Another way to look at "Universal Background Checks"...
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17
Like Tree18Likes

Thread: Another way to look at "Universal Background Checks"...

  1. #1
    Supporting Member
    Supporting Member

    Member #
    5427
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Raleigh, NC, USA
    Posts
    8,070
    Liked
    23259 times

    Another way to look at "Universal Background Checks"...

    There is another way to look at "Universal Background Checks". "Qualified Buyer Verification"...
    Last edited by mrerick; 09-15-2019 at 01:51 PM.
    jonesy814 and WendyZXZ like this.
    Cheers! Marc


    Check out my Gun Rights BLOG at: http://skilledshot.wordpress.com
    accipere facile, sed sumite! - Take it easy, but take it!
    NRA Certified Instructor: Pistol; Personal Protection Inside and Outside the Home; Rifle; Reloading: Chief RSO
    NC DOJ Concealed Carry Instructor; Appointed Member North Carolina Criminal Justice Information Network

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Member #
    28737
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Jax, Fla
    Posts
    2,183
    Liked
    6257 times
    How about hammers, baseball bats, knives...? Could make garage sales pretty complicated.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Member #
    1419
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,162
    Liked
    10093 times
    Here is how I look at it. Meeting some person you do not know at a presumed neutral/safe location for the purpose of selling a firearm solely based on the exchange of money is: perhaps dangerous, possibly immoral and likely demonstrates poor judgement.

    Allowing a family member to claim an inheritance, selling a gun to: your LGS buddy who has passed numerous checks, a business acquaintance who has been vetted by either the TSA, ATF, DOE or similar, or a LEO, or your long standing neighbor is within my definition of reason. Loaning your duck gun, skeet gun etc. to a friend, ditto.

    Telling me I have to pay the LGS to acquire and dispose of everything I would have otherwise moved privately is distasteful.

    I suppose there will eventually be some crazy compromise creating a new class of weapons, a 21 year old age level, a background check mandated for them etc., something affecting the whole 80% lower category. We will see. What I do not see is universal registration, a surrender/purchase mandated prohibition or worse in the first round.
    jonesy814 and Blackcloud2 like this.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    SmithAndWessonForums.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4
    Senior Member
    Member #
    28737
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Location
    Jax, Fla
    Posts
    2,183
    Liked
    6257 times
    Compromise, until the next compromise, then the next...

  6. #5
    Supporting Member
    Supporting Member

    Member #
    5427
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Raleigh, NC, USA
    Posts
    8,070
    Liked
    23259 times

    A useful "Universal Background Check" protects gun sellers...

    I think that there is a good path out of all this "Universal Background Check" stuff.

    That is to completely separate the firearms transaction from identifying that someone is qualified to acquire and possess a firearm.

    The key is that the system may not stop criminals from acquiring and possessing firearms, but it will protect anyone that wants to sell a firearm from turning it over to a prohibited person.

    That helps responsible gun owners, and potentially could reduce workload and record keeping for FFLs.

    Technology today could permit construction of such a system. The key is that nothing about the transaction transferring the firearm itself needs to be known or recorded in any central place. In fact, the only record that's needed is a legally verifiable document that the person transferring the firearm would keep. This could be used later to prove that you followed the law when handing over a gun to someone else.

    What's particularly important is that there is no central record of the transfer of a firearm. No potential gun registration point. No accumulation of records except the information used to determine that someone is prohibited.

    How would such a system work?


    The creation of "Real ID" (which is about to be universally used in the United States for all air travel verification of a person's legal identity) makes a system possible that is much better and safer than the way it's being done today.

    This updated system will also help solve some of the real problems with the currently inaccurate state of NICS records.

    Unfortunately, it doesn't reduce the workload on police, court, judicial and other investigative agencies that must populate a NICS prohibited persons database. That remains an unfunded mandate from the Federal Government whether things are changed or not.

    What a revised system would do would be allow every individual to privately and independently check their NICS status in advance of any firearms acquisition.

