We still don’t have a bill yet, so all we have to go on here is the Washington Post’s reporting, which is always a scary prospect when it comes to this issue. We do have some reactions from the blogosphere though, which are interesting.
Jeff Soyer worries about it turning into a bad deal really quickly. This is a real concern. I’m worried about this as well. It’ll be a real litmus test for how serious the Democrats are about ending their habit of screwing gun owners every chance they get.
If someone is so dangerous they can’t be trusted with a gun then I don’t think they can be trusted with a can of gasoline and a book of matches either. Either they can be trusted in public or they should be locked up.
I agree with this sentiment, but the vast majority of the population doesn’t. NICS, without a doubt, is a feel good measure, to make the public think it’s been made difficult for criminals to get guns, but it’s a feel good measure that there doesn’t seem to be much political traction to get rid of. People that think NICS is useless are very much a political minority. I think Joe’s second point is a good one:
Making the least agreeable portions of the infringement on our rights more palatable just means it will be more difficult to justify getting rid of it entirely later on.
I don’t think there’s any way we’re getting rid of NICS through the legislative process, but I do think this is a good point when it comes to the courts; in that the less infringing the background checks are, the less likely the court may be to throw it out. This is a good argument against the bill, I think.
SayUncle sums it up as “NICS deal – hey, letsâ€™ pay for stuff thatâ€™s already law“, which I think is accurate if the WaPo’s reporting is correct on this.Â We’re not adding new classes of prohibited person with this bill.Â If you’ve been committed, or adjudicated a danger to yourself or others, and you’re not in NICS, that doesn’t change your prohibited status.Â If the feds care to look, you’re still a “felon-in-possession”.Â If the Democrats hold true to the deal, it would seem that we’ll actually have a recourse for removing prohibited status for some offenses, and getting corrections made to the NICS database.