Pat McNamara Sees No Problem with Mandatory Waiting Periods, Universal Background Checks

Special operations veteran and firearms trainer Pat McNamara doesn’t see a problem with universal background checks nor mandatory 3-day waiting periods.

In an interview with Comedy Central’s Jordan Klepper, for the special “Jordan Klepper Solves Guns,” McNamara was asked point black about both measures that are really the bread and butter of the anti-gun movement because of their ostensible “common sense” appeal.  You can see the exchange in the video below.  It starts around 3:50 in.  I’ve also paraphrased it:

Klepper: What do you think of universal background checks?

McNamara: I don’t see any issue with it.

Klepper: What about mandatory 3-day waiting periods, is that too long?

McNamara: Nope, it’s not.

Okay, now there is going to be a non-trivial sum of people who are going to call for boycotting and blacklisting McNamara because his responses aren’t in lockstep with NRA dogma. To those people, I say, “Relax.” Not everyone is a hard-line purist. We do ourselves no favors by ostracizing pillars of our community because they think differently about an issue. Instead of attacking them, we need to educate them. We need to help them see what they’re missing.

I’ll do this as quickly as I can. In reverse order. The problem with waiting periods is twofold. First, there is no evidence to suggest that they reduce gun violence. It’s why in recent years states have repealed antiquated “waiting period” laws.

Secondly, if anything, waiting periods delay good guys or gals from getting firearms they may desperately need. So, for example, your cousin who lives in California just broke up with her violent boyfriend. The guy is a bit of a head case. She goes to buy a gun for self-defense because she doesn’t know how he is going to respond to getting the ax. Instead of walking out with the gun that day, she has to wait three whole days to receive it. That’s three whole days that she is unarmed and unprotected. Not good.

As for universal background checks, there are many reasons to oppose em. The NRA narrative is that UBCs will lead to registration which will inevitably lead to confiscation. Whether UBCs ultimately lead to confiscation can be debated but what can’t be is that a universal background check scheme is dependent on registration for it to be effective. Think about it, unless I notify the government, how will it know if I transferred a firearm to my neighbor if there’s not a registration system? Answer: It won’t.

Ultimately, UBC bills that do not contain a registration system are relying on good people to do the right thing, to self-report private transfers. Well, guess what, we don’t need laws that target the law-abiding. We’re not selling firearms to prohibited persons because (a) it’s against the law (b) we don’t want bad people to have guns and (c) it’s antithetical to our goal of protecting, preserving the 2A.

Now, the stats back us up on that. Most criminals do not obtain firearms from legal channels. They get them on the black market, use straw purchasers, steal them and/or borrow them from their fellow criminals. Universal background checks do nothing to stop the criminal flow of firearms.

The last reason to oppose UBCs is it increases the cost of gun ownership. By making every firearm sold, gifted, borrowed, etc., in this country subject to an FFL transfer fee we are chilling the right to keep and bear arms. Gun ownership is costly enough. I mean, why should my hunting buddy have to pay a $25 to $50 fee to borrow my scattergun to go on his whitetail hunt?

What it boils down to is that when all transfers are essentially taxed we can only expect participation in 2A activities to decrease. For the long term health and well being of the gun community, we want more people hunting, plinking, 3-Gunning — not fewer. As it’s been said, if you don’ use it, you’ll lose it.

The truth is that I can go on and on about arguing against mandatory waiting periods and universal background checks. But for now, this should hopefully provide a little more context as to why many of us oppose those measures. Maybe Mr. McNamara will see the light, maybe he won’t. Either way, let’s continue the conversation in a polite and respectful manner because we’ll catch more flies with honey than we will with vinegar.

UPDATE 6:37 PM, 6/9/17: Mr. McNamara addresses the comments in the following podcast. H/T to Steve Bui for the link.

About the author: S.H. Blannelberry is the News Editor of GunsAmerica.

{ 56 comments… add one }
  • Palerider June 9, 2017, 10:20 pm

    What part of ‘” shall not be infringed” do some of you boot lickers not understand?

