Posted on 06/22/2021 6:36:08 PM PDT by PROCON
SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — The number of people stopped from buying guns through the U.S. background check system hit an all-time high of more than 300,000 last year amid a surge of firearm sales, according to new records obtained by the group Everytown for Gun Safety.
The FBI numbers provided to The Associated Press show the background checks blocked nearly twice as many gun sales in 2020 as in the year before. About 42% of those denials were because the would-be buyers had felony convictions on their records.
(Excerpt) Read more at apnews.com ...
No sh*t.
That’s actually pretty reassuring even though I don’t live there.
I’ve been performing a deep dive into my state firearms law with respect to carry permits, and what are disqualifiers for someone to obtain and retain a firearm under state and federal law.
There is absolutley no question in my mind that the minimum requirements and preconditions necessary to purchase, own, and further continue to lawfully carry a firearm should also apply practically verbatim when applied to any right to vote.
Either that, or how about make purchasing a firearm as easy as voting? No ID, no questions asked, and buy as many guns as you want. How’s that sound?
FOR EXAMPLE, a finding of what’s called domestic abuse against spouse or child results in revocation of a carry permit and the right to own a firearm. Basically any conviction that results in a prison sentence longer than a year in jail (felony) will do this.
It would have quite the effect, in a positive way I think. Voting in aggregate is certainly far more dangerous than firearms overall. If a person can’t be trusted with a firearm, they surely should not be voting, and the reverse is true as well.
Those who can’t handle their affairs, mentally incompetent. They aren’t allowed to buy or sell real estate. They were not allowed to vote in years past, for obvious reasons.
What does that mean exactly Pro? Say you are pulled over one day for a broken tail light. The officer runs your DL through the system and sees that you failed a background check trying to buy a firearm. Does that mean a trip to jail for the background check fail, or is it just to give a heads up to the officer after the stop?
26 of them were legitimate
ya, writing a new law would sure slow that down......idiots!
In my state of WA, the State Patrol are notified upon a gun purchase denial. Where it goes from there I do not know.
Any MISDEMEANOR domestic violence conviction will bar you from firearms for life.
That or a dishonorable discharge are the two conditions for which there is no remedy.
Felons can petition to restore their rights in most states.
So with about 21 million checks for firearms purchases, that would be very roughly 1 denied out of 70 purchases. And about 40% of the 21 million checks were for new buyers.
The CRUD made me wait three hours for some unnamed delay about two weeks ago, when I bought a 9mm micro. This is for a person who has had 40 years of licenses to carry firearms. Some of them have been issued in a big Marxist city. They are purposely dicking with us.
I had been getting multiple 3-day ‘holds’ for the last 4-5 years. That is where if the FFL dealer does not hear back from the FIB, you get your firearm after it is held for 3 days.
Finally, in December, I got denied for an AR-15 stripped lower receiver. I’ve never even been so much as arrested-for anything-much less convicted of a felony restricting my right to purchase a firearm. After some research I learned a scumbag convicted felon in New Orleans LA has the exact same name as I do. 600 miles between us plus we do not share the same address nor the same SS number... I wound up having to get the federal DA involved to clear it up all up.
Such is the level of competence @ the FIB
Daddy um er the big guy takes care of me he need me for business reasons.
Another take is that 100+ thousand convicted felons we can’t trust with a gun are roaming free among us.
When I was navigating through the labyrinth of hoop jumps to join the .mil at one point I get a phone call from the recruiter asking about a DUI in some southwestern town in my state. I’ve never even been there, as far as I know.
I just allowed that, hey it wasn’t me, I don’t even know where that is, and thought that was the end of it. Later, they circled back to that, it seemed to me they wanted me to somehow “prove” that it wasn’t me, and I basically said that ain’t how this works, what am I supposed to do? Show me some evidence, I can refute that, but all I can think of there must be some kind of clerical error or mistaken identity.
Right! I think this would be a “great idea”, insofar as that goes toward keeping people on their toes.
Thanks Pro.
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.