simple way for EVERYONE to have a background check but no registry of guns!!!!

[chrisjp]

i just came up with this... needs some simple tweaking but i believe once its set up it would more than please NRA, gun owners, 2a individuals ect ect. and do it without the government knowing (NO GUN REGISTRY) what you bought but still making sure ONLY people that pass a background check CAN PURCHASE!!

i just came up with a great idea so that everyone has a background check when purchasing weapon but does not give the government any information to compile to make a "registry". they already have a database of everyone that could purchase a weapon. its called drivers license or state id or SSN (pick the easiest to reference...i would say SSN because it is the government and you have to write it down when making any purchase on the form anyway that way they make sure you are who they know you as). they know everyone if they have a record or restriction that disqualify s them from legally making a purchase. make a website (updated daily by government based on judgement if someone commits a crime that should remove them from the list, then their DL or state id or SSN removed from the list) FFL goes to simple numerically in order website with nothing but list of drivers license numbers listed and state id's numbers or SSN... if your number on the list...you can buy a gun...you walk out... government does not know what or if you bought anything so no registry but EVERYONE will have a background check already done determining if you are already cleared to purchase. simple i think no?

 

[DevilDawg1]

I like the simplicity.

But, lets do it the other way. If your number is on the list you cannot buy a firearm. And make the list available to the public.

 

[chrisjp]

no no NO you want it to be information for the FFL to use as determinate to a purchase. it will have no names...no addresses..only government given identification numbers. do you want public to know your SSN? or DL? does the public need to know who is not qualified, invasion of privacy no different that the map done by the NY newspaper. can be used to determine who to rob...no no no this is a simple answer to the "everyone gets a background check" problem but not give a bit of info to the government that you actually purchased to make a registry!! make life easyer for the FFL too...soon as you walk in door...hand over id's to check...if you not qualified FFL asks you to leave...no waste of time by either...all still with no information given to the government of what you purchased.

 

[DevilDawg1]

no no NO you want it to be information for the FFL to use as determinate to a purchase. it will have no names...no addresses..only government given identification numbers. do you want public to know your SSN? or DL? does the public need to know who is not qualified, invasion of privacy no different that the map done by the NY newspaper. can be used to determine who to rob...no no no this is a simple answer to the "everyone gets a background check" problem but not give a bit of info to the government that you actually purchased to make a registry!! make life easyer for the FFL too...soon as you walk in door...hand over id's to check...if you not qualified FFL asks you to leave...no waste of time by either...all still with no information given to the government of what you purchased.

Chrisjp,

I believe you are correct, your idea is a good one. Lets stick with yours.

 

[Sum Beach]

A good idea, I will admit I like the simplicity.
Pass the qualifications to drive a car, you get a license to drive
Pass the qualifications to buy a gun, you get a license to buy one.

However there is a drawback I see to this. That little magnetic strip on the back of everyones license contains that persons driving history and all applicable info regarding that individual for the DMV.
I would see this gun buyers licese as the same thing, all applicable info to that person as well as the history and automatic registy of a firearm whenever that license is swiped during a purchase.
Plus, I could see this license being used and required for purchasing ALL things firearm related and put on the magnetic strip. They would have a registry and history of all the guns you buy as well as accesories and even how much ammo you bought.

I understand your idea Chris but I dont believe the government would make it that simple.
But still a good idea!!

 

[chrisjp]

no license needed...no magnetic strip of all identificaion...guys its simple lets say my DL number is 12 345 678 and your SSN is 123 45 6789 and the the FFL once the "proposed purchaser" walks in the door the FFL asks for DL and your "SSN" (now remember when you purhcase a gun you write these down anyway when they do the background check to confirm you are who you say you are and pass the background check, the FFL is already trusted to write down all your information for their files, (only once you are actually purchasing) same as medical industry or anyone else that uses SSN and DL to track your records and by law are held to privacy laws)he then goes to website and checks "pa DL" list... and sees:

pa DL list SSN of DL holder
123 45 677 658 25 2658
123 45 678 164 59 7896
123 45 679 893 65 7799
123 45 681 748 65 2598 (note see here...whoever is 123 45 680 is not on list and cannot purchase because a background check already compiled says they are restricted for one definition or another and not allowed to purchase weapons)

