bad idea
Bigstock

WASHINGTON, D.C. (September 18, 2019) — Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) published a new Policy Memorandum addressing gun control proposals contained in a new document captioned “Idea for New Unlicensed-Commercial-Sale Background Checks”. FPC’s Policy Memorandum is available online at FPCPolicy.org.

The “Idea” document was first reported by The Daily Caller’s White House Correspondent, Amber Athey, in her story entitled “EXCLUSIVE: Here’s The Document The White House, [Attorney General] Barr Are Using To Push Gun Control On Republicans,” earlier today.

The “idea sheet circulating among Republican members” was reported to have been designed to “shop legislation on expanding background checks consistent with the Manchin-Toomey” gun control bill and “expand background checks to include all commercially advertised unlicensed sales.” The proposals in the document include creating a new class of “licensed transfer agents” and two new forms (“Bill of Sale/Chain of Title” and “New Form/Certification”), in effect a back-door, nationwide firearm registry, in order to force those engaged in the “commercial sale of firearms” to comply with the record keeping requirements of the existing Gun Control Act. But those who sell guns commercially must already comply with the Gun Control Act, regulations, and state and local laws, including by performing background checks.

“As we show, the ‘Idea’ document starts and finishes on a foundation of ignorance and nonsense. It has all the substantive value of a scrawling on a discarded bar napkin and poses neither novel nor meritorious solutions,” said FPC Director of Legal Policy, Matthew Larosiere.

“It is vague and appears to regulate conduct that is already illegal. And if it were enacted and enforced, it would result in the creation of a back-door nation-wide gun registry. And these constitutional and policy problems come without any countervailing benefit to public safety. The ‘idea’ document should have never made it out of the trash can, let alone into serious policy discussions.”

“The gun control concepts promoted in the ‘Idea’ document are unnecessary and in part duplicative of existing laws,” explained memorandum co-author and FPC Director of Legal Strategy, Adam Kraut.

“Individuals engaged in the commercial sale of firearms are already required to obtain a federal firearms license, have transferees complete ATF Form 4473, and complete a background check on that individual prior to transferring a firearm to them. Anyone who engages in commercial sales without a license violates federal law and is subject to imprisonment of up to five years and a fine of $250,000 or both.”

FPC strongly opposes these suggested gun control measures, “Universal Background Checks” (UBCs), and firearm/gun owner registration. For more on the dangers and impacts of UBCs, see FPC’s Policy Brief, “Universal Background Checks” & Burdening Access to Human Rights” at FPCPolicy.org.

To oppose this and other such restrictions on human rights, people can send messages to President Trump, Senate Leader Mitch McConnell, and other elected members using FPC’s Grassroots Action tools at FPCAction.org.

A related article by Larosiere, An Awful, Horrible, No-Good Expanded Background Check “Idea”, can be viewed at FPCNews.org.

 

Firearms Policy Coalition (www.firearmspolicy.org) is a 501(c)4 grassroots nonprofit organization. FPC’s mission is to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, especially the fundamental, individual Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, advance individual liberty, and restore freedom.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

64 COMMENTS

  1. If the “idea document” proposes duplication of existing law, maybe it is the wedge we need. Remove any means of a stealth registry, sell it like hotcakes, and give the anti-gun cabal a “victory” that does nothing.

    As to the “registry”, it is a curious thing. Reading the document, one comes upon wording that says the non-FFL sales document requirement and data retention can be bypassed if the private transactions go through an FFL. The wording also eliminates the requirement for private sellers to retain documentation if sales are conducted via FFL. A quick look at the document does make so-called UBCs “mandatory”, but there is no means to monitor private transfers (legal problems with the transferred firearms after sale could present serious complications for transfers that remain officially unacknowledged).

    Even though a duplicative document may serve to be a nothing burger that fills the anti-gun belly, the problem with granting even a hollow victory encourages more attempts to capture more information (losses for anti-gun muggles have the same result).

