Want universal background checks? A question....

[M14 Shooter]

TD and I meet up. We each buy a gun off each other. No BoS, no background check.
How does the state prove we broke the law?

Not all law breakers are discovered by LE.

So you agree that the state cannot prove that we broke the law.
Correct?

You cannot prove that TD won't give you up if the weapon was used in a crime.

You did not answer my question.
So you agree that the state cannot prove that we broke the law.
Correct?

Not with the facts as you present them.

Thank you.
Since the state cannot prove we broke the law, the state cannot enforce the law.
What sound argument is there that a law that cannot be enforces will pass a rational basis review?

You forgot to post my entire message...

You mean that story you made up? No need to address it.

Fact of the matter is there's no way to prove that I sold the gun to TD, there's no way to prove TD sold the gun to me, there's no way to prove that either of us ever owned the guns we sold, and there's no way to prove that the guns were sold after UBC was enacted. Since the state cannot prove we broke the law, the state cannot enforce the law.

I ask again: What sound argument is there that a law that cannot be enforced will pass a rational basis review?

 

[MXdad]

TD and I meet up. We each buy a gun off each other. No BoS, no background check.
How does the state prove we broke the law?

Not all law breakers are discovered by LE.

So you agree that the state cannot prove that we broke the law.
Correct?

You cannot prove that TD won't give you up if the weapon was used in a crime.

You did not answer my question.
So you agree that the state cannot prove that we broke the law.
Correct?

Not with the facts as you present them. Of course I dealt with the issue above when I wrote about those who think they are smarter than everyone else. I'll post a scenario which you won't consider, but others will:

TD brings the gun home and hides it from his SO, who is afraid of guns and doesn't want one in their home. Two weeks later she finds the gun hidden in TD's closet and has a fit.

One thing leads to another and the argument is loud enough to alarm the neighbor who calls the police. When the police arrive and see the gun on the bed where it had been placed, they immediately cuff both TD and his SO and secure the weapon.

The officer asked the SO what happened and she reported how she found the gun and when she showed it to him he grabbed her arm, causing a red mark and a scratch.

The officers then arrested TD for domestic Violence. The gun was checked into evidence and the tech routinely ran the serial number; it came back as stolen. TD was then charged with Possession of Stolen Property as well as DV, and when interviewed by the investigators told them he had recently purchased the gun from M14.

A search warrant for M14's residence was approved by the court and the next day M14's wife and children were all cuffed and held on the floor of their home as the home was searched. A dozen weapons were found and taken into evidence.

Later it was learned that the original weapon had been cleared from the stolen property list by the reporting agency, but because of budget cuts the state had not yet updated
the computer.

M14's guns were returned to him seveal weeks later; TD was placed on Probation for DV, and M14 slept on the couch for several months.

The issue with your story is that in the majority of cases the gun cannot be traced back.

When a SN is run it points directly to the manufacture. A call to him will get the name of the dealer that obtained the gun from the manufacture. The next step is a visit to the dealer who will have 20 years of paper records. You will then know the original purchaser nothing more. The original owner may have sold or given the gun away many years ago. It's not traceable past the first owner and the only way the gov will have record is if it was used in a crime or reported stolen.

If it comes to registering guns I am sure most guns will meet the same fate mine did. I had all my guns in a boat on a duck hunt, hit a stump all the guns fell in now I have none LOL

 

[The Rabbi]

TD and I meet up. We each buy a gun off each other. No BoS, no background check.
How does the state prove we broke the law?

Not all law breakers are discovered by LE.

So you agree that the state cannot prove that we broke the law.
Correct?

You cannot prove that TD won't give you up if the weapon was used in a crime.

You did not answer my question.
So you agree that the state cannot prove that we broke the law.
Correct?

Not with the facts as you present them.

Thank you.
Since the state cannot prove we broke the law, the state cannot enforce the law.
What sound argument is there that a law that cannot be enforces will pass a rational basis review?

You forgot to post my entire message...

You mean that story you made up? No need to address it.

Fact of the matter is there's no way to prove that I sold the gun to TD, there's no way to prove TD sold the gun to me, there's no way to prove that either of us ever owned the guns we sold, and there's no way to prove that the guns were sold after UBC was enacted. Since the state cannot prove we broke the law, the state cannot enforce the law.

