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

This forum is for general legislative discussions not specific to any given legislative session. It will remain open.

Moderator: carlson1


jason812
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 1258
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:41 pm
Location: Central Texas

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

#91

Post by jason812 » Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:06 pm

RoyGBiv wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:04 pm
Let's help draft a law we can live with....


-- Printed receipt for each party
-- Transaction records immediately deleted
How can you have a printed receipt and delete the transaction records?

User avatar

RoyGBiv
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 7
Posts: 7980
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 11:41 am
Location: Fort Worth

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

#92

Post by RoyGBiv » Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:10 pm

jason812 wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:06 pm
RoyGBiv wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:04 pm
Let's help draft a law we can live with....


-- Printed receipt for each party
-- Transaction records immediately deleted
How can you have a printed receipt and delete the transaction records?
The buyer gets a receipt, the seller gets a receipt, the government gets to delete the record after printing the receipt. Undifficult.
I am not a lawyer. This is NOT legal advice.!
Image
Nothing tempers idealism quite like the cold bath of reality.... SQLGeek


Nuts
Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 157
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2015 7:47 pm

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

#93

Post by Nuts » Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:34 pm

RoyGBiv wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:10 pm
jason812 wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:06 pm
RoyGBiv wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:04 pm
Let's help draft a law we can live with....


-- Printed receipt for each party
-- Transaction records immediately deleted
How can you have a printed receipt and delete the transaction records?
The buyer gets a receipt, the seller gets a receipt, the government gets to delete the record after printing the receipt. Undifficult.
And you trust the government to delete them?

User avatar

03Lightningrocks
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 9
Posts: 8454
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: DFW area

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

#94

Post by 03Lightningrocks » Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:41 pm

Nuts wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:34 pm
RoyGBiv wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:10 pm
jason812 wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:06 pm
RoyGBiv wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:04 pm
Let's help draft a law we can live with....


-- Printed receipt for each party
-- Transaction records immediately deleted
How can you have a printed receipt and delete the transaction records?
The buyer gets a receipt, the seller gets a receipt, the government gets to delete the record after printing the receipt. Undifficult.
And you trust the government to delete them?
Not me. Once it is in "the system" it is not going anywhere. Not one thing with this "offer" would do anything to stop a mass shooter. As a matter of fact, nothing any of the gun grabbers propose will do anything to stop a mass shooter. The thing is, none of them are trying to stop mass shooters. They are simply trying to look like they have done something so they can claim it during an election.

User avatar

RoyGBiv
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 7
Posts: 7980
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 11:41 am
Location: Fort Worth

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

#95

Post by RoyGBiv » Thu Sep 12, 2019 9:43 pm

Nuts wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:34 pm
RoyGBiv wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:10 pm
jason812 wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:06 pm
RoyGBiv wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:04 pm
Let's help draft a law we can live with....


-- Printed receipt for each party
-- Transaction records immediately deleted
How can you have a printed receipt and delete the transaction records?
The buyer gets a receipt, the seller gets a receipt, the government gets to delete the record after printing the receipt. Undifficult.
And you trust the government to delete them?
When I buy a gun through an FFL today, what record does the government maintain?
Would I be any worse off with my (admittedly pie in the sky) proposal?
I am not a lawyer. This is NOT legal advice.!
Image
Nothing tempers idealism quite like the cold bath of reality.... SQLGeek


hondo44
Banned
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 50
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 9:25 pm

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

#96

Post by hondo44 » Thu Sep 12, 2019 10:22 pm

I've never trusted Dan Patrick since the whole Jon Matthews debacle. King Jon was one of the strongest conservative voices on the radio and had his career destroyed over basically nothing. Dan Patrick and his whole RINO liberal constituency needs to go!
Chinese SKS, Yugo SKS, Romanian AK-74, Mossberg 500, Hi-Point 9mm carbine, Colt 2000 IWB


mrvmax
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 1777
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 7:16 pm
Location: Friendswood
Contact:

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

#97

Post by mrvmax » Fri Sep 13, 2019 5:42 am

RoyGBiv wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 9:43 pm
Nuts wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:34 pm
RoyGBiv wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:10 pm
jason812 wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:06 pm
RoyGBiv wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:04 pm
Let's help draft a law we can live with....


-- Printed receipt for each party
-- Transaction records immediately deleted
How can you have a printed receipt and delete the transaction records?
The buyer gets a receipt, the seller gets a receipt, the government gets to delete the record after printing the receipt. Undifficult.
And you trust the government to delete them?
When I buy a gun through an FFL today, what record does the government maintain?
Would I be any worse off with my (admittedly pie in the sky) proposal?
The 4473 is kept for 20 years but the FFL can destroy them after that. The ATF encourages the FFL to turn them in instead of destroying them. Some FFLs will shut down their license and get a new one just to avoid having to store 4473’s (in which case the forms are sent to the ATF). During yearly inspections the ATF IOI can gather any info they want off the 4473’s, I’ve had them take someone’s info before during audits (even though there was nothing questionable and after I told him the buyer was legit and had a CHL).

