Ohioans For Concealed Carry Discussion Forums

Federal authorities sought to take back guns from thousands of people the background check system should have blocked from buying weapons because they had criminal records, mental health issues or other problems that would disqualify them.

A USA TODAY review found that the FBI issued more than 4,000 requests last year for agents from the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives to retrieve guns from prohibited buyers.

It's the largest number of such retrieval requests in 10 years, according to bureau records – an especially striking statistic after revelations that a breakdown in the background check system allowed a troubled Air Force veteran to buy a rifle later used to kill 26 worshipers at a Texas church last month.

The FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) vets millions of gun purchase transactions every year. But the thousands of gun seizure requests highlight persistent problems in a system where analysts must complete background checks within three days of the proposed purchase. If the background check is not complete within the 72-hour time limit, federal law allows the sale to go forward. ATF agents are asked to take back the guns if the FBI later finds these sales should have been denied.

Oh, yeah. Our database needed updating...you're cooked, sorry.

That suit against the Air Force is making waves, huh?

Kinda sounds like NICS doesn't work, and that the State can't save us...

How does the FBI know who passed a background check for a firearm? Aren't NICS checks supposed to be destroyed?

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/25.9" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hey Peter, what's happening?
So we had to update our database and it turns out that you're not eligible anymore...

I think you are misreading (or misrepresenting) this article. This has nothing to do with an updated database, and nothing to do with past NICS check results. This is simply what happens when a NICS check takes longer than 3 days, the gun store completes the sale, and the NICS check finally comes back Deny. At that point, they tell the FBI to go retrieve the firearm.

bignflnut wrote: Kinda sounds like NICS doesn't work, and that the State can't save us...

NICS is broke which is why I think we need the fix NICS bill.

The states can save us. NICS is not mandatory for any state to comply with. A lawsuit back in the 90s mDE it voluntary. But all states decided to make it mandatory as it was free instead of setting up their own bavk ground check system.

Bianchi? wrote:How does the FBI know who passed a background check for a firearm? Aren't NICS checks supposed to be destroyed?

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/25.9" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Approved checks ( personal info, not the approval code) are purged after a certain time limit, but I don't remember what it was. Just a few days I believe.
Denied on the other hand, are retained.

JustaShooter wrote:This is simply what happens when a NICS check takes longer than 3 days, the gun store completes the sale, and the NICS check finally comes back Deny. At that point, they tell the FBI to go retrieve the firearm.

Listening to the debate on HR 4434 it sounds like under current law denies where a firearm was transferred go to the ATF, which doesn't have a lot of staffing so they often send retrievals to the FBI. In committee someone proposed (and it was adopted) an amendment to require automatic notification to the local FBI field office and the local law enforcement agency when this kind of prohibited transfer occurs. That's a good thing IMO, and frankly I'm surprised that doesn't happen already.

JediSkipdogg wrote:

bignflnut wrote: Kinda sounds like NICS doesn't work, and that the State can't save us...

NICS is broke which is why I think we need the fix NICS bill.

The states can save us. NICS is not mandatory for any state to comply with. A lawsuit back in the 90s mDE it voluntary. But all states decided to make it mandatory as it was free instead of setting up their own bavk ground check system.

This may not be the right one, though. Agencies should not be able to arbitrarily decide that someone is disqualified. It should be adjudicated properly, with due process. This one worries me that too many are going to be cut out with no recourse to preserve their rights.

This may not be the right one, though. Agencies should not be able to arbitrarily decide that someone is disqualified. It should be adjudicated properly, with due process. This one worries me that too many are going to be cut out with no recourse to preserve their rights.

It is a problem.
It is bad enough for someone to get constantly delayed, but to be falsely denied is up to a 1 year ordeal to straighten out.
That might be a reason the Fed's don't go after so many. They can't confirm the person is truly prohibited.
If you start getting delayed for no reason, there may be someone with info close to yours' , who is not a nice person, or they have faulty info.
That is why they have the UPIN , to clarify who is who. ("papers please")
Personally, I like the CHL route....a little extra writing, but no interaction with NICS.

Mustang380gal wrote:

JediSkipdogg wrote:

bignflnut wrote: Kinda sounds like NICS doesn't work, and that the State can't save us...

NICS is broke which is why I think we need the fix NICS bill.

The states can save us. NICS is not mandatory for any state to comply with. A lawsuit back in the 90s mDE it voluntary. But all states decided to make it mandatory as it was free instead of setting up their own bavk ground check system.

This may not be the right one, though. Agencies should not be able to arbitrarily decide that someone is disqualified. It should be adjudicated properly, with due process. This one worries me that too many are going to be cut out with no recourse to preserve their rights.

No agency decides that someone is disqualified. They simply arrest the person for a disqualifying offense. NICS, based on federal law, then decides who is or is not qualified to purchase a firearm. I get about 2 requests a month from NICS on clarification of arrest charges where they want the full police report. I would say seven out of ten times it is a D.V. pled to a D.C. and they want more info to see how the parties are related. Two out of ten times it deals with old cases where the disposition was never entered and technically I think they could do a deny thinking the case is still ongoing, but they delay and ask me to update the status of the case because the courts failed to do so. The last one out of ten is just randomness. I've been asked for OVI cases, theft cases, etc and simply send them the full report with no logic of why since they are always misdemeanors.

But I'm not sure if you think someone like my department gets to decide if someone is disqualified or not. We definitely do not. Even with a NICS delay, I don't get to say yay or nay. I simply provide them the requested info for them to. Which many times is sending them the complete police report.