I ask again: What sound argument is there that a law that cannot be enforced will pass a rational basis review?

Because we must do something.
This is something.
Ergo we must do it.

 

[The Rabbi]

TD and I meet up. We each buy a gun off each other. No BoS, no background check.
How does the state prove we broke the law?

Not all law breakers are discovered by LE.

So you agree that the state cannot prove that we broke the law.
Correct?

You cannot prove that TD won't give you up if the weapon was used in a crime.

You did not answer my question.
So you agree that the state cannot prove that we broke the law.
Correct?

Not with the facts as you present them. Of course I dealt with the issue above when I wrote about those who think they are smarter than everyone else. I'll post a scenario which you won't consider, but others will:

TD brings the gun home and hides it from his SO, who is afraid of guns and doesn't want one in their home. Two weeks later she finds the gun hidden in TD's closet and has a fit.

One thing leads to another and the argument is loud enough to alarm the neighbor who calls the police. When the police arrive and see the gun on the bed where it had been placed, they immediately cuff both TD and his SO and secure the weapon.

The officer asked the SO what happened and she reported how she found the gun and when she showed it to him he grabbed her arm, causing a red mark and a scratch.

The officers then arrested TD for domestic Violence. The gun was checked into evidence and the tech routinely ran the serial number; it came back as stolen. TD was then charged with Possession of Stolen Property as well as DV, and when interviewed by the investigators told them he had recently purchased the gun from M14.

A search warrant for M14's residence was approved by the court and the next day M14's wife and children were all cuffed and held on the floor of their home as the home was searched. A dozen weapons were found and taken into evidence.

Later it was learned that the original weapon had been cleared from the stolen property list by the reporting agency, but because of budget cuts the state had not yet updated
the computer.

M14's guns were returned to him seveal weeks later; TD was placed on Probation for DV, and M14 slept on the couch for several months.

The issue with your story is that in the majority of cases the gun cannot be traced back.

When a SN is run it points directly to the manufacture. A call to him will get the name of the dealer that obtained the gun from the manufacture. The next step is a visit to the dealer who will have 20 years of paper records. You will then know the original purchaser nothing more. The original owner may have sold or given the gun away many years ago. It's not traceable past the first owner and the only way the gov will have record is if it was used in a crime or reported stolen.

If it comes to registering guns I am sure most guns will meet the same fate mine did. I had all my guns in a boat on a duck hunt, hit a stump all the guns fell in now I have none LOL

Wry is relating what happened to him and his boyfriend, who was an ex con to boot.
Yeah, the story is fantasy. To be charged with possession of stolen property you have to know or reasonably be expected to know it was stolen. There is no way to determine that in this case.

 

[Dana7360]

I would also require insurance for that gun. Everyone who owns a gun should have to take out insurance to cover any damage or death caused by that gun.

If you knowingly transfer your gun to a criminal you are liable that is the law now

If you gun is stolen then no you are not liable and should not be if it was reported stolen

Yes it's illegal to sell a gun to a criminal. However there's no law requiring gun shows or private sales to find out of they're selling a gun to a criminal. How are they going to know they're selling a gun to a criminal if they don't do a background check?

I agree if a gun is stolen the person who owns it shouldn't be liable for what the criminal did. However they must report it to the police when they know that gun is stollen.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

If you support imposing universal background checks on all gun sales, whether through a dealer or not, I have a question for you.

Say I meet up with Turtledude; he and I buy a gun off each other, get a beer, and go home.

How does the government prove that background checks were not run before we sold the guns?

The answer is stunningly simple.

The new state IDs can be tied to very federal database we have. How hard would it be to design an app for your Droid? Slide the ID like a credit card, bam you've ran an NCIC check on that person...

I bet Google could design that app in a week for less than $1K

Or we could let the government contract it out and it would end up costing a trillion bucks and not work worth a fuck.

I don't have a dorid or smart phone and have no plans of ever getting one. Nor will I be forced by the government to do so.

 

[MXdad]

Yes it's illegal to sell a gun to a criminal. However there's no law requiring gun shows or private sales to find out of they're selling a gun to a criminal. How are they going to know they're selling a gun to a criminal if they don't do a background check?

I agree if a gun is stolen the person who owns it shouldn't be liable for what the criminal did. However they must report it to the police when they know that gun is stollen.

