Realistic Solution to “Background Check” and guns

Dec 2018
3,232
1,180
Florida
#1
So I’ve wondered off and on why we don’t require those who cannot legally purchase a firearm to have this notated on their state issued ID. If someone cannot be trusted with a firearm, they cannot be trusted in general society. If someone cannot grasp that murder is not ok? They don’t belong in civilized society. No background check is required by private sellers. Cops also don’t need to run one. If they catch someone with them? Or if someone is caught trying to buy with a state ID (driver’s license or ID card) that shows their rights are revoked? Boom. Prosecution. Easy peasy.

Can someone please let me know why this is not an acceptable process?
 
Jul 2016
6,038
4,942
BAN THE TROLL!!!!
#2
Probably one of the dumbest posts I've ever read. What about the idiots who bought guns at gun shows, private sales, and elsewhere where a background check didn't happen?

Background checks should occur with every gun purchase and upon renewal of driver's licenses, state ID's, etc. Selling guns without a state issued license to do so and failing to conduct background checks on purchasers should be a felony offense.
 
Likes: Pragmatist
Dec 2018
3,232
1,180
Florida
#3
Probably one of the dumbest posts I've ever read.
I doubt you understand it then.

What about the idiots who bought guns at gun shows, private sales, and elsewhere where a background check didn't happen?
“I’d like to buy a gun.”

“Let me see your ID.”

Btw. Background checks do happen at gun shows. Have you ever been to one?

Background checks should occur with every gun purchase and upon renewal of driver's licenses, state ID's, etc. Selling guns without a state issued license to do so and failing to conduct background checks on purchasers should be a felony offense.
No. It shouldn’t. And a background check could happen if it were free. But the same people who vote to restore a felon’s right to vote (liberal morons), also don’t want people to have free access to background check systems. And what is the point of a background check when someone who commits a crime has a license marked that shows they cannot purchase?

Note you didn’t actually address my suggestion. You just said “that’s dumb.” Then brought up situations where it would actually make it easier for me as a private citizen to check. Because end of day there are no “loopholes.” Felons are not allowed to purchase firearms. Period.
 
Likes: spyydrr
Dec 2018
3,232
1,180
Florida
#4
Probably one of the dumbest posts I've ever read.
Oh the irony.

What about guns at gun shows,
The so-called “gun show loophole” is a myth It does not exist. There is no loophole in federal law that exempts gun shows from gun laws normally applied to gun sales. Not one.

If you purchase a firearm from a federal firearms licensee (FFL) regardless of the location of the transaction — a gun store, a gun show, a gun dealer’s car trunk, etc. — that FFL must confirm that you are legally allowed to purchase that gun. That means the FFL must either run a background check on you via the federal NICS database, or confirm that you have passed a background check by examining your state-issued concealed carry permit or your government-issued purchase permit. There are zero exceptions to this federal requirement.

If an individual purchases a gun across state lines — from an individual or FFL which resides in a different state than the buyer — the buyer must undergo a background check, and the sale must be processed by an FFL in the buyer’s home state.
 

Ian Jeffrey

Council Hall
Mar 2013
74,563
43,298
Vulcan, down the street from Darth Vader
#5
“I’d like to buy a gun.”

“Let me see your ID.”
Putting this on a state-issued ID (whether a DL or other ID) is not problematic for me at first glance.
But the same people who vote to restore a felon’s right to vote (liberal morons), also don’t want people to have free access to background check systems.
I have no idea what you are talking about here. And why is it wrong to restore someone's right to vote? Is there a reason to support permanent disenfranchisement?
Felons are not allowed to purchase firearms.
And I certainly agree that violent felons should be denied permission to purchase firearms (unless the court restores it). But why even non-violent felons, who are not per se dangerous with a gun?
 
Jul 2016
6,038
4,942
BAN THE TROLL!!!!
#6
Oh the irony.



