Double Infringed

First of all, a tip of the hat to my friend Tony Simon, of DiversityShoot.com. I first learned of this through a post he shared on TAFKAT (The App Formerly Known As Twitter.), which referenced this video from The VSO Gun Channel. I highly encourage you to watch it.

While I’m perfectly fine with bashing serial “2A but-er” Tim Kennedy for endorsing this (and presumably profiting from it), what I really want to do is to simply make you aware that this is out there. Just like the host of the video, I pay attention to things like this, but I had no idea that a company like Double Check existed.

It turns out that this is a “service” available to FFLs which essentially performs an enhanced background check, which includes sources “that the current background-checking system (NICS) may miss.” Know why NICS “misses” those things? Because none of these things make you a prohibited person in the eyes of the law. In other words, current law, as passed by the people’s representatives in Congress, does not allow a person to be denied the right to keep and bear arms for the issues that Double Check screens for. Put yet another way, you could be 100% in compliance with the law governing the purchase and possession of firearms, but a poor social score as judged by Double Check could result in you being denied that right. Farming out your infringement to a private company doesn’t make it less of one.

Interestingly, a visit to Double Check’s website revealed a page full of “case studies,” profiling notorious mass murderers, implying that their enhanced background check would have stopped them. Notably, in every case cited, the killer either did not meet the legal threshold of being a prohibited person, existing law was not followed or enforced, or the criminal found a way to skirt the system (criminals never do that, right?). One that caught my eye was their profile of [name withheld], who killed 33 at Virginia Tech in 2007, which pointed out that although he had in fact been adjudicated as mentally ill and would have been legally prohibited from firearms possession, he lied on his Form 4473. Sound familiar?

Even more laughable is their page of “industry case studies,” citing businesses which have been sued in the aftermath of a mass shooting. Although Double Check touts its services for enhanced background checks at the point-of-sale, only one of the four businesses listed (Dick’s Sporting Goods) is actually a retailer (they no longer sell firearms). The other three…Remington, Ruger, and Daniel Defense…are manufacturers which do not conduct individual transfers (Daniel Defense does do direct sales, but firearms are shipped to an FFL which is responsible for conducting the actual transfer and background check as required by law). It is unclear to me how Double Check’s service would have helped these three manufacturers in any way.

Now, I don’t know how widespread the use of Double Check’s services are at this point in time. Their website seems to indicate that it may not have been implemented at all as of yet. But I definitely agree with the host of the video: I would absolutely refuse to do business with any firearms retailer and FFL who uses this product. Just like Double Check brand ambassador Tim Kennedy, they say they support the 2A, but…