NICS Background

[Rifleman55]

I was buying guns long before gca68 cane along and long before NICS, Both of these laws are utter nonsense. Neither one has ever stopped a criminal from obtaining a firearm. They are just some "feel good laws for a bunch of politicians"and anti gun people. I believe every gun control law ever passed is un Constitutional. The people that dreamed them up and voted to pass them should have been thrown out of office on their butts.

[Rifleman55]

I apoligise to the moderater that thought that my language got a little rough, I will be more careful in the future.

[CompVest]

PM was sent. Thank you for your apology, much appreciated.

[duns]

When I questioned the FBI and told them to check my SS# or even my military service records which contains my finger prints they simply replied that the NICS system was name based only and if I wanted to distingish myself from this other guy they would be glad to send me a kit so that I could become registered with the FBI. LIKE I WAS SOME KIND OF SEX OFFENDER!

I've heard of something called a UPIN -- that's probably the registration they were talking about. If i was you, I would look into it as I'm sure there is no stigma involved. I'm a resident alien and have been background checked and finger printed more times than I can remember, not to mention having to submit to HIV and other blood tests and get a range of vaccinations. Recently, I joined the trusted traveler scheme that allows me to enter the USA at JFK and other major airports without seeing an immigration officer -- that required another background check, an interview, and another set of finger prints as the way it works is that when you come into the country you swipe your fingers on a machine rather than going through the immigration line. If I was in your place, I wouldn't mind going through the screening to put an end to the NICS hassles.

I received my CHL the other day -- does that mean I won't need NICS background checks again? My NICS applications always resulted in a 3-business days delay so it would be nice not to have to go through it again.

[jmra]

When I questioned the FBI and told them to check my SS# or even my military service records which contains my finger prints they simply replied that the NICS system was name based only and if I wanted to distingish myself from this other guy they would be glad to send me a kit so that I could become registered with the FBI. LIKE I WAS SOME KIND OF SEX OFFENDER!

I've heard of something called a UPIN -- that's probably the registration they were talking about. If i was you, I would look into it as I'm sure there is no stigma involved. I'm a resident alien and have been background checked and finger printed more times than I can remember, not to mention having to submit to HIV and other blood tests and get a range of vaccinations. Recently, I joined the trusted traveler scheme that allows me to enter the USA at JFK and other major airports without seeing an immigration officer -- that required another background check, an interview, and another set of finger prints as the way it works is that when you come into the country you swipe your fingers on a machine rather than going through the immigration line. If I was in your place, I wouldn't mind going through the screening to put an end to the NICS hassles.

I received my CHL the other day -- does that mean I won't need NICS background checks again? My NICS applications always resulted in a 3-business days delay so it would be nice not to have to go through it again.

No NICS check with CHL. Considered getting the PIN but now that I have my CHL it is not a problem. The strange thing is the NICS was not a problem everytime. In fact the only time I would get denied is if the FFL happen to get a female agent. Go figure. There also appears to be a stigma attached to the PIN. I was told by the agent that suggested it that it would take more than a day everytime I purchased to get cleared but I would not have to worry about being denied. I don't think I would have to worry about the NICS if I were buying a rifle in another state because now my CHL should show up when NICS runs my info.

[chartreuse]

When I questioned the FBI and told them to check my SS# or even my military service records which contains my finger prints they simply replied that the NICS system was name based only and if I wanted to distingish myself from this other guy they would be glad to send me a kit so that I could become registered with the FBI. LIKE I WAS SOME KIND OF SEX OFFENDER!

I've heard of something called a UPIN -- that's probably the registration they were talking about. If i was you, I would look into it as I'm sure there is no stigma involved. I'm a resident alien and have been background checked and finger printed more times than I can remember, not to mention having to submit to HIV and other blood tests and get a range of vaccinations. Recently, I joined the trusted traveler scheme that allows me to enter the USA at JFK and other major airports without seeing an immigration officer -- that required another background check, an interview, and another set of finger prints as the way it works is that when you come into the country you swipe your fingers on a machine rather than going through the immigration line. If I was in your place, I wouldn't mind going through the screening to put an end to the NICS hassles.

I received my CHL the other day -- does that mean I won't need NICS background checks again? My NICS applications always resulted in a 3-business days delay so it would be nice not to have to go through it again.

No NICS check with CHL. Considered getting the PIN but now that I have my CHL it is not a problem. The strange thing is the NICS was not a problem everytime. In fact the only time I would get denied is if the FFL happen to get a female agent. Go figure. There also appears to be a stigma attached to the PIN. I was told by the agent that suggested it that it would take more than a day everytime I purchased to get cleared but I would not have to worry about being denied. I don't think I would have to worry about the NICS if I were buying a rifle in another state because now my CHL should show up when NICS runs my info.

duns - welcome to the world of same day purchases. I too came here as an LPR and would always get a delay on NICS. Now, as jmra says, you'll still fill out the form, but the FFL will photocopy or note the details of your CHL instead of calling NICS and you'll go home with your gun immediately.

jmra - I'm not sure whether a CHL would show up on a NICS check. Perhaps someone who knows for sure could enlighten us? I have vague memories of reading that it's info that DPS does not share outside TX; for example, a TX LEO would get the CHL annotation on running your license, but a KS trooper would not. I could be wrong, though.

