Quote:
It is possible that a felon would be stupid enough to attempt a purchase with a 4473 check, and that the purchase would be frustrated when the check comes back negative.
Do you understand that this does not keep the felon from getting a gun?
|
As I previously cited here, it does.
Between 2002-2003, over 120k people were denied firearms due to 4473.
That kept them from getting the gun from FFLs.
If we expanded that to all stranger-stranger transfers, it would prevent all but family and black market acquisitions.
Quote:
That criminal's possession of a firearm is already illegal. Do you really think that making it extra super double illegal helps?
|
Absolutely, because it makes it extra super double more expensive, at a minimum, and is
yet another charge you can throw at them during the commission of a crime if they use their illegal gun...
Charges - Crime, illegal possession of firearm,
illegal purchase of firearm (instead of, ooops, he bought it at a gun show)
Quote:
There are very few things I can guarantee, but I believe I can guarantee this: somewhere at some point in the future someone will be wrongly killed with a legally purchased firearm, and there is nothing you can propose which will prevent that.
|
And why does this mean we shouldn't use a 4473?
I've documented that it has stopped a lot of potential crimes (of that 120k, you can't honestly tell me that nothing was prevented).
@ATW
Quote:
Why not keep checks voluntary, but impose criminal penalties for people who transfer them to prohibited persons if they choose to forego the check?
|
That's de facto the same... because people will not always use the form even if it is law. However, it will punish the irresponsible, which is the same thing you recommend. I support that.