[Flat Tire]

Originally Posted by msup752

That is done today although not required and at an additional cost for the dealers time.

It still does not solve the problem of 150+ million guns already out there and forcing background checks when those change hands. Anyone possessing one could say they acquired it before the law went into effect and there is no way to prove otherwise without registration.

Add into all this the additional cost of using a dealer for private transfers and the Feds controlling intra state commerce and there are serious issues to deal with.

I'm all for universal background checks but I'm still not seeing a lawful way to accomplish it.

The ATF will never have enough funds to register all weapons in america.

[locutus]

Originally Posted by msup752

So how will you enforce it without registration again? ATF records are backwards searchable only back to the dealer.
Currently, background check records are required to be destroyed and do not document what make, model or serial number was purchased if the check was ok.
So if the law changes and a background check is required for all firearm transfers, how can anyone possibly verify a check was done if no weapon information is obtained and the records are destroyed?
Lets pretend the law changes and records are kept on who calls in for background checks and who the check was done on. It still doesn't prove that a specific transaction occurred as a result of the check. You would have to attach a serial number to the check and if you do that, registration! The government would have a computerized database of names attached to firearms for all transactions done after the system is implemented. Any existing firearms or illegal ones would still be unregistered.
The scenario above creates a new problem. If you are approached by LE and they inquire if you possess the firearm legally, how can they show if the firearm was yours before the law changed or if you acquired it without a background check? If it was made before mandatory checks were required, there is no way to tell.
That leaves one way to enforce background checks on all purchases. All legally owned firearms would have to be registered so LE could verify you legally possess it or them. No grandfathering could be permitted.
Remember, criminals have no duty to register their guns and cannot be prosecuted for not doing so under their 5th amendment right to refuse self incrimination.
So I'll ask again. How can the Feds require and enforce background checks on all guns without registration?
I'm not opposed to private citizens having access to background checks for private sales as long as the answer they get is "eligible" "denied" or "pending". Otherwise it can be abused.

You didn't read my post. that's their problem, not your's YOU DON'T NEED TO PROVE ANYTHING!!

[msup752]

Originally Posted by locutus

You didn't read my post. that's their problem, not your's YOU DON'T NEED TO PROVE ANYTHING!!

Lol. I read what you said and comprehended all of it. I'm not presenting my case as a citizen but rather as law enforcement. As you pointed out, LE would have to prove any violation. Better yet, federal LE will have to do it. Without registration, the Feds being present at the actual transaction, or a confession, it is un enforceable. Even if it "their" problem, it is still a problem to be solved.
Generally, laws that can't be enforced are tossed out by the judicial branch.
I do agree that the BATFE can't handle registration. Canada tried and failed at a tremendous cost. Australia tried and is still paying for it. Most of what the BATFE does is on paper still. They have not moved into the digital age yet.

[ClemsonSCJ]

We got in a discussion about this in one of my criminology classes the other day...the gov't, in my opinion, has been looking for events that they can use to push their agendas. We can say they're "coincidentally" getting all the ammunition they need, however I firmly believe they have had their hand in each one, but that's a different story. Either way, they've been playing the trial and error game with all these events to see which one tugs our little heart strings the most, and they've found it. If you want to cause the upmost panic and chaos among society, you don't hit skyscrapers, you don't hit theaters...where do you hit? Our children! Whether they took part in the Sandy Hook shooting or not, they've managed to exploit every emotion possible and directed it solely at the guns! Step 1: background checks, which opens the door to Step 2: registration, which opens the door to step 3: confiscation!

You don't fight fire with politics, you right fire with FIRE!

[Flat Tire]

Originally Posted by ClemsonSCJ

We got in a discussion about this in one of my criminology classes the other day...the gov't, in my opinion, has been looking for events that they can use to push their agendas.

They passed an 800 page document two days after 9/11. Who has an 800 page document sitting on their desk waiting for an "act of terror" to happen ? The sad part of this now is they can do anything they want if they put the words "act of terror" on it.

[nitestalker]

How many cases of firearms violations reported to the BATF have been adjudicated? There is thousands of violations now regarding BG checks. There were less than 10 arrest last year. There are not enough agents on any day to follow up these violations. In crimes where guns are used the gun charges are most often dropped .

[chuckusaret]

Originally Posted by nitestalker

How many cases of firearms violations reported to the BATF have been adjudicated? There is thousands of violations now regarding BG checks. There were less than 10 arrest last year. There are not enough agents on any day to follow up these violations. In crimes where guns are used the gun charges are most often dropped .

Not to mention the manpower and taxpayer dollars wasted reviewing and investigating thousands of thought to be violations.