View Single Post
Old April 17, 2013, 09:24 AM   #249
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
The actual NICS background-check system didn't go online until November of 1998. It couldn't have been stopping crime in 1993.
Wasn't there a five day waiting period and background check for handguns prior to NICS? My memory of the system back then is a bit fuzzy.
That was the provisional system while NICS was getting up and running. During that time period, you went to the store, filled out a form that basically says, This is me, I want a handgun. After that point, the dealer sent the information to the CLEO(s) and waited 5 business days. After those 5 business days they completed the transfer unless one or more CLEO's responded that the transfer would be illegal.

JD, I have read some great arguments from you for removing regulation from licensed dealers. What I have not read is a reason to extend those burdens to private sellers. Instead you seem resigned that the burdens are there, the activity is no different, so the burden should be extended to all. DO you work for a lobby like the FFLs of America or something?
I don't recall making such arguments, though it's possible. I draw a pretty big line between regulating them, and harassing them. I'd love to see the ATF get some more funding. Of course, I'd also like to see them be more firearm friendly, and improve their reputation through MUCH better conduct.

The largest single factor in the decline in crime, including violent crime, in this country over the course of years has been longer prison sentences.
Very little crime is "gun crime". Even allowing for the new people getting into that level of crime, it's going down faster than that percentage of gun crime that's not being repeated by people in prison.
1. You sell your Anschutz biathlon rifle to your neighbor who says he is interested in the sport. Unbeknownst to you, he committed vehicular manslaughter as a kid and is legally barred from owning firearms.

In this instance, it is unlikely that you have broken current law in your state because you have not knowingly transferred your rifle to a prohibited individual.
Is your neighbor still prohibited? Or would that juvenile offense have been expunged?

2. The person who sells you cocaine and brags about all the people he has killed since emerging from federal prison requests firearms for himself and his gang. You accommodate this request.

In this instance, you have knowingly trafficked in arms to a prohibited person. Without going to the trouble of any research, my sense is that this is already a crime in most states even in the absence of a universal background check.
Every state. If he sells me cocaine, I'm a habitual user yadda yadda.

"Encouraging the right thing" is not a sufficient basis for a new federal law that expands federal authority.
Even I choke on that one. It's all well and good to say people will still break the law. That's why we include a penalty phase. Laws do more than encourage doing the right thing, and we're being naive to ignore that. They set out a code of conduct for the people who follow them, and a code of penalties for those who break them.
JimDandy is offline  
Page generated in 0.06072 seconds with 7 queries