Smith And Wesson Forums banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,253 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
There is another way to look at "Universal Background Checks". "Qualified Buyer Verification"...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,632 Posts
How about hammers, baseball bats, knives...? Could make garage sales pretty complicated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,516 Posts
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.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,253 Posts
Discussion Starter #5 (Edited)
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?
[HR][/HR]
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.

[HR][/HR]
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.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,398 Posts
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.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,253 Posts
Discussion Starter #7 (Edited)
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sdismukes

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,165 Posts
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?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
630 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,058 Posts
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
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,253 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Actually, a revised system could eliminate having to go to a FFL for anything having to do with getting your background checked.

If you could do it from your smartphone or from home, and acquire an encrypted token that proves you're qualified for a transfer (and have an opportunity to correct any NICS errors encountered before you went to the FFL) that would be an improvement.

The key is that every citizen would be able to independently and privately get their "Qualified" digital token. Using a second application or web site, every seller (private or FFL) could compare a Real ID with the details unlocked at time of transfer from the encrypted token. The seller would get a record of the buyer's approved status. All of this kept private between buyer and seller. No central record keeping of anything related to the transaction.

Nothing involved in getting such a token or using it later should involved cost to the citizen. That would, as you correctly say, be like a "poll tax". The government should bear the entire cost of these schemes including populating the systems and running them as well as providing websites and apps for using them. That is an improvement.

This actually could eliminate all FFL transfer costs. If the leftists want these things, let THEM fund the systems and what it takes to maintain them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sig_230

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,308 Posts
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.
Your position is clear and is understood, yet runs counter to my opinion based on life experience living in the southwest, which unsurprisingly differs from many living east of the Mississippi River. Selling a gun ‘person to person’ in Arizona does actually require proof of the buyer to be an Arizona resident (drivers license), which I admit doesn’t always happen, but it does with LAW ABIDING CITIZENS! Why should an inheritance of a firearm become, by law, a crime? Should we restrict inherited cars, boats and planes also because they MIGHT be used in the course of a crime? No, that’s not the point.

The point is that many people, including some here on this fine forum, a forum blessed with firearm geniuses’, you’re falling for a simple ruse, the “Three Card Monty” so to speak. While we focus on ‘nits and nats’ during argument sessions, the government is implementing plans to completely shut down firearm ownership through legislative measures, AND criminals consistently acquire firearms illegally. If you invoke or challenge others today, defending the Second Amendment of the Constitution, not many beyond this forum will appreciate the difficult task. The original Constitution wasn’t accepted, so the state reps demanded and inserted 10 original ‘Amendments’ to the Constitution, which we all now accept as law. So many today think that these Amendments were original intent, they weren’t and for a good reason, they came by way of challenge!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,253 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
I guess I'm interested in changes that will actually reduce the risk to liberty by these infringing systems.

None of it stops criminals.

All of it diverts funds needed by police to actually fight criminals and terrorists.

The current system (which includes collecting the records of FFLs when they go out of business and storing them at the ATF) creates a risk of establishing a gun registration system.

We have an opportunity to eliminate the existing system, satisfy the need to check backgrounds for lawful transfers, AND make it easier, more efficient and less expensive to lawfully acquire guns.

There is give and take in the political process. Leftists are screaming for "Universal background checks" that we know won't stop criminals. But that doesn't matter. Why not use the opportunity to change the system to completely and securely privatize the gun transfer process itself?

Technology lets such a system be constructed, can reduce the cost of administrating it (freeing up money for actual police work), and move the process of establishing your status for acquiring guns to a private personal action from your smart phone or computer web browser.

As long as the law prohibits recording the actions of qualifying your status to acquire a firearm, there is no transaction or transfer record to use for later registration schemes.

When a private or commercial seller wants to transfer a firearm, they privately unlock the buyer's encrypted token so that they can verify their identity, and that they are not prohibited. Nothing needs to be done in a central system at that time. There is no central record of the transaction because it doesn't take place in a central system, yet the seller has proof that they transferred the gun to someone that is qualified to have it. The identity of seller and buyer are private and shared only between those two people. The seller can verify the identity against the government issued Real ID card...

That is an improvement over current systems, is much more private, and more resistant to registration schemes. It also becomes "Universal" for all lawful transfers (which are, when all is said and done, the only ones that can be controlled by such a system).

In effect the leftists get what they want (in name), while actually making things better for gun owners in a way that the ignorant leftists don't understand because they don't know anything about how NICS actually works.

The entire encrypted token based system can work even at gun shows where every individual can have both the encrypted token acquisition app and the identity verification app.

No FFL needs to ever be involved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sig_230

·
Registered
Joined
·
219 Posts
It's very simple, I never sell anyone (except family) a firearm without going thru an FFL! That way there is a trail of it leaving my possession and going into the buyer's possession. A simple and easy solution that only costs a few bucks. No worries, mate!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,516 Posts
BC2 I am not falling for anything. I am recognizing a current that has largely flowed in one direction since 1934. It rarely reverses course and when it does it is over issues like reimportation of military surplus. Some real gains have occurred in some states but that is not the federal one size fits everyone world. Some days simply retarding the rate of that flow is a win. That is in my opinion reality. I am not cheering it on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,295 Posts
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.
How about a Citizenship ID Card, if you wanna Register people for ANY Government Benefit, Voting, etc.? We can then have REAL I.D., and to Hell with ANYTHING that "infringes" on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (which doesn't seem to be interpreted plainly by the USSC, as they are total political tools now)?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,516 Posts
Citizenship alone is no guarranty of sanity, likelyhood of being prone to violence or lack of character. I wish I had some simple solutions to offer.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top