Join TexasGunTalk

Background Checks for Personal Sales

Discussion in 'Gun Legislation' started by Rob_USF, Sep 18, 2013.

  1. Rob_USF

    Rob_USF Member

    102
    0
    16
    Dec 29, 2012
    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!
     


  2. Koinonia

    Koinonia Well-Known

    1,203
    6
    38
    Sep 10, 2012
    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: Sep 18, 2013
  3. Acera

    Acera TGT Addict

    7,624
    4
    36
    Jan 17, 2011
    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.
     
  4. Rob_USF

    Rob_USF Member

    102
    0
    16
    Dec 29, 2012
    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!
     
  5. Rob_USF

    Rob_USF Member

    102
    0
    16
    Dec 29, 2012
    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!
     
  6. Shotgun Jeremy

    Shotgun Jeremy TGT Addict

    11,194
    1,169
    113
    Jul 8, 2012
    Copperas Cove
    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.
     
  7. ShootingTheBull

    ShootingTheBull Active Member

    571
    0
    16
    Jun 18, 2013
    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?
     
  8. Army 1911

    Army 1911 TGT Addict

    3,321
    1,719
    113
    Mar 17, 2008
    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: Sep 18, 2013
  9. Acera

    Acera TGT Addict

    7,624
    4
    36
    Jan 17, 2011
    Republic of Texas
    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.
     
  10. Rob_USF

    Rob_USF Member

    102
    0
    16
    Dec 29, 2012
    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!
     


Share This Page