Universal Background Check Soapbox

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • revance

    Expert
    Rating - 88.9%
    8   1   0
    Jan 25, 2009
    1,295
    38
    Zionsville
    Here is my prediction of what is going to happen with "Universal Background Checks".

    The NRA is going to attempt to work with legislators to pass a law requiring UBCs that is the least restrictive, least costly, and least offensive to gun owners. If they are successful, a bunch of people here are going to scream bloody murder over it and declare the NRA a bunch of dirty sellouts.* If they fail to strike a deal and thus refuse to support the bill Congress puts through, people will still react that way over the NRA.

    Here is the sad truth. UBCs have a LOT of public support. Yes that support is because they are too ignorant to see the downfalls of it, but that doesn't matter on capitol hill. Most people don't buy/sell/trade guns like us enthusiasts. A lot of gun owners have never done any private transactions. That leaves the vast majority of Americans believing that anyone against background checks just wants to help criminals get guns.* I firmly believe that House of Representative Republicans are in severe danger of losing a majority if the Senate sends them a UBC bill and they don't pass it. If that happens, then Dems can easily pass a full AWB and mag limit in '14.

    Maybe we will be lucky and the Senate won't pass anything, thus leaving the blame on Senate Dems... but I doubt it. Not with the Obama machine in full gear.

    I think what we need to be pushing for right now is either getting something good out of it (national reciprocity) or at the very least, minimizing how terrible it is by getting:

    - NICS more funding (so we don't have 2 hour long waits)

    - safeguards against de facto registration

    - somehow minimize the expense by finding a way to stop FFLs (who have a financial interest in NOT doing a transfer) from using their monopoly on gun sales to charge ridiculous transfer prices.

    The first two are pretty easy to do. The last is a little more difficult. It would be great if NICS was opened up to the general public, but then there are privacy concerns and issues with people abusing the system for non-firearm related things. Doing that would be waaaaay too complicated, so I doubt it will happen.* I think the best we can hope for is forcing the BATFE (by law) to stop refusing FFL licenses to "basement sellers". Let people get licensed to ONLY do transfers out of their home. If you do that, there will be a huge surge of people getting licensed (who have no financial interest in NOT doing a transfer). That by itself will keep the transfer fees low.

    Again, I hope nothing passes. On the other hand, I am fully aware of how these politics work. So is the NRA, which is why so many people dislike them. However the only reason they are as effective as they are is BECAUSE they know how to play the political game.* So stop griping about how the NRA sells out and get behind them. They are the only group who has the ability to help us in D.C.* All that "cold dead hands" talk works great at NRA conventions... legislators don't buy that BS.


    Flame away!
     

    purple72

    Marksman
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    May 26, 2008
    264
    18
    Central Indiana
    How long do you think it will be before the government demands "part" of the transfer fees? If they force all private sales to go through an ffl, I can see them taking a "tax" portion of the transfer. Just my opinion.
     

    revance

    Expert
    Rating - 88.9%
    8   1   0
    Jan 25, 2009
    1,295
    38
    Zionsville
    How long do you think it will be before the government demands "part" of the transfer fees? If they force all private sales to go through an ffl, I can see them taking a "tax" portion of the transfer. Just my opinion.

    All that could easily be protected in the original law.

    Im not saying it doesn't suck. Just that we might not have a choice. Don't assume people trying to make it suck less are against you.
     
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Aug 14, 2009
    3,816
    63
    Salem
    The only safeguard against de facto registration is NEVER writing down the serial number of the firearm along with the info of the person that bought it. Period. That's the only way that a universal background check could NOT be de facto registration.

    We do not negotiate with terrorists and we do not negotiate with Socialists. And for the same reason.
     

    Site Supporter

    INGO Supporter

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    530,636
    Messages
    9,955,709
    Members
    54,897
    Latest member
    jojo99
    Top Bottom