Most people don't understand what a waste of resources the Brady Checks are, so I did some digging and it's nothing more than catch and release. I wrote about it and the Daily Caller picked it up. I think there's some useful information we gunnies can use in arguing with the Communists, so here's the link:

https://dailycaller.com/section/guns-and-gear/

The op-ed is at the top of that page and the direct link is

https://dailycaller.com/2019/09/19/...y-nothing-happens-when-a-criminal-fails/

There's also a link in the item straight to GAO's report on how bad Brady skunks.

Exactly. You’d THINK the ATF would have some kind of team that investigated “denials” to make sure these weren’t “really bad dudes” about to do something. If they’re OBVIOUS felons, they should be arrested for trying to obtain a firearm. I’m not aware of very many folks getting prosecuted for trying to obtain a firearm when they are obviously prohibited from doing so.

I would tell the progressives.

BTW, great article! Nice writing!

The ATF is only interested in prosecuting LEGAL gun owners. Not FELONS. 😡

My red flag state would like me to comment on this thread.

Background checks need to go away not be improved

Background checks. Barr likes em, but he's Deep State, so there's that.

Ya reckon they watching you pretty close...?

Probably have an algorithm for Loony, conservative, gun nut types.



DF

Good job............no, make that Great job Dave.

Now, can you take that and testify at congressional hearings in D.C., ask the major promulgators on camera, direct questions re: "why are these violations not being prosecuted if you in Congress REALLY want to take guns out of the hand of criminals?"


The f'rs
Thanks for writing it and letting us know about it.

Geno

to them dems its a way to ruin the gunshows.

Thanks, Dave.

Background checks have more to do with a de facto registration of lawful owners, than stopping criminals, IMO.

Hear-hear!

Background checks, at the very least, are one of many little things the government does to discourage gun ownership. At worst, they disallow honest people who SHOULD be able to own guns. In between there's the whole registration thing and partial registration goes whole-hog if they ever get UBC's and have them tied to record-keeping, which they most certainly will be.

So does all the talk about crazy folks and guns. No sane person wants a truly crazy individual to access firearms or any other dangerous tool. The problem is, to really sum it up, it's just like gang members, criminals, etc. The government really doesn't care about them having guns, they want to take those away from law abiding citizens. People are slowly beginning to realize this, en-masse. They haven't gotten as far in realization about the insane. The government really doesn't care if insane persons do access guns. They want to label sane persons insane, just like they want to label the law-abiding as criminals. Then they want to deprive us of our weapons so they can deprive us of other essential liberties. All this talk about keeping the guns out of the hands of the mentally imbalanced actually does no good. I mean, who do y'all think they are talking about?

Thanks for the feedback. What bothers me the most is, the GAO report came out LAST SEPTEMBER, was lightly "reported," and yet, it seems I;m the first person in America to write anything about it after having actually read it. I'm really miffed because NRA, GOA, SAF haven't been flooding the media opinion sections about this.
Bottom line is, all Brady does now is sweat people like me, wastes our time, and doesn't seriously mitigate any murders. For example, the Gilroy shooter flunked a CA background check. Was he chased down? Naw. So he got a private sale in Nevada. What's wrong with this picture?

Dave, thanks for your article. The problem here is the takeaway from this will be the current system is broken and needs to be fixed. The problem is, it doesn't need to be fixed, it needs to be scrapped. The people being hassled are the exact ones who don't need to be hassled and this is precisely what the government and its owners want.

Background checks never stop a criminal from getting a gun.

The bigger prooblem in Gilroy was nobody was prepared or allowed to protect themselves.
Sad that they even needed to but in today crazy world it seems necessary
If the powers that be really wanted to stop gun crime would the shootings in Chicago and places akin be allowed to continue?
BG checks are not about stopping crime or protecting folks that is just what the public is told and mostly accepted propaganda.
GCA of 68 didn't stop Regan being shot, did it?
It is all a farce fed to the public to change our God-given Constitutional rights,
Don't think so?
Ask Beto

It was “crazy” people the Soviets rounded up and sent to the gulags for “re-education”.

So, who decides who’s crazy?

Be careful with that one. You see where I’m going....

DF

That’s only if your state put the fu*kings to you back in the 90’s by deferring to the Feds for NICS checks do to Brady law. Posted this before but you all keep hammering the dead horse to death. I have a total of 8 maybe 9 NICS checks run on me by LE since 91, doesn’t mean I bought a gun just means I applied. Keep beating the dead horse and pumping up your articles.

Each state has the option of turning over all background checks on firearms to the FBI or it can choose to act as a state point-of-contact (POC) to conduct background checks on either handguns, long guns, or both. Additionally, a state can choose to issue alternative permits. Alternative permits must be approved by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF).
Nebraska is a Brady alternative permit state and serves as a POC for purchasing handguns, but defers to the federal government to regulate long gun sales. Nebraska law prescribing handgun purchases (Laws 1991, LB 355) actually predates the Brady Law.

In Nebraska, an individual must apply in his or her county of residence for a firearms purchase certificate from a designated local law enforcement official. This is most often the county sheriff, but can be the chief of police. The local law enforcement official performs the background check, which includes NICS, as well as the ability to search additional local criminal databases. Applications can be made in person or by mail.

The local law enforcement official has three business days to complete a background check and is required to
approve the certificate if the applicant is (1) 21 years of age or older and (2) not prohibited from purchasing or possessing a handgun per federal law (18 USC 922). If the application is denied, the applicant must be told why in writing. Purchase certificates are valid for three years and allow the holder to purchase an unlimited number of firearms with one background check.

In 2006, the Legislature enacted the Concealed Handgun Permit Act. Concealed handgun permits are processed
by the Nebraska State Patrol. The requirements for a concealed handgun permit exceed those required for a Nebraska firearms purchase certificate. However, once granted, a concealed carry handgun permit also qualifies as an alternative permit. Concealed carry permits are valid for five years.

ATF has approved both of the state’s firearms purchase and concealed carry permits as alternative permits for buying long guns. State law does not require a purchase permit for buying long guns. Kthe buyer does not have a purchase permit, gun stores follow the Brady Law protocol and contact the FBI for the NICS check on long gun sales.

Sounds like the state is the problem in Nebraska, here no permit or anything else is needed to CC or buy beyond what the federal gooberment requires.

Isn’t that what you all are bitching about is the Federal goobermint. I mean NICS is a Federal goobermint registration right? And Federal regs require a NICS right? So if my state fuggs over Fed control and gives me the ability to purchase without the Feds knowing or having a record other than the 4473, that’s bad right? Thought that was what state rights were all about?
Does the article take into account the statistics of failed state and local background checks before it hits NICS? I think 13 or 14 states have permanent primacy over NICS.
As far as your permitless CC it’s only good in your state, mines good in 38, plus open carry has been legal here for 50+ years unlike Texass and others which had to enact it in the last few years.

So your state doesn't use the federal data base for background checks?
yeah right.

laffin,,,,

Maybe you otta go read how they check and see if you can get that stupid Nebraska handgun permit.
Damn, the ignorance in the place is astounding sometimes

Swifty,
While your criticism is good because it presents more information, I'd like to remind you of the concept of word count. The GAO report is 89 pages. You just TRY to crush that down into 700 words or less. Go ahead. It's hard, and a writer has to set priorities. If you can do better, have at it, we'lll be looking for your byline in forums aside the Campfire. Or even better, you'll write something so impressive, you'll be invited to testify under oath before a Senate or House committee hearing on live TV.

The ATF is not interested in doing any real work-- ie, tracking those who should not have guns.

PREZACTLY