Sounds like I was looking at it wrong.  So Alabama had 1 felon apply for a gun and fail the NICS check.  HI had zero felons apply.  But we had 8K denied due to mental health issues in 2018.  And about 1K who had a TRO.

One problem with those raw numbers:  we aren't told how many were false positives. 

The FBI and anti-gun, anti-2A groups will spin it as "the system prevented that many prohibited people from getting guns."  In reality, if 50% of those were false positives, that portion of the number had their civil rights violated in the name of stopping guns from winding up in "the wrong hands." 

Careful when you see stats.  On their own, stats can paint an incomplete and misleading picture.

HOW can they be enforced?  Please explain how the under-age gangbanger, felon, mentally ill, relative/close friend and out of state buyers will submit to a "uniform, universal background check" if the seller is (a) not the original/legal owner, (b) really needs the money and the buyer is offering more than the asking price, (c) doesn't care about the background check requirement, and/or (d) is a relative or close friend and feels safe doing the transfer without a check?

Without a national registry, there is NO WAY to enforce this.  Person A buys the gun retail and goes through a background check.  A year later he sells to person B.  Person B gives it to his sister who is being stalked.  The sister sells it on Craig's List to a stranger.  That stranger sells it to another person.  Without a registry, how do you know who had the gun last?  How do you even know if a suspect even possessed a firearm of the same caliber being sought without a record of it?  Most handguns recovered that were involved in a crime have been in the public for 15 years.  That's a really long time for there not to be a registry and having to find through detective work who had the gun when.  As soon as the police get a response, "Man, that gun must have been stolen, because it's not where I thought it was," the trail dies.

p.s.  Anyone not obeying the background check laws for private sales/purchases is unlikely to follow registry laws, too.  The system that was created to support the background check system is just as much a failure, since ONLY THE LAW ABIDING will be in the databases.

I never said universal background checks would stop all black market gun sales so lets set that aside.

What I did say is that a legal responsible person selling their gun in a private sale has no way of ensuring that they are selling to someone who is allowed to posses a firearm. Some gang banger wants to buy a gun off record so that they can commit a crime with it and they can get it because the seller has no way of knowing better.

A national registry of firearms is not required under my idea. So you know how Hawaii's system works, we get a permit to purchase which shows the buying has been cleared to buy the firearm. Imagine something along those lines but with a photo ID card and a unique serial number for the card holder. Anyone wanting to purchase firearms does a background check just like they would at a firearm store. They pass and the government gives them the ID card. The person now goes to buy a firearm from a dealer or a private citizen. The seller looks at the ID and calls the police station. The seller says "I want to sell a firearm to person with ID number 12345. Are they allowed to purchase firearms?" The police station then tells them the ID number is good and the seller then sells the firearm to the buyer. The government only knows that the person with ID number 12345 was interested in buying a firearm, they don't know any firearm serial numbers or whether a gun was even sold at all. Therefore no registry of firearms owned ever gets created.

Whether or not to have a registry is a separate issue with its own plusses and minuses.



The arguments you make are the same problems whether for private sales or from gun stores, so why not just ban all background checks of any type? If the criminal isn't going to follow the law anyway then the background checks at the gun store don't do anything either right? But keep in mind that some people do apply to buy guns who are flagged by background checks so we can't say they never work. It was reported that the last Texas shooter failed a background check to buy a gun but then was able to get one in a private sale. Maybe more has been released and the story is different now but it still shows the gaping hole in the system, as it exists.

I never said universal background checks would stop all black market gun sales so lets set that aside.

What I did say is that a legal responsible person selling their gun in a private sale has no way of ensuring that they are selling to someone who is allowed to posses a firearm. Some gang banger wants to buy a gun off record so that they can commit a crime with it and they can get it because the seller has no way of knowing better.

A national registry of firearms is not required under my idea. So you know how Hawaii's system works, we get a permit to purchase which shows the buying has been cleared to buy the firearm. Imagine something along those lines but with a photo ID card and a unique serial number for the card holder. Anyone wanting to purchase firearms does a background check just like they would at a firearm store. They pass and the government gives them the ID card. The person now goes to buy a firearm from a dealer or a private citizen. The seller looks at the ID and calls the police station. The seller says "I want to sell a firearm to person with ID number 12345. Are they allowed to purchase firearms?" The police station then tells them the ID number is good and the seller then sells the firearm to the buyer. The government only knows that the person with ID number 12345 was interested in buying a firearm, they don't know any firearm serial numbers or whether a gun was even sold at all. Therefore no registry of firearms owned ever gets created.

