Like many others, I have some reservations about the mandating of background checks for all gun sales, including ones within a family. While its important to keep guns out of the hands of truly dangerous people, the background check system needs to be fair, and reasonable. It needs to work for farm families, far away from the near big city, and also those who live in a metropolitan-area. It also needs to protect an individuals’ right to bear arms to protect himself and his family from an attack by those wishing to harm them.

They Have to Work for Rural Residents and Shouldn’t Be Burdensome

If two private individuals want to sell firearms, they should be allowed to do as such. In the era of the Internet, a person should be able to do a check of the government’s prohibited persons list, for no cost. If a person comes back clean, they can print the certificate up, and be required to hold the certificate for 10 years. If a person loses the certificate of sale, they should be subject to a $500 fine. This would keep honest people from accidentally selling firearms to those who are disqualified — and provide an criminal prosecution option for when a person knowingly violates background check provisions.

Federal Government Should Only Regulate Firearms in Interstate Trade

It’s not at all clear where the constitutional powers are given to Congress to regulate private sales, between two individuals within a state. In contrast, Congress could push the states to pass stronger background checks for intrastate commerce of firearms, but they can’t create a federal law that requires such a thing.

Background Checks Should Be Fair and Reasonable

If you are going to require background checks, then the list of disqualifers should be clear, and the list of people who are disqualified should be public knowledge. As Bill of Rights makes the second amendment a fundamental right, the reasons for being disqualified should be extremely limited, and narrowly targeted to avoid imminent harm to others. Banning felons, who have not had their rights restored, or those are mentally ill and pose an immediate danger to public, makes sense. But others who have shown reasonably good behavior, and are not posing an immediate and real threat of violence, should have the right to own firearms for self defense.