Capitol Armory ad

Background Checks for Personal Sales

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas

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!
  • Rob_USF

    Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 29, 2012
    102
    1
    Hey guys, I hope y'all don't mind me coming here for help with this but...

    I am a college student as some of you may know, and probably are as well. I'm having an upcoming debate regarding stronger background checks.

    Now of course, I'm on the "Against stronger background checks" for reasons I will not disclose on this thread, but I would like everyone to put in their two cents. It would really help me as far as getting the opening and closing speech for the debate ready!

    So down below (and please be detailed!) post your opinions on implementing a law to enforce background checks for personal sales.

    Why are you against this?

    Why would you not want personal sale background checks?

    What would it hurt?

    Are there any past examples of failures regarding the issue?

    Please keep in mind that I'm having a debate against a bunch of democratic gun snatchers, and the debate is pure cut-throat. I need to prepare a stronger argument against anything they could possibly bring up.

    Thank you all in advance for your participation, and a survey will follow in the next few weeks to get some data from 20 people (so long as the mods here don't mind, of course!)

    Thanks again!
    ARJ Defense ad
     

    Koinonia

    Well-Known
    Rating - 100%
    20   0   0
    Sep 10, 2012
    1,208
    31
    San Antonio
    I think my awnser to all questions, would be Freedom. I would fail debate class.

    What good is perceived safety, if there is no freedom?
     
    Last edited:

    Acera

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Jan 17, 2011
    7,596
    21
    Republic of Texas
    It is about freedom and protection from a gun data base and confiscation.

    The individuals that committed the recent shooting crimes violated the most harshly punishable laws the state has. Why do you think putting minor laws in place that effect law abiding citizens will have any bearing on those that don't respect or follow the strongest laws we already have?

    It is about the criminal, not the tool.
     

    Rob_USF

    Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 29, 2012
    102
    1
    I think my awnser to all questions, would be Freedom. I would fail debate class.

    What good is perceived safety, if there is no freedom?

    I think this is what I want to lead the debate up to, it's all about freedom, but I'm going to have to find some strong arguments and points. A lot of them! I have to have a 6-8 minute opening speech, and a 6-8 minute closing speech.

    Thank you for the reply!
     

    Rob_USF

    Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 29, 2012
    102
    1
    It is about freedom and protection from a gun data base and confiscation.

    The individuals that committed the recent shooting crimes violated the most harshly punishable laws the state has. Why do you think putting minor laws in place that effect law abiding citizens will have any bearing on those that don't respect or follow the strongest laws we already have?

    It is about the criminal, not the tool.

    Do you believe that to enforce personal background checks, a national database would be required?

    Also, is it true that every single national database in other countries have led to a confiscation?

    Also, do you believe there would be costs to having personal background checks? It couldn't be free, nothing in life is free.

    Thanks for the reply, I appreciate it!
     

    Shotgun Jeremy

    Spelling Bee Champeon
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jul 8, 2012
    11,247
    96
    Central Texas
    Rob, we have a LOT of good info and knowledgeable people on this forum. Why don't you tell us what you're already going in with and we can help add to it and polish it up.
     

    ShootingTheBull

    Active Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 18, 2013
    569
    1
    I don't mind a strong background check -- the Texas CHL process involves (as I understand) a much more thorough background check than the typical NICS check.

    What I object to is that the background check system is used as a default gun registry, depriving us of yet more privacy. If the background check bills under discussion would REMOVE the firearm info/serial number info off of the form 4473, then I doubt many of us would be as opposed as we are. But the background check system as-is is used to enforce a de-facto gun registry.

    Logically, it makes no sense -- why does the government need to know not only what type of gun (handgun, pistol, revolver, semi-auto, rifle, shotgun, whatever) in order to perform a background check? Why does the government need to know the serial number of that gun, in order to verify if you are a legal buyer?

    Answer: they don't. So remove it, and I wouldn't mind passing a background check at all. And, I believe many of us would find that a simple, easy, and fine compromise.

    Now -- reasons people object to background checks are that there is no constitutional basis for it, the constitution doesn't say "the right of the people WHO PASS BACKGROUND CHECKS to bear arms shall not be infringed." And there are implementation problems -- who performs the background check? It's not something that is done for free, only a licensed FFL can or will do a background check. And WHY would the FFL, who is in the business of selling guns, want to enable someone to buy a gun from someone who isn't him? Why should the FFL be required to put himself out of business?

    Then there's delays, or errors, etc.

    Then there's the sheer futility of it all. Do "background checks" do ANYTHING about actually reducing crime? Look at the Navy yard shooter recently -- he passed a background check. Heck, he passed the more stringent background check of the CHL process. He even passed background checks that had him working in a military facility! What, exactly, would more background checks have done to stop him? Nothing. Nothing whatsoever.

    Then there's the math about how many people fail background checks -- it's an astonishingly low percentage. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, in 2010, 98.8% of the applicants passed the FBI check. Only 1.2% were denied by the FBI.

    What does that tell you? It tells me that criminals are not trying to buy guns through the normal means, and that background checks are kind of pointless. So why expand them? Why continue to burden us? Why not vote for freedom instead of more regulation?