    • Scott in Atlanta June 10, 2017, 9:02 pm

      You hit the nail on the head, my friend. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED is not vague, ambiguous, or subject to negotiation. Our 2nd Amendment rights are guaranteed by the United States Constitution, and neither Pat McNamara, gun grabbers, liberals, George Soros, Michael Bloomberg, California, New Jersey, Illinois, Massachusetts, et al, have any say so in the matter. It’s a sad day, and in fact heralds the doom of our republic, when the Constitution is considered just “some document” with some suggestions in it that may or may not be adhered to. Mr. McNamara apparently has no understanding of the glue that has held our country together for over 200 years, and contributes in his own small way to its dissolution. Thanks for nothing.

  • evan lessuk June 9, 2017, 9:50 pm

    Dear Pat it is a 10 day waiting period in CA. The issue is it NICS or not? Does it wrk or not? Do you use Technics that do not wrk? I just saying this with love!

  • cropduster June 9, 2017, 8:34 pm

    How about all you “jump to conclusions” people that, for some reason, think comedy central and The Daily Show are going to edit according to PatMac’s context and not for their own agenda listen to PatMac’s address of their airing and editing on the latest Primary & Secondary Modcast. He addresses what they did right off the bat.

    • Schizas John June 10, 2017, 1:37 pm

      You must wonder about Pats judgment. Who would do an interview with a group known to edit and be anti-2A and not expect them to make you look bad. If you know your likely to get screwed, why bend over and grab your ankles the way he did.

  • Not So Quiet Professional June 9, 2017, 7:28 pm

    Those that criticize Mac on this short piece of highly edited content should step back and do a little research on him. I served with Mac for almost 4 years before he went on to start his own company and he is the real deal.

    This is a better video of him:

    • Scott in Atlanta June 10, 2017, 9:05 pm

      So he’s your pal. Whoop de do. If you’re truly his friend, you should sit down with him and say the words very carefully to him, very slowly, one at a time, so he can let each one and its meaning sink in … SHALL … NOT … BE … INFRINGED. Perhaps you should have a dictionary handy so you can examine the meaning of each word in detail, and in particular spend some time on “INFRINGED” … it’s a very critical word, and one that the Founding Fathers chose very specifically.

      • Pat mac June 12, 2017, 11:43 am

        Yelling “Shall not be infringed” does not make you more of a patriot.
        I am on my way to another state, to train and arm guys, as I do every week, in another state. You? The question that was asked, and not aired, was; “What about people who believe in UBCs?” To which I answered “I have no issue with it.” Because,……I do not. I explained to Klepper that UBCs are liberal code for gun registration
        Also, I did not callude with the Russians

  • Pam Dunn June 9, 2017, 5:49 pm

    The “waiting period” accomplishes NOTHING; It catches essentially ZERO criminals (who either steal or purchase stolen weapons) and has no sane purpose on earth except to make left winger anti-gun politicians feel better.
    DO NOTE that ALL of those same politicians generally have ARMED guards around them and some are even TWO FACE enough to have their own Concealed carry permit (Senator Diane Feinstein ) Should we mention virulent anti-gun moron Bloomberg with his SQUAD of 20 ARMED guards around him at all times?

  • Steve Bui June 9, 2017, 4:54 pm

    Also I would like to add that Pat himself said “there was more to the dialogue” when he was talking to the host “what the link showed.”

  • Dexter Winslett June 9, 2017, 4:45 pm

    Waiting periods violate the constitution, and do absolutely nothing to stop crime. Do not be weak. FIGHT! BTW, do not tell me police say this or that, I am 25 years retired police.

  • Steve Bui June 9, 2017, 4:41 pm

    I think you guys should check out Primary & Secondary podcast episode 102. Pat clarifies what he said in the video in detail.

    • Robert Coe June 9, 2017, 7:19 pm

      Thanks for putting in the legwork Steve. I went to the link. Almost 4 hours long. Can you narrow down the time frames? Thank you sir

  • Gene June 9, 2017, 4:21 pm

    I’ll just say Mr MacNamara’s response was idiotic, and leave it at that.

  • Michael Keim June 9, 2017, 4:19 pm

    It’s his opinion. The great thing about our country is everyone can have one. You know what they say about opinions

  • Calvin Henderson June 9, 2017, 2:43 pm

    The government is already running a wait program. Somehow I made that list and the past three purchases, I have been on a 5 day wait, with the government not even bothering to call back the FFL holder. Folks, we are living in the new SSA (Socialist States of America).

