Key difference between ALLOWING a NICS check versus MANDATING one

[abajaj11]

There is a Critical difference between ALLOWING ANYONE to make a NICS check, and MANDATING THAT EVERYONE make a NICS check.

Allowing anyone to make a NICs check is a good thing.

MANDATING that everyone make a NICS check is a pathway to registration, since the only way to monitor if this law is being followed would be to find out who owns what in advance. If a NICS check were mandated, POTUS and Mr. Holder will run with it and issue all sorts of executive orders and rulings that will result in de facto registration, in my opinion.

We need to be careful, IMHO, to distinguish between ALLOWING anyone who wants to be able do a NICs check (GOOD), and MANDATING that ALL sales and transfers MUST go through a NICS check (BAD).

Of course I am against any expansion of NICs because it will eventually lead to mandating that everyone use it.
But this seems to be a difference of which we should be aware.

 

[mugsy]

abajaj11,

Having chewed this one over and over, I think I agree with you. I would like to see the ability to easily use NICS for non-FFL sales IF desired and agreed to by the parties involved. However, there is no need and, I agree with you here, there is a very real danger in accepting a mandate for same. Governments, all governments, naturally try to expand their own powers whether in the name of "efficiency" or ideology, or a desire to "help" all the "average Joe's" out there. The logical move from a bureaucratic organization would be to get a baseline of all currently owned guns (registration) in order to carry out the requirements of a mandatory background check law. Now add to that the ideological desire of this administration to disarm Americans who aren't government agents in some capacity and you get a toxic mix -- toxic to the 2nd Amendment and to American basic liberties.
I'll be composing some additional letters to my Federal and State elected representatives. I will also be writing to the RNC to remind them why I currently contribute and why I might stop in the future. While I am at it I will also fire one off to the NRA-ILA as well just to remind them too.

 

[flybeech]

Allowance of citizens to access the NICS system might be acceptable, but there could be great potential for abuse and unintended consequences. For example, could NICS access be a way to "get even" with someone? For the citizen who desires to transfer a firearm to someone they don't know already has the option of availing themselves of the FFL. Many will do it for as little as $10 and isn't making another step toward registration and confiscation, which is what the occupied Federal government clearly desires. Slaves don't own guns.

 

[Arin Morris]

There's lots of things that start off voluntary before they become mandatory. It just needs to get its foot in the door.

 

[t_towner]

Could there be a way to be certified to own/purchase a gun where we go through a back ground check and are issued an ID card that show's we have the ability to own a gun...... not that we own one but we are cleared to own a gun. This would be reviewed every 3 to 5 years and immediately revoked if a person gets on the naughty list? Sorry if this is off topic.

 

[mugsy]

Could there be a way to be certified to own/purchase a gun where we go through a back ground check and are issued an ID card that show's we have the ability to own a gun...... not that we own one but we are cleared to own a gun. This would be reviewed every 3 to 5 years and immediately revoked if a person gets on the naughty list? Sorry if this is off topic.

That sounds like an OK concealed weapon license to me. Personally, I think folks with CWLs should be exempt from NICS but I realize that has flaws too.

 

[abajaj11]

I agree with everyone...I am against any expansion of NICs a all, which includes making it available to citizens if they like.
Because as someone said, citizens who wish to avail of it can do a transfer through an FFL already.

 

[ASP785]

I agree with everyone...I am against any expansion of NICs a all, which includes making it available to citizens if they like.
Because as someone said, citizens who wish to avail of it can do a transfer through an FFL already.

This is a question, so please don't take this as an attack or construed as anything else, but I do wish to get your opinion since you are against any expansion of the NICS.

Are you against requiring the state courts, when someone is adjudicated mentally, to submit that information to the NICS?

 

[Gonewithwind]

This may be a bit off topic as well, background checks are required to be called in by FFL holders on firearms purchases, though Oklahoma is not a registry state, why does the FFL holder give the serial number over the phone of item purchased. ( I know the gov't is not SUPPOSED to keep record hence non-registry)?

 

[Gonewithwind]

This may be a bit off topic as well, background checks are required to be called in by FFL holders on firearms purchases, though Oklahoma is not a registry state, why does the FFL holder give the serial number over the phone of item purchased. ( I know the gov't is not SUPPOSED to keep record hence non-registry)?