The so-called “gun show loophole” is a myth It does not exist. There is no loophole in federal law that exempts gun shows from gun laws normally applied to gun sales. Not one.

If you purchase a firearm from a federal firearms licensee (FFL) regardless of the location of the transaction — a gun store, a gun show, a gun dealer’s car trunk, etc. — that FFL must confirm that you are legally allowed to purchase that gun. That means the FFL must either run a background check on you via the federal NICS database, or confirm that you have passed a background check by examining your state-issued concealed carry permit or your government-issued purchase permit. There are zero exceptions to this federal requirement.

If an individual purchases a gun across state lines — from an individual or FFL which resides in a different state than the buyer — the buyer must undergo a background check, and the sale must be processed by an FFL in the buyer’s home state.

Tell that to those gun dealers in the hallways at those gun shows.
 
Mar 2012
55,534
37,027
New Hampshire
#7
Tell that to those gun dealers in the hallways at those gun shows.
How is any law going to stop that? News once showed them selling them out of the trunks in their cars in CA. They already have laws on the books but do it anyways. They used to have undercover ATF agents around most gun shows but I dont know if they still do.
 

Tedminator

Former Staff
Jun 2010
26,820
18,955
South Florida
#8
So I’ve wondered off and on why we don’t require those who cannot legally purchase a firearm to have this notated on their state issued ID. If someone cannot be trusted with a firearm, they cannot be trusted in general society. If someone cannot grasp that murder is not ok? They don’t belong in civilized society. No background check is required by private sellers. Cops also don’t need to run one. If they catch someone with them? Or if someone is caught trying to buy with a state ID (driver’s license or ID card) that shows their rights are revoked? Boom. Prosecution. Easy peasy.

Can someone please let me know why this is not an acceptable process?
Problem with your suggestion is that DLs are usually good for several years, so any crime done in the interim which would invalidate right to buy guns would not show up. Like this guy...

Florida man, mad over $1 jump in cigarette price, threatens clerk with loaded rifle

hehe nut. Anyhoo the Swiss have a good system.. buy a certificate from their law enforcement agencies thats good for a few months. each certificate is good for the purchase of 3 guns iirc.
 
Likes: Babba
Jul 2016
6,038
4,942
BAN THE TROLL!!!!
#9
How is any law going to stop that? News once showed them selling them out of the trunks in their cars in CA. They already have laws on the books but do it anyways. They used to have undercover ATF agents around most gun shows but I dont know if they still do.
Enforce the law?

After a few years in jail and with no guns or license to sell them, they won't be responsible for the crimes committed with the unlicensed guns they sold to God only knows who.
 
Dec 2018
3,232
1,180
Florida
#10
Putting this on a state-issued ID (whether a DL or other ID) is not problematic for me at first glance.
And it correctly goes through due process and punishes someone who violates the law.

I have no idea what you are talking about here. And why is it wrong to restore someone's right to vote? Is there a reason to support permanent disenfranchisement?
Absolutely. Someone who decides to commit a felony does not deserve to be treated as an equal citizen. They have shown a flagrant disregard for our laws in a civilized society. They broke the social contract. There are consequences for that. One of those should be reduced participation in the social contract.

Look at it this way. Why should your vote be equal to that of someone who commits a felony? Someone who decides to try to run people down with their car, or decides to rob liquor stores and put people’s lives in jeopardy, or defraud the public of millions of dollars? I’m not under any guise that these people are equivalent voters who followed the social contract.

And I certainly agree that violent felons should be denied permission to purchase firearms (unless the court restores it). But why even non-violent felons, who are not per se dangerous with a gun?
A felony is a much more heinous crime than a basic misdemeanor. It doesn’t happen by accident. They frequently involve things like racketeering, organized crime, drugs, and other stuff. As I said, I don’t see any reason they should be trusted after violating the social contract. Though to be fair, if someone cannot be trusted with a gun, they don’t belong in society. I understand your argument, but I lean much more towards stiff consequences for violating the social contract.
 

Similar Discussions