Gun Control 2022 (IV) - Gun Rights, Control, & Government

[Fartsniffage]

I'm guessing that's a vendor markup? What I'm trying to get is how much the Federal Government charges for an NICS check?

No it's added state fees to the NICS check.

Okay. But what does the federal government charge?

[Grinning Dragon]

No it's added state fees to the NICS check.

Okay. But what does the federal government charge?

Afaik, an FFL doesn't get charged by the federal gov to run a check, since the FBI run the check and the FBI is funded by taxpayers. FFLs tack on the charge for the paper work in processing the check/transfer.
Some states that run their own form of NICS instead of using the federal one, do charge per check, probably $2.00 - $5.00 per check.

[Grinning Dragon]

Depends on each individual FFL. There is one guy by me that will charge $20.00 whereas Academy will charge $50.00, then again, either one I used this was for a transfer + background. So I would suspect that they would charge the same amount for a private sale.
When I buy a private sale, no reason to bother with a background, give cash, get firearm, go home happy.

Tbh in some blue states it can get well over a hundred dollars for a NICS check, it's insane and pretty much restricts the poor from exercising their rights entirely.

It is insane. I have also heard that some FFLs don't like to deal with the paperwork when doing a background check for private sales is one reason they charge so much for their troubles and all.

[Grinning Dragon]

Apparently a majority of Texans now support red flag laws and increased background checks.
https://www.dallasnews.com/news/politic ... oll-finds/

Ironically Governor Abbot faced backlash when supporting Red Flag laws back in 2018.
https://www.texastribune.org/2018/07/27 ... g-gun-law/

Who did they poll, mostly Austin a heavily blue area of Tx?
1,169 registered voters bothered to answer the phone and participated, makes me wonder how many are like me (and I suspect a great many) and hung up or blocked the number, since it's boring and a waste of my time answering polling questions.
Then again shows the respondents are ignorant of due process protections.

[Telconi]

Okay. But what does the federal government charge?

Afaik, an FFL doesn't get charged by the federal gov to run a check, since the FBI run the check and the FBI is funded by taxpayers. FFLs tack on the charge for the paper work in processing the check/transfer.
Some states that run their own form of NICS instead of using the federal one, do charge per check, probably $2.00 - $5.00 per check.

Well I paid 19 dollars for a check today to buy ammunition...

[Albrenia]

I'm fully in favour of checks for buying guns and ammo (being anti-gun, I would be though heh), but why should the customer have to pay for the check?

Shouldn't that be covered by the government?

[Genivaria]

I'm fully in favour of checks for buying guns and ammo (being anti-gun, I would be though heh), but why should the customer have to pay for the check?

Shouldn't that be covered by the government?

That's generally how I feel about most mandated extra fees.

[Telconi]

I'm fully in favour of checks for buying guns and ammo (being anti-gun, I would be though heh), but why should the customer have to pay for the check?

Shouldn't that be covered by the government?

Because why pay for the fee when you can fuck the Republicans make the buyer pay?

[Grinning Dragon]

Afaik, an FFL doesn't get charged by the federal gov to run a check, since the FBI run the check and the FBI is funded by taxpayers. FFLs tack on the charge for the paper work in processing the check/transfer.
Some states that run their own form of NICS instead of using the federal one, do charge per check, probably $2.00 - $5.00 per check.

Well I paid 19 dollars for a check today to buy ammunition...

Good lord, nothing like making a box of ammo needlessly more expensive.
I just pay sales tax on ammo if I buy locally. Shipped ammo if I buy enough it's free shipping and no tax.

[Grinning Dragon]

I'm fully in favour of checks for buying guns and ammo (being anti-gun, I would be though heh), but why should the customer have to pay for the check?

Shouldn't that be covered by the government?

You are paying the FFL to do the paperwork, since the FFL is responsible to keep a record, just in case the BATFe (and really big fires) decides to show up and conduct an inspection.

[Telconi]

Well I paid 19 dollars for a check today to buy ammunition...

Good lord, nothing like making a box of ammo needlessly more expensive.
I just pay sales tax on ammo if I buy locally. Shipped ammo if I buy enough it's free shipping and no tax.