    Not aware of how many more hollow victories (duplicate laws that change nothing) are available to cobble together from the legal codes. The ruse may not be duplicable.

    Voting, at all levels in 2020 will be more important than any year before. And voting in 2022 will be even more critical than 2020. The battle is now more serious than ever.

    • RE Background Checks: Mr President, please consider these 3 points – 1) Will the proposed law have prevented any of these mass killings? 2) Will the proposed law make it more difficult for low income citizens to obtain firearms? 3) Regardless, once a bureaucracy is put in place, it will metastasize and restrict freedoms. Any new law must sunset in 5 years unless it can be shown to work. You will not get credit from Democrats, but there is a real danger that any law will be spun to take away your core supporters.B

      • Fail. The main mantra of gun control advocates is to gainsay any question such as “will this gun control law have prevented any of the previous mass killings that you are advocating?”

        The answer is always, “no,” but that won’t stop them and they are now trained to discount that argument.

        If you are going to be an advocate for 2A, be very knowledgeable. Not about the foundations, we all are, but about your opponents.

      • I like the above ideas with one exception or add

        If we serve them up a ‘nothing burger’…then we should ask(DEMAND!!!!!!!!) for some of our rights back

        1 end NFA of suppressors US wide no exceptions for any state!

        2 50 state wide and valid CCW no exceptions for any state, city or anyting!

        3 if you have a 50 state CCW the/any/or waiting period is GONE no exceptions for any state!

        4 end the 1986 ban on machine guns being made

        We want our rights back…they get or take…we get some back
        no more deals without us gun owners getting a POUND OF FLESH in return anymore

      • 1) Will the proposed law have prevented any of these mass killings?

        And the people on TAG complain about the ‘democrats’ knowing nothing about firearms. The point of background checks is not to stop ‘mass shootings’ but to attempt to stop (or at least make it harder) to gun run and perform straw purchases.

        • “The point of background checks is not to stop ‘mass shootings’ but to attempt to stop (or at least make it harder) to gun run and perform straw purchases.”

          Ok, let’s go with that.

          – How many straw sales were prevented because of NICS checks?
          – How do we know that if a straw purchase is prevented at one FFL, it wasn’t successful at another?
          – How do we know that a “legal” purchase through NICS check isn’t converted to a straw purchase after the buyer leaves the store?
          – How do we know that a cartel drone who can legally buy guns is not then selling them to the cartel gun runners? (trying to gun run legally purchased guns is too expensive…unless they are stolen)
          – How many gun running operations exist?
          – How many gun running operations have been interdicted because NICS checks prevented the sales? (Fast and Furious operation ordered FFLs to sell to gun runners, whether they passed NICS, or not)

          Each year, millions of guns are legally sold through FFLs. Is the legality attributable only to NICS? Or were the millions of legally sold guns simply being purchased by non-criminals and non-gun runners? How do we know that only NICS ensured the buyers were not prohibited persons.

          In 2017, there were 25.6million NICS checks. ~181K attempts were denied because of NICS review. How do we know those ~181k illegal buyers didn’t buy elsewhere successfully? To top it all off, of those 181k illegal buyers, only 22 were prosecuted. How do we know those not prosecuted didn’t obtain a gun elsewhere?

        • OK I will play too. back when the AFT was still willing to publish the facts, around 80% of firearms that were used for criminal activity were purchased for the sole purpose of criminal activity. This was by straw purchases or flat out gun running (the FFL was intentionally funneling the firearms) And the could never really prosecute anyone as they had to prove they KNEW what they were doing was illegal, not that their actions were illegal. Right now in most states anyone can sell a firearm to a violent felon without fear of prosecution as long as they are not stupid enough to admin it. All you have to do is claim that you never intend to sell the gun at the time you bought it, and you can do it over and over and over again.

