Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

spin

(17,493 posts)
3. It would be wise to update the background check system as was supposed to happen ...
Sat May 26, 2012, 07:57 PM
May 2012

because of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007. This law was signed by the President on Jan 08, 2008.

The NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007

***snip***

Questions and Answers

What is the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007?

The NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (NIAA), Pub. L. 110-180, was signed into law by the President on January 8, 2008. The NIAA amends the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 ("the Brady Act&quot (Pub. L. 103-159), under which the Attorney General established the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). The Brady Act requires Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs) to contact the NICS before transferring a firearm to an unlicensed person for information on whether the proposed transferee is prohibited from receiving or possessing a firearm under state or federal law. The NIAA was a bipartisan effort to strengthen the NICS by increasing the quantity and quality of relevant records accessible to the system.

Why was the NIAA enacted?

The NIAA was enacted in the wake of the April 2007 shooting tragedy at Virginia Tech. The Virginia Tech shooter was able to purchase firearms from an FFL because information about his prohibiting mental health history was not available to the NICS and the system was therefore unable to deny the transfer of the firearms used in the shootings. The NICS is a critical tool in keeping firearms out of the hands of prohibited persons, but it is only as effective as the information entered into the databases upon which it relies. The NIAA seeks to address the gap in information available to NICS about such prohibiting mental health adjudications and commitments and other prohibiting backgrounds. Filling these information gaps will better enable the system to operate as intended to keep guns out of the hands of persons prohibited by federal or state law from receiving or possessing firearms.emphasis added
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=49#2007


You appear to believe that the solution to the fact that the improvement to the NICS background check hasn't been successfully implemented is simply to "to restrict gun sales." Surely you do not mean that all sales of guns should immediately end?

President Obama mentioned this very problem in an op-ed to the Arizona Post.


First, we should begin by enforcing laws that are already on the books. The National Instant Criminal Background Check System is the filter that's supposed to stop the wrong people from getting their hands on a gun. Bipartisan legislation four years ago was supposed to strengthen this system, but it hasn't been properly implemented. It relies on data supplied by states - but that data is often incomplete and inadequate. We must do better.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/03/13/op-ed-president-obama-arizona-daily-star-we-must-seek-agreement-gun-refo


Obama didn't mention suspending gun sales or even imposing further restrictions on them. He was in favor of enforcing existing law and making sure that the states did a better job of living up to their responsibility to better input the data as required by the NICS Improvement Amendments Act.