Well it's a felony for me to directly receive ammunition.

And I bought an entire case, because the fee is a flat one, up to the maximum count. But hey, a 19% upcharge on a case of shotgun shells is totally reasonable to prevent nothing bad from happening, right?

[Grinning Dragon]

Good lord, nothing like making a box of ammo needlessly more expensive.
I just pay sales tax on ammo if I buy locally. Shipped ammo if I buy enough it's free shipping and no tax.

Well it's a felony for me to directly receive ammunition.

And I bought an entire case, because the fee is a flat one, up to the maximum count. But hey, a 19% upcharge on a case of shotgun shells is totally reasonable to prevent nothing bad from happening, right?

Right, wink, wink. Since we all know the baddies are going across state lines and buying ammo or Jimbob is stealing it and selling it on the DL.

[Telconi]

Well it's a felony for me to directly receive ammunition.

And I bought an entire case, because the fee is a flat one, up to the maximum count. But hey, a 19% upcharge on a case of shotgun shells is totally reasonable to prevent nothing bad from happening, right?

Right, wink, wink. Since we all know the baddies are going across state lines and buying ammo or Jimbob is stealing it and selling it on the DL.

Surely that background check magically prevented me from using the literally thousands of more suitable cartridges already in my possession to do bad stuff..

[Grinning Dragon]

Right, wink, wink. Since we all know the baddies are going across state lines and buying ammo or Jimbob is stealing it and selling it on the DL.

Surely that background check magically prevented me from using the literally thousands of more suitable cartridges already in my possession to do bad stuff..

Well of course it did. After all those laws magically make everything safer and are in no way illusionary.

[Telconi]

Surely that background check magically prevented me from using the literally thousands of more suitable cartridges already in my possession to do bad stuff..

Well of course it did. After all those laws magically make everything safer and are in no way illusionary punitive.

FTFY

[Plzen]

That's generally how I feel about most mandated extra fees.

This is my opinion also. The readiness of the US government to nickel-and-dime its citizens is... interesting, to say the least. What do they collect taxes for?

I’ve made it clear that I don’t consider firearms ownership a fundamental right, but that’s my personal opinion. The United States, as a society and as a nation, clearly does in fact consider private firearms ownership a fundamental citizens’ right. Fundamental citizens’ rights, obviously, ought to be paid for by the State.

Why this isn’t obvious to more people, shrug.

[The Two Jerseys]

Well it's a felony for me to directly receive ammunition.

And I bought an entire case, because the fee is a flat one, up to the maximum count. But hey, a 19% upcharge on a case of shotgun shells is totally reasonable to prevent nothing bad from happening, right?

Right, wink, wink. Since we all know the baddies are going across state lines and buying ammo or Jimbob is stealing it and selling it on the DL.

The gangs are totally not getting their ammo from a secret tunnel running under the border from Tijuana.

[Grinning Dragon]

Right, wink, wink. Since we all know the baddies are going across state lines and buying ammo or Jimbob is stealing it and selling it on the DL.

The gangs are totally not getting their ammo from a secret tunnel running under the border from Tijuana.

Of course not, there is a background check law in place for ammo, everything is right as rain again. Happy days are here again. Well except for the poor, the poor are once again shut out of exercising an enumerate right.

[Grinning Dragon]

Well then...
Former ATF Firearm Technology Instructor: 60% of Guns Don’t Meet the Legal Definition of a Firearm
[quote] This key part (that’s legally a firearm), according to the Gun Control Act, was referred to as “the frame or receiver,” which is, generally speaking, the body of a firearm in the area surrounding the trigger.

An accompanying federal regulation provided a precise, highly technical definition:

“That part of a firearm which provides housing for the hammer, bolt or breechblock, and firing mechanism, and which is usually threaded at its forward portion to receive the barrel.”

The problem — and this is where (Dan) O’Kelly comes in — is that he says roughly 60% of the guns in America do not have a single part that falls under that definition. The AR-15, for example, has a split receiver — one upper and one lower. Neither meets the requirement on its own.