          If this is not a issue, please explain to me how MKS Supply owner Charles Brown is not in jail. Look him up sometime. All he did was claim he was ‘conned’ into hundreds of directly traced guns that he personally transferred to a number of gun runners.

          At least if you are required to run a background check, gets a lot harder to claim ignorance.

          • “At least if you are required to run a background check, gets a lot harder to claim ignorance.”

            Indeed. But….that is a worry only after the crime is committed (illegal sale). It does nothing to prevent a prohibited person (purchase permission denied via NICS) from getting the gun. NICS can only stop a single transaction, at a single moment.

            Everything about NICS is “might”, “maybe”, “you never know”, “at least it is an attempt at doing something”.

            As noted earlier. 22 trials for ~181,000 denials is 0.000122 percent of denials. It is 0.00000086 percent of the 25.6million NICS checks in 2017. We want to burden 25.6 million purchases in order to achieve 22 convictions, and feel good about not selling to a prohibited person?

        • Binder wrote
          And the people on TAG complain about the ‘democrats’ knowing nothing about firearms. The point of background checks is not to stop ‘mass shootings’ but to attempt to stop (or at least make it harder) to gun run and perform straw purchases.

          OK so you clearly have not read the proposal, and don’t know what a straw purchase is.

          Your posts rely on substantive mistakes/falsehoods. You even have posts mixing up automatic and semi-auto.

    • If the government wanted to do something it could hold itself accountable for the many failures in which someone passed a background check because various government officials at different levels completely failed their jobs and did not enter information into all those fancy databases they have. Maybe a little individual responsibility for clear negligence would make a difference.

    • Correct as the 2 nd. states “Shall Not Be Infringed”. “Idea document” I have a idea as all gun control is un Constitutional and registration always leads to confiscation,not hell No but Eff No.

    • If the ‘heavies’ at the NRA are so stupid they cannot see why they need to resign, I wish the state of New York God speed in indicting them, convicting them, and incarcerating them.

      When Piper Aircraft folded, New Piper Aircraft was formed. Perhaps we need a New NRA to be formed, this time with transparency…

    • Or pushed aside by another organization that takes itself more seriously on behalf of its supporters and core mission. Could be GOA, or FPC, or SAF. Dunno at this point, but the shift of focus and funds to those others seems to be accelerating.

  4. We all know that the push here in our country is to foster “Authoritarianism” in the guise of public safety. I starting to really wonder how many of these “so-called” hi profile, mass shootings AREN’T false flag operations to promote this plan of act! In order to destory our Bill of Rights! I think we should really be worrying here.

  5. The only thing I/we expect and will tolerate is the expansion of OUR rights starting with National Concealed Carry Reciprocity.

    Not an inch backward on anything ever again!

    Repeat after me:

    “My/Our 2nd Amendment Rights ‘Shall NOT Be Infringed'”

    • So when do we start marching on the state capitols and expelling the anti-freedom occupants?

      I can say no compromise, but when my state government passes red flag laws, universal background checks, required training to purchase semi auto rifles, and so on and so on, I have zero choice but to comply if I want to buy, sell, or even possess a firearm in some cases. Or be a criminal and just wait until they catch me doing any one of the tens of thousands of illegal acts on the books, in which case my life is generally ruined.

      To me, dragging the scum out of office, surrounded by fellow Americans doing the same, has at least some chance of success, and a better return for my incarceration.

      Dont know how far an individual state has to slide towards tyranny before it’s time to stop complying and actually do something other than hiding in the shadows.

      We could vote ourselves out of this, but apparently as with everything else, not enough vote overall, and those that do are far outnumbered by the leftists in many states at this point…and it’s only going to get worse, barring some miraculous wins with SCOTUS that stops the states in their tracks, before people are turned into criminals…but it’s too late for that already.

    • “The only thing I/we expect and will tolerate is the expansion of OUR rights starting with National Concealed Carry Reciprocity.”

      That’s not an expansion of rights.

