records so they can sweep through towns to take all private arms, we have reached a turning point.

The gov’t moving to begin confiscating weapons would be a declaration of war.


34 posted on 02/02/2013 11:57:29 AM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

20,000 gun laws on the books already.

NO MORE LAWS OR REGULATIONS!

NONE!

Don’t give a G-D inch on anything!


35 posted on 02/02/2013 12:08:16 PM PST by 2111USMC (aim small, miss small)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

Most people don’t even know what a gun show is, and have no idea what is meant by the phrase “gun show loophole”.

They think that dealers can sell at a gunshow without doing background checks, which is false.

Ask people if they think they should have to pay for a background check to sell a gun to a friend or relative, or to inherit one from their parent. THAT is the same thing as the “gun show loophole”.


36 posted on 02/02/2013 12:09:59 PM PST by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave

“Why is that?” (a universal background check would have implement universal registration for it to be possible.)

Think about it. How do you enforce the requirement that private sellers have to participate in a background check?

The only way it will work is for the government to maintain a record of what guns you own and a record of what you bought and sold. Every state that has a universal background checks has registration.

BTW, this universal background check is the old gun show loophole. Their last attempt to close it was designed to impose such legal liabilities upon gun show promoters as to put them out of business.


37 posted on 02/02/2013 12:12:56 PM PST by DugwayDuke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

One can only hope so.


38 posted on 02/02/2013 12:21:48 PM PST by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

39 posted on 02/02/2013 12:23:43 PM PST by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DugwayDuke
How do you enforce the requirement that private sellers have to participate in a background check? The only way it will work is for the government to maintain a record of what guns you own and a record of what you bought and sold.

That's the only way? You couldn't just run stings? I think so.

Every state that has a universal background checks has registration.

Not true. There is no registration in PA and all sales have to go through a dealer. Except to family.

40 posted on 02/02/2013 12:24:45 PM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge; All
For those that think the PTB will quietly observe privacy and not have access to lists and not share those lists. Behold the city of Los Angeles now has access to firearms purchasers lists and the DA sends out letters to recent purchasers in the form of a warning letter that smacks of blatant intimidation, ie: “We know who you are and what you did”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/21/la-gun-owners_n_2345364.html

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=693490

41 posted on 02/02/2013 12:30:48 PM PST by Polynikes (Hakkaa Palle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Polynikes

Laws are very different in California. The question being discussed is whether federal law for background checks is the same thing as registration.


42 posted on 02/02/2013 12:38:25 PM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave

You’re the one insisting there is no registration, while acknowledging that gun dealers provide access to 4473 after crimes have been committed.


43 posted on 02/02/2013 1:31:26 PM PST by andyk (I have sworn...eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave

I know that but Kali has a reputation as being a pre-cursor to various social trends both good and bad.


44 posted on 02/02/2013 1:33:32 PM PST by Polynikes (Hakkaa Palle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge
The background check issue, along with a desire to devote more resources to mental health issues, were the two ideas that had overwhelmingly large support in the polls.

This does not bode well for both houses of Congress. Presumably, deficiency in mental health would logically have repercussions well beyond gun ownership, or merely the Second Amendment...

45 posted on 02/02/2013 2:00:12 PM PST by publius911 (Look for the Union Label -- then buy something else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
If your argument is that the gov’t will do what it wants regardless of any law prohibiting registration, then, pardon the phrase, what difference does it make what the law is?

The difference is that those entitled to ignore the law also decide whom it applies to.

The masters vs the producers; no contest, if they have all the weapons.

46 posted on 02/02/2013 2:10:59 PM PST by publius911 (Look for the Union Label -- then buy something else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave

That clarifies my confusion. Thanks.


47 posted on 02/02/2013 2:34:49 PM PST by Ghost of Philip Marlowe (Prepare for survival.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ez

Background checks could be gun control deal breaker, ez wrote:
Substituting the word “they” for the word “crooks” would make this poem equally applicable to government agents, who represent crooks anyway. :(

Whatever floats your boat and gets their goat.

Actually thought of using it but in certain groups and areas may not go over some of the guys in pointy hats (bishops) might not like it .... . Instead of offering a set design and hope the copy is kept. The object is to have it appear ir’s comming from the bottom up not from one central source and hopefully showing up all over the country. That scares the hell out of the powers that be including believe it or not the media. Besides as you say and I also thought of it. The word crooks does apply to to too many of them.

Also I could have signed it pushed my website http://www.theusmat.com/ etc etc but I’m most interested in to get a movement going rather than feeding my ego.


48 posted on 02/02/2013 3:48:29 PM PST by mosesdapoet ("It's a sin to tell a lie", in telling others that , got me my nickname ......Ex Chi" mechanic")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave

“Huh? We have background checks today on all sales from dealers.”

Universal means private sales in addition to FFL dealer transactions. How can anyone know a private sale went down if you don’t tell anyone? The answer is they won’t. So in order to track the weapons from private sales they need for all of us to register our weapons. How many folks do you know that have multiple guns that were never bought from an FFL dealer? So there is no record of them.


49 posted on 02/02/2013 3:53:58 PM PST by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer
"What part of this do they oot understand?"

Let me state up front that I am opposed to "universal background checks", because they will do zip to keep guns away from criminals.....BUT, it is POSSIBLE to have a check system that is "safe" from the gun owners standpoint....such a system would simply send the identifying personal info to the "check system".....and the query would be "is John Doe disqualfied from gun purchase?".

If there is no linkage with specific firearm identifying information, such an approach cannot be used to confiscate. After all, "John Doe" might have decided not to actually purchase after the background check.

And I'm sure we could start a trend where volunteers would go to gun stores and do "dummy purchases" (i.e. have a background check, but buy no gun). Heck, have each NRA member do it once a year.

50 posted on 02/02/2013 4:10:18 PM PST by Wonder Warthog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-57 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson