Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick attacks NRA and Supports expanded background checks

[mrvmax]

For me, personally, I would appreciate the opportunity to go to the local cop-shop, together with the other party in a gun transaction, and have the buyer and the weapon checked for eligibility and stolen, respectively. Print a receipt for each party, no other record kept.

No registration required, since the only check on the weapons is whether it was ever reported stolen.
NICS check on the buyer.
And a time stamped receipt on the transaction. In case the weapon is ever found tied to a crime.

I don't want to sell a gun to a felon or other disqualified person, or buy a stolen gun.
If that's better done by an FFL, OK, but, it should be easy and inexpensive.
I'd like it to be optional as well. So I could choose to use it for transactions with people I don't know personally. There's no reason for me to run a NICS check in order to gift a gat to my daughter.

YMMV

The problem is that Texas FFLs have no way of checking if the firearm is stolen. Some states do but nothing I know of exists in Texas. Sure, a NICS background check can be done but if that was mandatory across the US that could equate to a “wait time”. NICS would be overloaded and it would take the government years to get the system capable to handle the increase in checks. We know how well our government does in implementing new programs. NFA wait times are in months, would you like that for firearm transactions? Now with a Texas LTC the NICS Check is not mandatory but some FFLs do it anyway.

Our government is not good at solving issues like this so I don’t look to them to be our solution. What exactly does the government do that is easy and inexpensive? I don’t see most FFLs making mandatory checks cheap (if it’s left up to them). It will be a new way of generating income. I see no way mandatory background checks are a good thing but if implemented it may allow me to make more money.

[mayor]

For me, personally, I would appreciate the opportunity to go to the local cop-shop, together with the other party in a gun transaction, and have the buyer and the weapon checked for eligibility and stolen, respectively. Print a receipt for each party, no other record kept.

No registration required, since the only check on the weapons is whether it was ever reported stolen.
NICS check on the buyer.
And a time stamped receipt on the transaction. In case the weapon is ever found tied to a crime.

I don't want to sell a gun to a felon or other disqualified person, or buy a stolen gun.
If that's better done by an FFL, OK, but, it should be easy and inexpensive.
I'd like it to be optional as well. So I could choose to use it for transactions with people I don't know personally. There's no reason for me to run a NICS check in order to gift a gat to my daughter.

YMMV

Isn't this option available now?

[Boxerrider]

Pretty worked up about it, isn't he?
I buy a lot of tools and equipment, used, from people I don't know. If I choose to purchase them through a used equipment dealer, then that offers me some amount of protection in case the item later turns out to have been stolen at any point in its past. I pay for that through the added cost, time, and travel of working with a dealer. The highest level of security comes from buying a new item from a retailer, which comes at the highest cost, and assumes that what I want is currently being manufactured.
It sounds like the lt. governor wants to impose his personal belief system onto me. The "family and friends" part doesn't make me feel any better. It shifts the transfer of a firearm from being lawful unless proven to be a crime, to being unlawful unless proven to be legal. We've seen this model somewhere else, haven't we? How is that working? Also, where does this 10-15% number come from, and how many of those transactions are between people who don't follow laws regardless of how you make them?

[mrvmax]

For me, personally, I would appreciate the opportunity to go to the local cop-shop, together with the other party in a gun transaction, and have the buyer and the weapon checked for eligibility and stolen, respectively. Print a receipt for each party, no other record kept.

No registration required, since the only check on the weapons is whether it was ever reported stolen.
NICS check on the buyer.
And a time stamped receipt on the transaction. In case the weapon is ever found tied to a crime.

I don't want to sell a gun to a felon or other disqualified person, or buy a stolen gun.
If that's better done by an FFL, OK, but, it should be easy and inexpensive.
I'd like it to be optional as well. So I could choose to use it for transactions with people I don't know personally. There's no reason for me to run a NICS check in order to gift a gat to my daughter.

YMMV

Isn't this option available now?

Yes it is available (p 2p transactions through an FFL) but it’s not free and I doubt many use it.

[Alf]

If a teacher repeatedly gives a student A grades for mediocre work, no intelligent person expects the student to work harder.

[RoyGBiv]

For me, personally, I would appreciate the opportunity to go to the local cop-shop, together with the other party in a gun transaction, and have the buyer and the weapon checked for eligibility and stolen, respectively. Print a receipt for each party, no other record kept.

No registration required, since the only check on the weapons is whether it was ever reported stolen.
NICS check on the buyer.
And a time stamped receipt on the transaction. In case the weapon is ever found tied to a crime.

I don't want to sell a gun to a felon or other disqualified person, or buy a stolen gun.
If that's better done by an FFL, OK, but, it should be easy and inexpensive.
I'd like it to be optional as well. So I could choose to use it for transactions with people I don't know personally. There's no reason for me to run a NICS check in order to gift a gat to my daughter.

YMMV

Isn't this option available now?

I don't know that an FFL has access to the stolen guns database nationally.

Buller?

[OneGun]

Well, Dan Patrick has lost my vote.

[K.Mooneyham]

Well, Dan Patrick has lost my vote.

Well, the time for us to vote against him is in the primary. If Dan Patrick is this bad, what do you think the Democrat who will run against him will want to do? Keep in mind people like Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Corey Booker, Pete Buttigieg, Francis Patrick O'Rourke, and the rest of crazy socialistic statists running for POTUS on the Democrat side.

