Is the sellout starting to form?

General silencer discussion. If you want to talk about a specific silenced rifle or pistol, it is best to do that in the rifle or pistol section for that brand.

All NFA laws apply.

Moderators: mpallett, renegade, bakerjw

User avatar
L1A1Rocker
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 3578
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 7:40 pm
Location: Texas Hill Country

Is the sellout starting to form?

Post by L1A1Rocker » Wed Jan 30, 2013 8:11 pm

Behind the histrionics, a consensus is forming on universal background checks
Behind the histrionics, a consensus is forming on universal background checks

Members of the group, which includes Republicans Tom Coburn of Oklahoma. . .

So in addition to these two GOP Senators (Coburn and Kirk), we have Chuck Grassley and GOP Rep. Phil Gingrey, both of whom have expressed support for expanding the background check system. GOP Rep. Paul Ryan has also expressed support, which means it could very well get a vote in the House of Representatives. And what about other red and purple state Dems up for reelection in 2014, all of whom were supposed to run for their lives from any gun reform measure? Well, senators Mark Warner of Virginia and Tim Johnson of South Dakota both support background checks. And as noted above, Joe Manchin of West Virginia is working with this emerging bipartisan group reported on by USA Today.
I'm apposed to this on a 10A basis. The Feds cannot mandate laws regulating inTRAstate commerce. SCOTUS has been very consistent on this in the past. What I choose to do with my lawful, personal, PRIVATE property is none of the Feds business.

DarkPhoenix
Senior Silent Operator
Posts: 119
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2012 12:24 pm
Location: Sc

Re: Is the sellout starting to form?

Post by DarkPhoenix » Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:20 pm

Personally I would not sell any gun to someone i did not know, because I would feel terrible if that person turned out to be crazy and went and killed someone. I would personally not have a problem selling a gun to a close friend that I know. While that is what I believe, if someone else wants to sell a gun to another person, it does not bother me. If you are willing to take that risk, that is your choice. Universal background checks probably would prevent some unauthorized people from buying a gun. But it could also place us on a slippery slope, if univrrsal background checks are ok, why not fingerprints? Not trying to start an argument or anything, this is just how I see things. Yay for Amendment 1 and 2.

User avatar
este
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 2235
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 10:22 pm

Re: Is the sellout starting to form?

Post by este » Thu Jan 31, 2013 3:51 pm

L1A1Rocker wrote:I'm apposed to this on a 10A basis. The Feds cannot mandate laws regulating inTRAstate commerce. SCOTUS has been very consistent on this in the past. What I choose to do with my lawful, personal, PRIVATE property is none of the Feds business.
I don't exactly disagree on 10A... but....

1. This is going through in some form. Everyone has been parroting the 40% of all sales bullshit which is a stat from a phone survey from 251 people in 1993. None the less, it's apparently perceived truth.
2. We all know damn well private sale is not our first go-to, we have almost all had those moment when doing a private sale that you have to second guess who you are selling to.
3. Big positive.... We'll never have to head about the gun show loophole again!!! They'll have to come up with different retarded excuses of why guns are in criminal hands.
4. Yea, it's none of the govs business, but... no one has a problem with NICS and it's not like there isn't already a centralized list at DARPA or NSA or DHS, or whatever. So, I agree, it's crap. It's not the end of the world, we already have the same thing in place as far as the negatives go. The positives are some assholes in theory could be kept from getting a gun (I had a private sale fall through when I googled his name and found out he had recently been arrested for impersonating a doctor at a pharmacy, he was going to trail the next week, I don't think he was dangerous, but he was fishing Armslist for private sales).
5. A lot of states have already banned private sale, there hasn't been an example of the sky falling in those states. It's stupid, yes, but it's not nearly to the same level of stupidity as AWB or mag limits. And let's everyone thank god they don't know about silencers or even mostly that the AR-10 is an even scarier "AR-47" or whatever "weapon of war" is the rage today.

It's got a good chance of getting through, and I'm certainly not going to loose sleep over it. Would I like to see the citizen have the ability to do private sale with a background check? Yes, that would be great. Won't happen. Does "universal background check" sound good? Oh you betcha. Does anyone here even do more than one or two private sales a year? Are you willing to fall on a sword to do so?

Now.... What would be sweet, is since this is such "reasonable" legislation, is to put support behind it WITH an amendment/rider that says magazine capacity can not be limited by the federal government, ever. I'd be the biggest cheerleader for it, I'd be going door to door to add support for it :) It's about time that compromise actually meant they have to give up something as well.

