The ‘It’s Easier To Buy A Gun Than Cold Medicine’ Crowd Just Got Slapped With Reality

Under a section called “certification of transferee,” it asked about my criminal record — whether I had ever been convicted of a felony, subject to a restraining order, or prohibited from purchasing a firearm, among other specifics.

In red print, the form said that “an untruthful answer may subject you to criminal prosecution.”

The seller told me that my background check would likely be completed within a few minutes after I finished the paperwork. Once the purchase was finalized, an employee would walk the gun out to my car with me.

But I had only just finished printing my name when she stopped me and asked whether the address on my license matched my home address. I had moved since I obtained my license, and the addresses didn’t match.

That was a problem, she said.

To pass the background check, I would need to bring in a government-issued document with my correct address, such as a bill from a state-owned utility or a car registration. (I have never bought a gun, so I wasn’t aware of this.)

She apologized, told me the rules were strict around background checks, and asked me to come back another time to finish the purchase.

Well, yeah—of course, they’re strict. It’s the law. And straw purchasers are prosecuted harshly, as they should. In some states, they’ve increased the penalties. This is all known to most who support gun rights. It’s alien to the liberal media. The article isn’t a hit piece. It actually lays out how background checks are not some imaginary invention—and that retailers do follow the law. Federal gun charges are serious business. It’s also—you know—wrong. Is there room to improve the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS)? Yes. The system is only good as the information that’s fed to it, which is why the Sutherland Springs shooting in Texas is so tragic. It was totally preventable, as the Air Force veteran who committed the crime was convicted and sentenced to a year in jail for beating his wife and fracturing the skull of his child. Domestic abusers are barred from owning guns. The FBI was never informed of his conviction because the Air Force never passed along the proper paperwork. Most mass shooters buy their firearms legally, which makes the expanded background check talking point moot, but also a lot have exhibited signs of mental illness. There is no correct profile. The El Paso shooter was a white supremacist. The Dayton shooter was a self-avowed leftist who supported Elizabeth Warren and gun control measures.

Mental health is an area both sides can agree on needs to be improved, not just for mass shooting prevention, but in general. The problem is the Democratic Party, who don’t care. They will use any shooting or crisis to chip away at constitutional rights. Red flag laws sound fine. In fact, on paper, they could be if there are stringent due process mechanisms in the legislation. We all know the anti-gun Left will oppose such measures. It’s not about saving lives. It’s about gun confiscation. That’s a battle for another time. For now, a reporter just found out that gun retailers follow the law, and that background checks are an actual thing.