Multiple handgun sales (and multiple long gun sales in border states) forms are sent to the ATF and chief law enforcement officer. Those forms have all the buyers info plus all the firearm info.

Your proposal does nothing to solve the problem and only opens the door to other infringing legislation. As Reagan stated, government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem. I have not seen anything proposed that will stop people from being killed. There has been nothing implemented worldwide that I know of that has stopped killing.

User avatar

tomneal
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 982
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2004 2:26 pm
Location: Houston
Contact:

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

#98

Post by tomneal » Fri Sep 13, 2019 8:21 am

Pie-in-the-sky proposal

One of the problems with ending private transfers is that FFL's charge for transfers.

So, require the transfer to take place WITHOUT CHARGE at EVERY Federal office. :evil2: I mean EVERY Federal prosecutor, FBI Office, Post Office, Park Service, BATFE office, Social Security Office, VA, Federal Court, Military Base, NSA, CIA, etc. Just wonder in with your customer and a gun and have the Feds fill out and keep the 4473. Same rules as a private FFL. Oh, I guess that would mean you could bring a gun into every Federal Building in the United States.

This would have to be WITHOUT CHARGE because it's a constitutional right. If a 'poll tax' is unconstitutional then a 'firearm transfer tax' would be as well.

It must be at EVERY Federal office because you can't force those 'in the sticks' to travel.

You wouldn't even need an ID. 'They' have said you shouldn't need one to vote. :evil2:


Until 1968, someone could commit a Felony, go to prison, and when they got out, they could own firearms. The nation survived.
See you at the range
NRA Life, TSRA Life, USPSA Life, Mensa (not worth $50 per year so it's expired)
Tom (Retired May 2019) Neal


mrvmax
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 1777
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 7:16 pm
Location: Friendswood
Contact:

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

#99

Post by mrvmax » Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:20 am

tomneal wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 8:21 am
Pie-in-the-sky proposal

One of the problems with ending private transfers is that FFL's charge for transfers.

So, require the transfer to take place WITHOUT CHARGE at EVERY Federal office. :evil2: I mean EVERY Federal prosecutor, FBI Office, Post Office, Park Service, BATFE office, Social Security Office, VA, Federal Court, Military Base, NSA, CIA, etc. Just wonder in with your customer and a gun and have the Feds fill out and keep the 4473. Same rules as a private FFL. Oh, I guess that would mean you could bring a gun into every Federal Building in the United States.

This would have to be WITHOUT CHARGE because it's a constitutional right. If a 'poll tax' is unconstitutional then a 'firearm transfer tax' would be as well.

It must be at EVERY Federal office because you can't force those 'in the sticks' to travel.

You wouldn't even need an ID. 'They' have said you shouldn't need one to vote. :evil2:


Until 1968, someone could commit a Felony, go to prison, and when they got out, they could own firearms. The nation survived.
Best idea I’ve see or heard.

User avatar

RoyGBiv
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 7
Posts: 7980
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 11:41 am
Location: Fort Worth

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

#100

Post by RoyGBiv » Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:52 am

mrvmax wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 5:42 am
RoyGBiv wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 9:43 pm
Nuts wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:34 pm
RoyGBiv wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:10 pm
jason812 wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:06 pm
RoyGBiv wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:04 pm
Let's help draft a law we can live with....


-- Printed receipt for each party
-- Transaction records immediately deleted
How can you have a printed receipt and delete the transaction records?
The buyer gets a receipt, the seller gets a receipt, the government gets to delete the record after printing the receipt. Undifficult.
And you trust the government to delete them?
When I buy a gun through an FFL today, what record does the government maintain?
Would I be any worse off with my (admittedly pie in the sky) proposal?
The 4473 is kept for 20 years but the FFL can destroy them after that. The ATF encourages the FFL to turn them in instead of destroying them. Some FFLs will shut down their license and get a new one just to avoid having to store 4473’s (in which case the forms are sent to the ATF). During yearly inspections the ATF IOI can gather any info they want off the 4473’s, I’ve had them take someone’s info before during audits (even though there was nothing questionable and after I told him the buyer was legit and had a CHL).

Multiple handgun sales (and multiple long gun sales in border states) forms are sent to the ATF and chief law enforcement officer. Those forms have all the buyers info plus all the firearm info.

Your proposal does nothing to solve the problem and only opens the door to other infringing legislation. As Reagan stated, government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem. I have not seen anything proposed that will stop people from being killed. There has been nothing implemented worldwide that I know of that has stopped killing.
I wasn't trying to solve the violence problem, just trying to satiate the calls for UBC's in a way that is no worse than what exists today. When an FFL runs a NICS check, is a record kept by the FBI? If we pass a law declaring that record must be deleted, I'd say we gained something. 4473 remains unchanged.
I am not a lawyer. This is NOT legal advice.!
Image
Nothing tempers idealism quite like the cold bath of reality.... SQLGeek


Nuts
Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 157
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2015 7:47 pm

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

#101

Post by Nuts » Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:57 am

RoyGBiv wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:52 am
mrvmax wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 5:42 am
RoyGBiv wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 9:43 pm
Nuts wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:34 pm
RoyGBiv wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:10 pm
jason812 wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:06 pm
RoyGBiv wrote:
Thu Sep 12, 2019 3:04 pm
Let's help draft a law we can live with....


