What\u2019s the big deal about requiring background checks for private firearm sales? If you want to sell your gun to your neighbor, you just telephone the National Instant Check hotline and ask to have your potential buyer checked out . . . right?<\/p>\n
Wrong. Although it’s reported the Nevada state Legislature, in its semi-annual scramble to close as required by midnight June 1, has just enacted a measure allowing for (but not requiring) private parties to access the Silver State’s state-run “background check” apparatus, that’s a first so far as I know, and it’s still not clear quite how it will work. I’m told the state police will apparently be given five days to respond to a written request.<\/p>\n
Up till now, no such \u201cbackground check\u201d bureaucracy, state or federal, would accept or respond to any such call from a private party, so far as I\u2019ve been able to learn. In fact, such legislation is yet another Trojan Horse, designed to eventually channel every gun sale through full-time, federally inspected gun stores with Federal Firearms Licenses, at the very time the BATF now violates decades of past promises that \u201canyone can get one just by applying,\u201d with their ongoing campaign to systematically strip the FFLs from law-abiding citizens who they now deride as part-time, \u201cbasement dealers.\u201d<\/p>\n
Why route every transfer through a federal licensee? So that a paperwork record will be created of who owns every gun in America.<\/p>\n
We\u2019re told fears that this could eventually lead to confiscation are \u201cparanoid.\u201d I call that practicing psychiatry without a license, as well as insulting. Read your world history. You don\u2019t even have to go back very far, especially in such Third World paradises of victim disarmament as, say, California.<\/p>\n
Or do you really think Mafia hit men \u201cforget\u201d and try to buy guns through licensed dealers, instead of buying stolen or otherwise untraceable weapons out of Guido\u2019s car trunk — then slapping themselves upside the forehead and exclaiming \u201cWhat was I thinking?!\u201d when they fail to pass the background check? <\/p>\n
Comes now Jonathan J. Cooper, writing in the April 19 Salem, Oregon Statesman-Journal that \u201cWith Oregon Democrats moving forward on a bill to require background checks for private gun sales, the potential political backlash is becoming apparent.\u201d<\/p>\n
Gun rights advocates in early April filed petitions to recall three Democratic Oregon lawmakers who sponsored the legislation, and they say more could follow, Mr. Cooper reports.<\/p>\n
The Oregon state Senate voted in early April to require background checks on any person-to-person gun sale not involving relatives. A Junction City gun shop owner filed the first recall petition against Rep. Val Hoyle, who received campaign money from gun-rights groups but signed on as a sponsor of the background check bill.<\/p>\n
The lawmakers facing recall got a show of support from national Democrats. The Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee sent a statement calling the recall petition against Hoyle \u201cnaked retaliation by anti-gun safety activists who object to common-sense firearm laws.\u201d<\/p>\n
As it happens, I agree with that statement completely . . . once we apply our \u201cspielchecker\u201d to remove the Democrats\u2019 focus-group-tested buzz words and translate their statement into standard English, in which it reads: Yes, the recall petition is, in fact, \u201ca legal and proper response by defenders of vital, Constitutionally guaranteed human rights who object to the attempts of totalitarians to create a police state on the model of Stalin\u2019s and Hitler\u2019s through victim disarmament.\u201d<\/p>\n
In a statement released by her spokesman, Hoyle said she won\u2019t back off, adding that she\u2019s confident her constituents would support her if it got that far. To hold a recall election, Hoyle\u2019s critics would need to collect more than 3,000 signatures from registered voters in a district she won last year by 12 points.<\/p>\n
\u201cI want to be clear that I won\u2019t be intimidated away from doing what I think is right,\u201d Hoyle said.<\/p>\n
Separately, a group of constituents filed recall petitions against Rep. Susan McLain of Forest Grove and Sen. Chuck Riley of Hillsboro, both freshmen Democrats from swing districts in Washington County.<\/p>\n
Riley barely eked out a win last year, Mr. Cooper reports, defeating a Republican incumbent by less than one percent of votes cast. But he said he\u2019s not concerned about a recall over gun control, noting he campaigned on the issue. He believes his support for background checks is part of the reason he won his election.<\/p>\n
\u201cThere\u2019s no reason to think that you\u2019re going to be recalled for doing what you said you were going to do in your campaign,\u201d Riley said. \u201cIf you make promises and keep them, there\u2019s no reason to think that you\u2019re going to be recalled.\u201d<\/p>\n
The Web site Colorado Peak Politics (\u201cColorado\u2019s conservative bully pulpit\u201d) responded that for Coloradans, the Oregon battle shapes up as \u201cgun control deja vu.\u201d<\/p>\n
Back in 2013, of course, gun rights advocates successfully recalled two Colorado lawmakers (Democrats Sen. Angela Giron and Senate President John Morse) and caused a third (Sen. Evie Hudak) to resign due to their support of expanded \u201cbackground checks\u201d after the shooting in a \u201cno-guns-allowed\u201d movie theater showing the latest Batman film in the town of Aurora.<\/p>\n
Thus, \u201cWhile Oregon legislators don\u2019t seem too concerned about the local petitions against them, we\u2019d like to highlight the history of the battle in Colorado as a warning,\u201d comment the Colorado conservatives.<\/p>\n
\u201cForcing legislation through a friendly Senate and House will seriously irk constituents who believe in their constitutional rights. In Colorado, sheriffs, legislators, small business owners, and private citizens took aim at the laws before the ink was dry, despite Democrat arrogance. Former Senator Giron confidently told The Huffington Post in 2013 that \u2018I think it\u2019s without a doubt that we\u2019re going to make it through this [recall] \u2026 We are going to be making some history here.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n
