[Smokin' Joe]

Seems to me requiring a felon or otherwise disqualified person to submit information which might lead to that being disclosed (especially if it is a crime for them to try to obtain a firearm) would be a violation of the Fifth Amendment, just as requiring someone so disqualified from owning a firearm to register it (effectively requiring them to be testifying against themselves) would violate the Fifth Amendment.

Requirements of registration, background checks, and the like aren't binding for Felons and other disqualified parties.

If it's unConstitutional for them to be required to have them, why should the rest of us?

[SWAMPSNIPER]

Libs don’t believe that the Constitution means anything.

[drpix]

"Seems to me requiring a felon or otherwise disqualified person to submit information which might lead to that being disclosed (especially if it is a crime for them to try to obtain a firearm) would be a violation of the Fifth Amendment"

Would requiring criminal history on a job application for a government job or military enlistment be "violation of the Fifth Amendment?"

Of course not! That's because the 5th Amendment states, "nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself." The 5th does not cover required disclosure outside of involuntary criminal (police/court) proceedings.

It is not a crime for a felon to try to obtain a weapon and truthfully answers the question on criminal history. It is only a crime if he/she lies (just as it would be for lying on government job applications).

[Tublecane]

I’ve long wondered how it can be a crime not to report illegally gained income to the IRS. Al Capone had 5th amendment rights, too. But fedguv makes the rules up as it goes.