[Alabama Shooter]

I don't think it is what most people seem to think it is. Federal data, yep. Records of convictions, and open wants & warrants ought to be in there. What else could there be? Records of adjudication of mental incompetence? Ought to be there, right?

But how often does that happen on a Federal level? very rare. State data ought to be in there, right? Some is. Everything that has been reported by the states. But that is far, far from everything the states have. Also, states often only report records of arrests to the Fed database, they aren't nearly so good about getting case results (especially dismissals) into the Fed's system.

The big buzz right now about mental health, and how we should have state/local data on the "crazies" in the database, to keep them from getting guns runs smack head on up against legally defined privacy rights. Sure, it sounds like a fine idea, BUT it is not simply a question of where do you draw the line on privacy, that line has already been drawn, in existing law. NOW, is it right and proper to bend, break, or just ignore that line (and those laws?)? How is now different from when the law was made, and is the difference enough to warrant a diminish of everyone's rights?

The argument that people want to get rid of the system because it does not stop enough people is spurious at best.

As to the idea that a mandatory background check would have stopped the Shandy Hook shooter, it didn't. According to what I hear, the shooter did try to buy a gun from a shop the week before, and was denied by the background check. That didn't stop the shooting.

I heard he did not use a Bushmaster, then he did, then didn't, then he did. Right now the police are saying he was not denied a background check. I wasn't there. Neither were you. It does not matter.

The idea here is not to stop Adam Lanza. He is already dead.

He just KILLED HIS MOTHER and took the guns.

No, he took the guns then killed his mother. You understand the difference?

Patrick Purdy....

Same argument as above.

I know one fellow who gets delayed by the instant check. Seems his file is flagged. Turns out it is flagged because he has a security clearance.
You might be surprised about what is, and what isn't in their database.

Just about everyone I know and work with has a security clearance of some kind. A whole bunch of us own guns. I have never heard a complaint. Heck I even bought a gun today. The background check took approximately 75 seconds.

Like I said there will be defects. These are unavoidable. But not insurmountable.

I would say the Fed has a reasonable argument for having and maintaining such a database, since you are buying a gun from a Federally licensed gun dealer. But, to require it from a private citizen is wrong. Guns are not just guns, they are private property as well.

Our government has a proven history of regulating the ownership and sale of some private property, why encourage them to regulate even more?

When I sell my car, house, land, boat, cow or a host of other things there is all kinds of government involvement. If I publish a book, talk on the phone, march on City Hall or give money to my church the government is there. This has been going on long before either one of us one born. It is annoying as hell but it is all part of how the world works.

There are people still alive who can remember when it was a crime in this country to own gold. (there were certain exceptions, jewelry, coin dealers, etc..) But ordinary citizens could neither buy, nor own gold metal. Yesterday it was gold. Today it's guns. What will it be tomorrow?

Actually yesterday it was guns too, until it wasn't anymore.