    Okay, let's take it a step further: 1.2% were denied by the FBI. That's 73,000 attempts made to buy a firearm, that were by people who couldn't pass a background check. That's actually a pretty big number, but -- what did law enforcement do about it? How many of those 73,000 perjurers did they prosecute for falsifying the Form 4473 and attempting to buy a handgun illegally? They ignored 93.8% of them entirely! They only investigated 4,732. How many were actually prosecuted? 44.

    Talk about an absolute waste of the people's time, energy, and money -- a massive boondoggle, the entire background check system, because in an entire year where 10.4 MILLION background checks were conducted, the government chose to prosecute 44 people.

    What does that tell you? It tells me that that law enforcement actually isn't interested in the results of the background check system at all. It is very much not a priority for them. So what do they want? The registry. They want to know exactly who has exactly what. Why? What possible motive could they have for wanting to know exactly what you've got? I'll let you figure that one out for yourself.

    So -- I'll say it again -- I don't mind undergoing the background check. It takes a couple of minutes. It's invasive, yes, but compared to everything else we face, it's no big deal -- AS A BACKGROUND CHECK. What I very much object to is how they're trying to use the background check law to enforce a nationwide gun registration system.

    It would be very, very easy to find out where the politicians actually stand -- just offer to decouple the registration from the background check bills. Remove the gun information/serial number from the Form 4473. That's all it would take. If there was no way for the government to know what you bought, owned, or sold, AND if there was a convenient way to get the background check performed at no cost, then I think many of us would not be opposed to undergoing a background check.

    But again -- I have to ask -- what is the purpose of putting 100% of the citizens through this wringer, when 98.8% of us pass, and for those felons and fugitives who don't pass, THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T CARE ABOUT THEM ANYWAY, not enough to prosecute them at least! So what is this farce all about?
     

    Army 1911

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 17, 2008
    6,504
    96
    Dallas Texas or so
    It is real simple, the 2nd gives codifies the right to keep and bear arms without infringement. Until there is a background check and 10 day waiting period on going to church, stating an opinion or any of the other rights in the first 10 amendments, I can not support the same fro the second. This goes double for the media and politicians.
     
    Last edited:

    Acera

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Jan 17, 2011
    7,596
    21
    Republic of Texas
    Do you believe that to enforce personal background checks, a national database would be required?

    Also, is it true that every single national database in other countries have led to a confiscation?

    Also, do you believe there would be costs to having personal background checks? It couldn't be free, nothing in life is free.

    Thanks for the reply, I appreciate it!

    No but it steps in a direction that could go that way.

    The other side is constantly using compromise and reasonable controls as a way to advance their agenda. Every time we meet in the middle, it's our side losing ground.

    Don't deal in absolutes. If they want to do that, you can point out that every person who owns a gun does not shoot people, that is an absolute.

    So you point about every single nation that has a registration/database has led to confiscation is an absolute, however there are cases where it was attempted.......think Nazi Germany. There are cases where is has not yet been done.

    Of course there will be costs and fees, that is why many gun dealers are behind it, they see the dollar signs.

    JMHO, hope it helps.
     

    Rob_USF

    Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 29, 2012
    102
    1
    Rob, we have a LOT of good info and knowledgeable people on this forum. Why don't you tell us what you're already going in with and we can help add to it and polish it up.

    I haven't started extensive research yet, but like ShootingTheBull said, I feel as if more laws will not solve our problem, only be more of a hassle for those of us who enjoy our guns and are law abiding citizens. I feel as though the government does not regulate or commonly enforce the laws we currently have, and so I base my side of the argument on that. All it is doing is putting more of a burden on us.

    @ShootTheBull,

    The amount of information in your post was EXACTLY what I am looking for, THANK YOU very much! I will use every last bit of that information in my debate!

    My ears (or eyes) are still open for everyone else, though! So if y'all have the time, keep posting your personal opinions.

    Once again thanks everyone!
     

    V-Tach

    Watching While the Sheep Graze
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Sep 30, 2012
    8,899
    96
    Texas
    How would they enforce it? They couldn't without turning all Citizens into snitches..

    Why pass feel good legislation that would not stop crazy people from doing crazy stuff. But we did something!

    It would not stop the problem they are trying to solve.

    Any law, regulation, ordinance that would inhibit law abiding Citizens and not criminals will never gain my support.
     

    Pawpaw40

    Member
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jan 5, 2009
    157
    11
    East Texas
    Use Illinois as an example. In that state a Firearm Owner Identification Card is required to purchase a firearm from either an individual or a dealer. A background check is done to get a FOID, and dealers also perform a NICS check. The gangstas in Chicago don't have the FOID, they are getting their firearms through robbery, straw sales or other black market means. They aren't having their FOID's checked. If a "so called" universal background check law is passed, the only people that would have the background check performed would be your typical law abiding citizen. How is that going to combat the problem of street criminals getting firearms?
    I have a friend who is a Deputy US Marshall in a large midwestern city. Part of his job is to review the local PD's arrest sheet for possible federal prosecutions. He sends aproximately 80% of the arrests that have a firearm involved to the US attorney. The US attorney only prosecutes only those that the state will not prosecute. Since the state also has a felon in possession law, the only people the US attorney will prosecute are the ones the local DA feels are generally good people that would not serve the state to incarcerate.
     

