Go Back   Professional Soldiers ® > At Ease > The Early Bird

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

Old 11-06-2017, 12:42   #16
Old Dog New Trick
Quiet Professional
 
Old Dog New Trick's Avatar
 
Old Dog New Trick is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Just above the flood plain in Southern Texas
Posts: 1,944
Quote:
Originally Posted by TWITCHY View Post
Pete,
I have the same questions. I have submitted several background forms for weapons purchases, but never thought much about them, as I have no concerns with the check. But, I assumed that they would actually investigate (check the background) of the answers that are provided. So, does this indicate that you can actually lie on the form and be okay, because they won't actually check the answers that have been provided? One would think that they automatically check for military history, especially for dishonorable discharge.
My understanding is that no they don’t. The whole background check and 4473 is an over burdened paper tiger. For every person they catch and “deny” (because they never follow up with an investigation or submit for criminal charges) there are probably hundreds that lie and will never be challenged. They will either receive their weapons after five days or not and will return to get their money and try elsewhere until success.

We as a country have learned nothing from each failure preceding the events before the last.

The liberals and Democrats will scream for more gun control even though none of their previous laws have made things better, only worse. They will continue to protect those mentally deranged people at the expense of the general public with laws that contradict the laws they seek to prevent law abiding citizens from protecting themselves.

The best thing this country could do is wipe the slate clean of nearly every unenforceable gun law since NFA and tell the citizens of the country the government and the police are not responsible for your protection; because they are not; that’s been settled over and over in the courts. The Second Amendment exists for a reason and people should hold it right up there with the First and all the others.

ETA: I’m somewhat surprised that this happened in Texas. But at least in Texas the citizens responded to the call of action and by all accounts performed exemplary.
__________________
You only live once; live well. Have no regrets when the end happens!

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” (Sir Edmund Burke)

Last edited by Old Dog New Trick; 11-06-2017 at 13:07.
  Reply With Quote

NICS Schmicks
Old 11-06-2017, 15:49   #17
Badger52
Area Commander
 
Badger52 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Western WI
Posts: 4,017
NICS Schmicks

Many forget that there is no background check when it's a simple 1:1 private exchange of property (e.g., money/goods for a firearm).
__________________
The coin paid to enforce words on parchment is blood; tyrants will not be stopped with anything less dear. - QP Peregrino
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-06-2017, 20:04   #18
Old Dog New Trick
Quiet Professional
 
Old Dog New Trick's Avatar
 
Old Dog New Trick is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Just above the flood plain in Southern Texas
Posts: 1,944
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agoge2 View Post
Those checks are only as good as the people who are responsible for entering the information after a persons convictions.

Remember, people are lazy....
Prophetic are we?

Maybe they ought to convict and lock up the “lazy” administrative clerk in the AF JAG office that ‘forgot’ to send notification of conviction to NICS.

“Accessory to Mass Murder”

In other news of the day: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-so...-idUSKCN0ZH5GA

FBI sued over flawed background check database.
__________________
You only live once; live well. Have no regrets when the end happens!

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” (Sir Edmund Burke)

Last edited by Old Dog New Trick; 11-06-2017 at 20:13.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-06-2017, 20:13   #19
Agoge2
Area Commander
 
Agoge2's Avatar
 
Agoge2 is online now
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Vagabond
Posts: 1,291
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Dog New Trick View Post
Prophetic are we?

Maybe they ought to convict and lock up the “lazy” administrative clerk in the AF JAG office that ‘forgot’ to send notification of conviction to NICS.

“Accessory to Mass Murder”

In other news of the day: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-so...-idUSKCN0ZH5GA
Sounds like a plan to me....

Yep...I was afraid it would be something like that. I have seen it -- literally -- hundreds of times where lazy clerks never enter the sentence.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-06-2017, 20:16   #20
Old Dog New Trick
Quiet Professional
 
Old Dog New Trick's Avatar
 
Old Dog New Trick is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Just above the flood plain in Southern Texas
Posts: 1,944
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agoge2 View Post
Sounds like a plan to me....

