TexasCHLforum.com

tbrown wrote:

OldCannon wrote:Flawed, perhaps. But as a gun dealer, I have no desire to sell a gun to a hardened felon, and those guys try ALL the time to get one directly or through obvious straw purchases. What do you recommend instead?

Execute them. If we don't have the stones to do that, revoke their citizenship and kick them out. If we don't have the stones to do that, keep them locked in a cage until they're no longer a threat to decent people.

None of those are constitutionally as bad as requiring the rest of us to get government's permission before we buy guns.

I've wasted 10 minutes trying to think of an argument against what you've said here. Then I remembered an adage my father taught me.

rm9792 wrote:That the system be fixed. Get some true software experts in to fix it. Give the buyer benefit of doubt, use past checks instead of doing a new one every time and only check recent activity? The system is so flawed it is almost worthless. Before CHL I actually got delayed at one table then bought at another table (gun show) literally 10 minutes later. The first dealer was still getting delayed. That is a virtually useless system. Computers are so fast now that a check should actually take only a few minutes given all tha data on the form you have to provide. If the state doesnt update the records to the feds then that is on them, stop punishing honest people to attempt to stop dishonest people.

I completely understand where you're coming from, and the system isn't very efficient the way it's set up now. You _could_ even say it doesn't work (Virginia Tech massacre, Arizona massacre), and there's a balancing act that has to be struck. But law enforcement is a very messy business...local, state, and federal, and that messy business has computer systems built by the lowest bidder. Think about the implications of that.

"Computers are so fast now that a check should actually take only a few minutes" - it takes less, actually. Maybe 30 seconds.

Here's the problem, and it's getting worse: While in-theory, we can easily have more than 400 million unique names based on a first, middle, and last name, our cultures don't work that way. Social security numbers help, but not everybody likes giving that up for the background check (you're not required to). If you get denied or delayed, you absolutely should get a UPIN so that the problem is removed. One could argue that what SHOULD exist, however, is a way to get a pre-authorization code from the NCIS. Something you do on a personal level with them. That code is good for, say, 30 days. When you go to buy a gun, you present your ID and the code. Dealer verifies after you fill out the 4473 and you're all set. Of course, for most folks, that's completely unnecessary, because the system works well for almost all law-abiding citizens. My sample size says it works for 100% of them, but I haven't been in business long enough to claim that my population sample is indicative of, say, a typical gun show audience (hardly so).

"Give the buyer benefit of doubt, use past checks instead of doing a new one every time and only check recent activity?" - Depends on how the system works. Here in Texas, if you have a CHL, that's exactly how it works, and it's good for five years. That seems pretty darn reasonable to me.

"The system is so flawed it is almost worthless." That's hyperbole. The system is flawed, it is hardly "worthless". Worthless would mean that the majority of legal buyers are denied and the majority of illegal buyers are approved. That's nowhere close to the truth.

I feel somewhat silly defending the ATF/FBI's odd process, which was brought about by a long, strange string of benign cases as well as assassinations and massacres. Part of me wishes it didn't exist, but I know that this world is filled with dirtbags that will take the easiest path to getting a gun. I would really not have me be the "easiest path".

Bottom line: Until the system changes, get a UPIN if you're having problems.

longtooth wrote:Your middle paragraph is absolute TRUTH

The NICS system in my opinion is completely flawed and a serious overstretch of government. It is a great example of the typical US Gov knee-jerk reaction.

Flawed, perhaps. But as a gun dealer, I have no desire to sell a gun to a hardened felon, and those guys try ALL the time to get one directly or through obvious straw purchases. What do you recommend instead?

PBratton wrote: If your dealer is running a NICS on you and, as a CHL holder you do not appreciate it, find another dealer.

The end result of any transfer is that the dealer is ultimately responsible...

That sums it up perfectly.

mlawler wrote:I'm w/ OldCannon...Why the heck did the seller even DO a NICS check in the first place? Waste of time when it's not required.

In big stores like Cabela's, not every person is well-trained in anything but the basic process -- 4473, verify the right "Yes" and "No" blocks are checked, run a background check, wait for reply, sell gun, escort customer out the door, do you want fries with that?

Note: A NICS check is not _required_ if you have a TX CHL, but I don't think there's a rule saying it's not _allowed_ if you have a TX CHL. It might be Cabela's policy to run a NICS on every customer, I don't know.

If you're not passing a NICS when you know you should, you should make every effort to have the matter cleared (see the VAF statement earlier). Failing to do this COULD result in your CHL being revoked, and would certainly cause you problems should you ever be in a legal situation that involved firearms.

The matter of the ability to purchase a weapon using just your CHL - yes, you can absolutely do this, PROVIDED you had not done something that would disqualify you (i.e., answering "Yes" to questions 11b-k in the 4473 form you had to fill out). The guidance is clear on this: A current, valid TX CHL stands in place of a NICS background check.