TexasCHLforum.com

ScottDLS wrote: ↑Fri Sep 06, 2019 11:21 pm No let’s not start prosecuting people who “lie” on the 4473. The current iteration of the 4473 is like an IRS 1040. Many of the definitions are not clear. The instructions are based on what the ATF thinks the law ought to be rather than what it is or current case law. The definition straw purchases seems to change weekly. NICS is worse than the TSA no fly list. The real reason that almost no NICS denied purchase attempts are prosecuted is that the government would lose most of them for lack of proof. And they might get some court precedents that would contradict ATFs current interpretation of the law.

No to pre crime laws.
No to magazine capacity limits.
No to Federal or State interference in private intrastate commercial transactions.
No to plastic accessory and cosmetic feature bans.
No to restrictions on handgun or long rifle carry.

So when are you announcing your campaign for POTUS? I trust you’re not too grumpy?

RPBrown wrote: ↑Fri Sep 06, 2019 2:35 pm Just sitting here thinking about Dan Patrick and his shift in 2a stance and was wondering why if someone is denied through NICS, due to a felony, mental issues or whatever reason, why cant the feds contact local LEO's to investigate the individual trying top buy a weapon? The dealer has all of the relevant information (or should have) on the paperwork.
The West Texas shooter supposedly tried to buy a gun from a dealer and was denied. This should have prompted at least an investigation into this guy if not been cause for an arrest for a felon attempting to purchase a firearm

No, you’re not missing anything. It is so frequently the case that a criminal has lied on the 4473, and nothing happens to them, that this is a MAJOR source of frustration to gun owners. If people in authority are not going to enforce existing law, why should we have faith that they’ll enforce new law? That’s why there is more and more talk of "I will not comply". Why should we? After all, most of the of the proposed new laws are both unenforceable, and wouldn’t have made a single bit of difference in any of the mass shootings to date.

Let’s say that Dan Patrick gets his way.....how are they going to enforce background checks for private sales, when they have literally no way of knowing who has what in the first place? EVEN IF they research every 4473 on file from all previous gun sales (a project that would take at least 10 years), there’s no guarantee that those firearms are still owned by the buyer named on the forms! Therefore, even if universal gun registration were part of the new law, there’d be no way to know if all gun owners had registered their guns. Just look at what happened in Connecticut, and that’s just one relatively small state. Most of the privately owned MSRs still haven’t been registered post-Sandyhook, and practically none of the privately owned large capacity magazines have been turned in. Compliance is approaching 0%. And that’s in a largely antigun state. Can you imagine how low compliance would be in Texas?