This could work, and in general i am in favor of the idea. Better than requiring all sales go thru a dealer, who will charge big bux.
As DinoR sez-* The devil is in the details.*
My Dad gave me a single shot .22 after I completed the Boy Scouts class on gun safety.
It was a target gun, and I shot it in some competitions.
How early do you think they start Olympic training?
I imagine in other nations this is true also.
Yeah, I know - gotta have that gun right here and now!
I must be a big damn hero to face life’s dangers without one, for the equivalent of nearly 8000 three-day waiting periods. 
Whatever it might mean, which of course is the very unsettled part.
Is it crazy to suggest that people with Federal Firearms Licenses who are able to perform checks on the National Instant Criminal background check system, (run by the Federal Bureau of Investigation) charge fees capped at a reasonable level by the Federal Government, rather than rely on individual states to do it?
I believe that universal background checks are supported by both sides of the aisle, generally speaking, and there’s an entire industry dedicated to firearms who perform these ‘instant’ checks all the time. Is it REALLY that onerous for a FFL dealer to perform a check for a private sale, that they need to charge hundreds of dollars?
The dealers can somehow survive with a $25 fee for 5 minutes of work processing and certifying the validity of a firearm transfer.
I’m not understanding the mind being boggled. A father says to his son or daughter, who is now 18 or 21 or 30 years old, “Here. This Winchester is now yours.”. Or Pops dies, and his will indicates that his firearms are to be split up amongst his offspring (is that a better word than “child”). For all intents and purposes, my father “gave” me my first rifle and shotgun when I was 12 years old and started hunting. He kept track of them until I was 18 or so, but I could take them out shooting or hunting anytime I wanted to. I still own them and have never had to fill out any government paperwork (as it should be).
In the vast majority of US states, guns are not “registered” to an owner, at least as one thinks of vehicles or houses being registered or titled to a person. On a federal level, only Class 3 firearms (machine guns) are registered to a specific person.
I am not an FFL, but my understanding is that a licensee pays nothing to the FBI for a background check. That’s ZERO. MY state has a separate state check which costs the FL $4.00. But gun stores still charge anywhere from $25 to $50 to do a background check and transfer. They are in business to make money, which I understand, but if background checks are limited to the few people who actually hold FFLs, they are free to charge for their time/inconvenience/government restriction.
I have already written my legislators saying if universal background checks become a reality, the checks should be no more than $10, whether I can do it myself or have to go to a gun store.
As used in the Gun Control Act (as amended by Brady) , the term “fugitive from justice” has been defined in federal law since the day the Brady Act’s ink dried back in 1994, 921(A)(15):
[INDENT]“The term “fugitive from justice” means any person who has fled from any State to avoid prosecution for a crime or to avoid giving testimony in any criminal proceeding.”[/INDENT]
Fleeing from the state is a requirement in the law. As it was employed during the Obama years, it barred people who have not been convicted of anything. Is a gun prohibition spelled out anywhere in federal law for anyone who simply has an arrest warrant?
If they wanted to, Congress could include warrants in the 922(n) prohibition. 922(n) covers people under indictment:
[INDENT]“It shall be unlawful for any person who is under indictment for a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce any firearm or ammunition or receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.”[/INDENT]
When filling out the 4473, the transferee must answer yes or no, "Are you under indictment or information in any court for a felony, or any other crime for which the judge could imprison you for more than one year? (question 11.b).
That is asked BEFORE “Have you ever been convicted in any court of a felony, or any other crime for which the judge could have imprisoned you for more than one year, even if you received a shorter sentence including probation?” (question 11.c).
And that is asked BEFORE “Are you a fugitive from justice?” (question 11d).
Nowhere is any question about a warrant presented.
Seems to me throwing a half-million people who just had an arrest warrant into the 922(g) pool of prohibitions was just an easy (illegal) way to put a disability on those people without having any manner of due process.
.