Whether or not to have a registry is a separate issue with its own plusses and minuses.



The arguments you make are the same problems whether for private sales or from gun stores, so why not just ban all background checks of any type? If the criminal isn't going to follow the law anyway then the background checks at the gun store don't do anything either right? But keep in mind that some people do apply to buy guns who are flagged by background checks so we can't say they never work. It was reported that the last Texas shooter failed a background check to buy a gun but then was able to get one in a private sale. Maybe more has been released and the story is different now but it still shows the gaping hole in the system, as it exists.

I like your idea.  I think Hawaii should implement it and get rid of all registration.  There is no reason to have a registry, unless they are planning on confiscation.

I like your idea.  I think Hawaii should implement it and get rid of all registration.  There is no reason to have a registry, unless they are planning on confiscation.

I concocted a long email with that idea and sent it to my two state reps last week. Haven't heard back yet but I will follow up with a call if I don't hear anything in another week or so.

I have to disagree with you on the registry comment though. A registry does enable law enforcement to trace firearms found at crime scenes and help them solve crimes and catch the bad guys. Yes confiscation is a risk though. Unfortunately it is a double edged sword so you cannot separate the good from the bad, at least I haven't found out a way of solving that problem yet. 

I concocted a long email with that idea and sent it to my two state reps last week. Haven't heard back yet but I will follow up with a call if I don't hear anything in another week or so.

I have to disagree with you on the registry comment though. A registry does enable law enforcement to trace firearms found at crime scenes and help them solve crimes and catch the bad guys. Yes confiscation is a risk though. Unfortunately it is a double edged sword so you cannot separate the good from the bad, at least I haven't found out a way of solving that problem yet.

You could have just copy & pasted the info here.  Seems you and the Giffords Law Center folks think alike:

https://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/policy-areas/gun-owner-responsibilities/registration/

Laws requiring gun owners to register their firearms ensure gun owner accountability and help law enforcement solve crimes and disarm criminals.

Basically, the risk of an out-of-control government agency confiscating firearms is worth it if law enforcement's job is made easier. 

Of course, confiscation is such a far-fetched scenario, only conspiracy nuts would ever fear such a thing.

2005 was so long ago ....

https://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/09/us/nationalspecial/police-begin-seizing-guns-of-civilians.html

.

I have to disagree with you on the registry comment though. A registry does enable law enforcement to trace firearms found at crime scenes and help them solve crimes and catch the bad guys. Yes confiscation is a risk though. Unfortunately it is a double edged sword so you cannot separate the good from the bad, at least I haven't found out a way of solving that problem yet.

How would being able to track down a serial number help solve crimes?  If  a gun is used at another crime site, would the criminal leave a note with the serial number, make, and model, and caliber they used?  Serial numbers are only good for 1 thing, to track down the original owner and RETURN the gun back to them.  But many times it takes a long time, if at all to return a gun to the original owner who reported it stolen.  It's held as evidence.  And if your gun was used in a murder, would you want it back with the bad juju that it has on it?

Guns used in crimes are quickly sold back on the black market so the ballistics can't be traced back to the shooter.  And when this is done, the resale value drops.  So it could have changed hands many times from the first time it was used in a crime.  Had a special about this on Drugs Inc on NatGeo.

Registration serves only 1 purpose, confiscation.

How would being able to track down a serial number help solve crimes?  If  a gun is used at another crime site, would the criminal leave a note with the serial number, make, and model, and caliber they used?  Serial numbers are only good for 1 thing, to track down the original owner and RETURN the gun back to them.  But many times it takes a long time, if at all to return a gun to the original owner who reported it stolen.  It's held as evidence.  And if your gun was used in a murder, would you want it back with the bad juju that it has on it?

Guns used in crimes are quickly sold back on the black market so the ballistics can't be traced back to the shooter.  And when this is done, the resale value drops.  So it could have changed hands many times from the first time it was used in a crime.  Had a special about this on Drugs Inc on NatGeo.

