Today is Tuesday, July 29, 2014rss RSS feed

Registration by any other name is still unconstitutional.
By Jeff Knox

Gun Buyer

Gun Owners Wouldn’t & Shouldn’t Accept ‘Universal Background Checks’

FirearmsCoalition.org

FirearmsCoalition.org

Manassas, VA --(Ammoland.com)- The focus in Washington is slowly shifting from legislation banning certain semi-auto firearms and standard capacity magazines to proposals for “universal background checks” – just as we had previously warned it would.

Politicians know that America’s gun owners are beside themselves in opposition to gun and magazine bans.

They’ve watched as fearful shoppers have cleared the nation’s entire supply of AR and AK type rifles in just a couple of weeks, leaving manufacturers and importers 8 to 12 months deep in backorders.

The politicians remember what happened after the ban was passed in 1994 and they know there would be a serious price to pay for supporting bans on these popular tools today. On the other hand, the politicians seem to assume that a new law requiring background checks on private firearm transfers would have less negative impact on their ability to be elected.

That’s an assumption that could get them in deep trouble.

While gun and magazine bans are overt assaults on the right to arms, and, by comparison, “universal background checks” seem much less onerous, the fact is, inserting government bureaucracy into private transactions is just as unconstitutional, and potentially more dangerous in the long run, than the proposed bans. The core of the gun rights movement understands this and has already geared up for the fight and for the paybacks in the next election.

Even though some in leadership at the NRA have made comments that have been reported as a willingness to negotiate on the background check issue, the true activists in the organization – the guys who do the volunteer work, recruiting, working on campaigns, and participating in grass roots rights organizations – know that there can be no compromise on principles and fundamental rights. That’s why we created the National Coalition to Stop the Gun Ban, which includes dozens of rights organizations from every corner of the United States. One of the foundational principles of the coalition is opposition to, not only gun and magazine bans and restrictions, but also to any federal interference in private firearms transactions, and that opposition comes with a promise of active and concerted reprisals against any politician who is foolish enough to vote for, or in any way endorse, any of these rights-infringing proposals.

Some of the reporting suggesting that NRA, certain “conservative” politicians, or even members of the firearms industry might be willing to compromise on expanding background checks are clearly trying to convince wafflers that these proposals have broader support than they actually do. Mayors Against Illegal Guns director Mark Glaze is leading the wishful dreaming with suggestions that firearm manufacturers would support “universal background checks” in hopes of negating negative publicity.

He told CQ News that his group thinks the industry would support it to avoid the “black eye” they get whenever there is a shooting involving an assailant who should not have access to guns.

Of course this ignore the fact that all of the recent high-profile murderers either passed a background check to obtain their guns, or in the case of the Connecticut monster, murdered the guns’ rightful owner and stole them.

That didn’t keep Glaze and his boss from doing their best to black the eyes of the industry.

Glaze also suggested that federally licensed firearms dealers should also support “universal background checks” because it would force private buyers and sellers into their stores, and isn’t increased foot traffic what every retailer wants?

Mr. Glaze is either totally delusional or he is hoping that stating the idiotic in an upbeat and confident manner might actually fool someone into thinking that it’s actually a good idea.

There is no rational reason for anyone in the industry to support any of this nonsense and millions of reasons why they should not, but I’ll just present one: Smith & Wesson.

What the Great Purge of 1994 is to politicians, so the sale of Smith & Wesson in 2001 is to the firearms industry. Smith & Wesson had been an iconic brand in the industry for 150 years, but when they signed an agreement in May of 2000 with the Clinton administration to restrict the way they sold their guns, the gun buying public nearly drove the company out of business. One year later, the company, which had been purchased for $112 million just a few years earlier, was sold for $15 million and the assumption of $30 million worth of debts.

The point of the story is that, just as the portion of the public which clambers for gun control is not the portion of the public that votes based on a politicians position on gun control, the portion of the public that blames gun manufacturers when a lunatic abuses one of their products, is not the portion of the public that purchases those products and keeps the companies in business. Politicians, manufacturers, and retailers must understand that if they don’t “dance with the one what brung ‘em,” they’ll find themselves with a long, lonely walk home at the end of the night.

It’s time for Congress to quit arguing over complicated, resource sucking schemes that have no chance of reducing crime or atrocities, and instead focus on proven strategies that actually work.

About:
The Firearms Coalition is a loose-knit coalition of individual Second Amendment activists, clubs and civil rights organizations. Founded by Neal Knox in 1984, the organization provides support to grassroots activists in the form of education, analysis of current issues, and with a historical perspective of the gun rights movement. The Firearms Coalition is a project of Neal Knox Associates, Manassas, VA. Visit: www.FirearmsCoalition.org

  • 9 User comments to “Gun Owners Wouldn’t & Shouldn’t Accept ‘Universal Background Checks’”

    1. Can someone PLEASE explain to me the difference between a UNIVERSAL Background Check, and the NICS background check that I had to go through (the one that the firearms dealer performed when I purchased my last firearm)? I understand the meaning of the term universal, but don’t understand it in the context of the (already existing) background check.

    2. Let me paint you a scenario. I own a handgun legally and decide to sell it. A guy comes to the door and offers me a good price. I sell the gun and being an honest person, make a copy of his drivers license. 6 months later, the cops come crashing thru my front door, spread eagle everyone in the house and handcuff everyone. Hours later after the dust settles, the cops reveal the gun that was registered to me was used in a bank robbery and a cop was shot. Thats when the headaches start for me. If I had exchanged the gun using a 4473, I would be in the clear, but since I have no proof I sold the gun other that a stolen drivers license copy, the weight is on me. I see no reason not to do this. We cannot sell prescription drugs legally owned in the US so why should we be able to sell a weapon without proper prominence? IMHO

    3. Joe,you don’t want to have more gov.intrusion on your constitutional rights. The less the federal gov.know about you the better. The old saying more is better,NEVER applies to the gov.If you sold a weapon to someone that went out and murdered someone with it,you would be in no trouble at all ! If you wanted to show them the documentation of the sale,do it,but it’s not needed. The person you sold the weapon to commited the crime,not you ! I won’t even get into if you sell a car to someone and they go out and……….

