mOOsE wrote:FYI, the system is electronic and simply checks compiled databases. If we paid to cover the cost, it would be negligible as the system wasn't built FOR the expressed purpose of background checks on gun sales. The 10-12 fee is revenue generation for the state. While their are employees for the background check system, even if there was no check required, they would be employed for the other purposes of the system for law enforcement needs, security clearance checks, etc. I am not opposed to the fee, as I believe its very low and reasonable... but it is poor timing as it doesn't have anything to do with safety or gun rights. I am also concerned that, since there will now be a fee, will it get raised in the future as part of budgeting for the state. Not to mention the logistical frustration it will create for retailers, private sellers, etc. FFL transfers already charge fees for the most part, so will it be included (not likely).
I'll admit, I have no idea what the state is aiming to "charge" for background checks. I simply know that if I want to run a check on LexisNexis, for example, it's $10, or some such similar cost.
To be clear, my thought on background checks was that the consumer was being asked to fund a similar LexisNexis check that would cost that $10 or so bucks, not that there was an additional cost the state was tacking on as well.