now with each license for id confirmation lists the second asked for goverment id beside it...again no name no address for FFL to look up or keep (obviously they FFL would have to keep your information when you purchase but FFL books are not stored with the government its only a record of FFL of who they sold to and what already in law books with ATF) so it is a COMPLETELY PASSIVE way to have FFL check even before you look if you are "allowed" to purchase weapons... if not on list...you are told you are not on list and you can contact government for determination of why not and get procedure to get put back on list, or you dont contact because you already know you are not allowed to purchase and guess what...you just got stopped from purchasing!! again this should easily satisfy antis and pro guns alike (who alot WANT THOSE WHO SHOULD NOT PURCHASE GUNS FROM BUYING) but yet no record to government is sent of if you bought or what you bought if anything at all...thus no REGISTRY!!


also if its easyier... you can have website set up with ONLY numbers of individuals NOT allowed to purchase. whichever is easier to set up

 

[hillbilly]

You might be missing another point here. The Feds are in the business of furnishing background checks and charging for them. Currently I have had one for the hazmat endorsement on my drivers license and another one for my TWIC card and another one for the CCW permit. Each of these costs roughly 100 dollars and I must be checked every 5 years for each one.
They are making some serious money with this racket.

 

[chrisjp]

when the background check is done i think they charge 5$. so...would everyone be ok with 5$ of federal income tax increase to pay for setting the system up and updateing it daily...i think that would be cheap to "keep our kids safe" or whatever line they using to push their agenda

 

[skydivr]

Actually, on the form 4473, the SSN is OPTIONAL, it just makes it easier and speeds up the process. I don't fill it in and have never had a problem.

I see the problem as too many people, including the other party in your transaction, having access to your SSN. DL I don't mind as bad because I get a copy of (or visually get the info) the person I sell to EVERY TIME. But what's going to keep the buyer/seller from going outside and conducting the transaction ANYWAY unless all guns are registered?

I don't like the straw buyer nonsense either, but calling it a gunshow loophole is disengenuous because it happens a lot more than at a gunshow. And no change in the law is going to keep people from acquiring firearms. There are enough laws on the books currently for illegally having a weapon, they just need to be enforced better.

Your idea only works if there is mandatory registration, which is first step towards confiscation.

 

[Projekt]

You might be missing another point here. The Feds are in the business of furnishing background checks and charging for them. Currently I have had one for the hazmat endorsement on my drivers license and another one for my TWIC card and another one for the CCW permit. Each of these costs roughly 100 dollars and I must be checked every 5 years for each one.
They are making some serious money with this racket.

If there is a need in America, someone (particularly Government) will find a way to make money off it. We do exist in a Capitalist economic system... Demand and Supply are two core concepts. When the government makes the laws it is generally with profit in mind.

 

[kneedraggin636]

I admire your commitment to the problem. Given my technical background, and love of guns, I too have been working on a framework for a system to address this issue. However, look at how many Americans proposed logical solutions to the budget problems, and bailouts. Our politicians have their own agendas and big supporters to answer to, not us citizens. They want to propose quick band-aid solutions to problems as opposed to actually addressing the problem so they can get back to doing whatever the hell they do on the hill.

Additionally, any system like this is going to face serious opposition from even those who want to keep their guns, just like Americans oppose the TSA's means to screen airline passengers. "Dammit you better make sure no terrorists get on the plane, but don't do this, don't do that, don't make me take off my shoes, now I have to get to the airport early, ....". "Don't profile me. The feds have no right to know what types of guns I have,... but dammit, you better solve this problem so they don't ban anything I want to own."

Unfortunately, you can't make everybody happy, and I hate to say it, but a system like this won't really do much to ensure safety. It will produce a lot of data that can be accessed by the Feds or local law-enforcement, but without monitoring the guns themselves, and by that I mean tracking where a gun is at all times, there is no way to monitor what happens after the sale, or who has access to it. Yeah you could enact a law that says I cannot sell my gun to you without going through a dealer, but how do you enforce it? Do I take all my guns down once a year to show that I still have them? Send an ATF agent door-to-door to make sure everything I bought is still accounted for? In the case of the Connecticut shooting, that woman was within her rights to buy those weapons which gave her son access to them. Do you institute household background checks? So someone wouldn't be allowed to buy a gun on the basis that someone in the house is off their chain.

