Background checks

[Kathryn]

Would you tell me what is wrong with criminal background checks for all gun transactions. Yes, the FBI might keep the records and create a database for future confiscation. We should demand an outside auditor to prove that the data are deleted...

Given that we have criminal background checks for people in the gun selling business... why not background checks for ALL transactions? Isn't this just a giant loophole for the criminals?

No term papers, please!

 

[Coinneach]

Kathryn, the problems with BG checks are many and profound, not the least of which is that FBI employs marginally-competent clerks to run the system (I once had to spell my name 5 freakin' times before the droid got it right). And you have to be nice, or they'll deny you right there. The law and due process don't mean jackdammit.

Furthermore, a BG check presumes guilt until innocence is proven. By you. How do you prove a negative?

The records are out of date, sometimes by years. Literally.

The operators of NICS are bloody idiots. They have this nasty tendency to do system maintenance in the middle of the day, instead of during downtimes.

Is that enough?

 

[Monkeyleg]

Hi, Kathryn. Your point about the FBI keeping the files for later confiscation is probably the most salient. When the NCIC system went into effect in November 1998, the records were supposed to be destroyed once the check was complete. Instead, the Reno justice department kept the records, saying they needed to "audit" the system. That's registration. We all know that this administration is corrupt enough to violate the laws on this. How can we be sure that a future administration, such as Gore's, wouldn't be equally corrupt.

There are other reasons for opposing background checks as well, but I don't want to write a term paper .

Dick

 

[Brett Bellmore]

Fair enough question. My answer(S)?

1. Gun ownership is a civil right. Says so right in the Bill of Rights. Name one OTHER civil right which you have to pass a criminal background check to exercise.

2. The stated purpose of the background checks is to prevent firearms from being purchased by criminals. However, we know for a fact that the system is a pathetic failure at that; Criminals still get guns, don't they? In point of fact, about the only effect the background checks DO have on criminals is to encourage them to STEAL guns!

There's only one known way of keeping guns out of the hands of criminals: Keeping the criminals in prison. A criminal who's paid his debt to society should be restored all his civil rights, including gun ownership. And if he really can't be trusted with a gun, you shouldn't be unleashing him on the public, because he WILL be able to get a gun if he wants.

In the mean time, there's no justification for a law which can not accomplish it's stated end, but which can easily be peverted to pave the way for gun confiscation. Little benefit, massive cost...

3. The worst your auditor can do is point out that the law is being broken. Big whoppe; It's being broken now, everyone knows it, and we can't do anything about it. If the current administration has taught us anything, its that a President who's corrupt enough to corrupt the Justice department too, can't be stopped by legal processes. I don't want to count on Congress being willing to remove the President from office over gun registration; I want to make gun registration IMPOSSIBLE.

------------------
Sic semper tyrannis!

 

[Kathryn]

I'm naive, but I kinda like your saying to keep criminals in jail until they pay their debt, and whatnot. Course we know that doesn't happen, with overcrowding by drug offenders, but it's a nice idea.

I take a tiny bit of personal comfort in the fact that those with restraining orders can get denied. If they are that dangerous though, perhaps they should be jailed instead. When their psychopathic obsession is cured, they can be freed.

Uh oh, this can be a very long thread.

 

[Brett Bellmore]

Kathryn: Did I forget to say that the war on drugs ought to be ended, and all victimless crime laws be repealed?

Regarding restraining orders, though, I'll have to disagree; Again, gun ownership IS a civil right, and you don't have to be convicted by a jury of your peers to be subjected to a restraining order. You don't actually have to be found guilty of anything by anybody; Restraining orders are often issued as a matter of routine during divorce proceedings, without any particular finding of threat. Civil rights are just too important to justify allowing a judge to suspend them on his own say-so... That's a punishment, and you shouldn't be punished without having been found guilty of a crime.

------------------
Sic semper tyrannis!

 

[Paul Revere]

Kathryn...

The problem with "criminal background checks" as they relate to firearm purchases, is that the process is simply a FRAUD! It is a fraud for many obvious reasons ( check out www.nralive.com ). If you feel that the word "FRAUD" is unfair, let me illustrate by showing the definition; Fraud...A deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain.

