system for Private sale background checks

[bushidomosquito]

Rogue...

Yes. I am saying there should be no background checks at all. Along with the good points Mr. James just made, my reasoning for this is that it's impossible to prevent the feds from abusing it by lumping anyone into the verboten catagory. Smoked a joint when you were twenty? Denied. Got into a fight with the wife and the neighbors called the cops on you? Denied. Dragged into a barfight by a guy who's buddies told the police that you started the whole thing? Denied. Did you even read the rest of my post. This crap just doesn't work.

No background checks, as well as an end to the general demonization of guns may make it easier for crooks to get guns but it will also make it easier for thousands of normal folks to get guns as well. Folks who may have passed that gun cabinet a few times and decided it wasn't worth the hassle to fill out all that paperwork and then wait or were worried what others might think. That could really increase our numbers and make the gun culture as strong as it used to be. Antis know that crooks will always get guns. They are fully aware that their efforts do nothing to prevent crime. Their purpose behind all this legislation is to make guns harder and harder to get until most folks just give up and the gun culture dies off. Your sadly misinformed posts only serve to show that you have bought the lie as well.

 

[Rogueone]

ok, just making sure I got ya right. I'm not sure I'm ok with a repeat violent offender not being denied at the counter, but I will admit that prior to all these "restrictions" we didn't seem to have nearly as many gun "problems". Well, other than with organized crime and their fights.

Not sure if it's possible to make assumptions from that, but I will agree it's odd that it's "after" all these hoops that school shooting massacres and the "going postal" started showing up. I saw a video on google or youtube or such recently, that mentioned just about every one of the "mass shooting" perpetrators had been recently or was on anti-depressants at the time of their spiraling into crazy hood. Sure would be nice to get more data on that front.

And I'm not saying I'm wanting more government intrusion, was just curious about ways as a potential seller to keep guns away from persons who are legally allowed to have them, as well as maybe it could work as a pre approved background check system for an FFL, seeing as we do have those checks currently. And I get your point on the "felony" regardless of why point. If someone is convicted of a white collar crime, or say, G Gordon Liddy for his part in Watergate. What part of his crime suggests he would "improperly" use a gun?? it wasn't a crime relating to violence. So I agree that is a problem. Like how in VA there are a bunch of bills going in wanting anyone getting outpatient, voluntary mental treatment permanently barred from owning a gun. That's absurd. And thankfully we have a strong grassroots gun rights organization that keeps up on these issues and is constantly fighting such drivel.

And with all the good responses, there have been some really good, better ideas than my original premise. I really like the one just above, ask to see the person's voter registration. That's pretty darn simple Verifies their a citizen, not a felon, and actually participates in our country's system. I'd have no problem asking for that and denying someone buying my gun because "I don't vote, there are no good choices". If they can't be bothered to participate, the heck with them then.

and above all, thanks for the input.

 

[44 AMP]

Are you a Law Enforcement Agent? Do you want to be?

Because, when you do a background check to determine "eligibility" that is what you are acting as. FFL dealers must do this as a condition of their license to deal in firearms. Private citizens do not, because to require them to do so makes them in effect an extension of the government. The simple answer is "it ain't our job". And because it ain't our job, many people believe that private citizens should not be allowed to sell guns. Only FFL dealers.

Well, where do we draw the line? Guns are inanimate objects, they do nothing on their own, any more than cars, knives, rocks, and books. And to date, there is nothing that can see into the hearts of men. All a background check does is determine if the individual has been caught doing something illegal. AND, the state of the database is not what the public thinks it is. Having someone come back "clean" really doesn't mean anything. And having someone be denied is no real proof either. If you are looking for CYA, then only sell to or through FFL dealers. That way, if the check denies them, the FFL gets the blame, not you.

So, the way I see it, your idea has no merit, as the current system allows for the peace of mind you seek, just go through an FFL, and pay for the "priveledge". Or don't, as you see fit.

personally, I don't care for the idea of having to get or pay for another level of approval to sell my personal property. I am not my brother's keeper, and reject the idea that I ought to be. Anyone can commit a crime with anything I choose to sell, gun, car, chunk of firewood, or gallon of gas. I am not responsible for their decisions or their actions. And I do not choose to take that responsibility onto my self.

 

[Rogueone]

I'm gonna guess you didn't read thru the thread Many good points have been made, and many brought up good points, like the go to an FFL as you did.

No need to be abrasive, had you read through the posts you would have realized I agreed with the no need crowd

 

[chris in va]

I've sold a few firearms to VA residents over the past few years. I'll be honest, sometimes I just don't know their story. The best I can do is ask for their VA driver's license to be sure they actually live in the state. It doesn't let me know if they have a felony or not.

I'm open to suggestions on how to keep a private sale out of the hands of violent offenders.

 

[Musketeer]

Perception is Reality.

The bottom line is the idea that guns can be sold between private individuals completely avoiding any form of background check is a problem to the majority of people in the middle. Fight it all you want but you will eventually loose.

I think there should be a method available for background checks to be performed for private sales. I think we should propose it and we should control it rather than letting the left do so. We should establish that NO FEE may be charged by the gov't for performing this check (charging people to exercise a right is no different than a poll tax.)

Now I KNOW people are going to say "But criminals buy their guns illegally!" Many do, some don't. The VT killer didn't buy illegally and holes in the system for reporting system allowed him to buy. The bottom line though is the majority of people in this nation do have an issue with John Doe being able to sell an AK to Joe Smith with out even a cursory background check being required. We can either control the legislation, with as many benefits and safeguards as we can fit into it, or we can leave it to a Schumer or McCarthy to do so and then fight to get anything attached. Eventually it will happen, one way or the other.