FB3
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 280
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 11:21 am
Location: South Florida

Re: Is the sellout starting to form?

Post by FB3 » Thu Jan 31, 2013 4:35 pm

este,

All very good points and I agree in principal with pretty much of all that you said. However, the liberals are not reasonable nor are they interested in facts. They use emotional hysteria and illogical arguments to try to ram their agenda down the throats of the American public.

It is really a paradox that while some of your arguments ring true, that we can't afford to open the door even a crack, because the push to ban all personal weapons has just begun. By agreeing to even small sensible changes in the system, whatever that may be, we will just be giving and not getting anything. Give an inch and they take a mile.

User avatar
continuity
Elite Member
Posts: 4554
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 8:39 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Is the sellout starting to form?

Post by continuity » Thu Jan 31, 2013 4:39 pm

F that boooshit!! A close friend lent a snub nosed revolver to his Mom for self protection. The friends lowlife drug using sister laid down on Moms bed one evening and used said snub to blow her brains all over the wall.

Should my friend be liable for verifying not only Mom's, but every family member's reasonableness to access that weapon?
What amount of a man is composed of his own collection of experiences... and the conclusions that those experiences have allowed him to "know" for certain as "Truth"? :Ick

trek45
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 8:01 pm

Re: Is the sellout starting to form?

Post by trek45 » Thu Jan 31, 2013 6:12 pm

Universal background checks = universal gun registration. That's the problem.

If they're going to make it illegal to transfer a gun without doing a background check, how will they know whether you did the background check? The honor system? No, by matching the gun's serial number to the current owner. The word for this is "registry".

And even if it's not fully implemented at first, it would be the first step. The next shooting will be followed by cries of "This could have been prevented if we just made common sense changes to the universal background check registry!" Like it or not, the 2nd Amendment was written so we could protect ourselves from tyrants. I can't imagine why we'd also want to hand those very same tyrants an itemized list of what guns we own, and where to find them.

A universal gun registry isn't by any means reasonable for free people. It's just the first step in taking them away, as we've seen time and time again in this very country. First comes registration, then comes confiscation.

Forcing everyone to go through a dealer could be one way of implementing it, and I'm sure dealers would probably support that too - especially dealers where there isn't a lot of competition. Just like insurance companies are thrilled that it'll be illegal for us to not buy their product thanks to ObamaCare. And if you're the only dealer in 200 miles, you might as well charge $100 or more per transfer. If that's your only local dealer, and you don't get along with him, I guess you're screwed then.

It is never reasonable to give up freedom to appease irrational fears - especially when the freedom you give up won't actually solve the problem they're claiming it will. And don't get suckered into the idea of "compromise" either. Compromise isn't "I want to eat all of your cake, but I guess I'll only eat half." If we're willing to give something up (I'm not, btw), then what do we get in return? This is what we get - in a few months or years or whatever, they just come back and want the rest of that cake.

We need to be loud and clear that any further restrictions are not acceptable.
Last edited by trek45 on Thu Jan 31, 2013 7:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
este
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 2235
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 10:22 pm

Re: Is the sellout starting to form?

Post by este » Thu Jan 31, 2013 6:14 pm

continuity wrote:Should my friend be liable for verifying not only Mom's, but every family member's reasonableness to access that weapon?
Wow... No one is talking about liability, but alright...

User avatar
este
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 2235
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 10:22 pm

Re: Is the sellout starting to form?

Post by este » Thu Jan 31, 2013 6:15 pm

1. If you don't believe there is already at least a secret registry, you're a fool.
2. We're all NFA owners here. As someone else said last time this came up, we are the poster-boys for registration.

-M-
Member
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 3:18 pm
Location: Louisiana

Re: Is the sellout starting to form?

Post by -M- » Thu Jan 31, 2013 6:45 pm

trek45 wrote:Universal background checks = universal gun registration. That's the problem.

If they're going to make it illegal to transfer a gun without doing a background check, how will they know whether you did the background check? The honor system? No, by matching the gun's serial number to the current owner. The word for this is "registry".

And even if it's not fully implemented at first, it would be the first step. The next shooting will be followed by cries of "This could have been prevented if we just made common sense changes to the universal background check registry!" Like it or not, the 2nd Amendment was written so we could protect ourselves from tyrants. I can't imagine why we'd also want to hand those very same tyrants an itemized list of what guns we own, and where to find them.

A universal gun registry isn't by any means reasonable for free people. It's just the first step in taking them away, as we've seen time and time again in this very country. First comes registration, then comes confiscation.

