What's the argument against background checks for private gun sales?

That's odd, given that what I said is a DIRECT quote from 27 CFR § 478.129, which YOU cited!

 

So you're not talking about specific real life shooters?

 

The names and addresses of gun owners would seem to be a higher hack target than almost anything.

 

Why is that? The motivation of hacking for data is nearly always identity fraud.

 

If you need to act like your Alex Jones and deny the horrific incidents in which young males used assault weapons to massacre children or other targeted groups, that is what you will do.

I'm pleased to see even modest progress being made in the American public's support for reducing the lethal permissiveness.

US Senate Gun Measures Gain Support Despite Limited Scope
​

 

1. It's not 'our' creator, it's 'their' creator. And creator is not defined. My creator was my parents. How about yours.
2. As you say, 'they wrote', there were men.
3. They can't protect them from man, if man didn't create them. 'their creator' hasn't been defined.
4. Exactly, without gov't to grant and protect, we are on our own. Now, that document, the constitution etc, is a guideline to follow. It is NOT an absolute document.
5. Without an enforcement mechanism, gov't, our rights do disappear and we are on our own.
6. Which is why I say, at the end of the day, or when crap hits the fan, might makes right.

 

Who or what the "creator" is, is immaterial. They believed that when you are born, you have inalienable rights. The Constitution was written to protect those rights from the government. Your rights were not granted by anyone, they are an integral part of the human existence.

The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. No law is a merely a guideline, but all are subject to change. There is a specific process for that. The 14th amendment guarantees equal treatment under the law, for instance. You can't pick and choose to whom law applies, etc... If you could, those would be guidelines, not laws. The Constitution does not protect us from each other, it protects us from our government.

Your rights never disappear. Even though someone may kill you in the absence of police protection, if you have delegated your security to them, your right to life is never lost.

We shall never see eye to eye on this, I am afraid.

But, as a side note, I, over the years, have really appreciated your ability and willingness to engage in civil discussion without needing to resort to insults and ridicule. A quality that is sadly lacking amongst most of your fellow left-leaning posters here on PF. We can disagree without being disagreeable. Thank you.

 

WOW, you really need to bone up on reading YOU completely ignore the entire line lololol

Are you seriously and purposely ignoring the entire sentence? In all due respect NEVER read and sign a contract yourself, have a lawyer or someone competent try and explain it to you!

"the licensee shall record any transaction number on the Form 4473, and retain the Form 4473 for a period of not less than 5 years after the date of the NICS inquiry. "

But here is a bit more in detailed. But try and bare in mind we/I am talking about transferring ownership either by sale or gift! Don't confuse it with two thugs trading am eight ball of dope for a fire OR a friend giving or selling a friend a firearm with having a current FFL holder LAWFULLY after a background check transferring said firearm to the other friend/buyer ONLY IF THEY pass the background test.. If you stuck on any other way of transferring ownership or sales, then I'm against it and have posted many times to that..

Here is the full story,
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms
Rules for the

National Instant Check System
(NICS)
ATF Rules for National Instant Check System (gunlaws.com)

 

'They' believed that. In other words, men believed it. That doesn't make them inalienable. Heck most of the world doesn't have some of those man made rights.

They were written and a gov't was put in place to grant and enforce their written words of man made rights.

If these rights were so inalienable, why did they have to keep adding amendments?
Why didn't black men have the same inalienable rights as white men?
Why did land owners have more rights than non land owners?
Why did white men have these rights but no women had those rights?

You're welcome. It is nice being able to discuss without insults.

But, I have never shied away from insulting another back. As my deletion record would show.

 

Yes, and where in the above extract does it mention getting the person's NAME?

 

Are you talking about specific real life shooters or theoretical shooters?

 

So then what you're telling me is that the government has a gun registry?

 

Read the entire sentence or the entire statute, or just continue to misinformed

 

Nope.

 

And in which database is this in? An ATF database?

 

If you could quote where it says that the buyers name is recorded, you would have already done so!

 

The shooty lobby that has been denying the American public its demand that the deadly permissiveness be addressed will be very pissy if a slight accommodation of public safety is finally achieved, but there is a decent chance it will finally happen.

After a series of recent mass shootings, the latest Fox News national survey shows bipartisan support for a range of gun reform laws, especially background checks on all gun buyers. ​

​

In general, a 56% majority believes that having tougher gun laws would reduce mass shootings in the United States, while 39% do not.

On specific gun proposals, voters are most supportive of requiring background checks on all gun buyers (88%) and improving enforcement of existing gun laws (84%).

https://www.foxnews.com/official-polls/fox-news-poll-voters-voice-support-gun-reform

​

 

Here is the ATF page where you can download the latest revision of form 4473. The very first field on the section of the form filled out by the buyer is "Transferee's Full Name".
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/atf-form-4473-firearms-transaction-record-revisions

 

Ok, so get back to explaining how this practice by FFL's does not form a federal gun registry.

 

Because the government is prohibited from creating such a registry. The form 4473 is, by law, kept on file by the retailer for firearms he transferred, and must be (I think) subpoenaed before the feds have access to it. There is no requirement for the retailer to keep them in digital format, so it consists of large boxes of paper in many cases. I do not believe anyone could reasonably characterize this as a "registry".

 

I just assumed that the form was returned to the government, just like all government forms. I guess it could used by a tyrannical government in the future which wants to run a gun confiscation program.

 

LMAO

Ima break down for just because for since you have gone out of you way to be totally emersed in your roll

Now anyone with any commons sense and the smallest grasp of english would know that a proposed transaction would certainly include a BUYER or interested party, LMFAO

Now anyone with a grasp of the english language would know and understand that, IF, the sale, delivery or transfer IS NOT MADE, be it a failed background check, change of mind or forever whatever reason the TRANSACTION DOES NOT happen,

THEN

THE LICENSEE is still required By LAW to FILE the proposed firearms transaction of the person the licensee has initiated a NICS/Background check on sale or not

LMFAO

 

nope-the 4473 remains at the dealer

 

Yes. When exactly did I express any confusion over that?

Yes. When exactly did I express any confusion over that?

I am not seeing anything in that which mentions taking the persons NAME! That's been my point the entire time! It just mentions recording the "transaction number!"

 

I guess it could used by a tyrannical government in the future which wants to run a gun confiscation program. Any fear of this for you?