      “Not an inch backward on anything ever again!”

      That is not an inch forward. Concealed carry is a licensed privilege in many places. You are supplanting the exercise of an unalienable individual right with a government permission slip privilege to bear arms.

      Try national (and territorial) constitutional carry for exercise of a right.

      “Repeat after me:

      “My/Our 2nd Amendment Rights ‘Shall NOT Be Infringed’””

      Please stand for the exercise of the right and not some bone in the form of a government privilege. Then, your chant might actually mean something. If you don’t understand the differences between exercising a privilege and exercising a right, then your support of the 2A. however admirable, is meaningless.

  6. What, did they just hand a third-grader some crayons and a notepad and tell him to draft Universal Background Check legislation?

  7. UBC the right way. Make a phone App where the buyer enters information and submits for a check. The system returns a QR code that is good for 3 days which the seller scans. Seller confirms identity of buyer and passing status of check.

    No information about gun is included and checks can be done before a possible transfer.

    Implement this in exchange for repeal of the NFA.

    • There is no “right way” to do UBCs.

      At it’s very core it’s the federal government claiming jurisdiction over a business transaction when it is very clearly intrastate commerce (the two parties MUST by residents of the same state for it to be legal). That means it’s a state’s rights issue.

      • This isn’t true. In Colorado private sales must be conducted through an FFL. The only record of the gun and who it’s sold if is retained by said FFL. No information about the firearm is submitted to CBI. It’s essentially the same method used when buying a new gun from said FFL. There is no gun registry in Colorado but there is UBC.

        • You missed the point where I said it was a STATE issue.

          Colorado has every right to decide how business between its residents is conducted. The federal government doesn’t unless it tries to incorporate it under the interstate commerce clause. Good luck doing that when the parties involved are citizens of the same state. It is the argument they will use if UBC ever makes it to the Supreme Court.

          In the case of Colorado it is using the licensed federal tax collecting agent (FFL) as a cost & convenience measure. Nothing in federal law says that they have to.

          • “The federal government doesn’t unless it tries to incorporate it under the interstate commerce clause. Good luck doing that when the parties involved are citizens of the same state.”

            Interstate commerce clause has been successfully used (Supreme Court) to force a farmer to sell his production, the portion held back for his use, on the open market. Commerce Clause is also how a landmark civil rights case was decided against a business because it used toothpicks that traveled via interstate commerce to get to the business. The founders struggled with the clause at the convention, understanding the clause could be used to neuter the entire constitution and BOR.

            The federal government honors “states rights” only when convenient to the federal government.

  8. One term in the leaked GC agenda – “chain of title” = registry.
    Just like a title to you car or house – and it’s a chain – they want to know the custody from mfr. to end life cycle of the firearm.

    • I’m sure the hood rats will endorse this and comply willingly. HAHAHAHA. Sometimes I crack myself up. 🙂

  9. None of you get why this idea was floated. The TRUTH of the matter is that unless someone actually says something (usually by mistake), it is IMPOSSIBLE to prosecute anyone for a straw purchase. If a person was required to run a background check on the person buying the firearm the unbreakable defense of ‘I did not know’ would not work.

    Want to freak out a smart FFL, start asking legal questions during a firearm transfer. A smart FFL knows the ONLY way that they can get into trouble is if you or they say something wrong. The only thing that a FFL wants is you to fill out the 4473 correctly and say it that the firearm is for yourself.

    Now could something like this work? I don’t know. But don’t think it can’t without creating a firearm registry. The item being transferred does not need to be given to the feds, the person person selling does not need to give their information to the feds. The fact that a transferred actually happens does not need to be given to the feds. The only thing that does happen is that a verification number is returned by the feds to be placed on the bill of sale that the seller keeps.

    • “Now could something like this work?”

      Let’s think about that for a minute. Consider: Federal UBC law is implemented. You and I talk at work about one of us buying a gun from the other. We decide to conduct the transfer/sale in the Office Depot parking lot, next Saturday at 0900. We meet and do so. Then we go about our business.