Actually you are incorrect sales at a gun show follow the same rules that apply to a dealer at their place of business. If your at a gun show and purchase a weapon a BGC will be run just as if you walked into Gander Mountain and purchased one. The only exception is private transfers which are exempt as it should be

When I give a firearm to my son should I be required to go with him to an FFL and pay the fee $20-$35 each time. When I inherited many firearms from my father should I have been required to pay the transfer fee on each of those. If I loan a gun to a friend on a hunting trip should I be required to go with him to a dealer and have a BGC run and pay the fee.

That seems to be what many are suggesting. But the question remains how will the Gov know I made that transfer when the weapon cannot be traced to me to begin with?

 

[Dana7360]

Register the serial number of the gun and provide a title, just like an automobile.

We're told by gun lovers that cars are just as dangerous, just as lethal as cars. If we accept this premise, then guns should be registered and titled.

I would also require insurance for that gun. Everyone who owns a gun should have to take out insurance to cover any damage or death caused by that gun.

Do we require insurance to own a ladder? To own a swimming pool? To own narcotics or cleaning agents? Because all those things cause more deaths than guns.
Such a law would fall most heavily on the poor, who suffer from crime disproportianally.
Another lib unable to think beyond Stage One.

I was replying to a post that was comparing cars with guns. The law requires everyone to have at least liability insurance on their car. If they don't have it and they're either stopped by a cop or is in an accident, they're in a lot of financial trouble.

However, there's already insurance for ladders, narcotics and cleaning agents. It's call Health Insurance. There's already insurance for swimming pools. It's called Homeowner's Insurance. In the case of a pool, I think there's an extra charge on the insurance for the pool.

Those who own a gun should be required to have insurance to cover any damage or death to innocent people caused by that gun.

If a person can't afford insurance then they shouldn't be able to have a gun. Just like with cars.

The poor pay for their car insurance, if they have a car. They can pay for insurance for their gun. An innocent person shouldn't be liable for all financial responsibilities when someone shoots them. Being poor isn't a good enough excuse to be able to harm or kill someone and just walk away from the financial responsibility of what they did.

There is no insurance REQUIRED to own a ladder or a pool or anything else.
And if you intentionally shoved someone in the pool and they drowned for whatever reason your homeowners would probably not pay off. Because insurance does not cover intentional acts. And shooting someone is an intentional act.
So your argument is a total fail.

If that pool is in the ground or built into the deck as a permanent fixture of the property, yes they're required to have homeowners insurance that covers the pool. At least they do in my state.

A ladder and a pool are meant for different uses than to kill or injure. If you use a pool or a ladder correctly no one is hurt. If you use a gun correctly someone or something is either killed or injured.

Which is why our society treats guns differently from pools and ladders.

Just because someone somewhere might push someone into a pool on purpose doesn't mean that background checks aren't needed.

If shooting someone is an intentional act then why are there so many accidental shootings? There are countless stories of a gun that "just went off." I guess all those people who said that were lying.

Your biggest problem with me is that I'm not looking to take any any gun from law abiding citizens.

I grew up with them. My mom's family hunted. My dad started hunting when he met my mom. My dad used to hunt all the time with my grandfather. My dad's guns were in the garage all my life. It wasn't a big deal at all to anyone. My aunt used to sit on her back porch, waiting for the right size deer to walk by. Then BLAMO! They had venison in the freezer. My uncle used to give my cousins guns for christmas. I own a house on the south side of Mt. Rainier. There's elk everywhere. The population is out of control since their natural predator is no longer around to eat them. So during hunting season it's normal to see something dead on the hood of a car or on the bed of a truck. I have no problem with that. If there's too many elk then all of them will starve and do a lot of damage to the surrounding area.

I personally don't own guns and don't want to own a gun. Nor do I want one in my home or to enter a home that has one.

That doesn't mean I want to take any guns from anyone who is a law abiding citizen. Nor does it mean that law will take any guns from any law abiding citizen.

I'm like 86% of the people in our nation. We just want to close a loophole in the background check law.

I also would like to see mandatory insurance for all who own a gun to cover any injuries or death to innocent people that's caused by that gun.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I would also require insurance for that gun. Everyone who owns a gun should have to take out insurance to cover any damage or death caused by that gun.

