Senator Chris Murphy On Universal Background Checks
BY Herschel Smith
7 years, 1 month ago
TPM:
“You said earlier that you would be willing to allow a clean bill in Congress that bans or regulates bump stocks without requiring more, broader gun control to be attached to the bill,” Jake Tapper said. “Is universal background checks, closing the so-called gun show loophole, requiring background checks for private sales, is that the next step for people in your philosophical camp and Senate?”
“It should be the next step, in large part because it is the most popularly accepted change. And it has the biggest effect,” Murphy said. “So yes, that would be the clear next step. That should be our North Star as we try to figure out how to proceed.”
Never forget they want you in a registry. It’s their “North Star,” their “touchstone,” the penultimate inflection of their control desires. Just before illegality.
On October 9, 2017 at 3:04 pm, joe said:
are we not really in a registry when we buy a gun already?…other than buying a gun from a guy walking around the gunshow, you have to go through a background check for all the guys with tables…the only “loophole” is me buying from frank or joe nobody…no background check involved…
On October 9, 2017 at 3:23 pm, Herschel Smith said:
Sort of, which is why I don’t like Form 4473. But only sort of. All it means is that you bought the gun from an FFL. It doesn’t mean you didn’t sell it to somebody or that you still own it.
On October 10, 2017 at 2:09 pm, Yuri said:
Same question as joe. The government has a record of the name, address, age, etc, of everyone who has bought a gun from an FFL, attached to the type, make, serial number of the gun purchased.
And if there’s a private sale, the gun itself can still be traced back from the current owner/possessor to the original buyer from an FFL.
I guess I’m having trouble understanding how that’s not a registry.