"88 percent of all Americans support UNIVERSAL BACKGROUND CHECKS"

[Palladin]

the interesting thing about that statistic is the probably 90 percent of those 88 percent have absolutely no idea that a background check is required when buying a gun from a dealer

I had this conversation with an educated individual last week, when he started the 'universal background check"
He had no idea what was required to buy a firearm. He just got swept up in the rhetoric

 

[drgrant]

You're on to something here. I think you're off to a good start!

Perhaps we might consider giving in on a few issues if steps were taken to acknowledge and affirm our 2A rights. Start with a Gun Owners Bill of Rights (yes, I know, we already have that in the Constituion, but let's reaffirm that those rights in a contemporary law that can not be disputed). I

I like your suggestions. A couple of additional elements for such a law might include:

1) All license applications must be handled on a "shall issue" unless there is a clearly manifest flaw in the applicants character or mental health. No more "may issue" on the basis of "if we like you", and no more having to demonstrate a "need" to exercise your 2A rights.

2) Total licensing and processing fees can be no more than those to acquire a standard driver's license. Higher fees should be illegal, just as it is to impose a Poll Tax on voters.

3) National reciprocity of gun licenses, the same as driver licenses.

Can anyone suggest other things they would like to see included in legislation in exchange for giving in and compromising on UBCs or age 21 changes to existing laws?

If we agree to compromise, we should at least get something for it!

A sticking point for UBC's in Massachusetts is that would create a defacto prohibition on all AR and AK transfers within the state. If UBCs go into effect, any chance Beacon Hill would be willing to create a work around for that problem? Likely only a very slim chance. of that ever happening. So, if you want an AR and haven't yet bought it, now may be the time to pull the trigger.

nope

Lol anything UBC is anti gun period end full stop.

Especially when there is no chance in hell they will remove the HUGE infringements from the background check systems. (The fact that like essentially 50,000+ people are basically accused of being criminals with no due process every time a delay happens, not to mention thousands of bad denials, too. )

Sorry but this is DEPRIVATION OF RIGHTS WITHOUT DUE PROCESS. PERIOD.

Delays should never exceed 30 minutes. After 30 minutes it defaults to a proceed if they cant figure it out. FBI or whoever - "Get more staff. Stop f***ing around. Nobody cares about your problems. Serve the public, stop being faggots. "

If NICS is down, it defaults to a proceed. I dont care about your crashed computer. This is 2022, no excuses.

False Denials should be an automatic 10K fine for the .gov, defacto civil rights violation.

Start there and we can talk about UBCs but they will never, ever do it.

 

[cathouse01]

nope

Lol anything UBC is anti gun period end full stop.

Especially when there is no chance in hell they will remove the HUGE infringements from the background check systems. (The fact that like essentially 50,000+ people are basically accused of being criminals with no due process every time a delay happens, not to mention thousands of bad denials, too. )

Sorry but this is DEPRIVATION OF RIGHTS WITHOUT DUE PROCESS. PERIOD.

Delays should never exceed 30 minutes. After 30 minutes it defaults to a proceed if they cant figure it out. FBI or whoever - "Get more staff. Stop f***ing around. Nobody cares about your problems. Serve the public, stop being faggots. "

If NICS is down, it defaults to a proceed. I dont care about your crashed computer. This is 2022, no excuses.

False Denials should be an automatic 10K fine for the .gov, defacto civil rights violation.

Start there and we can talk about UBCs but they will never, ever do it.

What about “INSTANT” in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) doesn’t the federal government understand? Kind of like they don’t understand “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” in the Second.