Posted on 08/16/2019 12:24:27 PM PDT by VictimsRightsPro2a
It can be generally assumed that any function the government undertakes will be done incompetently, inefficiently and will cause unanticipated harm. And they want complete control of our healthcare. Really?
If the left forwards a bill with universal background checks for firearms, insert universal background checks for voter ID and immigration as well. Tie all three together.
Watch it die.
The measure that would be a disaster would be red flags ... especially if allowed by non-family members (family would be very bad, too). False reports would become the majority, far worse than ‘’swatting’’. The left would use this to attack ANY gun owner or just conservatives.
Powerful arguments...
Once they have it as the law of the land, they will tighten the requirements for firearms purchases further, making almost any offense or rumor against you cause denial of clearance and once you are part of the "prohibited group" you won't be able to possess firearms at all and will have to surrender them.
Even now, you have no right to know what's in your file(s) and if they pass this, anything at all can be added to your record without any recourse.
People overthink this stuff and the article is one more example of that failure.
The bottom line with a UBC is simple. Prohibited persons, the dangerous ones, know that they are prohibited so they find other ways to acquire what they want. Criminals simply don’t abide by the law. That’s kind of in the definition of “criminal”.
The ONLY people that would be impacted by a law (completely unconstitutional law, by the way) such as this are the ones who generally obey the law anyway.
Are these background checks really going to be universal? I’ve got a wacky lesbian in law who’s “wife” has a gun. What if I turn her in? Is she protected?
Federally mandated universal background checks is UNCONSTITUTIONAL!
Because it would mean that the Federal Government is now regulating INTRAstate transactions, when the Federal Government only has jurisdiction to regulate INTERstate transactions!
This super-duper background check sounds pretty nifty. Could we use it for voter rolls?
I am completely stable mentally, and I have no reason to believe there is any real risk of being reported under a red flag law. However, if anyone ever does report me, that will permanently end our relationship. No forgiveness. No second chances. Game over.
And when the gun owner dies, will the government confiscate his guns till his heirs pass background checks?
Under Red Flag laws, can one heir receive a firearm from the deceased, and the other heir wants it, can the jealous one “drop a dime” on the one who got the firearm and have it confiscated? “Better neither one get it than ‘HE’ have it!”
Well, every LEGAL transaction. Where the real problem lives. Right. I guess fidiots are still NOT part of the equation. Bad guy compliance in 3, 2, ....
***The “Universal Background Check” is the Holy Grail for the Left:***
They will always come up with “Just one more law” no mater how many are passed. My bet is if they get a “background check”, the will demand “liability insurance” for all gun owners.
The ultimate goal is still gun confiscation.
From 1976.
Nelson T. ‘Pete’ Shields
Founder of Handgun Control, Inc.(Now the Brady Center)
“I’m convinced that we have to have federal legislation to build on. We’re going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily — given the political realities — going to be very modest.
Of course, it’s true that politicians will then go home and say, ‘This is a great law. The problem is solved.’ And it’s also true that such statements will tend to defuse the gun-control issue for a time.
So then we’ll have to strengthen that law, and then again to strengthen that law, and maybe again and again. Right now, though, we’d be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal — total control of handguns in the United States — is going to take time.
My estimate is from seven to ten years. The problem is to slow down the increasing number of handguns sold in this country. The second problem is to get them all registered. And the final problem is to make the possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition — except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors — TOTALLY ILLEGAL.”
-Pete Shields, Chairman and founder, Handgun Control Inc., “A Reporter At Large: Handguns,” The New Yorker, July 26, 1976, 57-58
“Yes, I’m for an outright ban [on handguns].”
-Pete Shields, Chairman emeritus, Handgun Control, Inc., 60 Minutes interview
HCI, around 1984, came out in favor of a ban on semi-auto rifles and shotguns.
“...universal background checks — which would apply to the transfer of firearms between private citizens ...”
I’m sure street gangs would be on board.
Remember how Obama pushed for info on gun ownership on electronic medical records? Another reason to oppose Medicare for all because they will incorporate this medical record info into the background check.
So, don’t be surprised if a Dem president issues an EO to add this data to the background checks and any myriad of other accusations against gun buyers and owners as a pretext for confiscation.
They will say so what if it’s unconstutional, they’ll drag it out and pack the court. Wow, if we get this crap going coinciding with a recession, watch out.
Wrong! The real reason it would be bad is because a universal background check is unenforceable without a national gun Registry. Which is what the left wing would be shouting for 60 days after the universal background check bill was passed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.