  • Mike June 9, 2017, 2:04 pm

    Guys, background checks and short waiting periods is not a bad thing. ALOT of felons get guns illegally, but not all. I’ve been in gun stores when people have been told they’re ineligible of owning a gun. So some crimes, albeit a small percentage, probably are stopped by background checks. Another scenario was a woman breaks up with her bf and wants a gun for protection but has to wait 3-10 days (CA is 10). People, the goal is to be prepared and trained BEFORE the need arises. She should have already owned and trained with her own gun, before the breakup, before the relationship even started. The goal of this is start kids shooting early. Train them early. Educate them, not just in the act of firing a weapon, but in the moral and legal responsibility that goes with it. Why? When did Noah build the ark? Before the rain.

    • Winston June 9, 2017, 9:26 pm

      The US system is flawed because militant minorities end up with supra-rights exceeding those of the majority. Waiting periods, expensive permits and restrictive CCW laws are because of minority activists. Kelly, Giffords, Macnamara, Petraeus, Schumer, Gildebrand, Manchin, Obama, Clinton are all activists in the anti-gun minority.

    • Schizas John June 10, 2017, 1:43 pm

      Noah may have started the Ark before the rain, but not until God told him it was coming. Sometimes you don’t know it’s coming till it’s too late, but even a couple hours should be enough time to buy a firearm. In addition a 3-10 waiting period for someone who already owns a gun, is just downright stupid

    • Scott in Atlanta June 10, 2017, 9:06 pm

      Specious analogy. Noah had God to tell him the rain was coming. Sometimes people don’t realize the danger until it is right in front of them. They are then to be denied? By whose authority? Who made THEM God???

  • A.D. Roberts June 9, 2017, 12:32 pm

    I have no respect at all for Mcnamara. He sees no problems with waiting periods and background checks. Someone point out to this naive person that ALL of the information from the current background checks that is SUPPOSED to be deleted is still on file and they plan to keep it since there was NO time period required for the deletion of such information. As to a waiting period, does he honestly believe that a waiting period serves ANY function? The criminal just plans a little further ahead. And the good citizen who is under attack by some crazy neighbor needs the gun TODAY. So just where does he get off? I bet he believes that it really does no harm. Sorry. ANY INFRINGEMENT on our rights is an infringement. We WILL LOSE our rights by “death by a thousand cuts.”

    • Robert Coe June 9, 2017, 3:32 pm

      I watched the video twice to verify if in fact Pat was in agreement with UBC and the 3 day waiting period. I then read this entire column and readers responses as to why there should not be either the UBC of the three day period. Here is what I took from this:
      Opposition to the 3 day waiting period:
      1-A woman broke up her with her violent boyfriend and needs a gun by sundown for her self defense.
      2-There was a dispute between neighbors, one may be threatening and the other needs a gun by sundown for his self defense.
      Weak and irresponsible reasons to say the least. Since when do we become gunslingers with no training or experience and expect to take on a deranged subject that evening? Whatever happened to dialing 911? Am I to believe that some yahoo is now going to brandish a gun and point it at his neighbor which he purchased 2 hours prior? I have to admit the 3 day period is unacceptable but not based on these reasons. Lets just stick with the fact that it is a purchase like any other. You pay….you walk out of the shop. End of story.
      As far as UBC I have mixed feelings. Reasons:
      1-The government, at all levels have proven that they can not be trusted with classified/confidential information. Ie; A wiretap, an unmasking, a lying FBI director. Etc. You get the point.
      2-Record keeping. WE know the NSA is storing all our call data in violation of the 4th Amendment. As stated above, the government can not be trusted to protect the citizenry.
      3-Brian Terry was gunned down on the border…..AJ Holder led to his murder. No one in government was help accountable.
      In closing, I wear a gun and shield for a living but have no faith in those above me. So as much as I would consider a UBC, I am opposed because government officials are corrupt. Until the “swamp is drained” I stand opposed to any further regulation by those that wish to infringe on my rights. The bottom line is this. A perp is a perp is a perp. They will NEVER comply with ANY law.

    • Steve Bui June 9, 2017, 5:02 pm

      I suggest you check out Primary & Secondary podcast episode 102. There was a lot more that was said than what that Comedy Central video showed. Pat explains the real question he was asked was n’t what the link showed. Heavily edited this Comedy Central video was to make it fit their narrative. They just didn’t bother leaving in his explanations and challenge question to the host.

  • Darek June 9, 2017, 10:43 am

    As the gentleman said, in California the waiting period to buy any firearm, whether handgun or long gun, is not 3 days. It’s 10 days.

