Are you sure?
I've purchased several used handguns from a FFL and I didn't see any difference in the process.
Fern
The current system keeps track of new sales only for guns. There is a record of what gun is transferred and to whom. But it's for new guns only. So if a person, who is legal to own a gun, doesn't want to have a registered gun on the system they can do so by purchasing a used gun. Still, it's an infringement but not as severe.
-snip-
Are you sure?
I've purchased several used handguns from a FFL and I didn't see any difference in the process.
Fern
But since I do think the system worked with DOMA you really didn't prove any point whatsoever?
If you really like the background check system, then use it at the voting booth.
Most of the people that are stopped due to a background check are false positives. The system should at least be 80% or 90% accurate before we use it. I think they estimated that the background check system is wrong 90% of the time when it stops someone from purchasing a weapon.
If you really like the background check system, then use it at the voting booth.
The system is around 98% accurate. Again I posted the data for all to look at. Can we stop pulling numbers out of our asses now?
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/grants/239272.pdf
The remaining denials (71,410, or nearly 94%) did not meet referral guidelines or were overturned or canceled.
Field offices investigated a total of 1,923 unlawful possession cases that began in 2010. A retrieval of a firearm (or firearms) from a prohibited person by field agents occurred in 1,164 (about 61%) of the cases. The subject of the investigation was cleared in 509 cases (approximately 27%).
The system is around 98% accurate. Again I posted the data for all to look at. Can we stop pulling numbers out of our asses now?
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/grants/239272.pdf
98% accurate where? According to the data there:
Nearly 94% of the denials were overturned, cancelled or were not referred to be investigated for some reason, only a little over 6% of the denials were valid
Well fuck me it gets even worse...
Even 27% of the ones they went after were cleared
Obviously...he's confusing "accuracy rate" with "denial rate" or just assumes that all the denials were valid...sad, sad place to argue fromDon't bother. He can't read tables.
Umm, the actual denials for 2010 were 76,142. The amount of NICS applications was 6,037,394. So the amount of denials compared to approves was only 1.2%
Out of those 76K denials, only 4,732 was not turned into proceeds within 24. Those 4.7K denials were turned over to the ATF for further investigation. The other 68K were not.
Out of the 4,732 initial denials 2,265 ended up being delayed denials. Meaning they eventually the firearm was sold to that person. Only 2,467 were actually DENIED in 2010. That's it. Clear as day on the table. They list WHY they original 76K denials were done immediately by NICS. Most were false positives to things like a felony conviction.
So 2,467 ACTUAL legit denials out of 76K initial denials by NICS that were then acted upon by the ATF.... you do the math.
yes do the math. 75k/6 million equals what? .0125% that seems pretty fucking accurate doesn't it?
Yes do the math. 75k/6 million equals what? .0125% that seems pretty fucking accurate doesn't it?
This...1 billion times THIS!omg.. Go back to school!
Obviously...he's confusing "accuracy rate" with "denial rate" or just assumes that all the denials were valid...sad, sad place to argue from
omg.. Go back to school!
This...1 billion times THIS!
Did you read the post I quoted that I responded to? Obviously you didn't because the poster made no comment about accurate denial rates.
But I wouldn't expect an idiot like you to understand that.
Wow you are dense...I read them all and you are absolutely clueless as usual.Did you read the post I quoted that I responded to? Obviously you didn't because the poster made no comment about accurate denial rates.
But I wouldn't expect an idiot like you to understand that.
Reading comprehension isn't your strong point eh?Most of the people that are stopped due to a background check are false positives. The system should at least be 80% or 90% accurate before we use it. I think they estimated that the background check system is wrong 90% of the time when it stops someone from purchasing a weapon.
Yes you should both go back to school. Do they still teach reading comprehension?
Back pedaling much? No one cares much about non-denials from the NICS. Who cares if a law-abiding citizen that is seeking to purchase a gun is able to do so without being stopped?
Yes you are back peddling as I responded to exactly what the poster wrote, if he meant something else then he should have wrote that instead.
Sorry I don't speak "idiot speak" like you so I can only go by what people wrote.
Wow you are dense...I read them all and you are absolutely clueless as usual.
Reading comprehension isn't your strong point eh?
Seriously? The post you were responding to:Lol
Keep trying.
Your absolute stupidity in boldMost of the people that are stopped due to a background check are false positives. The system should at least be 80% or 90% accurate before we use it. I think they estimated that the background check system is wrong 90% of the time when it stops someone from purchasing a weapon.