Can UBGC ever work?

[HuntMaine]

I still see this train coming down the track but wondering if they would ever give private citizens access to NICS so we can still perform private sales. I would take that compromise to a NO Access and having to go to a dealer

I would like NICS to be able to access data or at least somehow flag people who have had mental illness Pre Adult as well as Adult. Point being if you got a kid who has a several mental
Illness, tendency to violence etc. they should be flagged and have to go through a secondary screening to determine if they should have access to firearms. somehow that needs to get fixed.

 

[Penniepup1]

If a a pre adult/adult who has been deemed mentally incompetent to purchase/possess a firearm but still resides in a home with a firearm(s). What doesn’t it take for the gubment to tell the competent adult that they are no longer able to possess firearms in the home because of said mentally defective person residing in the residence? I believe it’s a double edged sword.

 

[highlander]

UBGC don't/won't work unless you're willing to let the Goverment unfettered access to ALL aspects of you're life. Take certain types of meds no gun for you,live an unconventional life style no gun for you. Hold offbeat opposing political veiws no gun for you. Unpopular religious views no gun for you. Does this remind you of a certain European country about 60 years ago,if not papers,please

 

[Fritz the Cat]

No way do I want the general public to have access to NCIS. In MA one needs to have a lisence to own a gun so asking to see said lisence before completing a F2F sale works for me.

 

[Dadstoys]

What has the government ever laid hands on that hasn't turned into a grade A cluster f*ck ?
This would be one by design.

 

[NHKevin]

OP - exactly what problem are you trying to solve?

 

[Waher]

If someone is too dangerous to own a gun they shouldn't be walking around free. They should be in a mental institution or prison. If they aren't dangerous enough to be locked up, why pray tell are you hot and horny to deny them their natural rights?

 

[Varmint]

The background check system doesn't catch any criminals or mass shooters, it just harrasses gun owners.

 

[wahsben]

The background check system doesn't catch any criminals or mass shooters, it just harrasses gun owners.

Which is part of the plan along with registration.

 

[whatluck]

I still see this train coming down the track but wondering if they would ever give private citizens access to NICS so we can still perform private sales. I would take that compromise to a NO Access and having to go to a dealer

I would like NICS to be able to access data or at least somehow flag people who have had mental illness Pre Adult as well as Adult. Point being if you got a kid who has a several mental
Illness, tendency to violence etc. they should be flagged and have to go through a secondary screening to determine if they should have access to firearms. somehow that needs to get fixed.

tell me more about how its appropriate to violate someones rights without due process

 

[MSant]

No

 

[radioman]

If someone is too dangerous to own a gun they shouldn't be walking around free. They should be in a mental institution or prison. If they aren't dangerous enough to be locked up, why pray tell are you hot and horny to deny them their natural rights?

I agree BUT there’s that but again.
Do you realize how many additional facilities
we would have to have to lock up
that many people? This country already
locks up more people that any other country
on earth. How do you suggest we pay for
these additional facilities? My taxes are
huge enough already. I will be the first
to confess I don’t know the solution.

 

[namedpipes]

I still see this train coming down the track but wondering if they would ever give private citizens access to NICS so we can still perform private sales. I would take that compromise to a NO Access and having to go to a dealer

I would like NICS to be able to access data or at least somehow flag people who have had mental illness Pre Adult as well as Adult. Point being if you got a kid who has a several mental
Illness, tendency to violence etc. they should be flagged and have to go through a secondary screening to determine if they should have access to firearms. somehow that needs to get fixed.

The intent of UBGC is to force all transactions through an FFL because they can use that as a chokepoint. An FFL is subject to laws that we are not, for instance, selling those Glock pistols that have been deemed dangerous by the State.

The unwashed public will never have access to perform background checks.

 

[Waher]

I agree BUT there’s that but again.
Do you realize how many additional facilities
we would have to have to lock up
that many people?

Do you know how expensive it is operating the catch and release system we have now? In addition to subsidizing or outright paying for the medications and medical care for the crazy homeless population? It costs up to a million dollars a year to take care of some of the frequent ER fliers that are off their meds or selling their meds on the street. Much cheaper to keep them in a facility that the nonexistent ER only care they get now.

A good chunk on the people locked up now are for marijuana use as well. With legalization of that the prisons will empty out quite a bit. As would deporting foreign criminals which make up a quarter of at least the federal prison population.