There really is no simple solution to this problem. Addressing the problem is the problem.

Keep up the good work though.

 

[GNBRETT]

not gonna happen. the government wants to know who has guns and they should know who has guns.

if your arrested for domestic violence and a protective order is issued or a restraining order has been filed against you or ur convicted of a felony or ur a threat to urself or others the police want to know if you have a gun registered to you so they can seize them. its done every day with good reason.

 

[kneedraggin636]

Yes. Here in Maine, if you are arrested for domestic violence and the judge deems it necessary, you will be handing over your guns to the authorities.

 

[Argilbertson]

Interesting idea, but far too simplistic, I fear. Just off the top of my head I can tell you that any system designed to allow all FFL holders access is too vulnerable to intrusion from unauthorized sources, and if someone can break into the system, there's no secondary safeguards to make sure that fraudulent data is put there, rendering the whole database un-trustworthy. Secondly, even IF no personal identifiers were displayed on the database, the government can and would easily be able to link that data to people's personal data, which makes the "anonymity" non-existant. Sadly, the very nature of having an open database like that is what makes it unacceptable.

 

[chrisjp]

Interesting idea, but far too simplistic, I fear. Just off the top of my head I can tell you that any system designed to allow all FFL holders access is too vulnerable to intrusion from unauthorized sources, and if someone can break into the system, there's no secondary safeguards to make sure that fraudulent data is put there, rendering the whole database un-trustworthy. Secondly, even IF no personal identifiers were displayed on the database, the government can and would easily be able to link that data to people's personal data, which makes the "anonymity" non-existant. Sadly, the very nature of having an open database like that is what makes it unacceptable.

ok following that logic your statement is already compromised...lets say for example my drivers license is in the format of 35 659 153 for PA. and you go to the "pa drivers liscense list" and all you have is numbers in that format. so all you would do is start making up the numbers...so as i address in next paragraph, make it more secure and not have 2 id numbers together have in separate lists so no crossrefrenceing

ok to avoid the ability of someone collecting 2 forms of id together which in reality the FFL will be doing soon as you fill out the form (even sky if you omit your SSN) you run the same risk from the FFL!! (but again just like medical field your privacy is a federal law they would be violateing if they collect and distribute that data) , but lets say hackers are the issue...then only have the list as drivers license only, or SSN only.. all you have is list of numbers right?? no corresponding who they are attached too.. then logically already any would be identity thief or "manipulator" (dont forget the government would be updating data base in real time so when numbers show the computer could already cross reference known numbers that should "not" be in there so simple self diagnostic scan would catch "manipulations" ) would only have a set of numbers they could "guess" either way. nothing that is associated with any other data

 

[chrisjp]

not gonna happen. the government wants to know who has guns and they should know who has guns.

if your arrested for domestic violence and a protective order is issued or a restraining order has been filed against you or ur convicted of a felony or ur a threat to urself or others the police want to know if you have a gun registered to you so they can seize them. its done every day with good reason.

there is no registry in alot of states so this statement is innacurate. when you are in this situation they ask you if you have weapons, you either answer truthfully and guide them to your home to assist in pulling the weapons or your PO goes to your home and collects them for you...no here in pa there is NO REGISTRY OF ANY GUNS RIFLE OR HANDGUN IT IS 100% ILLEGAL when you purchase here in pa (handguns only) copy of you and gun serial number sent to PSP and MUST BE DESTROYED IN 72 HOURS by state law. if PSP uses the information they have to collect database and cross references it they are SUED and CHARGED by state statute of commiting a crime!! yes i agree with you of course the government WANTS a registry... and most likely has one (illegally) but no they do not have the right to know EXACTLY what i own for weapons in my home because that is part of the "safeguard against tyranny" the 2A exactly is designed to create.

 

[chrisjp]

Yes. Here in Maine, if you are arrested for domestic violence and the judge deems it necessary, you will be handing over your guns to the authorities.

same here...but when you are judged ordered to hand over your guns...they DONT have a printed list of what to collect. you hand them over because the following crime of being caught with a weapon under that circumstance is a WHOLE DIFFERENT LAW WITH POSSIBLY CONSIDERABLY STRICTER PENALTY'S. so guns are either given to family members so you dont have access to or in certain cases they are taken from the home when searched and handed over voluntarily, or if you stupid enough to lie..they are confiscated.