Registration serves only 1 purpose, confiscation.

THIS

Unless the original registered owner is the person committing the crime, registration is useless.  As a general rule, law abiding gun owners are the last ones to commit crimes with their firearms.   There are few exceptions, thus is life. Just as there are exceptions of LE committing crimes.

There is no real good reason for registration.

How would being able to track down a serial number help solve crimes?  If  a gun is used at another crime site, would the criminal leave a note with the serial number, make, and model, and caliber they used?  Serial numbers are only good for 1 thing, to track down the original owner and RETURN the gun back to them.  But many times it takes a long time, if at all to return a gun to the original owner who reported it stolen.  It's held as evidence.  And if your gun was used in a murder, would you want it back with the bad juju that it has on it?

Guns used in crimes are quickly sold back on the black market so the ballistics can't be traced back to the shooter.  And when this is done, the resale value drops.  So it could have changed hands many times from the first time it was used in a crime.  Had a special about this on Drugs Inc on NatGeo.

Registration serves only 1 purpose, confiscation.

There is another purpose:  to keep a record of firearms each law abiding person owns so that it can be used against them.

If a crime was committed with a .357, and I happen to own a .357, it causes my name to jump up on the list of possible suspects based on no other evidence.  No firearm recovered at the scene, no prints on a weapon, no DNA recovered -- just the fact I own the right caliber gun makes me appear more guilty.

Hell, let's REALLY make law enforcement's job easier!!  I think we should send all federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies:

a sample of our DNA,
fingerprints,
copies of our tax returns, both federal and state,
copies of all our statements for savings, checking, credit card, and investment accounts,
copies of our medical records,
copies of all our life, health, auto and homeowners/renters insurance policies and claims,
copies of our cell phone records and landline if any still exist,
college transcripts,
high school transcripts,
audio and video recordings from any home surveillance devices we own on a periodic basis,
copies of everything we post on any and all online sites especially if it's political in nature,
and the names and contact information for family, friends, co-workers, classmates, teachers and other associates since we were 16 years old.

The police have an important and difficult job to do.  This is the least we can do to ensure we have an orderly and safe society.  Civil rights can be forfeited in the name of public safety.  All the cool Socialist countries are doing it!

a sample of our DNA,

People are already doing that...23 and me, Ancestry, etc... #tinfoil

I concocted a long email with that idea and sent it to my two state reps last week. Haven't heard back yet but I will follow up with a call if I don't hear anything in another week or so.

I have to disagree with you on the registry comment though. A registry does enable law enforcement to trace firearms found at crime scenes and help them solve crimes and catch the bad guys. Yes confiscation is a risk though. Unfortunately it is a double edged sword so you cannot separate the good from the bad, at least I haven't found out a way of solving that problem yet. 

If you are going to make suggestions to compromise more of our rights, and make it even more difficult for the lawful to obtain weapons for self defense,  you really should suggest something for US in return.   

Abolishing registration, and destroying all records, seems a reasonable compromise. 

I would say a good compromise would be:

Have all ownership transfers have backgrounds checked.  This would require access to NICS for EVERYBODY.  Maybe an app would be nice.  So not required to be done at a FFL dealer.  Obamacare website did cost $7 billion.  I"m sure they can spare the funds for this.

In return, no registrations, no tax stamps, SBRs, normal mags and extendo clips, suppressors, all legal.  National reciprocity.  And owning a tank.

*edit

Well maybe require a tank-ed course to own the tank.  Like drivers ed, but for tanks.

I would say a good compromise would be:

Have all ownership transfers have backgrounds checked.  This would require access to NICS for EVERYBODY.  Maybe an app would be nice.  So not required to be done at a FFL dealer.  Obamacare website did cost $7 billion.  I"m sure they can spare the funds for this.

In return, no registrations, no tax stamps, SBRs, normal mags and extendo clips, suppressors, all legal.  National reciprocity.  And owning a tank.

*edit

Well maybe require a tank-ed course to own the tank.  Like drivers ed, but for tanks.

Hypothetically, let's say there is a mandated requirement to do an NICS check for private sales, but there's no registry.

Scenario #1:  I decide to loan my friend a shotgun to go hunting.  Law says I have to do a background check first.  Cop pulls him over in a traffic stop, and I get arrested for an illegal transfer.