    The change would make NICS a two part system. The first part would allow any citizen or green card holder to request a digital encrypted "Token" from NICS that indicates that they are not a prohibited person, and that contains details of their identity. That token could be issued with an expiration after which a new token would need to be obtained from the system.

    If you are not prohibited and requested a token from NICS and it responded with a negative or wait response, you'd have time to contact the FBI / NICS administrators and request that they clear up your lawful status. This request could take place from an App on your smart phone or a Website using a browser. The response would be an encrypted QR Qualification Token (that could be image scanned, printed and scanned or even emailed).

    No transfer has taken place, and nothing would be retained by the system. The only record is the token that you personally hold in your smart phone or printed on a sheet of paper.

    When you want to acquire a firearm, you show your Real ID to the seller (which contains your legal address) and let them scan your QR Qualification Token using a second smart phone app, or type the token number into an online Website.

    At that time, the app or the website responds with details of who the buyer is (to be matched to the Real ID) and their current Qualification status to acquire and possess a firearm. As the seller, you retain an electronic or printed copy of the "Proceed with Transfer" record issued by the NICS system.

    in the future, if there is ever a question about whether or not you transferred the firearm to a prohibited person, you have legal proof that you did everything right. There is no central record of the system issuing a "Proceed", and no record of what was transferred.

    This protects private and business sellers.

    The cost of the system (just like the cost of maintaining voter rolls) should be entirely borne by the government without any fees for checking your own status and obtaining a qualification token, or for verifying a token at the time of transfer. This potentially reduces costs to FFL dealers and gun buyers.

    Such a system could even make it possible to enable Internet based interstate sales of guns since shipping could be limited to the Real ID address of the buyer, and the buyer's personal signature could be required to receive the shipment.

    Of course, all this has no effect on actual criminals, but it could even help police catch prohibited people that carry guns.



    Such a two part system could even be used later to determine if someone in possession of a firearm remains qualified to do so. If you retain the qualification token, and were stopped by police while carrying a firearm, the code would prove then and there that you are not a prohibited person.

    This could be used to establish true concealed carry reciprocity nationwide.

    Such a system could even be used to qualify voters as they arrive at the polls. The code would confirm that you are who you say you are, that you are registered to vote in that precinct and that you have not voted before in that election.
    Last edited by mrerick; 09-15-2019 at 04:38 PM.
    Cheers! Marc


    Check out my Gun Rights BLOG at: http://skilledshot.wordpress.com
    accipere facile, sed sumite! - Take it easy, but take it!
    NRA Certified Instructor: Pistol; Personal Protection Inside and Outside the Home; Rifle; Reloading: Chief RSO
    NC DOJ Concealed Carry Instructor; Appointed Member North Carolina Criminal Justice Information Network

  7. #6
    Senior Member
    Member #
    22921
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    4,343
    Liked
    14457 times
    Well, it's not like some left-wing anti-gun kook is taking credit for NICS.

    Wayne LaPierre- "The best kept secret is the National Instant Check System wouldn't exist at all if it weren't for the NRA. It's true."

    That such a background check system is 'universal' makes sense to average Joe. Nuanced arguments about some background checks being good but others are bad will ultimately be a losing argument. NRA fought to impose this monster government database tool from Hell on gun owners to replace the Brady Act waiting period. As Wayne says: "NRA supported it, NRA got the votes and NRA got is passed." So... now we got it plus several states have waiting periods anyway.

    My opinion is that you either have a principled 2A position against background checks or you don't. Half-in half-out position is the path to UBCs and much worse.

  8. #7
    Supporting Member
    Supporting Member

    Member #
    5427
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Raleigh, NC, USA
    Posts
    8,070
    Liked
    23259 times
    Background checks can never stop criminals. But... they can protect sellers of firearms from inadvertently transferring a gun to someone that is prohibited from having them.

    Until I realized that a system focused on qualifying individuals could work quite differently from a system that records transactions (like we have today), I completely opposed changes in all this.

    Now I realize that we could end up with more advantages if it's implemented correctly and eliminates the current systems of record keeping (which create a risk for a future registration system).

