Uncle sums it up quite well, click here.
I had an empassioned discussion at SHOT with my partners about universal background checks for private citizens. Morally, if it shuts down access to those on the "gray" fringes - strangers, the mentally ill, the questionable buyer, the under-21 purchaser of a handgun - who are going to commit a crime with it, then yes. I think we all agree that it merits debate.
However, the rate of crime by those who might prefer the legal private market over an FFL pales in comparison to the sheer volume of violence committed by criminals who bypass the legal marketplace altogether. It is THOSE guns we need to find a way to bring back under legal control, and no amount of legislation is going to stymie the transfer of legal guns between criminals - the DOJ's own statistics bear this out.
So, while the emotional argument tugs the hearts and minds of well-meaning gun owners, I do believe it's the wooden pony stuffed full of legislative Trojans sent in humble concession when in fact it will be hewn from the lumber of countless failed attempts to erode the enamel of the 2nd Amendment and may yet get them in behind our wall.
Currently, the background checks performed by FFLs are there only to verify eligibility and not feed a national registry. But, some legislators are raising the need for a national registry, which dovetails nicely with "reforming" the background check process. Hell, our side snuck carry in National Parks into a credit card reform bill... how hard do you think it will be for them to ramrod this through??
As Uncle mentions and links, there is one true goal is to get our names. Then, history shows what every government with such a list can do in times of "threat to national security" within its own borders.
Ask a Brit.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone