Cost of CBI InstaCheck to "Increase Significantly"

At my LGS yesterday and was told by the owner he received a letter from CBI stating there would be a "significant increase" to the cost of the background check after the first of the year. Didn't actually see the letter.

Big surprise.

This is my shocked face.

I was guessing 7% increase per year but they can be as greedy as they desire. We have no recourse.

Wonder when they're going to let us know ?

Remind me again why we don't use the federal background check like most other states?

They'll let us know whenever they feel like it, we just have to pony up when they do. Is this how the colonists felt prior to the Boston Tea Party?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ray1970

Remind me again why we don't use the federal background check like most other states?

---

Because Colorado state government saw an opportunity to make a buck and the only thing better than making a buck is charging you twice for the same service.

Because they can.

Because it makes you safer.

All the gun owners, remember that, especially the fudds when they go to buy another hunting rifle. Perhaps they will be more willing to sign the recall petitions.

The peasants will be easier to control when only the wealthy can afford to own guns.

I can't find anything online to support this. I'm going to try to get a copy of the letter tomorrow.

Would like more proof. At what price point do you say fug it and not worry about this bs any more

The fee charged can be changed at any time to any amount. There is a required report on the amount of the fee due on Jan 15.

By statute it cannot exceed the direct & indirect costs so we'll get the report on those costs on the 15th. Well actually the joint budget committee will get the report, I'm assuming it will be public information.

And by indirect costs they mean fund the children's education, save the children from drugs, fund the entire state LEO fund and retirement, among others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sniper7

At what price point do you say fug it and not worry about this bs any more

---

Somewhere around $10.

[Coffee]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by merl

The fee charged can be changed at any time to any amount. There is a required report on the amount of the fee due on Jan 15.

By statute it cannot exceed the direct & indirect costs so we'll get the report on those costs on the 15th. Well actually the joint budget committee will get the report, I'm assuming it will be public information.

---

The direct and indirect costs can be manipulate how ever they want. Brophy did a pretty good job explaining this during the one sided debates.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rabid

The direct and indirect costs can be manipulate how ever they want. Brophy did a pretty good job explaining this during the one sided debates.

---

Of course they can, we get to see the accounting on Jan15. Doing BG checks may turn out to be a pretty plush job in a couple years.

Of course what can we do about it? Complain to the same *censored* people that passed it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ray1970

Remind me again why we don't use the federal background check like most other states?

---

Part of the reason is for more local "oversight" this occurred after that guy offed his wife in castle rock

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by merl

Of course they can, we get to see the accounting on Jan15. Doing BG checks may turn out to be a pretty plush job in a couple years.

Of course what can we do about it? Complain to the same *censored* people that passed it.

---

All they need is some creative accounting and those numbers mean nothing. Its not the first time a government agency would do something like that.

But we were assured the $10.00 "fee" implemented this last year would be more than adequate for any future needs.

We need to verify this and hammer our representatives of that fact.

We need to make so much noise at ANY firearm related legislation/taxes/fees that it is unattractive to them.
And a reminder of the recalls can't hurt either.

We have a real opportunity here folks. For once in this states history we have proved that We The People have a voice and it is loud enough to make a difference.


Let's not let that opportunity slip away......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sniper7

And by indirect costs they mean fund the children's education, save the children from drugs, fund the entire state LEO fund and retirement, among others.

---

The only law enforcement retirement funded by the state is for the Colorado State Patrol and state employed law enforcement such as CBI. Police and sheriffs are primarily funded by the city and counties which employ the officers.

Please direct your anger and frustration at the abused and underfunded PERA system which covers teachers, public defenders, and state employees.

poll taxes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BPTactical

But we were assured the $10.00 "fee" implemented this last year would be more than adequate for any future needs.

We need to verify this and hammer our representatives of that fact.

We need to make so much noise at ANY firearm related legislation/taxes/fees that it is unattractive to them.
And a reminder of the recalls can't hurt either.

We have a real opportunity here folks. For once in this states history we have proved that We The People have a voice and it is loud enough to make a difference.


Let's not let that opportunity slip away......

---

Did anyone actually believe that lie? The (D) wrote it in such a way that it would be open ended so that the (D) could charge whatever they want any time they want. This is a back-door way to make firearms purchases self limiting, once that cost goes through the roof the (D) figures that no one will be buying any guns, new or used from anyone in the entire state because the buyers won't be able to afford the transaction fee(s). The (D) is using our law-abiding nature against us.