    • Chris June 9, 2017, 12:42 pm

      I am a Life Member in the NRA who lives in California also. I find it totally acceptable to wait 10 days to pick up another new toy. I also think that new gun owners should have to pass a Gun Safety Course before picking up the gun. I have seen many instances of unsafe gun handling in gun shops by new purchasers. I also think that any woman or man planning to break up with their mate can plan ahead 10 days so that they are safely armed if they believe that is necessary. Call me crazy but I also that people should pass a Safe Driving Course and a Driving Test before they receive a Driver’s License which should be mandatory. I await your comments.

      • Jacob June 9, 2017, 1:45 pm

        Anything mandatory turns your right into a privilege. “You should have to pass a sensitivity course before being able to post something on social media and have to wait 10 days before it’s published. You might offend someone…” Sounds stupid when you apply that logic to any of our other rights.

      • Erick June 9, 2017, 2:07 pm

        All of your examples are with LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS. The criminal, gangster, drug-runner, etc. will not wait 10 days b/c he won’t even purchase from a legal, brick-and-mortar shop in the first place. Did you even read this article??
        As for driving, I know plenty of people with drivers’ licenses – who passed their written and driving test – and are complete imbeciles at driving, with multiple accidents and moving violations. Vice-versa, I know people who drive daily without ever receiving a driver license (no driver safety course, etc.) and they have had zero accidents, zero infractions (tickets), etc. More government “tests”, “licenses”, “permits”, etc. do nothing to guarantee quality or safety. All this does is make you FEEL safe, even when facts/reality says otherwise.
        Perhaps we need an “internet license” so people don’t say false or misleading comments online? Hmm?
        And what you consider a “toy”, others consider a life-saving tool, especially those not living in middle-class/upper-class estates.
        I’m sorry, but you have a distorted view of reality, evidenced by your comment. Regardless, I’m a believer in freedom: if YOU want to wait 10 days, pay for an unnecessary license, take a gun-safety course that is simply common-sense (don’t pull trigger, don’t aim firearm at people unless threatened), etc., then you should be able to do just that….just don’t force everyone else to live the way you want to b/c that’s not freedom.
        Take care. 🙂

      • Pam Dunn June 9, 2017, 5:43 pm

        I BET you voted twice for Moonbeam Brown your current governor, along with Kamela Harris your NEW senator and a bunch of other anti-gun democrates too.

      • Scott in Atlanta June 10, 2017, 9:12 pm

        I think you should have to pass a written test before posting comments to this board. I think you should have to pass a walking test before being allowed to walk on the sidewalk. I think you should have to pass a breathing test before being allowed to breath.
        Sir, living in California does this to you. You slowly become accustomed to being crushed by Big Brother, to where, as in your case, you don’t even mind anymore. “Big Brother, may I please go to the bathroom? No? Just because you say so? Okay, I’ll just sit here and pee in my pants. Thank you, oh benevolent Big Brother!”
        Myself, I enjoy freedom way too much to trust Big Bro to regulate every move I make. Who made them God, who made them all-wise and all-knowing? No one! My observations are, they are complete idiots and the more power you give them, the more they insist you give up. And there is NO SUCH THING as enough. Read 1984 – you’re on your way.

  • Leighton Cavendish June 9, 2017, 10:43 am

    UBCs are like drug deals…no way to enforce illegal ones…can prosecute after the fact, though…like with straw purchases.
    As far as waiting periods…that only really matters if a person is not already a gun owner.
    Here in Florida an LEO without a concealed permit can walk in a gun store in uniform and gun…and still have to wait 3 days for a handgun if it is not a replacement for his duty issued weapon. How insane is THAT?
    But…a shot gun or other long gun/rifle? Take it home same day. No questions asked. Just pass the instant background check.

    • A.D. Roberts June 9, 2017, 12:35 pm

      ANY law infringes on our God given rights and DOES break the Constitution. They don’t like the Constitution. Let them leave America and go to say, England. Or Russia. Or South Africa where the blacks will kill you for being white.

  • Robert Floyd June 9, 2017, 10:38 am

    If he is a “pillar” in the gun community, then he should already be educated. There is no background check or waiting period to run your mouth off (first amendment). There is no three day waiting period to register to vote (without any identification). Why do we get asked not to chastised the so called pillars of the gun community when they say something stupid. Evert American born is a pillar in the gun community. It looks to me that some would rather be a step or a sidewalk, rather than a pillar.