Scenario #2:  I advertise a handgun for sale, and a local buyer contacts me.  I'm required to do an NICS check first, but he's PCSing and really wants the firearm before he leaves tomorrow.  I decide to forego the NICS hurdle to make the sale.  He's military, after all.

In #1, how is that in any way a logical way to treat otherwise law abiding gun owners?  Requiring an NICS check (at the buyer's or seller's expense) both when the gun is borrowed and again when returned to the original owner is INSANE.  If the intent is to require the state to facilitate every single loan, return, rental, sale and gift of firearms, the burden IMO is too great.

In #2, without a registry, there's no way to track that gun back to me if I also bought it on the secondhand market.  Therefore, there's no way to enforce the NICS requirement unless the person in possession of it volunteers your information -- assuming you even gave it to them.  They may only have a phone number which can be temporary.

it's not hard to see that a law that is unenforceable can't prevent crimes, or even help solve them.  They will burden the lawful gun owners, buyers and sellers, but those who decide to avoid the hassles will for the most part do so.

Tell me again how this prevents gun violence?

Guilty until proven innocent. Might as well require convicts to get a tattoo of “FELON” tattooed on their forehead.

[sarcasm]

But not really...

Guilty until proven innocent. Might as well require convicts to get a tattoo of “FELON” tattooed on their forehead.

[sarcasm]

But not really...

They're just going to keep making more and more laws, and add people to more and more lists/groups, with ONE goal in mind -- to restrict as many people as they possibly can from ever legally owning a firearm.

People like EEF think these proposals will actually stop gun violence to some unspecified degree.

Yet, nobody, not even EEF, can point to a single mass shooting or other gun crime and definitively state how any of these proposals would have stopped an actual crime from happening.  EEF (as most Liberals do) goes off on a hypothetical, academic fantasy rant on how these laws are "doing something," and that the Cops are just one more law away from magically catching bad guys BEFORE they do anything bad.

EEF's motto: "We're doing something .... and stuff!"

If you are going to make suggestions to compromise more of our rights, and make it even more difficult for the lawful to obtain weapons for self defense,  you really should suggest something for US in return.   

Abolishing registration, and destroying all records, seems a reasonable compromise.

In my emails to my state reps I did include suggestions that would serve to benefit us such as a permit to purchase being good for 5 years and eliminating a check once people already own 2 guns (since we only have two hands and a 3rd gun can't make us more dangerous)

How would being able to track down a serial number help solve crimes?  If  a gun is used at another crime site, would the criminal leave a note with the serial number, make, and model, and caliber they used?  Serial numbers are only good for 1 thing, to track down the original owner and RETURN the gun back to them.  But many times it takes a long time, if at all to return a gun to the original owner who reported it stolen.  It's held as evidence.  And if your gun was used in a murder, would you want it back with the bad juju that it has on it?

Guns used in crimes are quickly sold back on the black market so the ballistics can't be traced back to the shooter.  And when this is done, the resale value drops.  So it could have changed hands many times from the first time it was used in a crime.  Had a special about this on Drugs Inc on NatGeo.

Registration serves only 1 purpose, confiscation.

Same way serial numbers for other items and vehicles help to solve crimes. It can tell you the current owner which can be the first in a line of clues that leads to the suspect.

Say you sold your gun to a friend but he never registered it because he is a criminal. This gun is used in a crime and police come knocking on your door. You say that you sold it to your friend so police go knock on his door. Your criminal friend probably denies any wrongdoing but police will at least know his name. Police find video of the incident which shows your friend committing the crime. Because they tracked the gun registration they could get your friends name and realize that it is him in the video whereas they might not be able to figure out who is in the video.

Another scenario. A guy kills his wife with his registered gun but he disposes of the gun and says it was an intruder. Cops can see the husband has a firearm registered to his name and they can verify it os missing. Then a search later finds a gun thrown in the bushes and they use the serial number to realize this is the firearm belonging to the husband whereas they might otherwise not know what crime the gun was connected to.

A registration isn't a magic bullet for police to solve the case, it isn't a guarantee that they will have all the evidence they need, but a registration is definitely something they can use to help them solve the case.