If you knowingly transfer your gun to a criminal you are liable that is the law now
If you gun is stolen then no you are not liable and should not be if it was reported stolen

Yes it's illegal to sell a gun to a criminal.

No. Its illegal to sell a gun to someone you have reason to belive is a criminal.
As such, there's no need for the seller to have positive verification on eway or the other to remain in compliance with the law.

 

[MXdad]

If that pool is in the ground or built into the deck as a permanent fixture of the property, yes they're required to have homeowners insurance that covers the pool. At least they do in my state.

A ladder and a pool are meant for different uses than to kill or injure. If you use a pool or a ladder correctly no one is hurt. If you use a gun correctly someone or something is either killed or injured.

Which is why our society treats guns differently from pools and ladders.

Just because someone somewhere might push someone into a pool on purpose doesn't mean that background checks aren't needed.

If shooting someone is an intentional act then why are there so many accidental shootings? There are countless stories of a gun that "just went off." I guess all those people who said that were lying.

Your biggest problem with me is that I'm not looking to take any any gun from law abiding citizens.

I grew up with them. My mom's family hunted. My dad started hunting when he met my mom. My dad used to hunt all the time with my grandfather. My dad's guns were in the garage all my life. It wasn't a big deal at all to anyone. My aunt used to sit on her back porch, waiting for the right size deer to walk by. Then BLAMO! They had venison in the freezer. My uncle used to give my cousins guns for christmas. I own a house on the south side of Mt. Rainier. There's elk everywhere. The population is out of control since their natural predator is no longer around to eat them. So during hunting season it's normal to see something dead on the hood of a car or on the bed of a truck. I have no problem with that. If there's too many elk then all of them will starve and do a lot of damage to the surrounding area.

I personally don't own guns and don't want to own a gun. Nor do I want one in my home or to enter a home that has one.

That doesn't mean I want to take any guns from anyone who is a law abiding citizen. Nor does it mean that law will take any guns from any law abiding citizen.

I'm like 86% of the people in our nation. We just want to close a loophole in the background check law.

I also would like to see mandatory insurance for all who own a gun to cover any injuries or death to innocent people that's caused by that gun.

There are two glaring errors as I bolded above.

I have no guns that have killed or injured a person. I have some guns that have killed animals, I have many guns that have not killed anything or anyone. Are you telling me the guns I use for target shooting are not being used correctly. I beg to differ with you I damn sure use all my guns correctly and handle them safely

As to number two, there is no loophole in the BGC law, that is a liberal myth. The only transfers exempt from BGC are private transfer because by law they are not required. No loophole there


Can you point to anything that BGC would solve? The shooting as at the theater in CO, Sandy Hook, Isla Vista, CA all involved legally purchased weapons where the purchaser under went a BGC

 

[Dana7360]

If that pool is in the ground or built into the deck as a permanent fixture of the property, yes they're required to have homeowners insurance that covers the pool. At least they do in my state.

A ladder and a pool are meant for different uses than to kill or injure. If you use a pool or a ladder correctly no one is hurt. If you use a gun correctly someone or something is either killed or injured.

Which is why our society treats guns differently from pools and ladders.

Just because someone somewhere might push someone into a pool on purpose doesn't mean that background checks aren't needed.

If shooting someone is an intentional act then why are there so many accidental shootings? There are countless stories of a gun that "just went off." I guess all those people who said that were lying.

Your biggest problem with me is that I'm not looking to take any any gun from law abiding citizens.

I grew up with them. My mom's family hunted. My dad started hunting when he met my mom. My dad used to hunt all the time with my grandfather. My dad's guns were in the garage all my life. It wasn't a big deal at all to anyone. My aunt used to sit on her back porch, waiting for the right size deer to walk by. Then BLAMO! They had venison in the freezer. My uncle used to give my cousins guns for christmas. I own a house on the south side of Mt. Rainier. There's elk everywhere. The population is out of control since their natural predator is no longer around to eat them. So during hunting season it's normal to see something dead on the hood of a car or on the bed of a truck. I have no problem with that. If there's too many elk then all of them will starve and do a lot of damage to the surrounding area.

I personally don't own guns and don't want to own a gun. Nor do I want one in my home or to enter a home that has one.

