Through this entire 591/594 mess, this question has been at the forefront of my mind. Why do we need background checks in a free society?

If someone is really such a threat that we're concerned about what they might do with a gun, why aren't they still in jail? And despite background checks, a felon can go into any hardware store and buy hammers, hatchets, axes, knives, nail guns... you name it... all that can be used to maim or kill. Not to mention guns are readily available on the black market.

On the flip side... if someone has served their time and is genuinely turning their life around, we're okay with stripping them of their right to one of the most effective self-defense tools available. I'm sure many can't afford to move to nice neighborhoods when they get out, so end up committing another felony just to protect themselves. We also accept stripping felons of their voting rights. Along with the stigma already surrounding them, it's equivalent to a life sentence. This is not helping felons reintegrate back into society; it's turning them away from it.

Meanwhile, law-abiding citizens have to prove their innocence to purchase a firearm and often wait 7-10 days or longer to get it, which in some instances may be too long (especially in 594's world where a long term loan is illegal) and is technically an infringement.

So what good are they?


Sent from my UAV using Disposition Matrix 2.0

It's not about our need for safety, it's about our leaders need for control

So who often has to wait 7-10 days? I can't remember having a background check go more than overnight, even with a delay.

I think your meta point - about why are people out of jail if we think they are dangerous enough to not own guns - is worth discussing.

The probability is they are going to re-offend, especially if it was a violent crime. I think our society is saying "you've served your time, but just in case you aren't reformed....."

How far back does a felon losing their 2A rights go?

I have, everyone in Cali has, which is what Washington appears to be attempting to model. In Cali it's if I remember correct, it's 2 weeks for rifles and shotguns, and around 30 days for pistols

Can you be more specific? 594 changes the maximum wait time (with no response to the background check), not the minimum wait time. It is possible the extra transaction load could delay responses though.

Haha just saw this on fb, seemed appropriate

You have a permission slip from the state that says you can take your purchase after a call to NICS, everyone else without a CPL (over 6 million people, I believe) has to wait 7 days.


Sent from my UAV using Disposition Matrix 2.0

I thought it was 5 days. But I've never bought a pistol without a CPL.

I actually agree with Curtis. If someone is too dangerous to own a gun, they're too dangerous to be on the streets.

We would have room to hold these people if we didn't insist on putting people guilty of victimless crimes in prison as well. Simple drug possession, or sales. Prostitution, etc. etc.

I think you're right, it's been a few years. Either way... you have to wait!


Sent from my UAV using Disposition Matrix 2.0

Yeah it is 5 days for a handgun without a CPL and 594 doesn't touch that.

I never said it did.


Sent from my UAV using Disposition Matrix 2.0

5 business days (meaning days on which state offices are open), which could easily stretch to 8 calendar days...

Here is your prime time example.

I am a Canadian.

Been here for 14 years.

I pay more taxes than Carter has Little Liver pills.

Got green card, got CPL.

Worst thing I ever did down here is a speeding ticket.

No other drama with the law in any way, ever.

I am squeaky clean, except for a bacon habit, bad bacon habit. I like a lot of bacon.

I GET DELAYED EVERY FUCKING PURCHASE, LONG GUN OR HAND GUN !!!!!!

And, it is anywhere from a few days to over a week before I get a proceed handed over to the FFL I buy from.

Explain that shit, willya ?

It is fucking retarded.

I think there are two questions here:

1) Should it be illegal for a felon to have a firearm?
2) If so, does it make sense to run background checks?

For 1), given the rate at which felons re-offend (anecdotally anyhow, I don't have data), I think it should be illegal for them to own guns. It's no different than telling a released child molester that he can't be near children.

For 2) . . . meh, I think you could eliminate the requirement to run background checks.

However, as we set up laws in this perfect world in our heads, it's all contingent upon rigorous enforcement of the laws that we choose to put in place.

My roommate in college had the same problem. Delayed EVERY single time. He ended up getting an internship with a police department while we were in college. They had the same issue with his background check and his supervisor later told him that it was because he shared his name and brith date with a felon located in Alabama.

You may be having a similar issue.