Is it me? What's up?

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

I infer from a number of imprecise perceptions that the reason some folks (probably most folks) want some gun control laws is that getting shot can kill you. I'm not being facetious. Shooting someone is violent and there ought to be laws against violent assaults. We have laws against such behavior. We also have speed limits, laws about DUI, restrictions on counterfeiting and many other problematic activities. Those laws are broken sometimes as are the laws against violent assault. On the face of it, it's just as illegal to stab someone as it is to shoot them but firearms work faster and from further away than a knife. So it seems that some extra controls aren't an altogether bad idea.

Should it be illegal for anyone to knowingly sell a firearm to violent criminals or folks with established mental problems and, to that end, should all states and territories in the US make it a law that all sales, both via an FFL or any other seller, have an NICS check performed by local law enforcement?

Vote or reply with your own idea.

Thanks

7 votes, 2 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Yes
	3 (43%)
	No
	4 (57%)
	2 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[gejohnston]

1. it already is a crime to sell to someone you know is a felon

as well as not a resident of your state.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

5. I realize

thanks

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

2. NICS check is just another expense

The only guns I've disposed of, by gift or sale, have gone to family members who I know are not violent criminals. I would not want to have to pay some dealer for a NICS check.

I bought one gun through an internet site, and for that I had to find a local dealer willing to run (and charge for) a NICS check.

I don't see a problem that needs fixing.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

6. I believe that...

...unless you're an FFL, the check should be free; $5 if you're an FFL.

[oneshooter]

11. I haven't had a NCIS check to purchase a firearm in almost 15 years.

My Texas CHL does it all for me.

[Straw Man]

12. Here's an irony ...

I haven't had a NCIS check to purchase a firearm in almost 15 years.

My Texas CHL does it all for me.

The same used to be true in NY -- a valid handgun permit exempted you from the NICS check. Then the Feds decided that New York's record-keeping wasn't up to snuff. Apparently cowboy-yahoo "guns for everyone" Texas keeps better CHL records than the bastion of gun-control rigor, New York. Who knew?

[gejohnston]

13. more irony

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117291094

[slackmaster]

3. NICS should be available to anyone who has a firearm to sell and a prospective buyer

There would have to be some safeguards put in place to prevent misuse of the system, i.e. using it for any purpose other than a firearm transfer, but that's just a technical issue that would not be difficult to solve.

Charge a very small fee for the service, e.g. $5, and then anyone who sells a firearm to a prohibited person from that point forward can be presumed to have known that he or she was breaking the law.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

7. sounds good n/t :)

[Eleanors38]

4. I support this within the limits of the Constitution...

The individual states can require a NICS-type test (or the NICS as presently constituted can be opened to accommodate individual purchasers) as long as there are no fees or no record-keeping beyond what is generated now. The U.S. government cannot, due to the restrictions of the interstate commerce clause, impose such a scheme on the state.

Most folks are unaware that individuals selling as a non-dealer and within their own state, cannot NOW knowingly sell to a prohibited person per the NICS standards.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

9. key issues:

"...individual states can require..." of course per the 10A.

"...as long as there are no fees or no record-keeping beyond what is generated now." exactly my thoughts.

"The U.S. government cannot..." as I said per the 10A.

"Most folks are unaware..." ignorance of the law...

Sounds good.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

8. operative word being "knowingly" criminal records are public but, the mental problems are not so

easily had and for good reason, I think.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

10. Quite true. n/t :)

[SQUEE]

14. It seems asinine

That the NICS is not opened to non dealers, but I don't believe it should be required for non FFL sales, the mere problem of establishing proof of having done the check being one of many headaches.

[Atypical Liberal]

15. No.

Requiring a NICS check for all sales, private and commercial, will result in a registry of firearm owners held by the government.

I do not think this is acceptable.

A better method is to have an FOID system like Illinois has, except make it opt-out instead of opt-in.

[Trunk Monkey]

16. No

Last edited Tue Dec 11, 2012, 02:18 PM - Edit history (2)

should all states and territories in the US make it a law that all sales, both via an FFL or any other seller, have an NICS check performed by local law enforcement?

How would you enforce this law with out registration?

How would you enforce this law in relation to all the guns still in use in this country that were before serial numbers and form 4473 became mandatory?

EDIT: I did some research and it appears that prior to 1968 serial numbers and (I've been out of the Army 10 years and I still want to write D.A) form 4473were not required , so I would guess there are waaaaay more than 300 million guns in this country that aren't on paper anywhere.

Your law would be unenforceable

/EDIT

All bolded text is edited original text has not been altered