No Profanity *** No Flaming *** No Advertising *** No Anti Trappers *** No Politics
No Non-Target Catches *** No Links to Anti-trapping Sites *** No Avoiding Profanity Filter


Home~Trap Talk~ADC Forum~Trap Shed~Wilderness Trapping~International Trappers~Fur Handling

Auction Forum~Trapper Tips~Links~Gallery~Basic Sets~Convention Calendar~Chat~ Trap Collecting Forum

Trapper's Humor~Strictly Trapping~Fur Buyers Directory~Mugshots~Fur Sale Directory~Wildcrafting~The Pen and Quill

Trapper's Tales~Words From The Past~Legends~Archives~Kids Forum~Lure Formulators Forum~ Fermenter's Forum


~~~ Dobbins' Products Catalog ~~~


Minnesota Trapline Products
Please support our sponsor for the Trappers Talk Page - Minnesota Trapline Products


Print Thread
Hop To
what universal background check really is. #7241384
04/12/21 10:32 AM
04/12/21 10:32 AM
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 9,181
Green County Wisconsin
G
GREENCOUNTYPETE Offline OP
trapper
GREENCOUNTYPETE  Offline OP
trapper
G

Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 9,181
Green County Wisconsin
an article worth reading

https://www.theoutdoorwire.com/features/5bf40571-3063-4df0-a0d6-258db109453d


there was a Meme a while back it is the picture showing a proper fence crossing used in many Hunters education books , shows a person on one side of the fence handing their gun to the person on the other side of the fence , it read something like in 47 states this is a model example of a fence crossing , in 3 it is a felony.

they are looking to expand that felony nation wide.

here is the text of the article in the link

Apr 12, 2021
Editor’s Note: The following was written by our friend, colleague, and long-time 2A advocate Michael Bane.

I mean, who can oppose universal background checks? Well, me for one, but as I live in a UBC state, Colorado, it doesn’t make any difference.

However, in the fight against UBCs in Colorado in 2013, we all learned a lot about the concepts of universal background checks, and virtually all of it is bad.

For a start, UBCs really aren’t really designed to do what they say, that is, provide for a background check for every firearms sale. Rather, UBCs are designed to “criminalize” actions that we in the gun culture take for granted and are of quite literally no consequence.

The best way to sum up UBCs is that they are designed to change the definition of possession of a firearm from the current definition used by BATFE and pretty much everyone with more than three working brain cells — “ownership” — to “physical possession” of the firearm. Here’s how that would work under the UBC rules as drafted by Michael Bloomberg’s “law fare” group (which we were able to prove in Colorado).

I own a firearm, say a nice Glock 19. I know I own the firearm because 1) I paid for it and 2) it was transferred to me by an FFL dealer. You drop by the Secret Hidden Bunker and, in the course of the conversation, you ask to se my new Glock 19. Sure. I take it out of the safe and hand it to you. You ponder it for a few minutes, say, “Wow! It’s a Glock!” and hand it back to me.

Under sane laws, there was clearly no transfer of ownership of the Glock 19. I did not offer to sell it to you; you didn’t not offer to buy it; no filthy lucre changed hands. However, under the universal background check proposals that are being tossed around, in the above situation both my guest and I would be guilty of federal felonies:

By handing my friend the Glock, my friend and I have executed a “transfer,” which under UBC laws can only be done by an FFL dealer. We are both guilty of an illegal transfer, even though there was no change of ownership of the firearm.
When my friend hands me the gun back, we are now guilty of another illegal transfer.
Ridiculous, right? You betcha, but that is the real reason universal background checks are so dangerous. Think of how many time you have handled a gun that wasn’t yours, maybe at a match, maybe in a hunt camp, maybe because a friend was desperately in need of a self defense firearms. Those are everyday

occurrences in our world, and, once again, are of no consequence whatever.

So why would a UBC law be so worded? Because it is specifically designed to be a weapon to damage or destroy our culture, to make owning a gun harder and more legally dangerous to the owner.

It gets worse…much worse. The original Bloomberg-drafted law was so broad that even if you have a person house-sitting, or you are military and deployed, and your guns are all in a safe where the person minding your house does not have the combination, an illegal transfer — one for every gun in the safe — is deemed to have taken place. Notice that there has been no change in ownership and, in fact, the person minding the house does not have access to the guns…just by being on the property of the gun owners, the house-minder is now guilty of a federal felony.