This brings up another question, of whether an out of state FFL would know that the TX CHL qualified as an alternative to NICS. I would imagine that a dealer in, say, the OK Panhandle would, on account of often getting customers from TX (think Guymon, OK) but could see how an FFL in WA, for example, might not. I wonder whether there's a mechanism for them to check whether a document qualifies?

[joe817]

No NICS check with CHL. Considered getting the PIN but now that I have my CHL it is not a problem. The strange thing is the NICS was not a problem everytime. In fact the only time I would get denied is if the FFL happen to get a female agent. Go figure. There also appears to be a stigma attached to the PIN. I was told by the agent that suggested it that it would take more than a day everytime I purchased to get cleared but I would not have to worry about being denied. I don't think I would have to worry about the NICS if I were buying a rifle in another state because now my CHL should show up when NICS runs my info.

duns - welcome to the world of same day purchases. I too came here as an LPR and would always get a delay on NICS. Now, as jmra says, you'll still fill out the form, but the FFL will photocopy or note the details of your CHL instead of calling NICS and you'll go home with your gun immediately.

jmra - I'm not sure whether a CHL would show up on a NICS check. Perhaps someone who knows for sure could enlighten us? I have vague memories of reading that it's info that DPS does not share outside TX; for example, a TX LEO would get the CHL annotation on running your license, but a KS trooper would not. I could be wrong, though.

This brings up another question, of whether an out of state FFL would know that the TX CHL qualified as an alternative to NICS. I would imagine that a dealer in, say, the OK Panhandle would, on account of often getting customers from TX (think Guymon, OK) but could see how an FFL in WA, for example, might not. I wonder whether there's a mechanism for them to check whether a document qualifies?

Last week we had a discussion regarding form 4473, and NICS checks. The ATF issues letters by State which spells out the ffl's verification requirements. Texas is allowed to bypass an NICS check if the purchaser holds a CHL at the dealer's option. It's my opinion that the dealer has the option of accepting a CHL in lieu of running an NIcS check, but is not required to. For example, Academy Sports runs NICS checks on purchasers even if they have a CHL.

Here's my response with a link to the ATF "Texas" letter, giving the dealer the option of accepting a CHL in lieu of NICS check or not:

"Not to stray too far off topic, a CHL holder does not have to go through a NICS check, as per 27CFR 478.102(d), but they do have to fill out ATF form 4473. Also, it appears that it is the FFL's prerogative to use this method as an alternative method of the NCIS check, but he's NOT required to do so:

http://www.atf.gov/press/releases/1998/ ... y-law.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Here's part of the text of that letter:
"Alternatives to a NICS Check

The Brady law provides that certain permits may qualify as alternatives to a NICS check. The concealed weapons permit in your State qualified as an alternative to a background check under the interim provisions of Brady, and will continue to qualify as an alternative to the NICS check required by permanent Brady. Of course all such transactions must still comply with State law."

Note: this is my opinion on the alternative ways. YMMV

Note: editing to add ATF listing of states and acceptance of alternative NICS checks:
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/brady-law/permit-chart.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chemist45]

I am against NICS.

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
Does NICS infringe? There is no question that it does.
Ask anyone who has ever been denied purchase due to a common name or one of the NICS phantom outages or slow downs. Their rights were infringed.
NICS is a clear infringement on the right to keep and bare arms.

Does NICS stop criminals? No it does not.
As has been stated before, the overwhelming majority of criminals do not get their guns through legal means.
They steal them or get them from other thieves.
One of the most glaring examples of NICS failure is the Columbine killers.
NICS was in force at the time and they still got guns. In spite of being under 18, the killers had 18 year old friends buy the guns for them.
NICS does not stop criminals.

I think its important to remember why we have NICS. NICS was a compromise put in place when the Clinton administration was pushing for California style 15 day waiting periods to purchase firearms. At the time I lived in a state with a waiting period (Michigan). The state claimed that the waiting period was to allow time for a background check. The reality was that no checks were being done. It was just another roadblock thrown in the way of honest gun owners to make gun ownership more of a chore.
NICS was probably the best we could have hoped for at the time but I think that, like the assault weapon ban, its time for NICS to go.

Last comment:
Just because an intrusive, unconstitutional law does not apply to me (I have a CHL, therefor I don't worry about NICS) is no reason not to oppose it.
Freedom is not just for the monied, the connected, the celebrity and the elite. Freedom is for all of us and when it is denied to any of us, we are all diminished.

[chartreuse]

Just because an intrusive, unconstitutional law does not apply to me (I have a CHL, therefor I don't worry about NICS) is no reason not to oppose it.
Freedom is not just for the monied, the connected, the celebrity and the elite. Freedom is for all of us and when it is denied to any of us, we are all diminished.