“For 50 years, ATF has been making this square peg fit in the round hole,” O’Kelly told CNN, “when, in fact, it doesn’t.”[/quotet

I believe this is the same fellow, lawyers have been using lately for expert testimony in where judges have sided with O'Kelly and dismissed charges against people running afoul of firearm laws.
Perhaps if thing continue down this path legally, things can come to a head and finally get deeper hooks into the unconstitutional NFA and GCA68 and cause irreparable damage to both stupid laws to the point they are as useless as a toothless heal hound?

[Grinning Dragon]

This sort of thing only happens in America. Only the police or military should have da gunz.....
Thai Soldier Livestreams Shooting Spree, Killing ‘At Least 12,’ Then Holes Up in Shopping Mall

[Telconi]

Well then...
Former ATF Firearm Technology Instructor: 60% of Guns Don’t Meet the Legal Definition of a Firearm

This key part (that’s legally a firearm), according to the Gun Control Act, was referred to as “the frame or receiver,” which is, generally speaking, the body of a firearm in the area surrounding the trigger.

An accompanying federal regulation provided a precise, highly technical definition:

“That part of a firearm which provides housing for the hammer, bolt or breechblock, and firing mechanism, and which is usually threaded at its forward portion to receive the barrel.”

The problem — and this is where (Dan) O’Kelly comes in — is that he says roughly 60% of the guns in America do not have a single part that falls under that definition. The AR-15, for example, has a split receiver — one upper and one lower. Neither meets the requirement on its own.

“For 50 years, ATF has been making this square peg fit in the round hole,” O’Kelly told CNN, “when, in fact, it doesn’t.”[/quotet

I believe this is the same fellow, lawyers have been using lately for expert testimony in where judges have sided with O'Kelly and dismissed charges against people running afoul of firearm laws.
Perhaps if thing continue down this path legally, things can come to a head and finally get deeper hooks into the unconsitutional NFA and GCA68 and cause irreparable damage to both stupid laws to the point they are as useless as a toothless heal hound?

Let's see...

Apparently a firearm needs to have these three things.

A) A hammer
B(i)A bolt, or B(ii) A breachblock.
C) A firing mechanism.

TFW half my guns aren't guns because no hammer lol.

[The Two Jerseys]

This sort of thing only happens in America. Only the police or military should have da gunz.....
Thai Soldier Livestreams Shooting Spree, Killing ‘At Least 12,’ Then Holes Up in Shopping Mall

But that doesn't count because tHaIlAnD iSn'T a CiViLiZeD cOuNtRy!

[Grinning Dragon]

This sort of thing only happens in America. Only the police or military should have da gunz.....
Thai Soldier Livestreams Shooting Spree, Killing ‘At Least 12,’ Then Holes Up in Shopping Mall

But that doesn't count because tHaIlAnD iSn'T a CiViLiZeD cOuNtRy!

Oh, right. Silly me I forgot. Deaths only count in countries like the US.

[Telconi]

But that doesn't count because tHaIlAnD iSn'T a CiViLiZeD cOuNtRy!

Oh, right. Silly me I forgot. Deaths only count in countries like the US.

Gotta love people who can wholly dismiss the deaths of people browner than them while also, somehow, not being racist.

[Grinning Dragon]

Well then...
Former ATF Firearm Technology Instructor: 60% of Guns Don’t Meet the Legal Definition of a Firearm


I believe this is the same fellow, lawyers have been using lately for expert testimony in where judges have sided with O'Kelly and dismissed charges against people running afoul of firearm laws.
Perhaps if thing continue down this path legally, things can come to a head and finally get deeper hooks into the unconstitutional NFA and GCA68 and cause irreparable damage to both stupid laws to the point they are as useless as a toothless heal hound?

Let's see...

Apparently a firearm needs to have these three things.

A) A hammer
B(i)A bolt, or B(ii) A breachblock.
C) A firing mechanism.

TFW half my guns aren't guns because no hammer lol.

For as long I can remember in my 40+ yrs, the whole AR lower being a firearm never made sense to me.