That doesn't mean I want to take any guns from anyone who is a law abiding citizen. Nor does it mean that law will take any guns from any law abiding citizen.

I'm like 86% of the people in our nation. We just want to close a loophole in the background check law.

I also would like to see mandatory insurance for all who own a gun to cover any injuries or death to innocent people that's caused by that gun.

There are two glaring errors as I bolded above.

I have no guns that have killed or injured a person. I have some guns that have killed animals, I have many guns that have not killed anything or anyone. Are you telling me the guns I use for target shooting are not being used correctly. I beg to differ with you I damn sure use all my guns correctly and handle them safely

As to number two, there is no loophole in the BGC law, that is a liberal myth. The only transfers exempt from BGC are private transfer because by law they are not required. No loophole there


Can you point to anything that BGC would solve? The shooting as at the theater in CO, Sandy Hook, Isla Vista, CA all involved legally purchased weapons where the purchaser under went a BGC

I don't know where you live but there is no background check required to purchase a gun at a gun show in Washington. The link below will so you the states that do.

Gun Show Background Checks State Laws

Look at Washington. It's bright red because we don't require background checks at gun shows. This law will close that loophole and close the one for private sales.

If you read my post carefully I clearly said "someone or SOMETHING." You used your gun property and that target was destroyed. That's something. Not a someone.

All the whining and moaning from the right is just another smoke screen.

Purchases at stores have been required to have that background check for many years. No one has taken any gun from any law abiding citizen.

Why don't you want the people of Washington to be able to vote to have background checks? Do you have any good reason? Or is your excuse that the law does nothing?

If you don't believe that this law will do anything what's your problem?

 

[M14 Shooter]

I'm like 86% of the people in our nation. We just want to close a loophole in the background check law.

There is no loophole in the law that allows you to get around having a background check done on when you buy a gun from a dealer. Your statement here does nothing but perpetuate fraud

 

[g5000]

If I wanted a few Percocet and my buddy Jimbo had some that sold to me...how does the government even know that we broke the law?

This was the end of the topic. The very first response! Well done.

The ability to break the law does not invalidate the law. Otherwise, why bother outlawing murder if some people get away with murder?

It is amazing this topic has gone on for 10 pages when it was finished right out of the gate.

I see you did not try to answer the question.

I see you failed to understand the fallacy of your question.

 

[M14 Shooter]

If I wanted a few Percocet and my buddy Jimbo had some that sold to me...how does the government even know that we broke the law?

This was the end of the topic. The very first response! Well done.

The ability to break the law does not invalidate the law. Otherwise, why bother outlawing murder if some people get away with murder?

It is amazing this topic has gone on for 10 pages when it was finished right out of the gate.

I see you did not try to answer the question.

I see you failed to understand the fallacy of your question.

There is no fallacy, there are only those that avoid answering it because they do not like where it necessarily leads.

 

[MXdad]

I don't know where you live but there is no background check required to purchase a gun at a gun show in Washington. The link below will so you the states that do.

Gun Show Background Checks State Laws

Look at Washington. It's bright red because we don't require background checks at gun shows. This law will close that loophole and close the one for private sales.

If you read my post carefully I clearly said "someone or SOMETHING." You used your gun property and that target was destroyed. That's something. Not a someone.

All the whining and moaning from the right is just another smoke screen.

Purchases at stores have been required to have that background check for many years. No one has taken any gun from any law abiding citizen.

Why don't you want the people of Washington to be able to vote to have background checks? Do you have any good reason? Or is your excuse that the law does nothing?

If you don't believe that this law will do anything what's your problem?

I must ask, have you ever been to a gun show? My guess would be no based on the statements you are making. The link you posted is very misleading and I am sure for the average person not familiar with requirements for buying and selling firearms they may make the same wrong assumption as you just did.

