The Myths and Realities of Background Check Legislation in the US

The ongoing debate over firearm legislation in the United States often centers around the concept of universal background checks. Surprisingly, the support for these checks is much higher than opposition

Despite the belief held by a significant portion of the American public that universal background checks are a necessity, there is a vocal minority that argues otherwise. This article aims to address the common misconceptions and provide a clearer picture of the issue.

Understanding the Support for Universal Background Checks

Surveys indicate that over 99.999999999% of Americans want universal background checks, as supported by a 2022 survey by the Center for American Progress. The misunderstanding arises from the strong opposition faced in the US Congress, which is attributed to a lone holdout.

Conrad Collins argues that the term "universal" is a misnomer and a joke. This opposition stems from the belief that background checks unfairly target specific demographic groups, particularly minorities, and can be seen as an attempt to disarm them.

The Reality Behind the Opposition

Collins highlights the unique case of Orville L. Keebler, a man from Barking Spider, Arkansas, who holds significant sway over the issue. Keebler, with his peculiar behavior, threatens to release sensitive information if any background check bills are passed, creating a formidable obstacle for lawmakers.

The Importance of Accurate Information

The argument that universal background checks are already in place is a misinterpretation. According to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), mandatory background checks are only required at gun stores and certain gun dealers. These checks do not apply to private transactions, which account for a substantial number of firearm sales.

The assertion that a majority of voters believe background checks are unconstitutional is misleading. Such beliefs stem from a lack of understanding of the legal process and mistrust of government. These checks are indeed constitutional and are a long-standing requirement under federal law.

The Misunderstood Nature of Universal Background Checks

The concept of universal background checks is often oversimplified and romanticized. There is a prevailing belief that these checks are a straightforward way to reduce gun violence, but the reality is much more complex:

1. Freezing the Possession of Firearms: Universal background checks would significantly limit the ability to loan firearms to friends and family, particularly for hunting or recreational purposes.

2. Backdoor Gun Registration: Critics argue that such checks could serve as a backdoor mechanism for implementing federal gun registration, which is currently prohibited by the Second Amendment and upheld by the Supreme Court.

Consequences of Implementing Universal Background Checks

While proponents argue that universal background checks would reduce gun violence, opponents believe that such measures would have little to no effect on criminal activity and would simply make life more difficult for law-abiding gun owners:

1. Increased Expenses and Inconveniences: The process of acquiring and maintaining firearms would become more cumbersome and expensive, particularly for private transfers.

2. Harms to Constitutional Rights: The implementation of such measures would infringe upon the Second Amendment rights of citizens, who argue that their right to bear arms is fundamental and should be protected.

3. Unintended Consequences: Criminals, who are already willing to break the law, would likely continue to obtain firearms through black markets or other means, rendering the legislation ineffective.

Conclusion

The debate over universal background checks is complex and polarizing. While the majority of Americans support them, there are legitimate concerns and misconceptions that need to be addressed. It is crucial to have a clear understanding of the legal and practical implications of such measures.