Three excerpts: "From 2008 through 2014, states handled about 68 million of the more than 119 million NICS transactions. To help ensure the completeness of the NICS database, states are required to update it with supporting documents when a prospective purchaser attempts to buy a firearm and is approved, denied, or delayed. We reviewed a judgmental sample of 631 state processed transactions and determined that in 630 of them the states did not fully update the NICS database or inform the FBI of the transaction’s outcome. These failures mean the NICS database is incomplete, and increases the risk that individuals found by states to be prohibited purchasers could be able to purchase firearms in the future." "Our audit also revealed a group of NICS transactions the FBI denied but ATF believed should have been approved because of a disagreement regarding the definition of a “Fugitive from Justice,” a category that disqualifies prospective gun purchasers. This disagreement was referred to the Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) in 2008, and OLC provided informal advice in July 2008. In August 2010, the FBI requested formal reconsideration of that advice, but 6 years later OLC still has not rendered a decision. We believe this issue should be addressed as soon as possible. Of those transactions that were denied by the FBI in this category from November 1999 through May 2015, there were 49,448 instances in which ATF did not agree with the FBI’s denial determination. ATF tracked these cases as FBI denials but, because ATF did not agree with that determination, ATF did not attempt to recover the firearm in the 2,183 instances in which the firearm was transferred." "We found that the number of NICS denial prosecutions has dropped substantially since FY 2003, when 166 subjects were accepted for consideration of prosecution. Between FY 2008 and FY 2015, an 8 year period, ATF formally referred 509 NICS denial cases that included 558 subjects to USAOs for possible prosecution. The USAOs accepted for consideration of prosecution 254 subjects (or less than 32 subjects per year), declined to prosecute 272 subjects, and decisions for 32 were pending at the time of our review." https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2016/a1632.pdf
The NICS system is horribly mismanaged. People who shouldn't be are delayed or denied, with most denials being overturned on appeal. There is no provision for prosecuting people who knowingly violate the law pursuing firearms purchases. In the end, it's a mess of a system that would be better off being scrapped and replaced instead of revamped.
Of course not. The Obama administration wants to take credit for denying guns to millions of criminals, but has no interest in prosecuting said criminals for the commission of a felony.
The Instant check system actually does work, and all Crime information is automatically entered into the Federal Crime Database, NICS, example- NYPD FINEST- Unconstitutional ? Yes. Does it work ? Yes. Misinformation is of no help to anyone.
I know a case of a man who was naturalized as a US citizen 15 years ago-he was denied because they claim he was in the USA illegally 18 years ago Yeah, crap like that
99.9% of the time the Federal Crime Computer system, the system NICS is piggy backed on, a limited task / access network, does its job of flagging prohibited persons from purchasing firearms. The hard copy form 4473 is another part of the equation. With its questions asking if the purchaser is a prohibited person. Even if prohibited people are occasionally sold firearms and could even get Concealed carry, this constitutes a tiny fraction of Firearms transactions and of no consequence.
Prohibited persons are sold firearms all the time, and carry them concealed. NICS does nothing to prevent this.
Then if the intent of the background check process is to keep criminals from getting guns, it doesn't work.
The purpose of the Instant check at the point of sale, a licensed gun store or pawn shop is to prevent Felons and other prohibited persons from purchasing Guns in a legitimate manner. This measure cannot prevent a Criminal from using Criminal methods to circumvent the procedure in order to illegally acquire firearms. Ie a strawman sale, theft or robbery etc....
As gun control, it doesn't work. Rather, it works about 0.06% of the time. For whatever use can be ascribed to the law, perhaps it's more effective for that.
No, that's about the percentage of people who lie on the Form 4473 who get convicted of the crime. Over 95% of the time people with the right to buy a gun buy a gun, the same as would have happened without the law. The vast majority of those who get caught by the law are ignored by law enforcement, leaving them free to buy a gun elsewhere. Essentially, with the Brady Act, we convict about 30-40 felons a year for the 4473 crime. That's the effectiveness of the Brady Act compared to not having it at all.
A more effective approach would be to do away with the portion of the law that supposedly bars a prohibited individual from purchasing a firearm from a federally licensed firearms dealer, allow the transaction to take place, and then report the prohibited individual to the authorities for arrest and prosecution. Then there is documented evidence of them having a firearm in their possession. It is essentially a sting operation.
Look at the data in Brady Act Enforcement 2010. ATF recovered two orders of magnitude lore firearms from prohibited persons than those who were prosecuted.
Then if prohibited individuals are not being prosecuted for firearm-related offenses, it is rational to conclude that the legislation from which these offenses originate serves no purpose in even existing, and should simply be repealed for lack of use.
A study by Duke University concluded that the Brady Bill Background checks was essentially worthless in decreasing violent crime