Let’s say you and your spousal unit are not married but share a home…while you are not home there is an attempted break-in and your spousal unit picks up the bedside gun to defend himself or herself. Well, if the gun is yours, that is, if it was transferred to you through your FFL or has been in your ownership for a long time, your spousal unit is guilty of a federal felony and could well do more time in the slam than the person breaking in.

The message in the universal background law proposals is that firearms are so incredibly dangerous and scary that they must be regulated at an unprecedented level, with an equally unprecedented level of intrusion into peoples’ personal lives.

So what about those polls, the ones that show everyone in America wants background checks? Well, a zillion years ago when I was in college, my major professor had dual PhDs in Mass Communications and Statistical Analysis. In order to pass his advanced class, I had to create an “objective” survey to be sent out to students, compile the results and present them to the professor. The catch was I had to present the results in advance of sending out the survey. It looked like an objective survey, but it was designed from the ground up to get specific results. I set the curve with an A+.

If some stupid college student could do that, imagine what the professional pollsters can do! The short answer to the polls is how the question is asked. Generally, it is asked in these kinds of terms: Do you favorite a background check on all gun sales? Yeah, sure. But if the question is expanded to should you be able to give a gun to someone in your immediate family, loan a gun to a good friend for a hunting trip, try a friend’s gun at the range, etc., the “consensus” collapses.

Secondly, we heard endlessly during the Colorado battle that 40% of all firearms sales did not pass through an FFL dealer. This number was repeated ad nauseam on television, in the newspapers, on the Internet and on the floor of the Colorado Legislature. It seemed reasonable to us to ask where the number came from. All those voices shut up. Here’s why, from FactCheck.org, hardly a conservative house organ:

“But that figure is based on an analysis of a nearly two-decade-old survey of less than 300 people that essentially asked participants whether they thought the guns they had acquired — and not necessarily purchased — came from a federally licensed dealer. And one of the authors of the report often cited as a source for the claim — Philip Cook of Duke University — told our friends at Politifact.com that he has “no idea” whether the “very old number” applies today or not. Even Vice President Joe Biden acknowledged that the statistic may not be accurate in a speech at a mayoral conference on Jan. 17. Biden prefaced his claim that “about 40 percent of the people who buy guns today do so outside the … background check system” by saying that ‘because of the lack of the ability of federal agencies to be able to even keep records, we can’t say with absolute certainty what I’m about to say is correct.'”

In other words, the 40% number, which is still being batted around today, is total BS. The Colorado Bureau of Investigation laid on extra workers to handle the anticipated 40% increase after the law passed.

But…wait for it…wait for it…nothing happened. The real number of private sales was closer to 2-3% than the 40% lie. Most private transfers take place inside of families, which was carved out in the Colorado and which is carved out in the proposed national bill. The vast majority of firearms sales in the country, as many as 98%, already go through FFL dealers. You cannot buy guns on the Internet without the gun being delivered through a dealer. There is no “gun show loophole.” Private sales used to be a bigger thing. But as the hammer of liability laws has loomed larger and larger, private sales have dropped to a very small percentage of the overall number.

Finally, we come to the real reason the Left so badly wants universal background checks:

The system as described in the bills will not work without comprehensive, universal firearms registration.

The goal of a UBC is that the feds will know every time a gun changes hands, to track the movement of guns. But that information is fundamentally worthless if the fed doesn’t know where all the guns started their movement.

Here is the way that it will happen:

• Much like Captain Louis Renault in Casablanca — shocked…shocked I tell you! — to find gambling going on at Rick’s, the feds will be shocked…shocked I tell you!…to discover that there was not a huge flood of “private” sales.

• That data will likely be tossed into the Memory Hole, and the feds and the political stooges will announce that the real purpose of the UBC is to track the movement of guns so that the FBI can swoop in on the domestic terrorists and insurrectionists.

• Then, predictably, the FBI and their political stooges will announce that they can’t do their job of interdicting domestic terrorists and insurrectionist by trancing gun movements unless they know where every gun in the United States, be it 200 million or 400 million or a billion zillion guns, is right at this moment. If there were only a database of all the guns in America, the FBI could track down all the domestic terrorists and insurrectionists, for sure this time!

