Universal background checks

[gunsandgunsmithing]

While many seem to think that a UBGC system sounds great, I haven't heard anyone talking about the down sides of implementing such a system, aside from the normal talk about registration and whose name gets on the "no buy" list.


The way I see it, is that a bgc system that further restricts gun ownership, by default, creates a vastly larger demand for blackmarket guns. That demand will command higher prices for illegal guns. Those profits will create a much larger illegal gun industry, much like the one of illegal drugs. We all know how the war on drugs is working.


I can't help but think about how prohibition worked out, in that era. Didn't the sale illegal alcohol fund the mob?


If the point of ubgc's is to save lives, it seems to me that we are failing to look at how many lives may be lost as a result of passing this kind of law.


As the value of our LEGAL guns will stay stable, the value of that same gun if stolen from our home or business will skyrocket, giving way to theft and loss of life of innocent gun owners. Then that gun gets into the blackmarket pipeline, where violence will be the standard, not the exception, and they won't be as discriminating about who they will sell to as are legal gun owners, as long as the buyer has the $$$. Alcohol funded the mob, drugs fund cartels and gangs, and illegal guns will fund a violent blackmarket for them. JMHO. Rant off...


Your thoughts.....

 

[Taildrag15X]

While many seem to think that a UBGC system sounds great, I haven't heard anyone talking about the down sides of implementing such a system, aside from the normal talk about registration and whose name gets on the "no buy" list.


The way I see it, is that a bgc system that further restricts gun ownership, by default, creates a vastly larger demand for blackmarket guns. That demand will command higher prices for illegal guns. Those profits will create a much larger illegal gun industry, much like the one of illegal drugs. We all know how the war on drugs is working.


I can't help but think about how prohibition worked out, in that era. Didn't the sale illegal alcohol fund the mob?


If the point of ubgc's is to save lives, it seems to me that we are failing to look at how many lives may be lost as a result of passing this kind of law.


As the value of our LEGAL guns will stay stable, the value of that same gun if stolen from our home or business will skyrocket, giving way to theft and loss of life of innocent gun owners. Then that gun gets into the blackmarket pipeline, where violence will be the standard, not the exception, and they won't be as discriminating about who they will sell to as are legal gun owners, as long as the buyer has the $$$. Alcohol funded the mob, drugs fund cartels and gangs, and illegal guns will fund a violent blackmarket for them. JMHO. Rant off...


Your thoughts.....

And you won't on any Main Stream Media, they only tell what they are told to say and not the whole truth......

 

[timeout]

G&G, I would say that your theory is 100% spot on.

 

[jonbearman]

It is a no win situation,you dont register and get caught,they confiscate,you register and one day they wake up and say its time to round up the guns you lose.

 

[people]

It is a bad thing. Contact your reps and tell them what you think and you vote.

 

[4xforfun]

I would be all for universal background checks if they do four things.

1) Make the whole process a quick and cheap deal....two days tops....twenty dollars tops. Make it so once the buyer has been cleared that the seller can ship the gun DIRECTLY TO THE BUYER....no FFL dealers need be involved.

2) Once the buyer has been cleared to make the purchase, THE GOVERNMENT MUST DESTROY ALL RECORDS OF THE TRANSACTION and subsequent search......NO DEFACTO GUN REGISTRATION BY STORING THE INFO!!! This is a biggy!!

3) if the buyer is denied, there needs to be a simple and cheap challange. We all know that there will be lots of "false negatives". The buyer needs some recourse and a way to fight the system.

4) This is a biggy......pass the above three, and NEVER ASK FOR ANYTHING ELSE. No bans on certin types of guns or mags. No more NEW restictions on WHERE you can leagaly carry. Once you ask, we go back to the laws as written wayyyyyy back in the eighteenth century.

Simple...they get their background checks and we eliminate any possability of gun registration in the future.

Just my .02
Tod

 

[people]

They should just open up the NICS check to all of us.
1) quick and cheap? That would be a phone call and free. Twenty bucks is not cheap.
2) not keep records. Lol they are not supposed to be keeping records now but they are.
3) yes there needs to be a way to fight a negative but it should be free.
4) yes. I want some full autos and more importantly I need some suppressors to save my hearing.