That sounds entirely reasonable to me.
Good post. And a good reason to restrict gun sales. The system is broken and dangerous people are Hoyt May 2012 #1
It would be wise to update the background check system as was supposed to happen ... spin May 2012 #3
So because the states don't obey the law I have to lose a civil liberty? hack89 May 2012 #6
Cry us a river. Adequate background checks and registries are all but impossible. Hoyt May 2012 #7
Your river is a bed of sand and you have no paddle. PavePusher May 2012 #10
Could you repeat that please? sarisataka May 2012 #14
Registries of people who should not be allowed around guns. Hoyt May 2012 #15
So the correct answer is to throw the baby out with the bathwater? sarisataka May 2012 #18
So you admit gun control is failure? You are finally getting it. nt hack89 May 2012 #23
"Gunsters"? Is that like "punsters", but of a different caliber? n/t PavePusher May 2012 #12
No, another poster used it and I like it. Hoyt May 2012 #16
Hoyt, you seem to like a lot of things.... PavePusher May 2012 #29
Cry us a river rl6214 May 2012 #20
Does the concept of FIXING features of our government that are broken have any meaning for you? slackmaster May 2012 #24
That would require actual effort... Clames May 2012 #30
Fabulous system you propose krispos42 May 2012 #34
It is a rare day sarisataka May 2012 #2
Updates and improvements... discntnt_irny_srcsm May 2012 #4
So where is all of this blood running in the streets? Tejas May 2012 #5
Where are all those supposed threats that cause you guys to carry? Hoyt May 2012 #8
But you've said elsewhere the world is full of problems. DanM May 2012 #9
Hoyt doesn't really do "logic". PavePusher May 2012 #11
You are 0 for 3 on this thread. Hoyt May 2012 #17
You are 0 for 950 in this Group. Clames May 2012 #31
But has Hoyt ever indicated that he understands that in order to influence... DanM May 2012 #22
Logic doesn't work with the right wing panderers to the gun lobby and supporters. Hoyt May 2012 #32
Don't you realize your target of persuasion isn't the right wing? DanM May 2012 #37
The NRA, TParty and the gun culture segment that uses guns to intimidate are right wingers. Hoyt May 2012 #38
What are the gun-rights people doing politically that gun-control folks can't do? DanM May 2012 #42
Exactly, right wingers have mobilized TBaggers, NRA types, etc., to pass right wing legislation that Hoyt May 2012 #43
So why is it impossible to mobilize Democrats to pass progressive gun control? hack89 May 2012 #52
You sure talk a lot about being intimidated by people with guns. Tejas May 2012 #75
You of course meant lies don't work... ileus May 2012 #39
If you don't know, just say "as usual, I have no clue". Tejas May 2012 #21
They are chasing down criminals. News Flash - you gun toters are not. Hoyt May 2012 #33
You are right SGMRTDARMY May 2012 #40
You can actually defend yourself without a gun, as the 96+% who do not carry prove every day. Hoyt May 2012 #45
Your right SGMRTDARMY May 2012 #46
So you leave home prepared to shoot some "young punk." How many times has that happened? Hoyt May 2012 #58
If a young punk physically assaults me or one of my family members SGMRTDARMY May 2012 #61
"Level headed?" How is that when you are worried about "young punks?" Hoyt May 2012 #62
Yep SGMRTDARMY May 2012 #63
How would you know about a "PPR'd female canadian"? Hugabear May 2012 #69
reading posts without registering. gejohnston May 2012 #70
Sure, but it's hilarious how common that explanation is here in the Gungeon Electric Monk May 2012 #71
Can't speak for anyone else gejohnston May 2012 #72
I've only been registered for a few days SGMRTDARMY May 2012 #77
Whhhaaa ---young punks-----whhhaaaa trumad May 2012 #73
I'm in my 60's and not in the best of health. SGMRTDARMY May 2012 #78
Hey, if it makes you feeeel better, then Tejas May 2012 #53
Unfortunately, your thing pollutes society with guns. Hoyt May 2012 #59
How odd, that's the same thing Joseph Stalin said. Tejas May 2012 #64
And don't forget Hitler. SGMRTDARMY May 2012 #65
I thought every gun owner was a threat? krispos42 May 2012 #35
Potentially they are. Non-toters are obviously much less likely to shoot innocents. Hoyt May 2012 #36
Again your right SGMRTDARMY May 2012 #41
Hopefully police are doing things that you aren't -- hopefully you are not police wannabe. Hoyt May 2012 #44
I am no police wannabe SGMRTDARMY May 2012 #47
Neither Zimmerman or Loughner had been arrested in their life. Doesn't mean much. Hoyt May 2012 #48
It's not a need, it's a choice that I consciously made many years ago. SGMRTDARMY May 2012 #49
More guns affect everyone -- but you don't seem to care about that. Hoyt May 2012 #50
How does more guns in the hands of honest citizens affect everyone? SGMRTDARMY May 2012 #51
YOU, and EVERY CCW, BETTER care what others think. That insular militant attitude, SHOULD disqualify WingDinger May 2012 #68
So you want the power to take my CCW hack89 May 2012 #76
What I better do is none of your business. SGMRTDARMY May 2012 #79
Who? Every damn person that sees themselves as Trayvon. WingDinger May 2012 #80
How will you know if I am armed? SGMRTDARMY May 2012 #81
YUP, just like on TV! Tejas May 2012 #74
re: "BTW, police shoot innocents many more times than CCW citizens." discntnt_irny_srcsm May 2012 #57
Non-drivers are less likely to Tejas May 2012 #54
What a crock of shit. PavePusher May 2012 #13
Swearing and personal insults in all most every post safeinOhio May 2012 #28
Making psychological diagnoses based on internet forum posts.... Callisto32 May 2012 #55
thank you for your opinion. safeinOhio May 2012 #56
"Swearing and personal insults in all most every post may indicate a person with rl6214 May 2012 #66
Perhaps it would be a good idea safeinOhio May 2012 #67
Source: Mayors against illegal guns? rl6214 May 2012 #19
For the most part... discntnt_irny_srcsm May 2012 #25
how many people are gejohnston May 2012 #26
"Maybe that is all there is in Oregon." discntnt_irny_srcsm May 2012 #27
From the FBI site: discntnt_irny_srcsm May 2012 #60
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»FBI Data Show Gun Backgro...»Reply #3