General Discussion

IdaBriggs

(10,559 posts)

5. When a "background check" is done for the FBI or other government entity

Reply to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #2)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 10:56 AM

Jan 2013

when *a programmer* wants a job, they check the other members of the household.

There are on-line search engines that show the names/addresses of other people living in a house - I think Yahoo! people search even has the feature, but don't quote me on that, since I haven't looked at it for a while.

Cross-checking an address with a parolee or felon list should be a "no-brainer" - asking the person buying the gun to list the other members of the household could even shorten that (but I say double-check).

Your point #4 is a problem for me - it seems STUPID and INSANE. It is a reality that needs to be changed.

In fact, #2, #3 and #4 all need to be changed - I could live with #1 being private, as long as *all level of law enforcement* had access to the information.

This seems to be common sense; I remain livid.

(But thank you for the thoughtful reply - it is helping me to calm down.)

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

115 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I am F*CK*NG PISSED. Michigan Gun Laws Written by the Mob?!?!? [View all] IdaBriggs Jan 2013 OP

Would you expected better from the Tbaggers in Lansing? Denninmi Jan 2013 #1

nope heaven05 Jan 2013 #59

Yeah, well, FightForMichigan Jan 2013 #82

sorry heaven05 Jan 2013 #84

I was just being silly FightForMichigan Jan 2013 #90

Got it heaven05 Jan 2013 #98

Some clarifications ProgressiveProfessor Jan 2013 #2

When a "background check" is done for the FBI or other government entity IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #5

Owning a gun is not a government job. WinkyDink Jan 2013 #7

Tracking them - like we do cars and cold medicine - should be. nt IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #12

Cars are regularly seen in public, guns aren't. That's the big problem. Recursion Jan 2013 #32

In foster care momrois Jan 2013 #52

^== This. The systems are in place. USE THEM. IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #54

It's pretty much like that in the entire country. galileoreloaded Jan 2013 #3

Even in DC during the gun ban you didn't have to register a rifle or shotgun Recursion Jan 2013 #35

AR-15's are considered rifles because they are rifles. Recursion Jan 2013 #4

I am saying they should be called GUNS and I want GUNS tracked. IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #8

What incentive will the drug dealers have to register their guns? Recursion Jan 2013 #15

You are pretending to play the fool. IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #21

How small do you think the number of currently illegally-owned guns is? (nt) Recursion Jan 2013 #22

One guy tried to bring a plane down with a bomb in his shoe. IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #37

I do not understand the analogy Recursion Jan 2013 #39

Stop if from increasing, of course. Duh. nt IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #61

Oh, Lord no. This would increase it significantly Recursion Jan 2013 #79

ROFL! And then when a law abiding citizen took them to a shooting range... IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #80

You seem to want a lot? atreides1 Jan 2013 #55

You are being OTT in asking for "Household members" Background Checks. ESPECIALLY with your WinkyDink Jan 2013 #6

I disagree. If its good enough for employment, then its good enough for guns. IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #10

But it just isn't "just like a car". beevul Jan 2013 #93

The state of MI registers pistols michreject Jan 2013 #9

Why does this make me want to throw up? IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #11

Thank you michreject Jan 2013 #17

When I asked how the police verify this, the answer was "they don't/can't." IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #26

OK, what's a way they could verify that? Recursion Jan 2013 #30

The internet has search engines. IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #40

Law enforcement tends to contract with the exact same services Recursion Jan 2013 #41

How about we start with RUNNING THE CHECK IN THE FIRST PLACE? IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #43

What check? There's no check they can run Recursion Jan 2013 #44

I have to disagree here. MessiahRp Jan 2013 #46

I assume the logic behind it is triage. AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #48

A gun is a gun is a gun. Parsing seems stupid, especially when you can "parse" UZIs - IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #49

If a gun is a gun is a gun AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #50

3% x 10,000 = 300 per year. 300 x 10 years = 3,000. IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #51

Less than that, actually. AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #56

The Common Sense suggestions promoted in this thread so far -- IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #60

I don't object to background checks at all. AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #62

In a background check, the feds know what sort of gun you're buying JustABozoOnThisBus Jan 2013 #19

It does for pistols michreject Jan 2013 #36

Florida has no registration at all HockeyMom Jan 2013 #24

I agree 100%. Private transfers are a real problem. Recursion Jan 2013 #31

MI has the same SYG law michreject Jan 2013 #34

I wish they had open carry HockeyMom Jan 2013 #38

"My husband offered to do this "for" me at a gun show since he has his CCW" Kennah Jan 2013 #91

Of course HockeyMom Jan 2013 #103

The background check only covers the purchaser nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #13