Forcing everyone to go through a dealer could be one way of implementing it, and I'm sure dealers would probably support that too - especially dealers where there isn't a lot of competition. Just like insurance companies are thrilled that it'll be illegal for us to not buy their product. And if you're the only dealer in 200 miles, you might as well charge $100 or more per transfer. If that's your only local dealer, and you don't get along with him, I guess you're screwed then.

It is never reasonable to give up freedom to appease irrational fears - especially when the freedom you give up won't actually solve the problem they're claiming it will. And don't get suckered into the idea of "compromise" either. Compromise isn't "I want to eat all of your cake, but I guess I'll only eat half." If we're willing to give something up (I'm not, btw), then what do we get in return? This is what we get - in a few months or years or whatever, they just come back and want the rest of that cake.

We need to be loud and clear that any further restrictions are not acceptable.
+1000, don't give an inch. Universal background checks will not solve mass shootings or any shootings. We should be taking freedom back, not giving it up. Once its done, it will never be un-done.

User avatar
Libertarian_Geek
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 3116
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 10:52 am
Location: Snarkeville, MS

Re: Is the sellout starting to form?

Post by Libertarian_Geek » Thu Jan 31, 2013 6:54 pm

I recommend a new type of check to replace the out-dated 4473 forms.

A simple system/website/iphone app:
Enter the name, height, weight, home city and state. That's it. You don't tell it that it's for 1 gun or 500. You don't tell it that it's even for a gun transaction.

It returns a simple pass or fail.

Nothing else is captured. Nothing else is displayed.

It would be required for dealer gun sales in place of the current background check. But it would be available for use when selling cars, providing loans, random vanity-checks, anyone on the internet can use it for any purpose they like. Even for checking their neighbors or political candidates.

The requests would be muddy enough that it would be worthless as a defacto gun registry, yet it would fit the bill and let gun sellers know if their person is a convicted felon, drug user, etc.
https://www.facebook.com/DareDefendOurRights

User avatar
Emilio
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 2339
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 10:38 pm

Re: Is the sellout starting to form?

Post by Emilio » Thu Jan 31, 2013 7:07 pm

I think "they" get some form of scraps. More concern of HC laws than anything now.

BTW, when I sell private sale I insist on carry permit # and DL, date it with ser#/make model,cal and put in my records. DOL form also works well.
Member of the LSU, SWR, and RUGGED underground. Shame Silencerco!

OJB4
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 572
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 7:10 pm
Location: South Louisiana
Contact:

Re: Is the sellout starting to form?

Post by OJB4 » Thu Jan 31, 2013 7:44 pm

Guess I should start keeping better records when I make a private sale. They have all been to close friends or family but I don't usually even make a bill of sale....much less get a copy of their ID.
I've gotta stop this habit.

trek45
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 8:01 pm

Re: Is the sellout starting to form?

Post by trek45 » Thu Jan 31, 2013 7:53 pm

este wrote:1. If you don't believe there is already at least a secret registry, you're a fool.
2. We're all NFA owners here. As someone else said last time this came up, we are the poster-boys for registration.
Sometimes gun owners are their own worst enemies. The people whose proposals you're endorsing are not your friends, and don't like that you can own guns, and will do whatever they can to chip away at your 2nd Amendment rights. So if they don't get a full ban this time, they'll take whatever they can get. Then, next time something happens (and there will always be a next time), they just demand more. And more. And more, until we're the UK or Australia.

The woman whose ideas you're endorsing had this to say about gun ownership in the US:

"If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them—Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in—I would have done it."
-- Dianne Feinstein

She couldn't get 51 votes. And she probably won't get 51 votes this time. But if enough quislings join the anti-gun forces and give in to "reasonable" restrictions and things like universal background checks (ie universal gun registration), they'll just keep using that model. They won't get the whole cake each time, but there are only so many slices until it's gone. Maybe save some slices for future generations..
Last edited by trek45 on Thu Jan 31, 2013 8:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

trek45
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 8:01 pm

Re: Is the sellout starting to form?

Post by trek45 » Thu Jan 31, 2013 8:03 pm

Libertarian_Geek wrote:I recommend a new type of check to replace the out-dated 4473 forms.

A simple system/website/iphone app:
Enter the name, height, weight, home city and state. That's it. You don't tell it that it's for 1 gun or 500. You don't tell it that it's even for a gun transaction.

It returns a simple pass or fail.

Nothing else is captured. Nothing else is displayed.

