Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

Universal Background Check Alternative

Discussion in 'Legal & Political Archive' started by skjos, Feb 25, 2014.

  1. skjos

    skjos Orting Member

    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    29
    I posted this about a year ago, but I thought I would bring it up again. Some liked the idea, others were venomously opposed.

    My take is that if we get non-gun owners involved in the check process, the government can't single out gun owners and will be less likely to gradually increase restrictions. Feel free to steal this idea if you like it.

    Have background checks performed on everyone at driver's license renewal. Those with a shady past would have a restriction put on their license (just like a "C" for corrective lenses). This does not identify gun owners, and ALL sales to non-restricted people should no longer require any paperwork (4473). Gun owners and non-gun owners would both get screened; if the government tried to gradually expand their definition of a restricted person, those that got flagged would be a huge population of angry people. If implemented right this would be less expensive than any current universal background check proposal. Those without a drivers license or a punched license would have to go through NICs at an FFL.
     
  2. Morpheus

    Morpheus Columbia Gorge Anyway, back on the farm.

    Messages:
    1,113
    Likes Received:
    589
    I'll bite.

    I kind of like this idea. Honestly, I think people should have a background check to get a driver's licence. Idiots do a lot more damage over time with cars. Now everyone has done their background check, all done. No registration for firearms or background checks. Sure, many people won't ever buy a firearm. But those that do, it speeds it all up.

    Of course, soon people will want to swipe your ID to verify it isn't fake. Which leads to quick record of someone purchasing something. Sort of how some stores do this for alcohol checks now. Now we are back to the beginning of the debate...
     
  3. pchewn

    pchewn Beaverton Oregon USA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    543
    Likes Received:
    289
    Bad idea.

    Here's the way it should work:
    Are you an adult in the USA and not in prison or in a mental hospital? Yes? Then you are approved for gun purchasing.
     
  4. Boomerang

    Boomerang Portland area Active Member

    Messages:
    318
    Likes Received:
    204
    Not commenting on whether this is a good or bad idea.

    It will never fly though, because you would have the background check done once every 8 years when you renew your driver license, as opposed to the NICS check done each time you purchase a gun. What if you become a felon during the 8 years until you renew your license?
     
  5. PiratePast40

    PiratePast40 Willamette Valley Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,098
    Likes Received:
    2,084
    I agree with Boomerang. It's the same concept as a CHL being proof of being a good guy. It's only valid for about 60 seconds after the BI is completed. After that, anything could have happened. Anyone subject to BI's and clearances is aware of that. Funny part is that if it actually happened, someone would have the records opened up as part of the freedom of information act. Then it would be a hoot to see all the politicians that couldn't pass a background investigation!
     
  6. trainsktg

    trainsktg Portland OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,663
    Likes Received:
    798
    Yet one more government 'approval' procedure that I would be compelled to participate in? No thanks.

    Keith
     
    oknow, 3MTA3, OLDNEWBIE and 3 others like this.
  7. Koda

    Koda Oregon Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter 2016 Volunteer

    Messages:
    2,196
    Likes Received:
    3,009
    Bad idea because then your 2A right is tied to a drivers license which is a privilege not a right.

    The way it should work is to remove the BS registration part from the background check. Its really that simple the make model serial number has nothing to do with a persons background.
     
  8. GunRightsCoalition

    GunRightsCoalition Vancouver Well-Known Member 2015 Volunteer 2016 Volunteer

    Messages:
    658
    Likes Received:
    412
    Agreed, if we let them out of prison or a mental institution and can't trust them with a firearm then we had no business letting them out in the first place. And I'll happily pay a bit extra in taxes to keep them locked up because 5 or 10 years from now I'm not going to be paying as much. (Long enough for the stricter penalties to reduce the crime rate)
     
  9. OLDNEWBIE

    OLDNEWBIE State of Flux Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,827
    Likes Received:
    3,957
    (Those with a shady past would have a restriction put on their license)

    The ACLU types would have a tizzy over that one. If this would fly sex offenders would have a "scarlet letter" on their DL already.
     
  10. Redcap

    Redcap Lewis County, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,990
    Likes Received:
    2,731
    Not just no but HELL NO.
     
  11. skjos

    skjos Orting Member

    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    29
    I understand your sentiment, but for that to be a realistic option all dangerous mental patients would need to be institutionalized until cured and all violent criminals locked up in prison until they learned to knit.
     
  12. skjos

    skjos Orting Member

    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    29
    You become a felon and your license is punched (no longer valid), you would need to get a new license with the updated information.
     
  13. skjos

    skjos Orting Member

    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    29
    The thing is we already have to go through a government approval procedure everytime we buy a firearm from a dealer, this would replace that procedure with one that did not include pseudo registration.
     
  14. skjos

    skjos Orting Member

    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    29
    I agree with this 100%, I should be able to call NICS myself with someone's information (of course this would probably be their drivers license number), and they tell me good guy or bad guy. I should not need to provide them any information about the transaction. Of course people may abuse this system to check up on a new girlfriend/boyfriend.
     
    3MTA3 and (deleted member) like this.
  15. pchewn

    pchewn Beaverton Oregon USA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    543
    Likes Received:
    289
    The problem is that you and other control-freaks define "REALISTIC" as being: "Preventing all possible dangerous people from obtaining guns".

    I don't think that is realistic at all.

    I would prefer to err on the side of individual liberty rather than false security. THAT is realistic.
     
    notazombie, Martini_Up, oknow and 3 others like this.
  16. skjos

    skjos Orting Member

    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    29
    The ACLU would certainly be the biggest hurtle, even though the indicator on the license would not spell out why the restriction was put in place (protecting an aspect of privacy). The population that was flagged would certainly not be happy about it and the ACLU would be their advocate.
     
  17. DMax

    DMax Yamhill Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,665
    Likes Received:
    2,302
    The left will never go for that as that would screw up there giving of drivers lic to illegals. Period. Same deal as can't do voter ID's. Period
     
  18. GunRightsCoalition

    GunRightsCoalition Vancouver Well-Known Member 2015 Volunteer 2016 Volunteer

    Messages:
    658
    Likes Received:
    412
    Exactly. If they are dangerous enough that they cannot be trusted with a firearm then that is exactly how it should be. No amount of laws and background checks are going to prevent these people from obtaining a firearm if they are determined to get one if they walk free. Background checks are just a poorly applied Band-Aid that doesn't really do anything to cure the infection. They point out the fact that we are knowingly letting dangerous people walk the streets. Background checks don't work with dangerous people we don't already know about.
     
  19. 2506

    2506 Seattle Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,371
    Likes Received:
    743
    I know I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but can someone explain to me what the soccer moms are screaming about regarding 'universal background checks' and how that's different than NICS? Serious question. And please hurry, my IQ drops every day.
     
  20. skjos

    skjos Orting Member

    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    29
    This proposal would not "Prevent all possible dangerous people from obtaining guns", it would prevent people proven as being dangerous from obtaining guns. I'm not advocating that the current restrictions be expanded, the intent is to limit the expansion by including non-gun owners.

    I know most of the folks on this forum would love to see the current restrictions rolled back, so would I, but IMO I don't think that is realistic.