      How does UBC prevent the sale? How does UBC verify that neither one of us is “prohibited”? How does UBC prevent the buyer from using the gun in a crime?

      Now, let’s take the same scenario, and follow the new law. Transaction happens, UBC is successfully conducted, in all its detail.

      How does UBC prevent the buyer from using the gun in a crime? How does UBC prevent the theft of the gun, later to be used in a crime?

      The most effect UBC can have is to give the seller momentary peace-of-mind that the gun was not sold to a “prohibited person” (assuming the NICS system can, indeed, identify properly all the prohibited persons). As such, the UBC law should provide only that the background check process for private sales is entirely voluntary, with no consequence for not using it. All of which pretty much leaves us where we are in states that do not already require UBC for private sales (unless the federal UBC terminates all state-mandated UBCs).

      • How does UBC prevent the sale? About the same as a laws against murder stops a killer.

        What is does is make it easier to prosecute the sellers who provide firearms to probated individuals. As it is now, anyone who knowing (or just doesn’t want to know) gun runs can just claim ignorance.

        When you can explain to me how you can stop a smart gun runner with the current laws, I will explain to you how to stop murder.

        • “What is does is make it easier to prosecute the sellers who provide firearms to probated individuals.”

          So…let’s fall back on facts, data and logic:
          2017 – 25,600,000 NICS checks; ~181,000 NICS denials: 22 convictions.

          For which other crime prevention measure do we require 25.6million transactions to successfully prove innocence of the buyer in order to permit the purchase transaction, at the success rate of 0.00000086 percent prosecution rate for attempted illegal purchase?

          NICS is factually, data supported, logically useless at achieving goals.

    • it is IMPOSSIBLE to prosecute anyone for a straw purchase

      That is a lie, people go to jail for years because of them. I was on the jury for one — it was an easy conviction. Left wing judge suspended the sentence.

      • “That is a lie, people go to jail for years because of them. ”

        22 faced trial in 2017. (0.00012% of 181,000 denials) NICS checks)

        One can understand the declaration that it is impossible to convict.

    • Any word on what cocaine Mitch thinks about this?

      McConnell already declared that he will wait until he has a bill handed to him that has a guarantee the president will sign it.

  11. This sounds a lot like the UBC law in Colorado. There is not registration of firearms. The record of what firearm and who it’s sold to is kept at the FFL where the transaction is completed. No information in the gun is submitted to CBI. The same is done when you buy a new firearm from an FFL. There is no back door registry. The claim that there is is scaremongering.

    • I’m fully on board for this being an option that can be used as it protects me as a seller. Just don’t make it required. A bill of sale could be used but this has more validity in a court.

      There is exactly one area where UBC law applies anyway. A business transaction between residents of the same state involving a used gun. That’s it. All new gun sales must go through a FFL. All other methods are already illegal.

      While it would be nice to have a fool proof, inexpensive way to verify if the person you’re selling to is legit it is not within the reasonable limits of the Interstate commerce clause to require it with this transaction. It is within the rights of an individual state to govern its own business affairs as long as it doesn’t infringe on the Constitution. As long as you have the autonomy to buy whatever you wish & the onus proving otherwise is in on the state or federal government, I’m OK with the background check.

      As always your milage may vary. Look at the whole picture & decide for yourself what is right.

      • There is so much historical evidence supporting that statement it isn’t even funny.

        Not just from the current Liberal/Democrat party but from every oppressive government that has existed.

        The instant someone says they know better how to conduct your affairs then you do watch out. Fight that tooth & nail.

        Unfortunately for us that fight was lost in 1934 on the gun control front. An argument could be made that overall it only ever existed in theory.

    • So, the records held at FFLs are not a registry, because in Colorado ATF agents cannot get them copied or even photographed and after the FFL ends the ATF doesn’t get them delivered physically?