It would be required for dealer gun sales in place of the current background check. But it would be available for use when selling cars, providing loans, random vanity-checks, anyone on the internet can use it for any purpose they like. Even for checking their neighbors or political candidates.

The requests would be muddy enough that it would be worthless as a defacto gun registry, yet it would fit the bill and let gun sellers know if their person is a convicted felon, drug user, etc.
And how does one prove that they used such a system before they sold the gun? The honor system? No, the answer is the Universal Gun Registry that's needed to make universal background checks work.

Thanks, but no thanks. Instead of trying to figure out how to help them further restrict our rights, why not try to figure out how to stop them from doing so?

And anyway, the problem with school shootings isn't a lack of universal background checks. It also not the reason there is so much gun violence in crime-ridden inner cities. Should it be harder to buy a car because drunk drivers kill so many people?

They. Want. Your. Guns.

Period. Don't help them. Feinstein's own words:
"If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them—Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in—I would have done it."
-- Dianne Feinstein

Don't come up with ways to help the woman who said in clear, spoken English that she wanted to take everyone's guns away. That's the end game. They can't get there overnight, but with a time horizon of a few decades and constant chips at the 2nd Amendment, they'll get there. I want my future grandkids to be able to enjoy shooting, not just get tired of stories about how people could own guns back in the day.

User avatar
Emilio
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 2339
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 10:38 pm

Re: Is the sellout starting to form?

Post by Emilio » Thu Jan 31, 2013 8:57 pm

Find it odd that they push these laws when the DEM/liberals doing these shooting? :roll:

>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeTCkoXs ... e=youtu.be
Member of the LSU, SWR, and RUGGED underground. Shame Silencerco!

User avatar
Libertarian_Geek
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 3116
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 10:52 am
Location: Snarkeville, MS

Re: Is the sellout starting to form?

Post by Libertarian_Geek » Fri Feb 01, 2013 9:40 am

trek45 wrote:
Libertarian_Geek wrote:I recommend a new type of check to replace the out-dated 4473 forms.

A simple system/website/iphone app:
Enter the name, height, weight, home city and state. That's it. You don't tell it that it's for 1 gun or 500. You don't tell it that it's even for a gun transaction.

It returns a simple pass or fail.

Nothing else is captured. Nothing else is displayed.

It would be required for dealer gun sales in place of the current background check. But it would be available for use when selling cars, providing loans, random vanity-checks, anyone on the internet can use it for any purpose they like. Even for checking their neighbors or political candidates.

The requests would be muddy enough that it would be worthless as a defacto gun registry, yet it would fit the bill and let gun sellers know if their person is a convicted felon, drug user, etc.
trek45 wrote: And how does one prove that they used such a system before they sold the gun? The honor system? No, the answer is the Universal Gun Registry that's needed to make universal background checks work.
It doesn't. It's the honor system today for private sales and it would continue to be the honor system. You know it's that whole presumption of innocence thing that we keep hearing nothing about.

Just like there's no way today to prove that you used such a system before selling a gun. We all know that people with bad intentions won't use it anyway, so proof that you used it is just keeping the honest people honest. Are you really criticizing this idea because it isn't strict enough?
trek45 wrote: Thanks, but no thanks. Instead of trying to figure out how to help them further restrict our rights, why not try to figure out how to stop them from doing so?
Implying that I'm trying to figure out "how to help them further restrict our rights" is a lie or a knee-jerk reply. You must have missed the part where I wrote that this would replace the current 4473. The data generated from this (because it's wide open for anyone on the internet to use at any time) would not be useable as a source for a gun registry (unlike today's system).
trek45 wrote: And anyway, the problem with school shootings isn't a lack of universal background checks.
No s--t.
trek45 wrote: It also not the reason there is so much gun violence in crime-ridden inner cities.
Again, No s--t.
trek45 wrote: Should it be harder to buy a car because drunk drivers kill so many people?
Did you even read my post? Did you understand it? It seems common for people in forums to combine red-herrings with false-premises and then make a straw-man to whack.
trek45 wrote: They. Want. Your. Guns.


Period. Don't help them. Feinstein's own words:
"If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them—Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in—I would have done it."
-- Dianne Feinstein


Don't come up with ways to help the woman who said in clear, spoken English that she wanted to take everyone's guns away. That's the end game. They can't get there overnight, but with a time horizon of a few decades and constant chips at the 2nd Amendment, they'll get there. I want my future grandkids to be able to enjoy shooting, not just get tired of stories about how people could own guns back in the day.
See previous "no s--t" comments.