 

[chrisjp]

I admire your commitment to the problem. Given my technical background, and love of guns, I too have been working on a framework for a system to address this issue. However, look at how many Americans proposed logical solutions to the budget problems, and bailouts. Our politicians have their own agendas and big supporters to answer to, not us citizens. They want to propose quick band-aid solutions to problems as opposed to actually addressing the problem so they can get back to doing whatever the hell they do on the hill.

Additionally, any system like this is going to face serious opposition from even those who want to keep their guns, just like Americans oppose the TSA's means to screen airline passengers. "Dammit you better make sure no terrorists get on the plane, but don't do this, don't do that, don't make me take off my shoes, now I have to get to the airport early, ....". "Don't profile me. The feds have no right to know what types of guns I have,... but dammit, you better solve this problem so they don't ban anything I want to own."

Unfortunately, you can't make everybody happy, and I hate to say it, but a system like this won't really do much to ensure safety. It will produce a lot of data that can be accessed by the Feds or local law-enforcement, but without monitoring the guns themselves, and by that I mean tracking where a gun is at all times, there is no way to monitor what happens after the sale, or who has access to it. Yeah you could enact a law that says I cannot sell my gun to you without going through a dealer, but how do you enforce it? Do I take all my guns down once a year to show that I still have them? Send an ATF agent door-to-door to make sure everything I bought is still accounted for? In the case of the Connecticut shooting, that woman was within her rights to buy those weapons which gave her son access to them. Do you institute household background checks? So someone wouldn't be allowed to buy a gun on the basis that someone in the house is off their chain.

There really is no simple solution to this problem. Addressing the problem is the problem.

Keep up the good work though.

when you buy a gun from a dealer you have to have a background check right?? well then "they" know you are purchasing something right?? this way the background check of collected data of "hes a good guy" or "hes a bad guy" ,they already have this info dont they?? (all crime is recorded right??) what is wrong with pre preparing that info into a simple system of saying...this id is a good guy vs this id is a bad guy. only licensed FFL dealers can log into site, no names or addresses or other "identifying for identity theft" marks to cross reference. so again who in their right mind would not realize that this is a SIMPLE way to have background checks for everyone but not giving the government when how and what information???

answer to your question...the laws are already in the book you have to transfer weapons at a dealer if they handguns...some states rifles also, so that system is already in place. violation of that rule is a CRIME. so if you selling outside that rules, your a CRIMINAL and probably dont care if you follow the rules right?? but no just like here in pa registry is ILLEGAL because we don't WANT THEM TO KNOW WHAT WE OWN AND THEY SHOULDN'T because its the "situation" the 2a uses and creates to protect against tyranny. and this system i created protects EXACTLY THAT but short cuts what is done already by law and that background check is completed in order to purchase.

 

[chrisjp]

i have also sent my suggestion to the NRA and my local Representative so it can be passed along...i really truly believe this is a all encompassing solution to the background check issue without giving the government knowledge that can be used against you and keeps the sanctity of the 2 amendment

 

[chrisjp]

Actually, on the form 4473, the SSN is OPTIONAL, it just makes it easier and speeds up the process. I don't fill it in and have never had a problem.

I see the problem as too many people, including the other party in your transaction, having access to your SSN. DL I don't mind as bad because I get a copy of (or visually get the info) the person I sell to EVERY TIME. But what's going to keep the buyer/seller from going outside and conducting the transaction ANYWAY unless all guns are registered?

I don't like the straw buyer nonsense either, but calling it a gunshow loophole is disengenuous because it happens a lot more than at a gunshow. And no change in the law is going to keep people from acquiring firearms. There are enough laws on the books currently for illegally having a weapon, they just need to be enforced better.

Your idea only works if there is mandatory registration, which is first step towards confiscation.

i also agree with the ability to do private sales...as part keeping the "they dont need to know what anyone owns" part of our first line of defense against tyranny. they want background checks for every gun purchase right?? so everyone that goes to a FFL has to provide that info in order to buy right? so lets make it quick and easy for both buyer and FFL. you on list...come on in...you not on list...leave! and nothing i suggested has any ability to do a registry or knowledge whatsoever you even bought anything