 

[4xforfun]

They should just open up the NICS check to all of us.
1) quick and cheap? That would be a phone call and free. Twenty bucks is not cheap.
2) not keep records. Lol they are not supposed to be keeping records now but they are.
3) yes there needs to be a way to fight a negative but it should be free.
4) yes. I want some full autos and more importantly I need some suppressors to save my hearing.

My point is that if it is not actually listed in the bill, they could pass it and then charge anything they want...make it so expensive that no one could afford to buy or sell a gun.

 

[people]

I still would not support it for this reason. When has the government ever got involved in anything and made it better?

 

[4xforfun]

I still would not support it for this reason. When has the government ever got involved in anything and made it better?

The space program of the 1960's. After that, I draw a blank!! ;D

 

[ReedG]

The main issue to me is that not one thing in the BGC bill would have any impact on the mass killings they keep referring to.

For what it's worth, I watched my first-ever Obama speech today. I am stunned by his outright lies, innuendos and insubstantiable comments. I am also sick-to-death of the news media. The mass killings being constantly referenced were not carried out by people who would have submitted to a background check. I cannot find a single competent (anyone other than the Brady "bunch") study that expanded background checks or outright gun registration could have prevented any of the killings.

Every person I know would like to be able to do something to protect our children and society from wacko killers. Background checks will have no impact at all on doing that.

 

[Pres100]

As many have said gun control is not about guns but about control. If UBGC are instituted and controlled by the govt. it is no longer a right but a govt controlled privilege.

 

[Webster]

I still think the real problem is the mentally ill pass a background check. Criminals will always get hand guns regardless of the laws.

 

[Shynloco]

Though everything that has been said has it's merits, one BIG thing people often forget is that THE STATE COLLECTS FEES everytime you register a gun. Even a INTER-FAMILY trasnfer costs you $19 in good 'ole California. Yes I know it's a screwed up place, but MONEY is a huge motivator that POLITCIANS conveniently forget to talk about, and speak ONLY in terms of the myth of "Public Safety." Without it, we might actually have some honest politicians with down to earth goals and egos. That is something that is COMPLETELY MIA in Washington and many State Capitols these days.

 

[Valar]

I think the whole point of the background checks is pointless. First, explain to me how it would have changed the Newtown shootings? It would have not the mother bought the guns and failed to have enough sense to keep them locked up! Period , the laws would not have changed a thing. Emotion runs high, but the Obama admin does not want to stop at background checks. This is a starting point to roll threw the door! Good honest gun owners should not pay a dime more for there right, Don't forget, The Right To Bear Arms! When you give a inch they will take a mile! Criminals will have there guns. They steal them! They will not comply with background checks before they steal them! AS Far as I am Concerned they need to enforce what is currently on the books! Stop! Using victims family's, and putting them true more distress to try and support a gun control agenda that will ONLY affect honest Gun enthusiast! The Media and Obama support gun control because they are city folk. They have forgotten that guns fought for and won the very freedom this nation was built upon. In MY opinion anyone that thinks otherwise, Well you have no business on a firearms shooting forum! I AMi ONLY ENTITLED TO THIS OPINION BECAUSE THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH WAS FOUGHT FOR AND WON, WITH YES... GUNS!

 

[KMart]

Webster
Be careful with the term "mentally ill". All the government has to do, is say that by a consensus of the psychiatric doctors in the U.S., anyone that would consider owning a firearm is "mentally ill", and should not own a firearm.
It doesn't have to be true, they just have to say it enough. Think global warming.

 

[sdean]

Even the space program would be very debatable. How many people were killed in Space Shuttles?

 

[LCazador]

Attached to any background check bill are two words , " data base " . No back ground check will work without it . On the 4473 there is already a question that asks if you have been mentally adjudicated . If there is no data base attached how can you possibly check to see if the buyer is abject ? I'm sure everybody that fills out the 4473 is perfectly honest , even at gun shows !