A Letter from Senator Coburn

In an unanswered letter to senator Coburn i pointed out the fact that early last year the CT legislature voted down a bill that would have allowed the involuntary treatment or incarceration of mental cases who were deemed a threat to themselves or others. The bill was voted down at the request of the ACLU. The ACLU claimed the bill would violate the rights of violent mental cases.

The state of CT continues to release violent felons from prison early despite the fact that some of those felons have committed murder soon after being released.

CT politicians not concerned about violence prone mental cases getting guns. They would much rather punish law abiding gunowners.
 
Still doesn't stop criminals

The only debate the senators should be having in my opinion, is the debate on how to better enforce existing laws; NOT creating news ones. There are already so many bans and so many laws regarding this and still the criminal shootouts continue.

Sen. Coburn's intentions may be noble and sincere but he needs to see that ANY compromise will only lead to the eventual collapse of the 2nd amendment. All I can think of is what will happen if the gun control lobby gets every compromise they ask for. Then eventually, all that will be left to give is Dianne's uncompromising AWB laws. What happens then?

The only thing these debates do is further alienate responsible gun owners and condition people on the fence and others into more easily giving up their 2A rights.
 
The proposal I will offer, on the other hand, would create a consumer portal that would allow someone to go online for free and print out a pass that proves they are not on the NICS list. Law abiding citizens won't be treated as guilty until proven innocent and they won't face a new tax as they exercise their constitutional rights. Citizens also won't be required to keep records under my proposal. Finally, my bill will allow people who already have a concealed carry permit to buy a gun without taking additional steps, and it will give states the right to come up with their own ways to declare that someone isn't on the NICS list.


Stepping back a bit, a bearing in mine that I contribute 5 figures a year to a combination of the SAF and the ILA, so make no mistake about it, I am a 2nd Amendment Defender, what is really wrong with the above?

If I had the ability to go to an app on my iPhone, punch in the name and SSN of a guy standing in front of me who I am selling a firearm to, get an "OK" in a moment, and then be able to rest assured that my sale to him was not going to bite me in the ass later, and that by taking this step I am absolved from any liability for what the firearm might be used for later, what's the downside?

Forget replying with "but ... but ... but ....." Really, if the system was set up *exactly like it is described* above, there is no record of the firearm serial number, etc., it's a people-check.

In Wisconsin, and I am sure elsewhere, many diligent sellers are already doing the same thing on their own. I require, and many other local sellers require, a CCW be displayed prior to a sale. That's become the informal "background check" for the Armslist crowd here, and it works. Meet at McDonalds for coffee, show your CCW, and do business. Substitute "Show CCW or punch in the info on an iPhone and get an OK" and... well.... if that's the worst thing that happens to us, it's not the end of the world. Really, it would add ZERO to my existing hassle-factor, or to those to whom I sell. We are already doing that ourselves. No reputable seller wants to sell to a prohibited person. I would WELCOME the ability to have personal access to a system to help me make sure.

Donning flameproof suit now.


Willie

.
 
If I had the ability to go to an app on my iPhone, punch in the name and SSN
Click to expand...

  1. First, I'm not giving some stranger my SSN w/out brick and mortar store.
  2. Second, I'm not trusting that was some stranger's name and SSN, 4473 includes descriptive data i.e. height, weight, address, etc.
  3. Third, we've already seen DNS hacking, I want an 800 number and a human being.
 
^^^^


"Whatever"...

But let me get this straight: You want a phone number so I can READ your SSN to a live operator? Who will take more time than me (or you) punching it into a computer? And you don't think that I can check your name against your drivers license, etc? I do that already when I look at your CCW........ :rolleyes: And in the end, you don't need to do business with me, and I don't need to sell to you. In order for a transaction to take place two people must agree to mutual terms. That's why it's called a PRIVATE sale, right? Right now you WILL show me a Wisconsin CCW to buy from me, or we will not do business. If there is a system set up for me to do a quick-check on you as a buyer, and you don't want to be checked, "see ya 'round'" ..

In any event the process is irrelevent: The fact is that if there was a routine and easy way for private sellers to make sure the buyer isn't a prohibited person, without keeping a record, I would applaud it.



Willie

.
 
What's the whatever in quotes?

No, I don't want a phone number so you can read my SSN to someone on the other line. I want a phone number so a bonded FFL can call it in, and do the ID specific detail work.

Neither my license nor my CPL have my SSN on it.
 
^^


So let me get this straight. You want all private sales to go thru a FFL where you would need to pay a fee, never mind the time spent, rather than having an online system available to joe-blow the seller so he can take a minute to make sure you aren't on the "no guns for this guy" list before he hands over something that you found on Armslist? You prefer to need to go to an FFL rather than to allow a private seller to check you out in a minute, for free, from his smartphone? :eek:



Uhh.... "whatever" .... :rolleyes:


Willie


,
 
JimDandy said:
I want a phone number so a bonded FFL can call it in, and do the ID specific detail work.
Click to expand...
FFLs are bonded?

I've never heard that before. If they are bonded, what are they bonded for or against? Does theeir bond cover knowing a customer's social security number, or does it cover just things like selling defective guns or taking money and not providing product?
 
The letter sent by the Senator included his vision of an internet enabled instant background check system available to the general public. Actually the system that he proposed would allow the BUYER to run a check on himself, and then print proof of this to be provided to a seller. This would alleviate privacy concerns, as expressed above, and enable seamless private sales without delay. It's actually not a bad idea. In fact it's likely a darned good one. I missed the part about the BUYER running the check on himself when first responding.


FFL's aren't bonded for anything.



Willie


.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think a lot of gunsmiths are bonded, and lots of gunsmiths are also FFL's - but the bonding is a function of the gunsmithing work and responsibilities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top