Compromise

Ok, the gun-banners want universal background checks on all gun sales, even private ones.  They also insist their only concern is improving gun safety with common sense gun regulations and are certainly NOT for banning and confiscating all guns and you are a knuckle dragging trogolodyte with a small wiener for even THINKING such a thing.  Let's call this group of folks Bloomberg after their biggest booster.  (we could call them 'Liars' and much much worse, but we will keep it civil)

We, in the gun community, lets call us the NRA after our biggest entity for lack of another term, have been at this game a long time.  The NRA has compromised in the past but the compromise all seems to go one way.  Agin us.  When gun bannage is called for it is always the NRA that has to claw back some ground.  If the NRA gets gun friendly legislation passed later it never quite makes up for what we lost.  Except maybe for the sea change in Shall Issue.  So the NRA is wary, to say the least.

Anyway, so there is a motion on the floor, universal background checks, how should the NRA respond in a legislative judo type way, where it looks like the NRA compromises, but actually gains much more than they lose?  Use out opponent's weight against him.

As soon as the the NRA says yes to universal background checks the clamor from their own side will be deafening, so this so called compromise better be good... If you want to win them over and get them on the same page.

Ok, why would our side be upset about universal background checks?  Lots of reasons.  It's a hassle, to start.  You are never going to get the people that type SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!!!1!!eleven in all caps, as you don't need permission to vote...  but most gunnies are on board to prohibiting the sale of a pistol to paroled felon that did time for murder.  Our real problem is that a universal background check can mean universal tracking of every sale.  A simple matter to turn that tracking into a universal gun registry.  And a registry is required to conduct a universal confiscation.  And THAT is our biggest bugaboo.  Registration historically leads to Confiscation.  

So how do you square the circle?

Remove references to serial numbers from the background check process.  I've advocated about this before. 

Now the NRA GAINS something in a compromise.  Serial numbers are in the FFL log book, just like now, on gunstore sales.  So the criminal investigation side doesn't gain or lose anything new.  FFLs that perform the checks still get their fee for running it for a customer that wants to do an individual private sale.  The gummint has a record that T-Bolt ran a check on himself on such and such a date, and, let's say, that permission slip is good for a month.  T-Bolts long lost Uncle that sold him the gun can feel confident that T-Bolt is permitted to receive the boomstick.

Probably will have to have a check box on gun type.  Until we can sell pistols, &c., across state lines.  Maybe make that legal in this Universal Background Check Bill.  So, at any rate,n if not changed, Uncle in Kentucky can sell the .30-30 rifle to T-Bolt via this system, but would still have to do a FFL dealer to dealer transfer for the war bringback M1917 S&W revolver.

So, what happens if T-Bolt goes rogue and becomes a felon a year later?  The gummint has a record that I at least sought permission to receive a firearm.  So now the po-po has grounds to issue a warrant and confiscate my firearms now that I am a prohibited person.  Just like now.

So, Bloomberg gets his Universal Checks, the NRA gets it's gun rights protection, and we have a compromise!  There is the win-win gains, and nothing is lost via anyone's stated desires.

---

But it's not that simple, is it?  Bloomberg would HOWL.  He doesn't really care about the background check.  He wants the eventual registry.  So he will oppose this bill whole hog, but make up other reasons to declare it unacceptable beside the 'we can't make a confiscation registry out of THIS!'.   He can't state that desire as when its worded that way he can never get any votes to pass anything.  

NRA would HOWL.  Or at least the 6 million dues paying members and 10's of millions more in the gunnie community that care about this and understand this.  Because once you open the door to any gun-control sausage making in the legislature who know what will pop out the other end of this beast in a bill heading to the executive to sign or veto.  You get things like the Hughes Amendment of '86 when you open this door.

So NO one would be happy.