[DEB]

Well, Dan Patrick has lost my vote.

Well, the time for us to vote against him is in the primary. If Dan Patrick is this bad, what do you think the Democrat who will run against him will want to do? Keep in mind people like Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Corey Booker, Pete Buttigieg, Francis Patrick O'Rourke, and the rest of crazy socialistic statists running for POTUS on the Democrat side.

This not voting for a Republican as they are the least of evils needs to stop, IMO. I don't totally agree with any Republican I vote for, but I figure I can work to change the things later, that I do disagree with. But, this Nation is now on a precipice, teetering on being Venezuela (Communist) or maintaining the line. I don't see anyone bringing back the good old days or even supporting moving in that direction, at least at the upper echelons. If we don't vote for Republicans, then we get Warren, Sanders, Beto et al. So, just like Mooneyham stated, lets make our voices heard in the Primaries, but when the primaries are concluded IMO we stand and vote for the Republican choice. Then work for change. Cause if the other side wins, there won't be any going back, they (Democrats), fully intend to destroy everything this country is and stands for. Dan Patrick and soft Red Laws, Donald Trump and Bump Stocks, can be changed back. Absolute banning of semiautomatic rifles, large capacity magazines, stacking the courts with Communist Judges, ain't going back, at least within several generations. Heck, I am thinking about getting my Daddy to vote Republican this time as well, ever since he passed away in 1979 he has voted Democrat. I don't know what causes the dead to vote Democrat, but I intend to change that as well.

[dhoobler]

I think that Gov. Abbott should call a special session and demand that the legislature pass a law that requires licensed dealers to perform background checks at gun shows. They then declare the gun show loophole closed and go home.

[anygunanywhere]

I think that Gov. Abbott should call a special session and demand that the legislature pass a law that requires licensed dealers to perform background checks at gun shows. They then declare the gun show loophole closed and go home.

You bet! That will stop the antis dead in their tracks. They will leave us the heck alone and all will be rainbows, unicorns, and pixie dust.

[03Lightningrocks]

I think that Gov. Abbott should call a special session and demand that the legislature pass a law that requires licensed dealers to perform background checks at gun shows. They then declare the gun show loophole closed and go home.

You bet! That will stop the antis dead in their tracks. They will leave us the heck alone and all will be rainbows, unicorns, and pixie dust.

I thought licensed dealers already had to do checks at gun shows. Or is that the point?

[AF-Odin]

Hush, that is just the point

[03Lightningrocks]

[mojo84]

Here is most of an email I received from Dan Patrick today.

On Fox News' America's Newsroom on Friday, I told Julie Banderas I would fight to expand background checks to include all stranger-to-stranger gun sales. It makes no sense to me to allow anyone to sell a gun to someone they do not know who might be a felon or a killer. No one has worked harder to defend our Second Amendment rights than I have. In 2018, the NRA gave me an A+ rating. I am a proud supporter of the NRA and I am a gun owner. I would never sell a gun to a stranger, and I don't think any responsible gun owner would either.

Currently, 80% of all gun sales include a background check. Of the 20% that don't go through a background check, we believe about half are transfers between family members. Federal officials estimate that the remaining 10% of guns sold are involved in more than 80% of gun crimes. It is just common sense that we try to close that that ten percent gap.

We know background checks work because over 750,000 felons have been rejected — stopped from buying a gun — because they couldn't pass a background check.

I'm not naïve enough to believe that background checks will stop bad guys from getting guns — but expanding background checks to include stranger-to-stranger gun sales is one of dozens of steps we are looking at to reduce shootings (read below about my Select Senate Committee on Mass Violence Prevention and Community Safety). Frankly, expanding background checks is too easy not to do — the process takes just a few minutes at a gun store.

The Right Thing to Do

Let me be absolutely clear about this. There is a lot of misinformation out there. I believe gun transfers between family members should continue to be allowed without a background check. What I am proposing is that anyone who wants to sell a gun to a stranger simply go to a gun store and fill out the background check form. Then the gun can be exchanged and the deal is closed. This is NOT a ban on private gun sales and this change in the law will NOT lead to a gun registry. That is utter nonsense. I don't support banning private gun sales or a national registry, and I never will. I am sorry that some of my allies in the battle to protect our Second Amendment rights are angry about this — but as I say in this Fox clip, the National Rifle Association is just wrong on this. Their refusal to compromise on this issue will only hurt our long-term defense of the Second Amendment.

Every public poll I have seen in the past year shows there is broad support for expanding background checks. After the El Paso shooting, a Fox News poll showed that 90% of Americans support expanding background checks, including strong majorities among Republicans and gun owners. If those of us who support the Second Amendment won't begin a discussion on this common sense change in our current laws, we risk losing everything. The crazed gun control crowd— from Biden to Beto — will sweep in and destroy our rights. They want to take away our guns — and even remove the Second Amendment from the Constitution. Some have proposed "buy back" programs — which is absurd — you can't buy back something you don't own — our guns belong to us and we have a constitutionally protected right to have them.

http://email.vervemail.com/ct/54603608: ... 8492BBA5:r