Yep...I was afraid it would be something like that. I have seen it -- literally -- hundreds of times where lazy clerks never enter the sentence.
“You had one job...and you failed.” People died as a result.
__________________
You only live once; live well. Have no regrets when the end happens!

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” (Sir Edmund Burke)
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-06-2017, 23:00   #21
Brush Okie
Area Commander
 
Brush Okie's Avatar
 
Brush Okie is online now
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Washington
Posts: 4,441
This shooting has made me believe in gun control. Look how making meth and narcotics illegal has stopped the drug addiction in this country. All we need is more laws.
__________________
What doesn't kill me better start running.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-07-2017, 06:54   #22
JimP
Quiet Professional
 
JimP's Avatar
 
JimP is offline
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: State of confusion
Posts: 1,075
Guys, I'm at Fort Sam, about 30 minutes away from the scene. We had a heck of a time getting accountability of all our folks Sunday, but eventually got an "up" from all.

A couple of observations:

First: I'm a bit paranoid and as such I am armed all the time unless it's when I come to work and they prevent me from defending myself, but that's another story. But I have to say, San Antonio is a very low-threat atmosphere. I am a believer that an armed society is a polite society. Taking the fam downtown or the river walk or around isn't the paranoia-inducing event it is in Boston or Chicago or NYC. it simply "is"....; but, even then, I am armed.

Second: When seconds count, the police are minutes away. We are free men and are beholden to no one for our safety. Refuse to allow the bureaucrats to seize upon this opportunity to further push us into servitude. Bow to no man.

Third: I simply cannot fathom that down here, in Texas, that NO ONE was armed in that Church. NO ONE......what the hell is wrong with that picture...?? Refuse to abdicate your responsibility to protect you and yours. Do not patronize places that make you a target. So far as I know, carry was allowed in this Church yet NO ONE had a weapon. Sad.

Fourth: As I type this, the Chief of Staff (wife Unit, one (1) Ea., type three, Mod 4) is out at Bass Pro taking the training class for her LTC here in Texas. She's been carrying under reciprocity from Alabama and Iowa but last night she just mentioned I needed to set out a gun or two as she was taking the training today. Do discussion, no argument. I got a good one.

Stay armed my friends. Jim
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-07-2017, 07:36   #23
Old Dog New Trick
Quiet Professional
 
Old Dog New Trick's Avatar
 
Old Dog New Trick is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Just above the flood plain in Southern Texas
Posts: 1,944
Jim, glad to hear you and all yours are accounted for.

My same thoughts with yours but ‘expectations’ often result in ‘complacency.’

Don’t know why I hadn’t looked earlier since moving to Texas, but your last comment made look to see if both mine and Mrs. ODNT’s Washington CCP had reciprocity in Texas. They do, we have about a year to take the classes in Texas now and I informed her to go back to carrying. Because you just never know when and where evil people will do evil things.

All be safe and be prepared always.
__________________
You only live once; live well. Have no regrets when the end happens!

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” (Sir Edmund Burke)
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-07-2017, 08:09   #24
bblhead672
Guerrilla Chief
 
bblhead672's Avatar
 
bblhead672 is offline
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 692
In the last couple of days I have heard more Texans say they are going to start carrying, carry again or carry more often. No place is safe and not likely to get better.

There is a great forum for Texas LTC holders and those interested in obtaining it.
http://texaschlforum.com/
It's run by a Houston attorney who is a NRA Board Member.

The TX Legislature lowered the cost to obtain LTC from $140 to $40 this year.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-07-2017, 10:35   #25
Brush Okie
Area Commander
 
Brush Okie's Avatar
 
Brush Okie is online now
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Washington
Posts: 4,441
With the global war on terrer a church is a prime target for muslim terror groups.
__________________
What doesn't kill me better start running.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-07-2017, 11:13   #26
Agoge2
Area Commander
 
Agoge2's Avatar
 
Agoge2 is online now
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Vagabond
Posts: 1,291
Whether or not actually true -- churches will always be considered gun-free zones. I happen to know that mine is NOT... as long as I am there.

There is no shortage of clowns that will always target them because people simply don't go to church expecting things like that to happen there. Unfortunately, many people choose to keep their heads buried in the sand regardless of what they see happening around them.