Fact of the matter is that all the states in red on that map require dealers at guns shows to run BGC. As a matter of fact all states are required and do run all dealer sales through the BGC process no matter of it occurs at a gun show or at a store. There is no way around it as it is Federal Law

This link here will show you the actual requirements for dealers to sale in WA
BATFE Gun Show Guidelines - Washington Arms Collectors

The actual whining is from the Hoplophobes on the left who claim gun show loopholes when none exist. The people of DC are not going to pass UBC because it will not pass constitutional muster and because they know without mandatory registration it does not a damn thing


What shooting would have been prevented by BGC
Colorado Theater? - Nope shooter passsed BGC
Sandy Hook? - Nope guns were legally purchased, BGC performed. Shooter murdered and then stole weapons
Isla Vista? - Nope shooter passed BGC

The National Institute for Justice has admitted that Universal BGC will not work

Effectiveness depends on the ability to reduce straw purchasing, requiring gun registrationand an easy gun transfer process

They go on to say that Universal BGC will most likely increase the straw purchases and thefts which are currently where better than 3/4 of all crime guns come from

this does not address the largest sources (straw purchasers and theft), which would most
likely become larger if background checks at gun shows and private sellers were addressed.
The secondary market is the primary source of crime guns.

http://www.nraila.org/media/10883516/nij-gun-policy-memo.pdf

Facts are facts Universal BGC will do nothing but add a burden onto law abiding citizens by causing them to have to take a trip to a FFL each time they want to sell a gun and pay the FFL fee each time. The information above from the GOV clearly states Universal BGC checks will not have an effect on gun crime. So the question is why are you pushing it if it is shown to not work and you can't point out to a crime that would have been prevented by having Universal BGC.

The fact of the matter is criminals don't go through legal channels to obtain weapons

For me personally its not a burden when purchasing as all I do is flip out my CCW, hand over cash and walk out. Nothing further has to be run on me

 

[jon_berzerk]

Register the serial number of the gun and provide a title, just like an automobile.

We're told by gun lovers that cars are just as dangerous, just as lethal as cars. If we accept this premise, then guns should be registered and titled.

Another idiot who doesnt get it.
What criminal is going to register his guns?
Hell, most honest gun owners wont register them either. It will be a bigger failure than Obamacare.

What criminal is going to register his guns?

constitutionally he is not required to register a firearm

failing to do so is not a crime for the felon

registration laws are only aimed at the legal gun owner

With every system there will be those who do not comply. Let me repeat that for clarity's sake. WITH EVERY SYSTEM THERE WILL BE THOSE WHO DO NOT COMPLY.

I wonder if that means every system is worthless?

i am not talking about lawful gun owners not complying with a registration law

i am talking about the felons

the FELON is not required to comply with registration laws

he can not be busted for failing to register a firearm

according to Haynes v. United States

the court ruled that registration only applies to persons who could lawfully own a firearm

 

[MXdad]

There is no loophole in the law that allows you to get around having a background check done on when you buy a gun from a dealer. Your statement here does nothing but perpetuate fraud

This same poster is under the impression that BGC are not run at Gun Shows in WA LOL

 

[ricechickie]

i am not talking about lawful gun owners not complying with a registration law

i am talking about the felons

the FELON is not required to comply with registration laws

he can not be busted for failing to register a firearm

according to Haynes v. United States

the court ruled that registration only applies to persons who could lawfully own a firearm

So, can't he be busted for unlawfully owning a firearm???

 

[jon_berzerk]

Register the serial number of the gun and provide a title, just like an automobile.

We're told by gun lovers that cars are just as dangerous, just as lethal as cars. If we accept this premise, then guns should be registered and titled.

Another idiot who doesnt get it.
What criminal is going to register his guns?
Hell, most honest gun owners wont register them either. It will be a bigger failure than Obamacare.

What criminal is going to register his guns?

constitutionally he is not required to register a firearm

failing to do so is not a crime for the felon

registration laws are only aimed at the legal gun owner

With every system there will be those who do not comply. Let me repeat that for clarity's sake. WITH EVERY SYSTEM THERE WILL BE THOSE WHO DO NOT COMPLY.

I wonder if that means every system is worthless?

No, but it means this one is.
Because the very people who will not comply are also the very people causing the problem. The people who will comply are also the very people who will not cause a problem.
So what have you solved?

So what have you solved?

a list of legal gun owners

to make easy for a confiscation law

 

[jon_berzerk]

i am not talking about lawful gun owners not complying with a registration law

i am talking about the felons

the FELON is not required to comply with registration laws

he can not be busted for failing to register a firearm

according to Haynes v. United States

the court ruled that registration only applies to persons who could lawfully own a firearm

So, can't he be busted for unlawfully owning a firearm???

yes of course

but he can already be busted for that without registration laws

so what is the point