    4. You’re assuming registration is required, and that a valid bill of sale wouldn’t hold up in court. He issue is how does a gun owner conduct a private sale to an individual, not having access to that persons possible criminal record or mental health. Conversely, how does a buyer know if the weapon is not stolen or used in a crime? (Assuming we aren’t in a state req FFL for transfer and/ or registration). Most gun owners want to be responsible, but believe its none of the govts business what guns I own. This is issue I’d like some good open debate on.

    5. Dave, as I understand it, NICS check records are supposed to be destroyed in 90(?) days. “Universal background checks” are tantamount to a gun registration list. One “shouldn’t” be able to be used in a confiscation, the the other is the basis for confiscation. Now – if someone could prove to me that the NICS checks are being destroyed – and why does the form used at the gun show I just attended list the firearm by make, model, and serial number? It wasn’t yellow like the 4473 I’m used to….

      Never let your guard down!

    6. Robert Zraick on February 2, 2013 at 5:14 PM said:

      Here is the problem. To make an argument that it makes sense to check the background of someone purchasing a gun, seems to make sense on the surface of it. But here is the deception involved.

      Under the surface is a plan to stop people from owning guns for such a variety of reasons That a huge percentage of people who would be responsible gun owner will be denied ownership.

      Returning vets who have served the country are already on the government’s radar as “potential terrorists”. It will be used to stop all veterans from owning guns.

      People who at any point in their lives who have ever taken a prescribed anti-depressant will likely be denied gun ownership. Even if this was for a short period in a distant past. Even though they may have tried them to get through a difficult time, and are now normal and functional.

      There will be so many different ways that the government will used to deny the rights to so many people, that it will be ridiculous.

      But that is the goal of the tyrants. They will use any excuse no matter how flimsy or invalid to push their agenda.

      Secondly they will use the data collected to disarm the people when the tyrants declare a national emergency. The data will be kept on file and be used for total confiscation when the time comes.

      This also part of the plan to push the ultimate goal of the tyrants. Their plan is to kill all those who would oppose their tyranny when the time comes.

      If they were proposing a system which would ask. Are you 18 years of age? Are you currently under treatment for any psychological disorders? have you been convicted of a felony in the last ten years? And leave it at that, then perhaps the argument could be made for a new gun being purchased.

      Then if the data was not gathered into a data base for use and records where not kept to be use at a later time for full confiscation then perhaps the argument would hold up.

      But in reality, these background checks are just a stepping stone to empower the tyrants and nothing else.

      No matter how reasonable they may seem on the surface, there is a hidden agenda to totally disarm all the people and leave them defenseless against a tyranny.

      Those who believe their arguments falsely believe that the government is good, always has the best interest of the people as their goal, and would never become tyrannical. People who believe this are fools and have not learned the lessons of history.

      Our government is already tyrannical. Not sometime in the future, but today, now.

      Do not trust them, do not believe them. Oppose them now in every way you can. Do not help them to destroy you.

    7. Power corrupts. ALL documentation can be used against you. If felons and crazies are to be kept out of the legal gun market, keep them locked up. No Problem!

    8. DaveGinOly on February 2, 2013 at 7:31 PM said:

      Missing from this thread -

      The FFL is a licensed dealer. As a licensee, he has agreed to follow regulations requiring him to conduct background checks prior to making certain sales.

      “Universal background” checks will involuntarily impose upon private persons the same responsibility that an FFL voluntarily assumes. The fact that FFLs must follow regulations conditions the population at large to accept similar regulation, but with no consideration of the fact that FFLs volunteer to abide by regulations when they accept the license. FFLs operate under license, i.e., they operate through privilege, not by right. The private citizen has a right to transfer personal property without government interference.

      The attempt to impose “universal background checks” is part of a process by which rights are first converted to privileges, the privileges can then be narrowed over time, and eventually they can be denied because privilege is exercised with the permission of the state.

      Additionally, “universal background checks” will impose a liability for failure to conform to the requirements of the law, liability that was voluntarily assumed by the FFL.

      Gun-grabbers ask “Why shouldn’t private sales be regulated the same way as those made through FFLs?” Now you know how to respond.

    Leave a Comment

    • Sign up Ammoland for your Inbox

      Daily Digest

      Monthly Newsletter

    • Recent Comments

      • Lava: Now we really know they’re desperate. If anybody doesn’t know they’re insane he is seriously...
      • Lava: Is there some way to filter the graph? What do those symbols mean? Kind of hard to click on six overlapping...
      • Dr Dave: @PA Constable since when does the PA Constabulary require annual weapon proficiency exams to carry a weapon?...
      • RDNK: Well it lasted about an hour longer that I thunk it would !
      • TEX: And these gungrabbing parasites like to talk about mental issues ? Damn,those are some skanks ! I guess...
    • Social Activity

    • Most Popular Posts

      • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
    Copyright 2014 AmmoLand.com Shooting Sports News | Sitemap | Μολὼν λαβέ

    Win a Daniel Defense DDM4v9 Rifle

    Subscribe and receive our emails , the drawing will be August 15, 2014 maybe you will be the lucky shooter receiving a Daniel Defense DDM4v9 Rifle. For more information visit the Daniel Defense promotional page.
    Monthly email subscription from Ammoland
    13715712
    14304352