My guess is that the 4,000 comes from cases where NICS never issues a "proceed" or "deny".

We had one sale where NICS never issues a proceed or deny for 9 years, we let the license expire without renewing but I doubt after 9 years they were ever going to say proceed or deny.

IMHO there is an intentional practice at NICS to do this....the buyer cannot appeal a perpetual delay.

Buyer said it always happens to him, claimed he had no idea why.

We waited the required time, and even a little more, I even called NICS....they just said "there was something that needed looked into more". Finally as allowed by law I gave the buyer his gun.

Bigger chain stores will not EVER transfer on a perpetual delay...thus allowing NICS to deny a sale in a way the buyer cannot appeal.

Also there are MANY cases where states entered past offenses into a shared database....the offense was a MM when committed (one case I knew of was in the 1980's)...then decades later the state of CA made it a felony.

Well they entered the old cases into the database as felonies when in fact they were MM back then. Took the guy some lawyer fees to get it straightened out, he was/is a class 3 owner too. First he knew of it was failing a NICS check at Walmart or some such...after passing them for years and even buying class 3 stuff which have NFA stamps and a federal background check.

Bill

JediSkipdogg wrote: No agency decides that someone is disqualified. They simply arrest the person for a disqualifying offense. NICS, based on federal law, then decides who is or is not qualified to purchase a firearm. I get about 2 requests a month from NICS on clarification of arrest charges where they want the full police report. I would say seven out of ten times it is a D.V. pled to a D.C. and they want more info to see how the parties are related. Two out of ten times it deals with old cases where the disposition was never entered and technically I think they could do a deny thinking the case is still ongoing, but they delay and ask me to update the status of the case because the courts failed to do so. The last one out of ten is just randomness. I've been asked for OVI cases, theft cases, etc and simply send them the full report with no logic of why since they are always misdemeanors.

But I'm not sure if you think someone like my department gets to decide if someone is disqualified or not. We definitely do not. Even with a NICS delay, I don't get to say yay or nay. I simply provide them the requested info for them to. Which many times is sending them the complete police report.

You do remember that there was some attempt to get people who were elderly and had someone watch over their finances DQ'd, right? No due process, just help making sure bills were caught up. And the VA was trying to get all with PTSD on the DQ list, too. Again, no due process, just a diagnosis.

Those are the agencies that I mean. Social Security, VA, etc. I am not that stupid to think that individual police departments get to decide.

Mustang380gal wrote:

JediSkipdogg wrote: No agency decides that someone is disqualified. They simply arrest the person for a disqualifying offense. NICS, based on federal law, then decides who is or is not qualified to purchase a firearm. I get about 2 requests a month from NICS on clarification of arrest charges where they want the full police report. I would say seven out of ten times it is a D.V. pled to a D.C. and they want more info to see how the parties are related. Two out of ten times it deals with old cases where the disposition was never entered and technically I think they could do a deny thinking the case is still ongoing, but they delay and ask me to update the status of the case because the courts failed to do so. The last one out of ten is just randomness. I've been asked for OVI cases, theft cases, etc and simply send them the full report with no logic of why since they are always misdemeanors.

But I'm not sure if you think someone like my department gets to decide if someone is disqualified or not. We definitely do not. Even with a NICS delay, I don't get to say yay or nay. I simply provide them the requested info for them to. Which many times is sending them the complete police report.

You do remember that there was some attempt to get people who were elderly and had someone watch over their finances DQ'd, right? No due process, just help making sure bills were caught up. And the VA was trying to get all with PTSD on the DQ list, too. Again, no due process, just a diagnosis.

Those are the agencies that I mean. Social Security, VA, etc. I am not that stupid to think that individual police departments get to decide.

I remember those instances, but this bill doesn't change those attempts. They can still try all of that. I agree though that agencies should not be able to decide that and that's why at least for the mentally incompetent there is a process, which is rarely completed and why so many are not on the list for that.

DOJ report - pdf of 60 some pages...

https://news.url.google.com/url?sa=j&ur ... qbr630wryw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

JustaShooter wrote:I think you are misreading (or misrepresenting) this article. This has nothing to do with an updated database, and nothing to do with past NICS check results. This is simply what happens when a NICS check takes longer than 3 days, the gun store completes the sale, and the NICS check finally comes back Deny. At that point, they tell the FBI to go retrieve the firearm.

I certainly could be misunderstanding the article, it's the USA Today, so I'm not certain the authors comprehend what they're writing.

What's the basis to "retrieve the firearm"? A database said so? Is someone prosecuted at this point for an illegal purchase? Is the buyer compensated for the cancellation of the transaction? Does the selling company refund the cash/credit? Does the seller get the weapon returned (inventory replenished as "new"?) Seems complicated...but I could misunderstand the process...
Are other firearms, perhaps gained in private transactions, also up for "retrieval" on this basis? Why or why not?

We've so completely accepted the lie that guns are dangerous and therefore we have to compromise with the antis so that WE seem politically/socially reasonable (be a cool kid, come on, just do it), appealing to the power of the State to approve our RKBA instead of foundational Negative Rights. Now we have to PROVE that we're qualified to simply POSSESS a thing.

NICS is repugnant to RKBA, commerce and so much else (False idol/savior). Shall we subject due process rights to a database? Freedom of assembly? Why we continue to feed that Beast is beyond me.