It is what it is. At the very least, it's some sort of slim assurance to the state that the person taking temporary possession of the weapon has gone through a background check. However, the state doesn't bar immediate and direct permanent conveyance of firearms from spouse to spouse, or parent/grandparent to child/grandchild, notwithstanding prohibited status.
The status quo, Max, is not as I would have it. But I'm also not entirely in favor of rational anarchy, either. I'd like to see some specific rollbacks in scope and depth of control, but not to the point where some loose cannon doofus gets to strut around heeled, 2A or no 2A. The fact of the matter is that some people just don't pack the fuckin' gear to be trusted with a firearm, concealed or not. And that doesn't make me a commie.
They have gotten you with the giving up your freedom and liberty for the Illusion of security.
The reason they want everything to go through a background check is NOT because they care one bit about criminals having guns, it is because they want to be able to track and have records of which law abiding citizens own which guns so they can come take them when they want.
Just as they have Exactly done serveral times in CA and NY and other states when they changed laws or rulings.... we show you bought xxxxx and since thanks to our laws you can't sell it or give it away without a paper trail... hand it over now or we'll take you to jail.
The Criminals will never have a problem getting all the guns they want. That is a plain an simple FACT that is shown all over the world.
These laws are only there to put the noose around the law abiding gun owner's necks so they know who to string up first.
It's pretty hard to hit everybody's doors at once with the storm troopers, but much easier if they know exactly who's door to go kick down.
And if you think that they already don't use the paperwork and background checks to compiles lists you would be simply one with your head stuck in the sand. Every background check is going into a database, every time they "audit" a FFL, they are saving as much information as they can get away with.
The criminals having guns is not really much of an issue if the citizenry is armed as they should be. It's only a problem when the citizens are disarmed by the government and the criminals have all the guns. But stupid "good" people will then be happy to have yet more rules and regulations put on them for "their own safety".
Of course they love to play the citizens against each other .... "You are one of the good guys, so you won't mind a few more regulations... it's to keep those other rabble you don't like from causing trouble because they are not as (trustworthy, intelligent, civil, Racial etc.) as you."
If all the citizens walked around well armed as they should be, it wouldn't matter if a criminal had a gun, the moment they pulled it out and did something they would have a whole bunch of guns shooting back at them. That's the way it should be.
