TexasCHLforum.com

Can someone help me understand the background check process and what am I missing when purchasing a firearm
it seems a big proposal item from the WH is failing a background check
so if i go to buy a new pistol and somehow the check comes back as a no sale or some other code, under current laws, is anyone reporting this to LE or some other agency? is it even required?
I would think if I am a bg and know I cannot legally purchase a firearm, why would I go to a legal place and try to buy one, knowing the check will come back NO sale. I know we have dumb criminals, but still.

i just dont follow the logic proposed on prosecuting back ground check failures or how its supposed to help if so

sorry
but I am just not getting the jest.

here's the info on NICS,
http://gunguy.tempdomainname.com/nicsfail.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

One of the proposals floating around is to dispatch PD to arrest anyone who has a denial. The system is not perfect and errors are made, now they want you to go to jail if that error occurs.

If you cant buy or possess a firearm because you are a convicted felon, but have no outstanding beefs, why should you be arrested? Attempted purchase? Attempted possession? I don't think so.

If you are denied because you have current issues, outstanding warrants, for example, I can see having someone hustle on down to pick you up. They have been wanting to find you anyway.

Criminals are very often some of the dumbest people you ever imagined.

One issue is the likelihood of errors, getting the wrong guy. Knowing how often bad info shows up on someone's credit report, wrong name, wrong numbers, etc. that makes me nervous.

all great and well till your name is john smith

JALLEN wrote:the likelihood of errors, getting the wrong guy. Knowing how often bad info shows up on someone's credit report, wrong name, wrong numbers, etc. that makes me nervous.

That's the most common error in NICS checks according to several FFLs I've talked to. People with common names seem to be wrongly denied more so than those with less common names.

MoJo wrote:

JALLEN wrote:the likelihood of errors, getting the wrong guy. Knowing how often bad info shows up on someone's credit report, wrong name, wrong numbers, etc. that makes me nervous.

That's the most common error in NICS checks according to several FFLs I've talked to. People with common names seem to be wrongly denied more so than those with less common names.

Yep. Before getting my CHL I was denied once. Some guy in PA has same first name, last name, middle initial, and date of birth.
It's not possible to have a cleaner record than what I have. It's the only time I've had an issue with NICS and the "agent" that issued the denial failed to follow proper protocol. So thankful that I have a CHL. I also changed all of my documents to reflect my full middle name instead of just my middle initial.

powerboatr wrote:it seems a big proposal item from the WH is failing a background check
so if i go to buy a new pistol and somehow the check comes back as a no sale or some other code, under current laws, is anyone reporting this to LE or some other agency? is it even required?

The FBI runs NICS. http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

When the FBI doesn't prosecute felons who try to buy guns, the fault goes all the way up the chain to Mueller and Holder and the buck stops with Obama. So if you want to confuse an anti-gun Democrat, ask them why Obama isn't prosecuting criminals he know are trying to buy guns. When they try to say the Fast and Furious conspiracy is an isolated incident, you know they're lying because of the extremely small percentage of prosecutions for a slam-dunk Federal crime.

MoJo wrote:

JALLEN wrote:the likelihood of errors, getting the wrong guy. Knowing how often bad info shows up on someone's credit report, wrong name, wrong numbers, etc. that makes me nervous.

That's the most common error in NICS checks according to several FFLs I've talked to. People with common names seem to be wrongly denied more so than those with less common names.

Maynard Tetlinger?

Anygunanywhere

anygunanywhere wrote:

MoJo wrote:

JALLEN wrote:the likelihood of errors, getting the wrong guy. Knowing how often bad info shows up on someone's credit report, wrong name, wrong numbers, etc. that makes me nervous.

That's the most common error in NICS checks according to several FFLs I've talked to. People with common names seem to be wrongly denied more so than those with less common names.

Maynard Tetlinger?

Anygunanywhere

Jonathan Winters was taken to task, all those years ago, by Maynard T Etlinger.

My brother used to make up names, from childhood right on up and probably still does. We were sitting in the Fountainbleu Hotel on Miami Beach many decades ago when we heard one of his nonsense names being called to the desk over the PA, and a real person responded.

Another time the Boston police showed up at Boston College to arrest him for an outstanding warrant after he used one of his nonsense names that actually had a real person attached to it. He was able to convince them they had the wrong guy.

I wanted to ask a follow up question that has been sticking in my head lately.

With regards to the universal background checks as proposed I often see the counter argument that failed BGCs aren't prosecuted currently or are not followed up with any sort of regularity.

My question is this: Is intent to purchase a firearm that you are not legally allowed to own a federal crime? If a BG goes to a pawn shop (that has a FFL) to purchase a firearm and is denied has a crime been committed? I want to better understand the situation since we use the argument of 'better enforcement of the current laws' in response to new legislation.

EDIT:
Did some checking and found the following. This assumes that the actor deliberately lied on the form. What if the actor did not provide false info (either rock dumb, or didn't know), would the same rules apply? Could the actor be brought on felony charges?

"It is a felony to deliberately provide false information in an effort to buy a gun, and studies financed by the Justice Department show that people who do so are more likely than the average person to commit violent crimes after they are denied a firearm purchase."
ref: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/14/us/po ... d=all&_r=0

Here is the way that I see the universal background checks proposed by the WH.
As it is now NICS disposes of the records practically immediately, and the only record of sale is kept with the FFL.
With the proposed plan the records of the transaction would be kept on the federal level, and the we have defacto, come on say it with me............................................
REGISTRATIOIN

To bad that I lost all of my guns years ago in a horrible boating accident.

I would venture to guess that the vast majority of people ligitimately failing a NICS check don't even know that they are "prohibited persons" because the record of their criminal conviction was either under juvenile adjudication, domestic violence related, or so far back in their lifetime they really aren't aware that they are NOW in a "prohibited" class.