• Creating that database will require a bit of help from all the other acronym agencies and the Tech Oligarchs, but hey, it’s an EMERGENCY…violent domestic terrorists and insurrections are on the verge of overthrowing the duly elected socialist government of the Former United States of America…emergency measures have been declared. And when there’s an EMERGENCY, when emergency measures have been declared, Americans will queue up to surrender their rights, a la COVID-19. As you may remember from high school, “But it was alright, everything was alright, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother.”

• Then, after an amazingly short period of time, all the political stooges will line up and chant in unison that the FBI’s magnificent database had failed, not because the FBI wasn’t super magnificent, but because there were just too many guns! Hmmmmmm…how might we fix that?

• Confiscations begin. If you’d like to know how that will happen, I refer you to Matt Bracken, author of the Enemies Foreign and Domestic trilogy, which is pretty much shaping up to be future history: “Team Tyranny won’t need to conduct many door-to-door gun raids. They’ll just lock you inside a digital gulag in your own house.”

All gun registration always lead to confiscation. That is the only reason for registrations in the first place. The reason the Left keeps chanting about universal background checks, even though there is no rational reason for such beyond what we already have, is because they represent a crucial first step to “groom” the nation for confiscations, the same way certain non-white parties in the United Kingdom groom you girls, and for the same reason.

We’re going to get screwed.

—Michael Bane


America only has one issue, we have a Responsibility crisis and everything else stems from it.
Re: what universal background check really is. [Re: GREENCOUNTYPETE] #7241452
04/12/21 12:21 PM
04/12/21 12:21 PM
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,133
New York border
Cragar Offline
trapper
Cragar  Offline
trapper

Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,133
New York border
Using that flawed logic , would it be a felony for a licensed FFL gun dealer to hand you a gun to hold as you are considering purchasing it ?

Plus if the FFL holder is convicted of a felony , they lose their FFL licence.
You can both share a jail cell awaiting trial.

I would never purchase a firearm without holding it first to see how heavy it is and how it squares into my hands/shoulder, and how the sights look in my sight picture.


NRA benefactor member
Re: what universal background check really is. [Re: GREENCOUNTYPETE] #7241513
04/12/21 01:56 PM
04/12/21 01:56 PM
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 9,181
Green County Wisconsin
G
GREENCOUNTYPETE Offline OP
trapper
GREENCOUNTYPETE  Offline OP
trapper
G

Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 9,181
Green County Wisconsin
it might be , think about who's writing this stuff , Blumberg's law team


America only has one issue, we have a Responsibility crisis and everything else stems from it.
Re: what universal background check really is. [Re: GREENCOUNTYPETE] #7241527
04/12/21 02:14 PM
04/12/21 02:14 PM
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 13,979
North East Kansas
Marty Offline
trapper
Marty  Offline
trapper

Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 13,979
North East Kansas
All new 'laws' on firearms are meant to infringe on our rights. Meanwhile the criminals are not prosecuted and even encouraged by those same politicians.


"He who is forged in fire, wont get his butt scorched under the sun"
Re: what universal background check really is. [Re: Marty] #7241541
04/12/21 02:40 PM
04/12/21 02:40 PM
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 9,181
Green County Wisconsin
G
GREENCOUNTYPETE Offline OP
trapper
GREENCOUNTYPETE  Offline OP
trapper
G

Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 9,181
Green County Wisconsin
Originally Posted by Marty
All new 'laws' on firearms are meant to infringe on our rights. Meanwhile the criminals are not prosecuted and even encouraged by those same politicians.

and most of the old ones also , it is and always has been about a slow steady march to an un armed populace , no matter how they sold it

what we have today is significant evidence from the places that have already gone there that is saves no lives , only penalizes the law abiding to enable the criminal weaker victims .


America only has one issue, we have a Responsibility crisis and everything else stems from it.
Re: what universal background check really is. [Re: GREENCOUNTYPETE] #7241555
04/12/21 03:08 PM
04/12/21 03:08 PM
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 13,979
North East Kansas
Marty Offline
trapper
Marty  Offline
trapper

Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 13,979
North East Kansas
Just say no.


