Buckeye Reporter

The debate surrounding firearm background checks continues to be a contentious issue. Some argue that these checks are necessary to prevent dangerous individuals from obtaining firearms, while others view them as an infringement on constitutional rights.

Dan Wos, in his article republished with permission from AmmoLand, challenges the constitutionality of the background check system. He refers to it as "the government hijacking of a God-given right and selling it back to you as a government-issued privilege." Wos contends that this system places undue burdens on law-abiding citizens who wish to exercise their Second Amendment rights.

He points out that many states require permits for carrying guns and argues that the process is often cumbersome and restrictive. Even when individuals comply with various requirements such as training, fees, and storage mandates, they may still face limitations due to gun-free zones.

Wos highlights data from 2017 provided by the Government Accountability Office, noting that out of 112,090 people denied firearm purchases through the NICS background check system, only 12,710 cases were investigated. He questions whether this indicates systemic failures resulting in false denials for many applicants.

Further complicating matters is the low number of prosecutions related to these denials. In 2017, there were only 12 prosecutions for attempting to purchase firearms illegally. This raises questions about the effectiveness of the system in preventing crime versus its impact on law-abiding citizens.

Critics like Wos argue that background checks have become more effective at hindering legal gun ownership than stopping criminals. He cites claims by John Lott from the Crime Prevention Research Center suggesting that up to 99% of firearm purchase denials could be false positives.

Wos concludes by asserting that despite improvements claimed by authorities like the FBI regarding denial accuracy rates, skepticism remains about whether these systems truly protect public safety without infringing on individual rights.