TexasCHLforum.com

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

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

Exactly!

Any false information entered on the form is considered perjury. It should be prosecuted

Maybe he did not lie on the form and was denied based on his answer to the felony charge ?

RPBrown wrote: ↑Fri Sep 06, 2019 2:35 pm 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.

initiative- or laziness...

RPBrown wrote: ↑Fri Sep 06, 2019 2:35 pm... why cant the feds contact local LEO's to investigate the individual trying top buy a weapon? ...

Would this be the same local LEO's who won't cooperate with ICE?

flechero wrote: ↑Fri Sep 06, 2019 3:15 pm

RPBrown wrote: ↑Fri Sep 06, 2019 2:35 pm 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.

initiative- or laziness...

I started thinking that the gun dealer could call local law enforcement and report the felon trying to buy the gun. But I don't know if the check hotline states the reason for denial. I would bet that most gun dealers just figure denied is a denied and move on with the next customer.

Do dealers have a legal responsibility to report a felon trying to buy a gun, or just a moral responsibility? I keep reading that most felons that try, are not prosecuted.

I know a few years ago when I was selling guns, there was no reason given for fail/hold, however if the person filing form 4473 answered a question incorrectly you would obviously know why immediately.

Keep in mind folks, never forget....gun control isn’t about the guns, it’s about the control they have over an unarmed citizenry.

See that guy was a criminal it's just us Honest Law Abiding Citizens they want to disarm.

I read somewhere there were thousands of people last year that lied on the gun application form and like 10 were prosecuted.

They dont want more people in jail who are real criminals.

There is a big push this week on NBC about too many people in jail.

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?

I do not recall the source, but I recall looking into this very thing back in the 90s.
IIRC, a DA attempted to prosecute a criminal who lied on a 4473 form.
The judge threw it out because he said of course the man lied - he's a criminal and therefor the law did not apply to him. Or words to that effect.
This may be an urban legend, but that is what I recall.

To our Lt. Governor and others: Lets make it a point to prosecute those who lie on a 4473 attempting to illegally buy firearms. Let's do that before we start limiting the rights of honest people.

RPBrown, that's just silly talk. The government does not act logically.