Now, I know it would never fly (because the antis would fight it tooth and nail since it eliminates the ability to differentiate those who bought guns from those who are using the look-ups for other reasons), but how is it that you think this is an additional burden/erosion of rights?

It takes away the argument because even private sellers could say "I ran a background check". Although, they wouldn't be required to.
It takes away the ability to use background check data as a gun-registry.
It eliminates the current 4473.

If buying from a gun-dealer, you'd make your purchase. They'd do a quick check and done. They'd update their paperwork, just as they do today and would mark a "Pass" column in their books (not recording the seller's info).

If buying from an individual. No change. Unless the seller wanted to run a check on you. It's totally up to them.

If you're about to buy a couch on craigslist, you could use it to see if the seller has a seedy background. This puts non-gun data into the system.

It weakens the arguments about "private sale loopholes". It also highlights the argument that everyone keeps ignoring in the current gun debate narrative. The fact that background checks are currently capturing data on gun purchases and sending it into an opaque system that's most likely an illegal gun-registry. This is one of the main reasons that today's background checks are a problem. To the uninformed Joe-citizen, they don't see the problem and no one is filling them in on it.
https://www.facebook.com/DareDefendOurRights

trek45
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 8:01 pm

Re: Is the sellout starting to form?

Post by trek45 » Fri Feb 01, 2013 2:31 pm

The flaws in your logic are:
1. You trust the government too much.
2. You think the government trusts you.

User avatar
Libertarian_Geek
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 3116
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 10:52 am
Location: Snarkeville, MS

Re: Is the sellout starting to form?

Post by Libertarian_Geek » Fri Feb 01, 2013 3:37 pm

trek45 wrote:The flaws in your logic are:
1. You trust the government too much.
2. You think the government trusts you.
Please elaborate (or not).

1.> My proposal doesn't require the trust of the government, just the will of the people. I stated that it wouldn't pass. Given that, please point out where I showed any trust in the government > 0.
2.> Again, I stated that it wouldn't pass (just that it makes for a counter-arugment). Given that point, please quote where I showed any expectation that the government trusts me.

Even though it benefits the ego to do so, try not to cherry-pick individual statements while taking them outside of the complete context that I've established. I'd rather not have to piece each part together repeating the original context every time that I counter your hyperbole.

If you do this, then you'll have fewer (if any) actual retorts and we can both save time on this already tiresome thread.
https://www.facebook.com/DareDefendOurRights

User avatar
doubloon
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 11901
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 1:02 am
Location: Houston-ish

Re: Is the sellout starting to form?

Post by doubloon » Fri Feb 01, 2013 4:02 pm

Libertarian_Geek wrote:...
If buying from an individual. No change. Unless the seller wanted to run a check on you. It's totally up to them.
...
I am sort of OK with an idea like this but how do you keep people from running checks just to run checks? Given, they would have to have access to some personal key like a DL# or a SS# which <theoretically> you would have to provide to them. Personally if it was free I might run a check on myself once a week just for shits and giggles.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDtd2jNIwAU MUSAFAR!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CrOL-ydFMI This is Water DavidW
Complete Form 1s http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=79895

User avatar
Libertarian_Geek
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 3116
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 10:52 am
Location: Snarkeville, MS

Re: Is the sellout starting to form?

Post by Libertarian_Geek » Fri Feb 01, 2013 4:28 pm

doubloon wrote:
Libertarian_Geek wrote:...
If buying from an individual. No change. Unless the seller wanted to run a check on you. It's totally up to them.
...
I am sort of OK with an idea like this but how do you keep people from running checks just to run checks? Given, they would have to have access to some personal key like a DL# or a SS# which <theoretically> you would have to provide to them. Personally if it was free I might run a check on myself once a week just for shits and giggles.
You don't. People just just run checks for shits and giggles, or vanity-checks. That helps to prevent it from being used as a gun registry.

It's not private information though. It would only flag "Fail" if:

you were a fugitive from the law, current felon, illegal alien, etc. All public information. Keep in mind, that this is just a spit-ball idea that just formed here as a reply to a post. I haven't taken the time to vet the details of said thought experiment.
https://www.facebook.com/DareDefendOurRights

User avatar
silencertalk
Site Admin
Posts: 33986
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 9:31 am
Location: USA

Re: Is the sellout starting to form?

Post by silencertalk » Fri Feb 01, 2013 9:08 pm

trek45 wrote:Universal background checks = universal gun registration. That's the problem.
I don't believe that.

