Background Checks

[JackEllis]

I might be the only only visitor to this site who didn't know much about NICS other than having to fill out the form and then wait (California rule) 10 days. I wasn't too terribly surprised by what I found, which is that the so-called background check appears to be cursory. I've posted my references at the bottom so others can verify that what I've written is factual. The minor editorializing is mine.

There are 9 tests NICS uses to determine whether someone can purchase a gun:

• Has the buyer been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by more than a year in jail
• Is the buyer a fugitive from justice
• Does the buyer use unlawful drugs
• Has the buyer been found by a court of law to be mentally defective or has the buyer been committed to a mental institution
• Is the buyer an llegal alien
• Was the buyer dishonorably discharged from the military
• Did the buyer renounce US citizenship
• Is the buyer subject to an order restraining the person from harassing, stalking or threatening an intimate partner or the child of an intimate partner
• Has the buyer been convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence

This list catches some things and misses others. For example, making threats against people other than domestic partners or their kids as Nikolas Cruz did would not show up in a background check.

All records of successful inquiries (requests for NICS background checks) and inquiries that are approved after an appeal are destroyed immediately. So someone who repeatedly gets rejected when they first apply but manages to get approval would never be flagged. Similarly someone who submits a large number of applications (to buy a large number of weapons) in a short period of time would also not be flagged.

If for some reason an inquiry requires further checking, NICS has three business days to conduct further due diligence. If the inquiry has not been acted upon within three days it is automatically approved.

Before the NICS database was made operational, the original legislation required local LE to notify a gun seller that they had no information indicating the buyer was or should be prohibited until NICS was operational.

ATF definition of a prohibited person

Synopsis of Criteria for a Prohibited Person

Brady Bill This is the legislation that authorized NICS

About NICS (FBI site)

[dustoff31]

I might be the only only visitor to this site who didn't know much about NICS other than having to fill out the form and then wait (California rule) 10 days. I wasn't too terribly surprised by what I found, which is that the so-called background check appears to be cursory. I've posted my references at the bottom so others can verify that what I've written is factual. The minor editorializing is mine.

There are 9 tests NICS uses to determine whether someone can purchase a gun:

• Has the buyer been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by more than a year in jail
• Is the buyer a fugitive from justice
• Does the buyer use unlawful drugs
• Has the buyer been found by a court of law to be mentally defective or has the buyer been committed to a mental institution
• Is the buyer an llegal alien
• Was the buyer dishonorably discharged from the military
• Did the buyer renounce US citizenship
• Is the buyer subject to an order restraining the person from harassing, stalking or threatening an intimate partner or the child of an intimate partner
• Has the buyer been convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence

This list catches some things and misses others. For example, making threats against people other than domestic partners or their kids as Nikolas Cruz did would not show up in a background check.

All records of successful inquiries (requests for NICS background checks) and inquiries that are approved after an appeal are destroyed immediately. So someone who repeatedly gets rejected when they first apply but manages to get approval would never be flagged. Similarly someone who submits a large number of applications (to buy a large number of weapons) in a short period of time would also not be flagged.

If for some reason an inquiry requires further checking, NICS has three business days to conduct further due diligence. If the inquiry has not been acted upon within three days it is automatically approved.

Before the NICS database was made operational, the original legislation required local LE to notify a gun seller that they had no information indicating the buyer was or should be prohibited until NICS was operational.

ATF definition of a prohibited person

Synopsis of Criteria for a Prohibited Person

Brady Bill This is the legislation that authorized NICS

About NICS (FBI site)

Correct. Any database is only is only as good as data submitted to it. Nickolas Cruz didn't show up because he was never arrested or 5150'd for anything despite the sheriff's office visiting him 40 over times.

The Texas church shooter didn't show up because the Air Force failed to submit his prohibition to NICS.

The Auroura, CO shooter didn't show up NICS because even though his psychiatrist (a university employee) reported him to the school as a threat, he was never arrested or 5150's so he didn't show up in NICS.

The college that the Tucson shooter attended sent the college police to his house and served him with papers saying that they thought he was a threat and not to come back to school until he had a clean psych eval. But no action was taken beyond that. So he had no record in NICS.

I could go on, but I think you see the trend here.

Yet some would have us believe that more background checks using the same system we have now, operated and fed by the same people who operate and feed it now will fix things. There is a word for people who think like that.

[JackEllis]

Correct. Any database is only is only as good as data submitted to it.

Yet some would have us believe that more background checks using the same system we have now, operated and fed by the same people who operate and feed it now will fix things. There is a word for people who think like that.

The system is inadequate in part because data that arguably should be fed to it isn't. Not just what's mandated by law, but things like encounters with the police that currently are not.

Relying on any one measure to reduce the number of shootings won't work. It's going to take more than one, each of which probably has an unacceptably high failure rate when taken by itself but when applied in combination will result in far fewer failures.

One of the big flaws in NICS is that it relies on people feeding data into it.

[FalconLair]

background checks won't solve anything

[Barang]

he was reported 39 times and it didn't make a difference. So who's really to blame here? I know it is not the AR-15.

