Should NICS be opened for everyone?

That's the NICS check. And mostly I'm ok with it, except for the sales/use tax. Washington State has worked pretty hard to make sure they get a slice of the pie in any gun transaction they can. Out of state/internet site purchase? Use an FFL, and pay tax on EVERYTHING, gun, shipping, even the FFL fee. Now if you sell your deer rifle to your kid, or worse, "sell" your kid's deer rifle to your kid himself when he turns 18, or 21, or moves out on his own, or whatever rite of passage you choose...

In fact, gifting in this state using that system could be even more costly. Without a bill of sale reciept, you'd have to pay use tax on the FFL fee, shipping if applicable, and sales tax on the fair market value of hte firearm.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for SOMETHING, as long as it doesn't start giving the state another way to stick their hand in my wallet for a sale that either isn't sale, or they don't belong in as interstate commerce, etc.
 
EricReynolds said:
. . . . we as gun advocates need to start thinking of fair and reasonable compromises on this issue because something is coming. It can either be change we can live with or not. I'd prefer a change we could live with.
If something is coming, it's not a compromise. Compromises involve both sides giving something up. I doubt very seriously that the anti-gun crowd wants to give anything up.
 
but we as gun advocates need to start thinking of fair and reasonable compromises on this issue because something is coming.

What part of it is a fair or reasonable compromise? What is the other side giving up? They're not...that's not compromise, thats one side demanding something from the other side, which has no evidence that it will benefit public safety or achieve the stated goal of benefiting public safety. So it is inherently unreasonable and unfair.

It would be illegal for the seller to knowingly sell a gun to felon, but what about all the times when a seller UNknowingly sells a gun to a felon?

There are a number of voluntary ways to vet a person and no one is forced to sell to someone that they do feel might be a prohibited person.

Edit: Spats beat me to it!
 
I am fundamentally against requiring NICS checks for private transactions.

Giving people access to NICS poses serious problems, as previously discussed.

The only way I can envision voluntary NICS checks for private transactions would be if buyers could go to an FFL and get a certificate showing that the buyer had passed a NICS check.
 
I'd be ok with that in some form.. a number entered on BATFE website that shows a name and "Pre-approved" good for a week.. match name to photo-id.
 
Back
Top