I argued that if BG checks were so costly and time consuming for CSP, maybe they should allow FFLs be able to have direct access to the BG check databases. No need for a paid uniformed monkey to input data into a computer when a FFL could do the same thing for free. Its all automated after all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric P

I argued that if BG checks were so costly and time consuming for CSP, maybe they should allow FFLs be able to have direct access to the BG check databases. No need for a paid uniformed monkey to input data into a computer when a FFL could do the same thing for free. Its all automated after all.

---

The CBI does them in Colorado. They uses the FBI's NICS that is free and a redundant check through their records.

Of course, nobody is asking FFLs if $10 is the right number for them to handle the transfers. The state gets to increase fees, but the local FFL is locked in at $10.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brian

Of course, nobody is asking FFLs if $10 is the right number for them to handle the transfers. The state gets to increase fees, but the local FFL is locked in at $10.

---

Doncha know? All gun shop owners are MIILLIONAIRES, just ask some of their customers and the government. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brian

Of course, nobody is asking FFLs if $10 is the right number for them to handle the transfers. The state gets to increase fees, but the local FFL is locked in at $10.

---

Lets say 10 bucks is the real amount that a shop can charge for a transfer, above the 10+ for the state. How does the state tell a business owner what his time is worth? They'll just quit doing them. Problem solved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ben4372

Lets say 10 bucks is the real amount that a shop can charge for a transfer, above the 10+ for the state. How does the state tell a business owner what his time is worth? They'll just quit doing them. Problem solved.

---

That was the original intent of the limit on FFL fees in the first place. Now they'll jack the fee up to $50 to further discourage people from doing business. And then they'll point to the success of the law in reducing illegal transactions, right up to the point that someone plays shooting gallery in another "gun free" zone, at which point they'll reveal that the gun was obtained in an illegal transaction, and the only way to prevent such a tragedy in the future is with gun registration...

The playbook is well documented and transparent.

Well they raked in just over $38k on Friday. Lets see how much they actually spent to do the checks. I bet it is less than 1/3 of that. So the BG fee should be $3.33 or less.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric P

Well they raked in just over $38k on Friday. Lets see how much they actually spent to do the checks. I bet it is less than 1/3 of that. So the BG fee should be $3.33 or less.

---

And I heard they completed all the checks with 16 man hours.

some of our local gun shops need to lean on the politicians to completely do away with checks on the state level. so many things can be done to improve this system if we cant kill it off. Current gun owners andCHP holders should all be exempt.

This is outrageous!

This is nothing more than a poll tax

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thebolt

The only law enforcement retirement funded by the state is for the Colorado State Patrol and state employed law enforcement such as CBI. Police and sheriffs are primarily funded by the city and counties which employ the officers.

Please direct your anger and frustration at the abused and underfunded PERA system which covers teachers, public defenders, and state employees.

---

Dont get your nightstick bent, I wasn't going after LEO in any way shape or form. I was pointing out that the demonrats will try to say they need funding for any numerous causes so they can cut into our wallets more.

Hmmm, and my wife has a position in Cody, WY that is open to her if she wants it after the new year.....

The owner of a LGS that doesn't do NFA or NFA transfers tells customers that having an NFA item waives your constitutional right to search & seizure allowing any LE entity to come into your house at any time and search it.

Doesn't make it a fact.

law is the LAW!

Suckers

You know, what the Bolt said makes sense and it all comes together and makes even more sense.

PERA + Amendment 66 = solvency for publicly funded retirement.
Only 66 went down in flames.
PERA + increased "fees" to CBI for BGC = solvency for publicly funded retirement.

I hope everyone keeps in mind that some businesses, like The Firing Line, supported the bill to instate the Gun Tax. I'm sure if you look you can find the video from the news report.

That's not true. But way to go- continue sabotaging the good that I tried to do for members when I started working there. This kind of crap is why I've pretty much stopped posting here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeusExMachina

I hope everyone keeps in mind that some businesses, like The Firing Line, supported the bill to instate the Gun Tax. I'm sure if you look you can find the video from the news report.

---

From: http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/19/us/colorado-gun-control/

Richard Taylor, a manager at the Aurora gun store and range Firing Line, said the 15-round restrictions on rifle magazines are "poorly worded" and are likely to affect owners of nearly every magazine. He said sheriffs consider the new legislation unenforceable, and the $10 limit on charging individual buyers for background checks is far below the $50 a store typically charges for handling a transfer.

"If the dealers can't make any money at $10, they're not going to do it," Taylor said. Under those circumstances, "How are people going to legally transfer a firearm?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sneakerd

That's not true. But way to go- continue sabotaging the good that I tried to do for members when I started working there. This kind of crap is why I've pretty much stopped posting here.

---

Good to see you posting again Sneakerd.
And what you do at the Firing Line is the Devil's work. You present us with temptation beyond our resistance and we end up spending more than we plan when we just came there to just use the range........[Tooth]