"He who is forged in fire, wont get his butt scorched under the sun"
Re: what universal background check really is. [Re: GREENCOUNTYPETE] #7241560
04/12/21 03:25 PM
04/12/21 03:25 PM
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 2,608
Wyoming
C
cmcf Online content
trapper
cmcf  Online Content
trapper
C

Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 2,608
Wyoming
There actually was/is a very small loophole in the fed laws pertaining to gunshow nonlicense transfer. It stated that the collector could sell guns without being licensed providing the income from said sales totaled less than
10% of the sellers total income. I have not been to a ton of shows, Arizona, Texas, Wyoming. Maybe a total of
Twenty times and there was always one-three tables that were rented by individuals that were not dealers but had a few guns for sale. Some of these people would have one of the dealers do a NICS background and then transfer the gun for 10-20 bucks and some would not selling the gun directly to the buyer. And according to the ATFB&E this was/is perfectly legal. The main thing the U C agents at the shows were looking for was the same faces at every show over and over. One guy they approached and asked to see a current FFL when he said he wasn’t licensed they said they had seen him at every show at that location and two others for two years and it looked like a business to them, so the guy could either cease and desist or they would get the IRS up his but with a microscope and Who knows what we’ll find? The guy took their advice.


“The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined” B. Disraeli

Re: what universal background check really is. [Re: GREENCOUNTYPETE] #7241578
04/12/21 03:51 PM
04/12/21 03:51 PM
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 10,253
Finally run aground in TN
Scuba1 Offline
"color blind Kraut"
Scuba1  Offline
"color blind Kraut"

Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 10,253
Finally run aground in TN
not one more inch


I do all my own stunts ..... but never intentionally
Re: what universal background check really is. [Re: cmcf] #7241587
04/12/21 04:10 PM
04/12/21 04:10 PM
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 9,181
Green County Wisconsin
G
GREENCOUNTYPETE Offline OP
trapper
GREENCOUNTYPETE  Offline OP
trapper
G

Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 9,181
Green County Wisconsin
Originally Posted by cmcf
There actually was/is a very small loophole in the fed laws pertaining to gunshow nonlicense transfer. It stated that the collector could sell guns without being licensed providing the income from said sales totaled less than
10% of the sellers total income. I have not been to a ton of shows, Arizona, Texas, Wyoming. Maybe a total of
Twenty times and there was always one-three tables that were rented by individuals that were not dealers but had a few guns for sale. Some of these people would have one of the dealers do a NICS background and then transfer the gun for 10-20 bucks and some would not selling the gun directly to the buyer. And according to the ATFB&E this was/is perfectly legal. The main thing the U C agents at the shows were looking for was the same faces at every show over and over. One guy they approached and asked to see a current FFL when he said he wasn’t licensed they said they had seen him at every show at that location and two others for two years and it looked like a business to them, so the guy could either cease and desist or they would get the IRS up his but with a microscope and Who knows what we’ll find? The guy took their advice.



the ATF created much of that , in the late 80s early 90s and even beyond if you had an FFL but it wasn't your primary income they wanted you out. go to a gun show and before it opens for the day I get to talk to dealers as I work security for a couple shows a year the number of guys there who had an FFL at one time then had to let it go and were TOLD by the ATF to sell their "personal" collection as private sales.

you can also attend shows nearly every weekend and still make well less than 10% of your total income for many it is a hobby more than anything. I see a lot more trading between dealers most of the time than I do sales out the door with maybe finally an exception at the last show I worked in March. even then prices were high and the guns weren't exactly rushing out the door.


America only has one issue, we have a Responsibility crisis and everything else stems from it.
Re: what universal background check really is. [Re: GREENCOUNTYPETE] #7241775
04/12/21 07:50 PM
04/12/21 07:50 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 20,568
williamsburg ks
D
danny clifton Offline
"Grumpy Old Man"
danny clifton  Offline
"Grumpy Old Man"
D

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 20,568
williamsburg ks
We should have fought background checks in the 90's when Clinton and the NRA told us how wonderful it would be. The timid no guns folks would be appeased and we would all live happily ever after


Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)
Re: what universal background check really is. [Re: GREENCOUNTYPETE] #7241874
04/12/21 09:27 PM
04/12/21 09:27 PM
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 11,992
The Hill Country of Texas
Leftlane Offline
"HOSS"
Leftlane  Offline
"HOSS"

Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 11,992
The Hill Country of Texas
They keep records folks. And for years and years too. If anyone denies it they are lyin or talkin out their butt.


“What’s good for me may not be good for the weak minded.”
Captain Gus McCrae- Texas Rangers


Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread