The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post - Changed my mind on universal background checks.

**44 AMP** · February 18, 2013, 10:41 AM

Ok, I understand what the OP wants, and it is not the background check of today, or one that is proposed by anyone, save the OP.

What I am confused about is how is full registration required to make a "universal" background check work? (and before anyone gets the wrong idea, I am opposed to the universal check on principle, just as I am opposed to the current law, on principle)

The check is run on a person, not the gun. All the checks I have been through, the closest they come to any information about the gun is the questions "long gun, or handgun?"

How is that registration? Sure, the 4473 form is registration, but that form stays at the dealer. Police can go look at it, but its not in the Fed computer database. Right?

Also, where does the ex post facto principle come in? They aren't supposed to make a law that retroactively creates a crime (although they have done it a few times, and are trying hard to do more). You couldn't be held criminally liable for not getting a UBC before the effective date of the law (assuming it does get passed), so the law could only apply to transfers done after it goes into effect.

So, someone please explain to me how it can't work without registration? Even if they kept the data (and they will, there are lawsuits currently pending to force them to purge data that they have already kept, in violation of the statute), all they have is data on you (as recieveing a gun) not what gun. Not the ser# of the gun, linked with your name.

Ok, is that it? THey can't trace a GUN back to see if there was a check before its transfer. I can see that. Is that where you think they need the registration for it to work? OK, I can see that too.

But that isn't what is being proposed, is it? I'm not hearing that they want a law to be able to trace a gun back and see that the check was done, the current system cannot do that. They would need full registration (an impossibilty) for a system to work like that. While they might be able to get all new guns in their system there is no way possible to get all the existing guns into that system.

What I am hearing is that they want to have the check run on anyone recieving a gun, from now on. That is what they are demanding, isn't it?

Or am I looking at this the wrong way?

February 18, 2013, 10:41 AM	#25
44 AMP Staff Join Date: March 11, 2006 Location: Upper US Posts: 28,817	Ok, I understand what the OP wants, and it is not the background check of today, or one that is proposed by anyone, save the OP. What I am confused about is how is full registration required to make a "universal" background check work? (and before anyone gets the wrong idea, I am opposed to the universal check on principle, just as I am opposed to the current law, on principle) The check is run on a person, not the gun. All the checks I have been through, the closest they come to any information about the gun is the questions "long gun, or handgun?" How is that registration? Sure, the 4473 form is registration, but that form stays at the dealer. Police can go look at it, but its not in the Fed computer database. Right? Also, where does the ex post facto principle come in? They aren't supposed to make a law that retroactively creates a crime (although they have done it a few times, and are trying hard to do more). You couldn't be held criminally liable for not getting a UBC before the effective date of the law (assuming it does get passed), so the law could only apply to transfers done after it goes into effect. So, someone please explain to me how it can't work without registration? Even if they kept the data (and they will, there are lawsuits currently pending to force them to purge data that they have already kept, in violation of the statute), all they have is data on you (as recieveing a gun) not what gun. Not the ser# of the gun, linked with your name. Ok, is that it? THey can't trace a GUN back to see if there was a check before its transfer. I can see that. Is that where you think they need the registration for it to work? OK, I can see that too. But that isn't what is being proposed, is it? I'm not hearing that they want a law to be able to trace a gun back and see that the check was done, the current system cannot do that. They would need full registration (an impossibilty) for a system to work like that. While they might be able to get all new guns in their system there is no way possible to get all the existing guns into that system. What I am hearing is that they want to have the check run on anyone recieving a gun, from now on. That is what they are demanding, isn't it? Or am I looking at this the wrong way? __________________ All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.