Heck, how many times do you think license plates on cars end up helping cops solve the crime?  (A lot)

You could have just copy & pasted the info here.  Seems you and the Giffords Law Center folks think alike:

https://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/policy-areas/gun-owner-responsibilities/registration/

Basically, the risk of an out-of-control government agency confiscating firearms is worth it if law enforcement's job is made easier. 

Of course, confiscation is such a far-fetched scenario, only conspiracy nuts would ever fear such a thing.

2005 was so long ago ....

https://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/09/us/nationalspecial/police-begin-seizing-guns-of-civilians.html

Strawman. I never argued the risk of confiscation wasn't real or wasn't serious.



BTW, are you going to answer my earlier post? Are you for completely doing away with all background checks including ones done at gun stores? You are ignoring that background checks will make it harder for criminals to buy guns on the black market.

And if criminals aren't going to follow the law anyway then logically speaking you must think ID requirements for voting won't stop illegal voters either right?

Strawman. I never argued the risk of confiscation wasn't real or wasn't serious.



BTW, are you going to answer my earlier post? Are you for completely doing away with all background checks including ones done at gun stores? You are ignoring that background checks will make it harder for criminals to buy guns on the black market.

And if criminals aren't going to follow the law anyway then logically speaking you must think ID requirements for voting won't stop illegal voters either right?

You're the King of Strawman Arguments.

LOL!!!     

Voter ID is ENFORCED at the polling place, because the PICTURE ID ISSUED BY THE GOV'T is difficult to alter or counterfeit nowadays.  Even so, who is going to spend the time and money trying to vote with a bogus ID and risk a felony?  Especially if they are "undocumented guests" of our great nation.

Maybe if everyone wanting to sell a gun had to drop it off at the police station for sellers to pick up, your screwed-up hypothetical strawman would be at least 1% valid.  Then the process could be 100% enforced at the point of executing the transaction, just like voting at the polls.

Same way serial numbers for other items and vehicles help to solve crimes. It can tell you the current owner which can be the first in a line of clues that leads to the suspect.

Say you sold your gun to a friend but he never registered it because he is a criminal. This gun is used in a crime and police come knocking on your door. You say that you sold it to your friend so police go knock on his door. Your criminal friend probably denies any wrongdoing but police will at least know his name. Police find video of the incident which shows your friend committing the crime. Because they tracked the gun registration they could get your friends name and realize that it is him in the video whereas they might not be able to figure out who is in the video.

Another scenario. A guy kills his wife with his registered gun but he disposes of the gun and says it was an intruder. Cops can see the husband has a firearm registered to his name and they can verify it os missing. Then a search later finds a gun thrown in the bushes and they use the serial number to realize this is the firearm belonging to the husband whereas they might otherwise not know what crime the gun was connected to.

A registration isn't a magic bullet for police to solve the case, it isn't a guarantee that they will have all the evidence they need, but a registration is definitely something they can use to help them solve the case.

Heck, how many times do you think license plates on cars end up helping cops solve the crime?  (A lot)

Very few states have mandatory registration.   They must not solve any gun crimes...

Hawaii has had mandatory registration of all firearms since 1994.  How many crimes have been solved by the requirements?  I'd say the cost to benefit ratio must be awful.

Very few states have mandatory registration.   They must not solve any gun crimes...

Hawaii has had mandatory registration of all firearms since 1994.  How many crimes have been solved by the requirements?  I'd say the cost to benefit ratio must be awful.

Maryland spent millions over 15 years to force all law abiding gun owners to submit a sample spent bullet for a "ballistic fingerprint database."  That way, when CSI gets their hands on a ballistic image from a crime scene, they can just run a search of registered bullet prints and WHAM!!!  Case closed.

After those 15 years, the program was ended after solving ZERO CRIMES.  Total waste of tax money, resources and legislative infringements on law abiding gun owners.

When people know what's being used to solve crimes, they learn to not do those things if the are committing the crimes.  They wear masks to avoid being seen on cameras.  They wear gloves to avoid leaving prints.  They wear baggy clothes to conceal their build/body type.  If someone commits a crime with a registered firearm, he/she is an idiot who deserves to be caught.

https://www.baltimoresun.com/maryland/bs-md-bullet-casings-20151107-story.html