[tacticool]

NICS is a "feel good" law with little if any benefit to public safety.

Incorporating the Second Amendment and requiring the States to allow open/concealed carry would benefit public safety much more.

[Vic]

NICS is a "feel good" law with little if any benefit to public safety.

The unfortunate reality that has to be remembered is that laws are made by politicians. Politicians work by compromise. Therefore, in order to get some law passed, the political entity must compromise with the opposing political entities.

So we arrive at a system in which a law is proposed that will allow citizens to purchase firearms. The political opponents of this idea create the specter of lawless hordes making runs on the gun shops to buy these guns. In order to defeat this notion, a system is proposed to filter out these lawless hordes. The final proposal (the one that passes the lawmakers' compromise mindset) is that law-abiding citizens can purchase guns (benefit), as long as the check system can determine that the citizen is not part of the lawless horde (compromise).

It does not prevent crime. It does not prevent criminals from obtaining firearms. It does prevent criminals from obtaining firearms in the same manner that law abiding citizens obtain firearms.

I do not believe it necessarily infringes on your rights (not you, Tacticool, I mean "you" in general), because the law allows you to purchase the firearm, it just inserts an extra step in the purchase process.

I don't want to sound like some great advocate of the NICS system. Its existence gives me no pleasure. I do, however, understand the reasoning for it, and more importantly, the compromise issues that invariably accompany legislative actions, which spawned its establishment.

[chartreuse]

NICS is a "feel good" law with little if any benefit to public safety.

The unfortunate reality that has to be remembered is that laws are made by politicians. Politicians work by compromise. Therefore, in order to get some law passed, the political entity must compromise with the opposing political entities.

So we arrive at a system in which a law is proposed that will allow citizens to purchase firearms. The political opponents of this idea create the specter of lawless hordes making runs on the gun shops to buy these guns. In order to defeat this notion, a system is proposed to filter out these lawless hordes. The final proposal (the one that passes the lawmakers' compromise mindset) is that law-abiding citizens can purchase guns (benefit), as long as the check system can determine that the citizen is not part of the lawless horde (compromise).

It does not prevent crime. It does not prevent criminals from obtaining firearms. It does prevent criminals from obtaining firearms in the same manner that law abiding citizens obtain firearms.

I do not believe it necessarily infringes on your rights (not you, Tacticool, I mean "you" in general), because the law allows you to purchase the firearm, it just inserts an extra step in the purchase process.

I don't want to sound like some great advocate of the NICS system. Its existence gives me no pleasure. I do, however, understand the reasoning for it, and more importantly, the compromise issues that invariably accompany legislative actions, which spawned its establishment.

I've bolded what I believe to be the fundamental flaw in your reasoning.

I would argue that we are, in our natural state, intrinsically allowed to purchase firearms, with no law required to enable that. Any laws regarding firearms purchases must therefore comprise some restriction or other upon our natural abilities and rights.

Edited to add: I mean no criticism of you personally and note that you appear to be from The Netherlands and therefore from a Napoleonic code system of law, in which laws are enacted in order to permit things. I, on the other hand, come from the Anglo-American common law tradition, in which everything not forbidden is permitted. This may explain the disconnect.

[Vic]

Everything is codified in the law. What you can do, as well as what you cannot do, and all the exceptions to either are codified. The law is written to ATTEMPT to cover every eventuality, and almost always fails, but tries nonetheless. This is why our laws take up entire libraries.

Now, let's be clear: I'm not suggesting that every possible action that a human might make requires a law to be passed that either allows or forbids that action, and specifies conditions to the rulings. For example, there is no law that specifically allows a person to breathe. No law needs to be made that covers that.

On to the finer point, the law isn't so much written to GRANT the right to purchase a firearm. Its intent is to specify the PROCEDURE that is to be followed when doing so, and to provide conditions in which a buyer cannot be sold a firearm (felons, minors, etc.).

I don't want to get into semantics here. If I wasn't clear on what I meant in that phrase, it is my fault for not expressing it more clearly.

Also: Nederland, in addition to being a lowland country in Europe, is also the name of a small town (population 18,000 or so) just south of Beaumont, Texas. Beaumont and Nederland are approximately 90 miles east of Houston and 40 miles west of Louisiana.

[shootthesheet]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/infringe" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; It seems to me anything any government puts into law that stops us from freely exercising this civil right is unconstitutional.

Legal Dictionary

Main Entry: in·fringe
Pronunciation: in-'frinj
Function: verb
Inflected Forms: in·fringed; in·fring·ing
Etymology: Medieval Latin infringere, from Latin, to break, crush, from in- in + frangere to break
transitive verb : to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another infringed —U.S. Constitution amendment II>; especially : to violate a holder's rights under (a copyright, patent, trademark, or trade name) intransitive verb : ENCROACH —in·fring·er noun
Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.

emphasis added

[03Lightningrocks]

I don't like it one bit. It doesn't do anything to prevent the lawless from acquiring guns, but it does infringe on the law abiding citizens constitutional rights. It is as wrong as wrong can be.