    Southpaw

    Forum BSer
    Rating - 100%
    14   0   0
    Mar 30, 2009
    17,862
    96
    Guadalupe Co.
    Do you believe that to enforce personal background checks, a national database would be required?



    Thanks for the reply, I appreciate it!

    Yes, I don't see how it would be legally enforced without a database. I believe this would also lead to a searchable database for all FFL transfers as well (contrary to current law). I just don't see the feds chasing down ever handwritten 4473 form when they come upon an suspect and he say's that he transferred it thru an FFL 20 years ago but has no idea who, what or where.

    Also, how will all past private sales be documented? If they aren't in some database, then who's to say that pretty much any gun wasn't transferred prior to UBC enactment? I suppose manufacturing date would come into play here, but there are still going to be many millions of guns that were made before.

    Without registration or a database somewhere of every firearm in the country, BC's for private sales would be unenforceable and seemingly open to scrupulous use by LE against a guy who swears he bought the gun from a guy in a Walmart parking lot a day before the law went into effect. Or the guy that bought the gun from a dealer in another state at another time with no recollection of who that even is. Will it be against the law to have a bad memory, because I would be doing life. :D

    I too believe it's about freedom as well and the government not being involved in what I do with my private property. But I am convinced that background checks for private sales is the first step to universal registration and eventual confiscation in some form or another. That could be through taxation but I'll stop there for now.


    EDIT- It took me a little to write this, so if I repeated anything that was posted while I was writing this, my apologies.
     
    Last edited:

    V-Tach

    Watching While the Sheep Graze
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Sep 30, 2012
    8,899
    96
    Texas
    But I am convinced that background checks for private sales is the first step to universal registration and eventual confiscation in some form or another. That could be through taxation but I'll stop there for now.

    And rightly so...

    The attempt at taxation is occurring now.
     

    txbikerman

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 10, 2013
    5,958
    21
    mckinney
    Imo no background checks on private sales. The government is in our business as it is


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
     

    BigBoss0311

    Well-Known
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 8, 2010
    1,333
    46
    McKinney, TX
    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
    • This was written by Franklin, sometime shortly before February 17, 1775 as part of his notes for a proposition at the Pennsylvania Assembly, as published in Memoirs of the life and writings of Benjamin Franklin (1818). A variant of this was published as:
      • Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
     

    jordanmills

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Sep 29, 2009
    5,371
    96
    Pearland, TX
    Don't forget frivolous additions to the "no buy list" that I'm sure would quickly become like the "no fly list". Lots of people added for no apparent reason, no way to dispute it, no way to find out why you're on it. Some government drone types a name or number in wrong, and now all your guns are forfeit, just like your right to travel.
     

    grumper

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 5, 2012
    2,993
    96
    Austin
    It's an issue to be decided by each state. The federal government does not have the authority to regulate intrastate commerce between 2 private individuals. At least they are not supposed to up until the kangaroo courts decided anything and everything including all economic activity and all economic inactivity constitutes interstate commerce.

    If a state wants background checks on private sales that never cross state lines it is within their authority to pass legislation requiring it. If a state passes it against the wishes of their populace, then their legislators can face the wrath of the voters during the general or recall elections. If a state doesn't want background checks on private sales, the federal govt should **** off. That's how Federalism is supposed to work.

    Back in 1968 that interstate commerce clause didn't encompass anything and everything, and that is the reason why only transactions crossing state lines were required by the GCA 1968 for an FFL to get involved. If they believed they had the power they would have made every sale require a FFL, but they couldn't. Sadly this is no longer true because everything including the boogers you pick out of your nose are considered interstate commerce now.
     
    Last edited:

    stanjones

    Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 19, 2013
    73
    1
    South Austin
    We have a natural right to arm ourselves.This right to self-protection exists by the nature of our humanity. The Constitution only acknowledges this right, it does not grant the right. If you have to meet ANY "requirement" before you are allowed to own a gun, then it is not a right. period. Realistically people should be able to open carry if they want, and you should be able to own anything that military and police can own. Authoritarian "laws" have no place in a discussion of rights...you do not have to ask to excercise a right.
     

    Shorts

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Mar 28, 2008
    4,607
    31
    Texas
    Why are you against this?
    Because.
    Besides the state regulates it and I'm perfectly happy with the requirements.


    Why would you not want personal sale background checks?
    I do not like there is a record (4473).
    I do not like the inconvenience of filling out 4473 and asking Mother may I?



    What would it hurt?
    My convenience and effort. It would hurt my wallet by increasing cost of a firearm purchase including an FFL in the deal. Not to mention, there is now a paper trail (4473).


    Are there any past examples of failures regarding the issue?
    No, I have never failed to buy a firearm in a private sale or sold a firearm in a private sale.
     
    Every Day Man
    Tyrant

    Support

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    116,120
    Messages
    2,953,348
    Members
    34,941
    Latest member
    Irowland1994
    Top Bottom