The Coloradoans see a similarity in Oregon Sen. Riley\u2019s remark that \u201cThere\u2019s no reason to think that you\u2019re going to be recalled for doing what you said you were going to do in your campaign.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cWe\u2019ll see about that, Sen. Riley,\u201d the Coloradoans conclude.<\/p>\n
NO FOSTER KIDS FOR LICENSED GUN OWNERS<\/strong><\/p>\n Stephen Gutowski of the Washington Free Beacon reported in March that a Nevada couple is seeking a change to state law after being denied a license to raise foster children due to a regulation that bars foster parents from carrying loaded firearms.<\/p>\n Brian Wilson and his wife Valerie applied to become foster parents in 2013. After a three-month process, which included \u201cten weeks of parenting classes and multiple home study visits,\u201d the couple was told they would be denied foster parent status because of their refusal to comply with a demand from the state\u2019s Department of Family Services that they not carry any weapons when foster children are present.<\/p>\n \u201cIf they were to turn around and deny our right to foster a child because we had a Bible or Koran, they\u2019d be screaming from the heavens, \u2018How dare somebody infringe upon somebody\u2019s First Amendment rights?\u2019\u201d responded Brian Wilson. \u201cI\u2019m really heartbroken,\u201d Valerie Wilson told the Nevada Assembly\u2019s Judiciary Committee back in March. \u201cI really want a family. It\u2019s been our plan all along.\u201d<\/p>\n The couple supports a bill sponsored by Assemblywoman Michele Fiore, R-Las Vegas (who\u2019s been known to appear in campaign ads wearing a holstered gun on her hip) that would change the Nevada Department of Health and Human Services\u2019 regulations requiring firearms to be unloaded and inoperable any time foster children are present with their foster parents.<\/p>\n \u201cWe have children in need of great foster care, and we have had people that are law-abiding citizens that have gotten their background checks, that have their CCWs (concealed carry permits), literally denied to foster a child because they have a concealed-weapons permit,\u201d Fiore said during the hearing.<\/p>\n Fiore told the Las Vegas Review-Journal the bill has bipartisan support. State Sen. Kelvin Atkinson, D-Las Vegas, who has a concealed-carry permit, is considering becoming a foster parent, she said.<\/p>\n Reaction to the bill within the committee was mostly positive. \u201cI was really shocked to hear about this current law because I grew up with a father who was in law enforcement and we were exposed to guns my entire life,\u201d commented Assemblywoman Victoria Seaman, R-Clark County. \u201cI am now a CCW holder.\u201d<\/p>\n The Nevada Firearms Coalition supports the bill. \u201cCitizens should not be denied the opportunity to be participants in the foster care program because they own firearms,\u201d NFC president Don Turner said in a letter to the committee. \u201cSafe storage . . . is the critical component of firearms safety in the home and this bill adequately addresses these issues.\u201d<\/p>\n Opponents of the bill insist being a foster parent \u201cis not a right.\u201d<\/p>\n True. But keeping and bearing arms is. And denying gun owners the opportunities that others enjoy to participate fully in our society tends to \u201cinfringe\u201d that right . . . doesn\u2019t it? <\/p>\n HER WORK WILL GO ON<\/strong><\/p>\n Sarah Brady, who pressured politicians to ignore the Second Amendment (a provision without which the current federal union could never have been formed), died April 4 at the age of 73.<\/p>\n Her husband was shot during an assassination attempt on Ronald Reagan in 1981. James Brady was paralyzed, and last year died of those injuries. Reagan\u2019s life was saved by the quick actions of Secret Service agents who were armed, including one who deployed an Uzi machine pistol.<\/p>\n By making it harder for potential crime victims to arm themselves, as the president\u2019s bodyguards were armed that day, Mrs. Brady\u2019s work will go on, continuing to cost countless lives.<\/p>\n Vin Suprynowicz, former editorial writer for the Las Vegas Review-Journal, is the author of \u201cSend in the Waco Killers\u201d and a new novel about the War on Drugs, \u201cThe Testament of James.\u201d A version of this column appears in the June 10 edition of Shotgun News.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" What\u2019s the big deal about requiring background checks for private firearm sales? If you want to sell your gun to your neighbor, you just telephone the National Instant Check hotline and ask to have your potential buyer checked out . . . right? Wrong. Although it’s reported the Nevada state Legislature, in its semi-annual scramble […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[8,17,51],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2509","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-2nd-amendment","category-big-brother","category-self-defense"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/pWqFl-Et","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2509","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2509"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2509\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2510,"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2509\/revisions\/2510"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2509"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2509"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vinsuprynowicz.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2509"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\nA letter to the couple from the Clark County Department of Family Services said \u201cThe applicants stated they would not be able to comply with this regulation if licensed due to having a concealed weapons permit to carry their personal defense weapon on their physical body.\u201d<\/p>\n