  12. What a load of guano…we “give” and the badguy’s “take”. Their goal is no guns. Duh😫

    • Like your continued attempts to direct people here to your storefront with every (irrelevant) comment you post?

  14. “…all advertised commercial sales…”

    Since ALL commercial sales are NOW restricted to FFLs and are required to include a background check, does this create a new class of commercial sellers who are NOT required to be FFLs? Are we bringing back tabletop FFLs by letting an existing FFL or a newly created transfer agent do the NICS check? So, I could be in the business of selling guns without being an FFL? Sounds like a win.

    • No, it’s the other way around. They will call each ad in the newspaper or online commercially advertised sale. Same for gun shows. Gun on a table – commercial advertising. This is a UBC with some clever wording.

      • “They will call each ad in the newspaper or online commercially advertised sale. ”

        Thanks for that. Was puzzled for two days over “commercial sale” in the “idea paper”. For some reason, just couldn’t get twisted enough to be that devious.

  15. Yeah, let’s establish a federal registry for firearms. I mean look at all the death and destruction caused by guns. But, that doesnt go far enough. There are so many other things we need to be protected from. Look at alcohol, drunk driving, spousal abuse, drunk texting. We need to establish a federal list of all those who may possibly commit alcohol related crimes. We need a federal heads up on these people to protect society sincea that is the principal job of government. Then, look at sexual abuse of women. The obvious response to protect women and children from toxic masculinity is to castrate all males. Let’s get started and solve all the problems we can. Are you with me? Are you an Ameri-can or an Ameri-can’t ?

    • “Are you an Ameri-can or an Ameri-can’t ?”

      You left out making murder illegal, and creating police and federal agents to stop it.

  16. This is the United STATES and should stay that way, No national registries!!! NONE!!! I think if the states so deisred they could hold a convention to dissolve the union.

  18. No one is addressing or talking about the real problem involving active shooters in the USA. What has every AS shooter had in common, except for one which was a terrorist? Anti-depressants! There has been a 400% increase in anti-depressant prescribed over the past 10 years.

    • “There has been a 400% increase in anti-depressant prescribed over the past 10 years.”

      Old news, old views. Vaccines are the real culprit, now.

      (Did I get that right?)

        • “It is actually new info. And no, vaccines have nothing to do with AS.”

          I think you are wrong about vaccines. Have read it here, quite often, that vaccines can be traced to just about every evil outcome visited on society. Can’t put stuff here that isn’t true.

  19. Trump and Moscow Mitch McConnell will soon be history and the majority of Republicans will along with the Democrats pass a universal background check. Maybe not registration but then again who knows for sure.

    • You’re a little late to the party today, Vlad. Most everyone has already gone home and doesn’t care about your drivel posted way down here at the bottom.

      • It is not my fault I am late to the party people always tell me to bring the meth and they give me the wrong address which is usually the local police department.

    • If Mich is Moscow Mitch, than Biden and Warren taking million from the Chinese tell you what?

      As far as UBC that is luddinte desperation anyway, since everyone knows it will just push 3d which is the future

    • UBC can’t be enforced without registration. Therefore UBC is in effect a registration scheme. We know what registration leads to.

      All Democrat presidential candidate forerunners said they want registration and most said that they want confiscation as well. The smarter ones did not say it out loud yet.

  20. Many are missing the Main Point: That is to insert “Commercial” into the market area of private party firearm sales/transfers/inheritance, gifts, temp loans and so forth. The reason is “Commercial Goods/Commerce” fall under the Authority of Congress and that would extend/allow current Congresses Authority to write Laws/ Regulations to control those Private transactions.

    Current Fed gun Laws only restrict a very narrow field regulation that overflow into the private arena. The application of “Commercial” to what is currently “Private Transactions” would open a entirely new field of regulation, restrictions and specific or defacto registration.

Comments are closed.