    A revised system could eliminate many of the risks and expenses associated with the current system.

    When considering privately selling a gun to someone, I'd actually appreciate having a system that could be used to verify that they are legally qualified for the transaction. Right now, I have no protection except to always do it through a FFL.

    I doubt we could eliminate background systems completely. Given that, we'd be better off with a system that protects privacy, eliminates central transaction records, and privatizes seller transaction records but allows you to verify who you're dealing with, and that they are qualified for the transaction.
    Last edited by mrerick; 09-15-2019 at 04:48 PM.
    sdismukes likes this.
    Cheers! Marc


    Check out my Gun Rights BLOG at: http://skilledshot.wordpress.com
    accipere facile, sed sumite! - Take it easy, but take it!
    NRA Certified Instructor: Pistol; Personal Protection Inside and Outside the Home; Rifle; Reloading: Chief RSO
    NC DOJ Concealed Carry Instructor; Appointed Member North Carolina Criminal Justice Information Network

  9. #8
    Senior Member
    Member #
    9772
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Erath County, Texas
    Posts
    9,084
    Liked
    36622 times
    Quote Originally Posted by mrerick View Post
    Background checks can never stop criminals. But... they can protect sellers of firearms from inadvertently transferring a gun to someone that is prohibited from having them.

    Until I realized that a system focused on qualifying individuals could work quite differently from a system that records transactions (like we have today), I completely opposed changes in all this.

    Now I realize that we could end up with more advantages if it's implemented correctly and eliminates the current systems of record keeping (which create a risk for a future registration system).

    A revised system could eliminate many of the risks and expenses associated with the current system.

    When considering privately selling a gun to someone, I'd actually appreciate having a system that could be used to verify that they are legally qualified for the transaction. Right now, I have no protection except to always do it through a FFL.

    I doubt we could eliminate background systems completely. Given that, we'd be better off with a system that protects privacy, eliminates central transaction records, and privatizes seller transaction records but allows you to verify who you're dealing with, and that they are qualified for the transaction.
    The biggest issue I have with any system is that criminals will bypass it. I know we are looking at private sales here, and that the tokenized system fixes a lot of issues we law-abiding types have with expanding the current system - but how does that stop a criminal from getting a gun from someone who doesn't care who he sells to?
    No God, No Good.... Know God, Know Good....

    Any government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take everything you have.--- Thomas Jefferson

    911 Response time: 600+ seconds. 1911 response time: 800+ feet per second.

    US Navy, Vietnam Vet, NRA Life Member, GOA Life Member, Hook'em Horns!


  10. #9
    Senior Member
    Member #
    9649
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    349
    Liked
    1448 times
    A universal background checks for non-dealers will require the seller/buyer to go to a FFL and I'm quite sure pay a fee. This seems like a government required fee or TAX.

    If this is a tax, then we are required to pay a tax to exercise a Constitutional Right.

    If I remember my history at one time some states required a poll tax to vote, i.e. a tax on exercising a Constitutional Right. The poll tax laws were struck down as illegal and discriminatory.

    SO, why if a poll tax is racist and illegal then why would not a tax on buying a gun be illegal and potentially racist?

    When the NC Legislature started talking about requiring voter ID, the opponents objected (and will file suits) alleging that requiring a person to pay for a government ID was a poll tax and unconstitutional.

    Just food for thought.
    Last edited by WCCPHD; 09-15-2019 at 05:28 PM.

  11. #10
    Senior Member
    Member #
    10292
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    NW Pennsylvania
    Posts
    9,025
    Liked
    25680 times
    Pennsylvania has their own system, PICS. It is the Pennsylvania Instant Check System. I don't really know how it works. I don't know if it links to the National system for background checks, or if they input data to the national system. It seems if they are only checking state records that someone could easily slip through who is a recent resident of the state, so I would assume they somehow link to the NICS system


 
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3
Copyright © 2019 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
SmithandWessonForums.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson. We are an enthusiast site and fans of Smith & Wesson Firearms. To visit the official Smith & Wesson site, click here: Smith-Wesson.com.