View Single Post
Old January 25, 2013, 02:49 PM   #38
Spats McGee
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 5,591
Originally Posted by Alabama Shooter
The point is that it is NOT a restriction. There is no reason why sane, law abiding people in the country legally can't own a firearm. There is absolutely nothing to prevent it from happening by having a background check.
I agree that there is absolutely nothing to prevent transfers from happening by background check. There is, as far as I know, nothing to prevent two private parties from asking an FFL to do a transfer, including NICS check. For those citizens who choose to do just that, more power to them.

Where we disagree is whether such a check should be mandatory for private citizens to use a background check for private transfers. I am of the opinion that it is the government's job to prove something (such as proving beyond a reasonable doubt that I have committed a felony crime) before I am prohibited from exercising fundamental individual rights, not that it is MY job to demonstrate to the government that I am not prohibited. I have likened such a restriction (mandatory background check on all transfers) to the prior restraint doctrine under the First Amendment. Once exercising a right becomes available only to those who get the governmental stamp of approval, it's not really a right any more.
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some.
Spats McGee is offline  
Page generated in 0.04127 seconds with 7 queries