 

[radioman]

Do you know how expensive it is operating the catch and release system we have now? In addition to subsidizing or outright paying for the medications and medical care for the crazy homeless population? It costs up to a million dollars a year to take care of some of the frequent ER fliers that are off their meds or selling their meds on the street. Much cheaper to keep them in a facility that the nonexistent ER only care they get now.

A good chunk on the people locked up now are for marijuana use as well. With legalization of that the prisons will empty out quite a bit. As would deporting foreign criminals which make up a quarter of at least the federal prison population.

Sounds good to me. Do you think you could
find a politician that would actually do those things?
I doubt it. That’s why things will never change.

 

[usp45ct]

Will it stop crime....No
Will it stop criminals from getting guns...No
Will it treat mental illness....No
Will it stop straw purchases...No
Will it stop the gun show loophole...No. because there is NO gun show loophole.
Will it add another law so a useless politician can say we did this...yes.

 

[42!]

So I'm assuming a theoretical discussion that includes an assumption that there will be laws restricting possession and that all we are talking about here is how could this be accomplished. I'm not discussing what is or is not permitted by the 2a, nor what it could be perverted into by the dishonest or incompetent.

I posted this not long ago in another thread;

This is what I was thinking.
The database contains everyone legally in the US (if you think you're not already on a gov list you're just fooling yourself).
A web interface
Everyone gets a logon with multi-factor identification
When someone wants to buy a gun, the buyer logs on and shows the resulting indicator to the seller. Red=No Green=yes, nothing more. If it's red the buyer can privately logon to see the reason and appeal the decision.
On the back end, the system checks the identified person against whatever DB system is created for this. When a green is indicated it's display only with no DB record created.
Since anyone can access their own record anytime, with or without an actual sale pending, it's use does not directly indicate a sale. And since no information on any firearm, or the number of firearms is ever entered, it does not provide a list of firearms ownership.
Access to checks is always under the control of the individual.

As I said, this would require some serious changes to the laws.

As with the development of any solution I welcome constructive criticism, comments on the flaws and how to fix them.

 

[42!]

Will it stop crime....No
Will it stop criminals from getting guns...No
Will it treat mental illness....No
Will it stop straw purchases...No
Will it stop the gun show loophole...No. because there is NO gun show loophole.
Will it add another law so a useless politician can say we did this...yes.

Only enslavement offers absolutes

The real world is grey

Does the lack of absolutes mean we shouldn't try? If so, you are not perfect therefore you should not exist.

 

[Deleted member 67409]

So I'm assuming a theoretical discussion that includes an assumption that there will be laws restricting possession and that all we are talking about here is how could this be accomplished. I'm not discussing what is or is not permitted by the 2a, nor what it could be perverted into by the dishonest or incompetent.

I posted this not long ago in another thread;

As with the development of any solution I welcome constructive criticism, comments on the flaws and how to fix them.

There is absolutely no way for a "citizen database" to work because you're ignoring the concept of federalism.

Most people do not directly deal with the Federal government outside of Federal income tax, college loans/FAFSA, or certain Federal benefits/programs like the VA, SNAP, etc. Most people's interaction with government involves the state government. Arrested? Probably arrested by local government and prosecuted by the state. If you're getting arrested by the Feds, you're having a bad time. Who prosecutes most crimes that render people ineligible to buy guns? States - domestic charges, most felonies (drug charges, felony assault, B&E, sexual assault, etc.).

Let me put it to you this way. I pay taxes to my fire district, my town, my state, and the Feds. I don't think you understand how disconnected different parts of the government are.

Here's an example. If someone's arrested for operating on a suspended driver's license in RI, there's literally no communication between the actual criminal justice system prosecuting and defending the crime and the Division of Motor Vehicles who control motor vehicle licensing. I met one client this summer while I was interning for the public defender who is going through a Kafka-esque nightmare of seven or more years because of bureaucratic failure to communicate.

Now, with guns, its a little easier in theory because you're only dealing with one Federal agency - the ATF. But the ATF gets all its info from the states unless someone's ticked off the Feds. And what the ATF wants is control over the system. Creating a user interface that allows people to NICS check themselves goes against the ATF's intent. In theory, the ATF can totally shut down and stop processing NICS checks, halting gun sales.

 

[Dadstoys]

It's the registration part they want.
They don't GAF if it works .

 

[HuntMaine]

OP - exactly what problem are you trying to solve?