[Epaphroditus]

Multiple hangun purchases within 5 says are reported as form 3310.4

Some FFL have systems in place to catch repeat problems (Cabelas) flags previously denied, similar names/addy to prevent straw purchase and so on.

I'm addition to NICS each state can have additional checjs or mechanisms in place. Similarly individual FFL have their own policies.

[Epaphroditus]

Also more some questions on 4473 rely on the applicants truthfulness and the answers are not verified. A big one is the drug question but there are others like citizenship.

[rugershooter]

I might be the only only visitor to this site who didn't know much about NICS other than having to fill out the form and then wait (California rule) 10 days. I wasn't too terribly surprised by what I found, which is that the so-called background check appears to be cursory. I've posted my references at the bottom so others can verify that what I've written is factual. The minor editorializing is mine.

There are 9 tests NICS uses to determine whether someone can purchase a gun:

• Has the buyer been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by more than a year in jail
• Is the buyer a fugitive from justice
• Does the buyer use unlawful drugs
• Has the buyer been found by a court of law to be mentally defective or has the buyer been committed to a mental institution
• Is the buyer an llegal alien
• Was the buyer dishonorably discharged from the military
• Did the buyer renounce US citizenship
• Is the buyer subject to an order restraining the person from harassing, stalking or threatening an intimate partner or the child of an intimate partner
• Has the buyer been convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence

This list catches some things and misses others. For example, making threats against people other than domestic partners or their kids as Nikolas Cruz did would not show up in a background check.

All records of successful inquiries (requests for NICS background checks) and inquiries that are approved after an appeal are destroyed immediately. So someone who repeatedly gets rejected when they first apply but manages to get approval would never be flagged. Similarly someone who submits a large number of applications (to buy a large number of weapons) in a short period of time would also not be flagged.

If for some reason an inquiry requires further checking, NICS has three business days to conduct further due diligence. If the inquiry has not been acted upon within three days it is automatically approved.

Before the NICS database was made operational, the original legislation required local LE to notify a gun seller that they had no information indicating the buyer was or should be prohibited until NICS was operational.

ATF definition of a prohibited person

Synopsis of Criteria for a Prohibited Person

Brady Bill This is the legislation that authorized NICS

About NICS (FBI site)

What's your point? Serious question.
An instant background check is, by nature, going to be a more cursory check.

[Endless]

In Maine or Oregon it’s a 10 minute process. California can do the same thing in 10 days in 10 minutes. That’s 100% fact.

Reality is the 4473 needs a complete overhaul.

Now folks hear folks wanting to shoot folks all the time. The issue is who do you take seriously? You blanket everyone even though some folks say it because they are pissed in the moment. That can be from a driver that cuts you off to a knife wielding person. I know many of you have done it. If you say you never have then maybe it’s YOU that needs an evaluation.

Look get rid of the democrats in California and your gun laws will slowly shift to free state laws. What we also have in California is a population problem. Meaning that we have millions of people that are afraid of firearms and can’t stand black guns. They don’t understand them period. Plus folks in California aren’t ready for open carry with no permit. It’s the way of life in Maine. Point blank period. Plus Maine’s crime is way below California but again we come back to about a million folks in the entire state vs many millions in California.

There is no easy or quick fix to the background check unless you overhaul the 4473 and get rid of the 10 day wait. That’s complete and utter bull**** from the democrats in California.

[wpage]

The current system evidently needs work.

[Doheny]

California's background check is instantaneous. The ten-day waiting period is a cooling-off period.

[Notpc]

California's background check is instantaneous. The ten-day waiting period is a cooling-off frustration period.

After the first gun purchase, the ten day wait is irrelevant, but I think it was upheld by the court. Just one more poke in the eye to the people they shouldn't be worrying about. Jose gang banger doesn't have a "cooling off period".

[Doheny]

After the first gun purchase, the ten day wait is irrelevant, but I think it was upheld by the court. Just one more poke in the eye to the people they shouldn't be worrying about. Jose gang banger doesn't have a "cooling off period".

Agreed. Why do I need a ten-day cooling off period when I'm a CCW holder who happens to be carrying when I'm buying a gun?

.

[GW]

Agreed. Why do I need a ten-day cooling off period when I'm a CCW holder who happens to be carrying when I'm buying a gun?

.

To screw with you. To make you say "Eff it. It's not worth the hassle."
Every gun owner they turn off with this petty nonsense is a victory for them.

[L84CABO]

More fun facts for you...

California is the only state that maintains a "Prohibited Persons" list for firearms...the APPS system (Armed Prohibited Persons System) which was implemented around 2006. Since it's inception, however, the list has never been even remotely close to zero. At times there have been almost 40K names on the list. That is 40K people who were believed to have as many as 60K firearms that aren't supposed to.

The lowest the list has ever been appears to have been around 2015/2016 with about 10K names and 20K firearms. It is, of course, difficult to monitor this since the information in the list is extremely confidential. I suspect in part because if people knew that we can't even enforce the current laws on the books and/or don't have enough resources to go after the known criminals, they might be opposed to implementing even more gun control...that obviously can't be supported.

And this is just one state.