Thursday, October 29, 2015


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.        


Daddy Hawk said...

That suggested compromise may look neutral from a place like Maryland where you have to ask Mother May I to exercise a right (unless it's an abortion); but, here in Texas where FOIDs and other such nonsense are unheard of, that idea would be shot down faster than a drone at a nudist colony. And, before you say I missed the point, I get your theory that it would never fly for either side and don't even bring it up because Hughes Amendment. My concern is that some idjit staffer in DC will stumble upon this and NOT get it. So, say it with me: "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!!11!!"

abnormalist said...

I wrote this a little while ago to explain to some of my more intelligent friends the issue with UBCs..

If we get stuck with UBCs, I'd like to see it implemented in a simple web page. Enter your name, birth-date, and optionally some other external ID (Driver's license, SS#, state issued ID card but leave this OPTIONAL just in case there were five Jon Smiths born that day and 4 are convicted killers) for both the buyer and seller, and have the web page return a pass/fail and that's it.

Print a copy (or save as a pdf) that has the date, the sellers name and their pass, the buyers name and their pass, and you have proof for your records and presto chango hands gun is sold.

No FFL transfer, no serial numbers, just two consenting adults doing what they will wherever they will (on smart phones and the like).

Farm.Dad said...

How about this for a compromise ... NO! balls in your court, whats the next thing you want to impose ?

ASM826 said...

I'm not with you on this. I think every piece of gun legislation starting with the 1934 act is unconstitutional. I want no government tracking or oversight on firearms.

I don't care if felons buy guns. Felons get guns now if they want them. They also can buy knives, machetes, gasoline, archery equipment, and thousands of other things with weapons potential. If the society doesn't trust someone, they could keep them in prison. Once you let them out, they are citizens again.

I don't trust the NRA to do anything but protect their own interests, either. They are not really an advocacy group for gun rights, they are a self sustaining corporation. If our Constitutional rights were fully restored, would the NRA fold up their tent and disband?

And finally, the end game is clear. Bloomberg & Company want English style gun control, bans, and confiscation. Any compromise with them just sets them up to come back and compromise some more. Nope.

New Jovian Thunderbolt said...

You still run NICS checks in Texas, Daddy Hawk. Bet you wouldn't mind stripping your serial number from that transaction.

Sure they SAY they delete the NICS request db line item...

New Jovian Thunderbolt said...

You've ALL submitted to a NICS check. Good luck getting rid of that. Sure, I'd love to, but I don't think that is in the cards.

Old NFO said...

Sadly, you're right. There is no winner, and no telling what would actually come of it... sigh

Bubblehead Les. said...



Why? Because I HAVE to jump through Hoops to get a Concealed Carry Permit that would allow me to BYPASS filling out a 4473 under current Ohio Law.

And if the RKBA means ANYTHING, then the rest of the Country needs to provide PROOF that they are Eligible to VOTE just as I have to provide PROOF that I am Eligible to use the RKBA.

Think the Uber-Liberals in the Modern Democommie Party would go for that?


Angus McThag said...

Doesn't matter if the serial is recorded or not.

You bought a gun on x date. Where is the gun, citizen?

Just because they don't know what kind is irrelevant.

They're going to look until they find a gun. An woe unto you if the number bought and sold don't tally to the same number found.

The compromise for universal background checks isn't playing games with HOW the guns are registered, but in how we mark the buyers. A CCW is a portable background check. A forbidden person doesn't have one. Give the forbidden ID with a red bar on them or something.

Still, I'm OK with felons owning guns as long as we get to the point of recognizing that if they're too dangerous to have a gun, they're not safe to have outside the prison.

Daddy Hawk said...

I do get to bypass the NICS check with my CHL, but you are right that I would like to forego doing a 4473 period.