Most of the highly public shootings are people with bad mental health issues. Would be good to preclude them from ownership and access early on

 

[HuntMaine]

tell me more about how its appropriate to violate someones rights without due process

If someone is found mentally incompetent then yes they should not have that right.

 

[milktree]

Most of the highly public shootings are people with bad mental health issues. Would be good to preclude them from ownership and access early on

Are you saying that because, by definition, a mass shooter is mentally f***ed up, or because you believe there was some clear, decisive evidence *before* the event that would have predicted it? (Evidence that would pass due process and Constitutional muster)

The first is a tautology (useless); and the second is wrong (like factually incorrect).

 

[HuntMaine]

Are you saying that because, by definition, a mass shooter is mentally f***ed up, or because you believe there was some clear, decisive evidence *before* the event that would have predicted it? (Evidence that would pass due process and Constitutional muster)

The first is a tautology (useless); and the second is wrong (like factually incorrect).

I never said that, but nice try. No my point is that people who are being treated or have ben treated for mental illness should have to go through a secondary screening if they are to be considered to be allowed to possess or own a firearm.

Not sure how the process would be implemented but it should be done.

 

[fshalor]

The ONLY way this would work is if a private HIPPA compliant entity as a service was created.

That business would be usable as a service. They would need access to all of every persons health care care data.

They would need access to all Court docs. And full financials.

They would need to build up a rubric of risk.

And they would need to build up a portal where customers could submit pii and get back a good or pass. I could see there being a pre-screen option too. Where like TSA you can go through a process and get Good for a year and have to only submit a small amount of data to maintain that Good.

The would need to build a program for harvesting that data but also escalate to humans in a pool who would review the evaluations.

There would need to be a healthy insurance backing. $10k fine if a person reviewed came up with firearm in a crime. $250k fine if used for suicide, $1mil if in a mass shooting, etc.

Using the system would need to be optional. On the choice of the seller. (Dealer or citizen.)

Key. The government should absolutely never have access to our medical records. They want it. Bad.

 

[namedpipes]

I never said that, but nice try. No my point is that people who are being treated or have ben treated for mental illness should have to go through a secondary screening if they are to be considered to be allowed to possess or own a firearm.

Not sure how the process would be implemented but it should be done.

In fairness he was asking you to clarify what you meant...

Here's the problem. The only way to know if someone ought to go through that secondary screening would be for the government to examine the medical records of everyone that seeks a gun license. In that one statement there are two, separate violations of the Constitution.

It is not possible to prevent these things from happening. It is only possible to reduce their impact (by allowing people to quickly respond - ie have a gun on them) and to punish those to do commit the atrocity.

MY view is that some people are incapable of existing peacefully in our society as it is today. Since WE aren't changing and since it seems inhumane to lock the poor buggers up in what amount to jails, the alternative is to remove them from that society:

Create throwback communities to 200 years +/- ago. A planned community along the lines of Olde Sturbridge Village, but self sustaining. Work out a plan to help people integrate into that society and find their niche, whether it is farming, blacksmith, teaching, running a shop, whatever. But there's no phone, no tv, SURE as hell no facebook. You get your news by walking down to town common and talking or reading the weekly paper. Yes, we had mud eaters back then but there weren't usually more than one or two idiots to a village.

Hard work is good therapy for many people.

We've forgotten that.

 

[NHKevin]

Most of the highly public shootings are people with bad mental health issues. Would be good to preclude them from ownership and access early on

I reject your premise of a widespread public safety issue.

 

[drgrant]

OP - exactly what problem are you trying to solve?

"The gun bans are coming (cuz the tv said so) lets bend over and lube up so it hurts less" thing, apparently....

I don't get it, every time this stuff happens there's always a group of people willing to set their rights on fire in a vain attempt at getting the nuisance anti people to go away, but they forget that there is no satisfying those people. The only way to stop them is to render them irrelevant....

-Mike

 

[milktree]

I never said that, but nice try. No my point is that people who are being treated or have ben treated for mental illness should have to go through a secondary screening if they are to be considered to be allowed to possess or own a firearm.

Not sure how the process would be implemented but it should be done.

Right, but people who have been committed to an institution are *already* banned from touching guns.

And there’s no correlation between being treated for mental illness and mass shooters.

 

[Fritz the Cat]

Hard work is good therapy for many people

Sounds like a lovely place. We can have a sign above the "entrance" to the "village" that says Arbeit Macht Frei. Sounds hip in a foreign language