-- Printed receipt for each party
-- Transaction records immediately deleted
How can you have a printed receipt and delete the transaction records?
The buyer gets a receipt, the seller gets a receipt, the government gets to delete the record after printing the receipt. Undifficult.
And you trust the government to delete them?
When I buy a gun through an FFL today, what record does the government maintain?
Would I be any worse off with my (admittedly pie in the sky) proposal?
The 4473 is kept for 20 years but the FFL can destroy them after that. The ATF encourages the FFL to turn them in instead of destroying them. Some FFLs will shut down their license and get a new one just to avoid having to store 4473’s (in which case the forms are sent to the ATF). During yearly inspections the ATF IOI can gather any info they want off the 4473’s, I’ve had them take someone’s info before during audits (even though there was nothing questionable and after I told him the buyer was legit and had a CHL).

Multiple handgun sales (and multiple long gun sales in border states) forms are sent to the ATF and chief law enforcement officer. Those forms have all the buyers info plus all the firearm info.

Your proposal does nothing to solve the problem and only opens the door to other infringing legislation. As Reagan stated, government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem. I have not seen anything proposed that will stop people from being killed. There has been nothing implemented worldwide that I know of that has stopped killing.
I wasn't trying to solve the violence problem, just trying to satiate the calls for UBC's in a way that is no worse than what exists today. When an FFL runs a NICS check, is a record kept by the FBI? If we pass a law declaring that record must be deleted, I'd say we gained something. 4473 remains unchanged.

Appeasement never is a good idea in anyway.

User avatar

Flightmare
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 2439
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2016 7:00 pm
Location: Plano, TX

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

#102

Post by Flightmare » Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:27 pm

RoyGBiv wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:52 am
I wasn't trying to solve the violence problem, just trying to satiate the calls for UBC's in a way that is no worse than what exists today. When an FFL runs a NICS check, is a record kept by the FBI? If we pass a law declaring that record must be deleted, I'd say we gained something. 4473 remains unchanged.
Let me ask you this. Do you believe that even if they had UBCs and a federal gun registry, that the antis would be satiated?
If so, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.
If not, what problem are you trying to solve?
Deplorable lunatic since 2016

User avatar

carlson1
Moderator
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 10241
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 1:11 am

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

#103

Post by carlson1 » Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:32 pm

Francis said what the whole Democratic Party wants to do. Take all Ar15’s and AK 47’s. The problem is they will not stop there.
Image

User avatar

anygunanywhere
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 7413
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 9:16 am
Location: La Grange, Texas

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

#104

Post by anygunanywhere » Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:07 pm

tomneal wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 8:21 am
Pie-in-the-sky proposal

One of the problems with ending private transfers is that FFL's charge for transfers.

So, require the transfer to take place WITHOUT CHARGE at EVERY Federal office. :evil2: I mean EVERY Federal prosecutor, FBI Office, Post Office, Park Service, BATFE office, Social Security Office, VA, Federal Court, Military Base, NSA, CIA, etc. Just wonder in with your customer and a gun and have the Feds fill out and keep the 4473. Same rules as a private FFL. Oh, I guess that would mean you could bring a gun into every Federal Building in the United States.

This would have to be WITHOUT CHARGE because it's a constitutional right. If a 'poll tax' is unconstitutional then a 'firearm transfer tax' would be as well.

It must be at EVERY Federal office because you can't force those 'in the sticks' to travel.

You wouldn't even need an ID. 'They' have said you shouldn't need one to vote. :evil2:


Until 1968, someone could commit a Felony, go to prison, and when they got out, they could own firearms. The nation survived.
:iagree: x1 bazillion
"The Second Amendment is absolute...If we refuse infringement to our Right to Keep and Bear Arms, as protected by the Second Amendment, we will never be burdened by tyranny, dictatorship, or subjugation - other than to bury those who attempt it. B.E.Wood

User avatar

03Lightningrocks
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 9
Posts: 8454
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: DFW area

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

#105

Post by 03Lightningrocks » Fri Sep 13, 2019 3:10 pm

RoyGBiv wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:52 am

I wasn't trying to solve the violence problem, just trying to satiate the calls for UBC's in a way that is no worse than what exists today. When an FFL runs a NICS check, is a record kept by the FBI? If we pass a law declaring that record must be deleted, I'd say we gained something. 4473 remains unchanged.
You have been around long enough to know there ain't no satiate to be had. No matter what we give them now, after the next few shootings they will come after more. Anything the anti's get will ONLY serve to embolden them.

Post Reply

Return to “General Legislative Discussions”