A person who does these types of actions is a special kind of coward, but no different than those that attack malls and schools. Cowards...one and all....
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-07-2017, 12:25   #27
TACJAM
Asset
 
TACJAM is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 8
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badger52 View Post
Many forget that there is no background check when it's a simple 1:1 private exchange of property (e.g., money/goods for a firearm).
True, but the seller is still responsible if sold/traded to a felon or other prohibited person. The problem is that it is difficult, if not impossible, to get a background check on another person; or (if you are the purchaser) to check to see if the gun being sold has been reported stolen, etc.

Selling to someone with a license to carry concealed reduces the chances of making an illegal transfer, but it's not a certainty, and there's no "safe harbor" for private transfers.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-07-2017, 12:42   #28
Razor
Quiet Professional
 
Razor's Avatar
 
Razor is offline
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 4,296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badger52 View Post
Many forget that there is no background check when it's a simple 1:1 private exchange of property (e.g., money/goods for a firearm).
That situation depends on state laws. If you live in a state with a majority of mindless Commie sell-outs in the state legislature like CO, then even private transfers require a background check.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-07-2017, 13:42   #29
Badger52
Area Commander
 
Badger52 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Western WI
Posts: 4,017
Quote:
Originally Posted by TACJAM View Post
True, but the seller is still responsible if sold/traded to a felon or other prohibited person. The problem is that it is difficult, if not impossible, to get a background check on another person; or (if you are the purchaser) to check to see if the gun being sold has been reported stolen, etc.

Selling to someone with a license to carry concealed reduces the chances of making an illegal transfer, but it's not a certainty, and there's no "safe harbor" for private transfers.
As Razor points out there could be state laws that vary on the subject & complying with those is a consideration. TX appears to have no such restriction on private sales (nor my state, as I imagine many others). However, other than conscience, in many places there is no legal onus on either party to verify the other's qualities (or lack of). If you have a citation in law that has an over-arching application I'd honestly love to hear it.
__________________
The coin paid to enforce words on parchment is blood; tyrants will not be stopped with anything less dear. - QP Peregrino
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-07-2017, 15:33   #30
TACJAM
Asset
 
TACJAM is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 8
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badger52 View Post
As Razor points out there could be state laws that vary on the subject & complying with those is a consideration. TX appears to have no such restriction on private sales (nor my state, as I imagine many others). However, other than conscience, in many places there is no legal onus on either party to verify the other's qualities (or lack of). If you have a citation in law that has an over-arching application I'd honestly love to hear it.
Badger: I think you're right that there in no overarching specific legal requirement to verify a transferee's qualities and I overstated that as being a requirement vs. a recommendation. I was thinking of federal firearms laws, but it's been a while since I looked at those, so I went back and checked:

Federal law prohibits transfer of a firearm or ammunition "to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person" is legally prohibited from possessing a firearm. (18USC 922(d)). This applies whether interstate or intrastate. Most states that I know of have similar laws.

The "knowing or having reasonable cause to believe" gives some protection to the unwary seller/transferor, but the devil is in the details. Different courts have given different interpretations to that phrase; some adopting a subjective standard (i.e. the govt. must prove the seller himself had reason to believe) while the majority adopt an objective standard (the govt. only has to prove that the proverbial "reasonable person" would have had reason to believe). The latter interpretation can be stretched - and has been in drug cases (though I haven't heard of it in firearms cases) - to require a defendant to prove that he actively inquired of the buyer.

That's just the criminal side of it. In a civil case, the seller is in a worse position. because, among other things, the evidentiary standard is much lower. Either way, I don't like the idea of a jury deciding my fate based on what their idea of a reasonable person should have known.

So, I 1) prefer not to sell any of my firearms; 2) if I do, sell only to people I know REALLY well; or 3) sell through someone holding an FFL. But, my risk tolerance when it comes to incarceration is fairly low.

Last edited by TACJAM; 11-07-2017 at 15:36.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 20:21.



Copyright 2004-2017 by Professional Soldiers ®
Site Designed, Maintained, & Hosted by Hilliker Technologies