Why not? It is COMMON SENSE and the only people with a problem are criminals. IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #14

It may be common sense nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #20

You're mostly correct michreject Jan 2013 #23

Read post 20 nadinbrzezinski Jan 2013 #25

Article I, Section 9 : no bills of attainder AngryAmish Jan 2013 #16

Therein is the problem HockeyMom Jan 2013 #27

I don't trust the "honor system" - I am a "trust, but verify" person. IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #29

Do you think that registration of place of residence should be obligatory for all citizens? JVS Jan 2013 #18

This information is currently available via internet search engine for most of the population. IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #28

How about laws in place to prevent felons and other pipoman Jan 2013 #33

You know, I was starting to calm down. I really was - a calm, rationale discussion IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #42

I know that "enforce existing laws" is an NRA talking point, but there really is a HUGE gap here Recursion Jan 2013 #81

NY Sullivan Act were also 4Q2u2 Jan 2013 #45

Your own analogy is flawed. AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #47

Post facto enforcement: Buy gun. Provide registration. LEO run checks. IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #53

I'm personally ok with that sort of check AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #57

In brainstorming mode, drunk drivers have to "blow clean" before their car starts. IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #64

Two points there: NutmegYankee Jan 2013 #66

At what point do you believe registering *all guns* as opposed to *pistols only* IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #68

Response: NutmegYankee Jan 2013 #76

Well, we agree with enough to get started reforming based on those. IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #85

There are a lot of reforms that can be made. NutmegYankee Jan 2013 #88

But the drunk driver is a very different creature from a speeder. AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #67

Ah, because the criminal we *don't want to know about* because we can't do a database check IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #71

I am loathe to associate 'rational' with the NRA in any capacity AtheistCrusader Jan 2013 #74

Now this is getting ridiculous. NutmegYankee Jan 2013 #58

The right not to have my kid killed because we went to McDonalds, the mall or school IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #63

Violation of the Constitutional protections for people is NOT common sense! NutmegYankee Jan 2013 #65

If I have reason to believe a crime is being committed - "straw man" - IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #69

If you get a warrant signed by a judge, with probable cause, then there is no issue. NutmegYankee Jan 2013 #72

Actually, my proposals all involve using reasonably available information -- IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #86

As long as a judge approved it. NutmegYankee Jan 2013 #89

Those have been the laws here in Michigan for years. Kaleva Jan 2013 #70

Apparently there was a change in December. Things got looser, thanks to Lame Duck Crap. IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #73

I've owned rifles and carbines for a long time now and I don't know what got "looser". Kaleva Jan 2013 #78

So *anyone* can walk into Bass Pro Shop and walk out with a rifle (no check) - IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #83

No, you still have to go thru a background check if you buy a rifle at Bass Pro Shop Kaleva Jan 2013 #87

I am F*CK*NG PISSED. Michigan Gun Laws Written by the Mob?!?!? maryland native Jan 2013 #75

Welcome to DU. IdaBriggs Jan 2013 #77

There are so many laws covering prescription drugs Tsiyu Jan 2013 #92

So, in a nutshell, you're upset that the cops can't stop people from breaking the law? OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #94

Look, you guys take this "right" and turn it into an infinite entitlement Tsiyu Jan 2013 #95

OP was about cops being unable to stop illegal transfers. OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #96

Many gun-humpers don't want transfer laws Tsiyu Jan 2013 #97

I never said do nothing. I think several measures will be effective. OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #99

Just wait Tsiyu Jan 2013 #100

So basically, your prediction is that the blood will be running in the streets? OneTenthofOnePercent Jan 2013 #101

We didn't have the economic hardships then that we have now Tsiyu Jan 2013 #102

Buht yoo got a RAHT to keep as many guns as you want... Taverner Jan 2013 #104

Message auto-removed Name removed Jul 2014 #105

I was asked for an opinion concerning a reply to this OP......... wandy Jul 2014 #106

Darn it - I missed the troll! IdaBriggs Jul 2014 #107

Someone has to make a record that not all Democrats support a total surveillance police state. ActualCommonSense Jan 2016 #108

Welcome, where was this "it was cited as an example of a Dem. Und. actual post"? thanks. uppityperson Jan 2016 #109

Thank you for reminding me of this 3 year old post; treating guns like cars IdaBriggs Jan 2016 #110

Post removed Post removed Sep 2016 #111

Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2016 #112

woohoo!!! Trump, you joined us!!!!!!1111 uppityperson Oct 2016 #113

lol DesertRat Oct 2016 #114

Yup uppityperson Oct 2016 #115