The deception is that it is described as a mechanism to "protect the public" by performing an "instant" FBI background check on the individual who is attempting to buy a firearm from an FFL dealer. This sounds respectable, and as such, most people that aren't aware of the deception, buy into the idea. Your stated question is proof that people believe that background checks are good things. That's the deception. The reality however, and therefore the "unlawful gain" is that the alledged "backgound check" actually performs a completely different (unpublicized) function...it performs a registration of the purchaser's firearm. And that is the fraud! And that is ILLEGAL.

The clammer about background checks at gun shows (in the media today) is an even bigger FRAUD. Since the deception makes people believe that firearm purchasers at gun shows do not have to submit to the background checks at all... that more legislation (more government control of our lives) is needed to close this "loophole". The fact is, all FFL dealers who sell firearms at gun shows, follow the exact same process of NICS/4473 as they do from their stores, no exceptions...none! All sales of firearms become registered in federal government computers. That is the FRAUD!

The reality is, that since many private individuals like you and I can buy and sell firearms between one another without submitting to the NICS/4473 fraud, at gun shows (or anywhere else for that matter), an all out attack has been waged against private sales at gun shows (since this is the biggest forum for possible private sales). But of course the fraudulent media doesn't exactly tell you the story in those terms. They don't tell you that the reason this attack is waged is because those private sales DO NOT get REGISTERED!!! Therefore, the fraud is exposed to sunlight when you realize that it's not criminals they're after, its law abiding good folks like you and I. They want ALL firearms in the registry, not just the ones sold through FFL dealers, ALL OF THEM!

 

[cruiserman]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kathryn:
Would you tell me what is wrong with criminal background checks for all gun transactions. Yes, the FBI might keep the records and create a database for future confiscation. We should demand an outside auditor to prove that the data are deleted...

Given that we have criminal background checks for people in the gun selling business... why not background checks for ALL transactions? Isn't this just a giant loophole for the criminals?

No term papers, please! [/quote]

The data are not deleted, and no outside governing body can be sure of it. The only way is to keep them from getting the data in the first place. I would rather allow everyone to be on an even keel, since you know criminals are getting guns anyway. Loophole = freedom.

 

[loknload]

Some time ago the FBI and the city of Pittsburgh was pulling some funny stuff with gun registration, that is until they got caught at it. I don't remember all the details.
Also Instead of opening Alcatraz as a tourist attraction it should be opened up as a prison again and operated the way it was.
When you go to prison you lose all your rights. Do the Crime, Do some real Hard time.
No more Country Club Prisons. To many bleeding hearts have to much to say about things they should not.
Like those maroons from PETA encouraging Acohol to save a cow,udder nonsense

------------------
We preserve our freedoms by using four boxes: soap,ballot,jury, and cartridge.
Anonymous

 

[Monkeyleg]

loknload, the "program" you're referring to was an "experiment" done by the University of Pennsylvania in conjunction with the Justice Department. They collected form 4473's, and created a computer program that could map the city and show which homes had _legally_ purchased guns, and what guns were in each home. Somebody blew the whistle, and the experiment was halted, but the software program still exists.

Dick

 

[6forsure]

Where does the Second Ammendment mention background checks? Background checks for the First too? All a bunch of n*tless/gutless PC BS!

 

[HankL]

Kathryn, You starting to get the idea now?
The very best to you and your's
Hank

 

[Piggy]

The Founders believed all peacable Americans had the right to keep and bear arms. The operative word is PEACABLE. Look over the NICS form at all the categories of people prohibited from buying firearms. Many people that fall into the prohibited categories are NOT violent individuals. Meanwhile, the anti's continue to push for an expansion of the list of prohibited persons to include those convicted of misdemeanors and those with a history of unspecified mental disorders. Soon, anyone who's ever been on prozac for mild depression, or prescribed sleeping pills for insomnia, or anyone who's taken Ritalin for hyperactivity, will be considered mentally unfit to own firearms. By today's psychological standards, where new mental disorders are being invented by the day, we are taught that any deviance from ideal behavior and/or emotional experience (in other words, having a unique personality) constitutes a serious mental condition. If we all suffer from some sort of concocted mental disorder, by the liberals reasoning, we are all unfit to own firearms.
Are you starting to see where background checks are leading?

 

[loknload]

Monkeyleg thanks for correcting me.That did take place out in the Pittsburgh area though didn't it? Anyway I stand corrected. It was a dirty deal against honest Americans.

------------------
We preserve our freedoms by using four boxes: soap,ballot,jury, and cartridge.
Anonymous