A universal background check could be the exact same background check we have now, except you would have to do it for a private sale and not just a dealer transfer.

You can prove that it was done by getting a transaction ID number.

Govt. keeping records of it is already illegal.

The best reason to fight this is that it will keep them from having hope that they can pass a magazine ban. So I agree to not give in, but what I really don't want is a ban on something.

trek45
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2009 8:01 pm

Re: Is the sellout starting to form?

Post by trek45 » Fri Feb 01, 2013 9:26 pm

silencertalk wrote:
trek45 wrote:Universal background checks = universal gun registration. That's the problem.
I don't believe that.

A universal background check could be the exact same background check we have now, except you would have to do it for a private sale and not just a dealer transfer.

You can prove that it was done by getting a transaction ID number.
Ok, you get a transaction ID number. What does that number represent? Is it just a random number that isn't tied to anything, or is it tied to the record of the transaction in the registry?

If it's just a number, people could just make them up. Even if there's some cryptic formula, how long would it take for someone to crack it and make a generator for them?

With universal background checks, there would need to be some way to prove one was performed. Either by going to a dealer (and I'm sure most dealers would love mandated customers), or by [the horrible idea of] using an app or phone number or something and entering someone's personal information. If the proof is just a number that isn't attached to anything, then how do they determine if it's valid? They will not push universal background checks without also having penalties for violating the law. So there will need to be a way to show whether it was done. If that's not a registry, or the honor system, then what is it?

But maybe I am missing something.. So how could they implement universal background checks without any kind of registry, and also have a way to definitively charge people who buy/sell guns without using the universal background check system? The only way I can see that happening is if there was a record of the background check - which ties the gun and the buyer together - in a registry.

User avatar
continuity
Elite Member
Posts: 4554
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 8:39 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Is the sellout starting to form?

Post by continuity » Fri Feb 01, 2013 10:10 pm

silencertalk wrote:...You can prove that it was done by getting a transaction ID number.

Govt. keeping records of it is already illegal...
Uh, the naivety of that thought is concerning.
What amount of a man is composed of his own collection of experiences... and the conclusions that those experiences have allowed him to "know" for certain as "Truth"? :Ick

User avatar
Libertarian_Geek
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 3116
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 10:52 am
Location: Snarkeville, MS

Re: Is the sellout starting to form?

Post by Libertarian_Geek » Fri Feb 01, 2013 10:48 pm

silencertalk wrote:
trek45 wrote:Universal background checks = universal gun registration. That's the problem.
I don't believe that.

A universal background check could be the exact same background check we have now, except you would have to do it for a private sale and not just a dealer transfer.

You can prove that it was done by getting a transaction ID number.

Govt. keeping records of it is already illegal.

The best reason to fight this is that it will keep them from having hope that they can pass a magazine ban. So I agree to not give in, but what I really don't want is a ban on something.
Right. If you had to, you could prove that it was done by getting a key # (that could be verified but not reversed) in return. Each key number supplied would be logged as used. Again, the key to keeping the background check from becoming a gun registry is to allow everyone and anyone to use it for whatever reason they want. As long as the government's private key never made it out, it would hold true.
Charge a nickle for each look-up so it won't get used 2M times a second.

It doesn't have to be a registry tied with one look up per firearm if you intentionally muddy the data by letting everyone use it if they want. Trek seems to be missing this point. Maybe even intentionally at this point.

If you care to get real geeky, I can explain how the keys transaction numbers would work and wouldn't be vulnerable to someone coming out w/ a key gen (as long as the original private key(s) were kept secret.
https://www.facebook.com/DareDefendOurRights

glocker17
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 182
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 9:52 pm

Re: Is the sellout starting to form?

Post by glocker17 » Sat Feb 02, 2013 12:15 am

Ok, you get a transaction ID number. What does that number represent? Is it just a random number that isn't tied to anything, or is it tied to the record of the transaction in the registry?

If it's just a number, people could just make them up. Even if there's some cryptic formula, how long would it take for someone to crack it and make a generator for them?

With universal background checks, there would need to be some way to prove one was performed
This is nothing new, and nothing else would be needed. We already have this, the number provided by NICS can be verified but not the info. Otherwise a dealer could just make up a batch of numbers on a 4473. I have requested this info internally, and it does in fact use a logarithmic scale to produce the NICS number. BATFE can verify that a number was issued, but keeps no other info after a period of time.

I will fight this on GP as it is a further creep towards other infractions, but in actual reality I am not real concerned.

.02

Post Reply