    • Jacob June 9, 2017, 1:54 pm

      Well put. So many people are ok with regulating the hell out of firearms but if they applied that logic to any of our other rights they would call you a Nazi.

  • Deadmeat99 June 9, 2017, 10:29 am

    The fact that he agreed to do an interview for a Comedy Central show with a millennial beta-male about guns makes me question Mr. McNamara’s judgement and critical thinking skills. The fact that he said what he said makes me wonder how he interprets the oath he took.

  • Rangemaster11 June 9, 2017, 10:07 am

    Here in California, there is a 10 day waiting period. Hopefully, legal action is being revived to somewhat fix this. For those who are already licensed, permitted, etc. and already owns guns, what purpose does the waiting period serve?

  • Carl Carlson June 9, 2017, 9:56 am

    I don’t see nothing wrong with a 3 day waiting period. Lets give law officials a chance to check out the future gun owner.

    • Ldub June 9, 2017, 10:20 am

      I see nothing wrong with a 3 day waiting period either. In fact, if LE needs more time to check out a future gun owner, let’s give em 3 weeks…and if that’s not enough, 3 months…or 3 years even! Yay! Waiting period = good. Uh, riiiiiiiiight…..

    • Scott in Atlanta June 10, 2017, 9:14 pm

      Double negative … if you don’t see nothing wrong, then you’re saying you see something wrong?

  • Bob I. June 9, 2017, 9:22 am

    Anyone who has ever been interviewed by any media outlet can attest that context is created in the editing room. It is totally in the realm of the possible that we aren’t privy to preceding questions and statements that might have changed the entire complexion of the article but were deliberately edited out (for the sole purpose of having a pro-gun celebrity appear as if he supports gun control.) In that sense, the left wins this round as they’ve managed to muck-rack a digital lynch-mob wanting to stretch McNamara’s neck over an article produced by the left. The liberal-controlled media does this all the time. Before going off half-cocked, simmer down hotheads and lets have someone from our camp interview Mr. McNamara to set the record straight. Stop playing into the liberals’ hands, Think!

    • Tom June 9, 2017, 12:08 pm

      Apparently the author, Mr. BLANNELBERRY failed to confirm the validity of this story with Mr. McNamara.

      Mr. BLANNELBERRY either suffers from poor journalistic practices or was trying to post a hit piece against Mr. McNamara.

  • Patrick June 9, 2017, 9:06 am

    I have never heard of this guy and that should still be the case. People with anti 2nd opinions shouldn’t get “airtime” on pro gun media. They already monopolize main stream media, stop giving them a voice on media I regard as gun friendly. Finally, to the statement this guy is a great trainer, I would have to question that. If you can’t put 2 and 2 together around UBCs, how can you possibly do anything well.

  • Tom June 9, 2017, 9:03 am

    Well, it’s too bad he “represents” the gun community. What he’s said needs to be challenged. Tucson, AZ is notoriously liberal.

    Perhaps it’s time to avoid going to his classes or buying his products? He’s on the web and can be contacted.

    He needs to know what others think.

  • PeterC June 9, 2017, 8:17 am

    I used to live in Massachusetts, where registration of private gun transfers was mandatory. We were supposed to self-report by filling out a little blue form and mailing it to the Department of Public Safety. More often than not, the little blue form got mailed to the circular file, where it belonged.

  • Steven Kaspar June 9, 2017, 8:14 am

    No Constitutional right should have a waiting period ever! just another famous load mouth dickhead!

    • Larry Brickey June 9, 2017, 8:40 am

      Calling people nasty names always helps a discussion move forward.

    • Bob I. June 9, 2017, 9:13 am

      Did you even read the article above?

  • GRA June 9, 2017, 8:00 am

    So says the “hero” who has access to any and all firearms he wants. SCREW THIS FOOL McNAMARA !!! I don’t care how badass he is, how many medals he has and/or how much of a hero everyone thinks he is, he has no authorization to speak for me and/or other gun owners. The only reason this silly-assed article interviews him in the first place is to give propaganda to the liberals. No reason for waiting periods nor background checks at all for any firearms. Absolutely stupid. I hope this silly-assed interview serves only to ruin the careers of both McNamara and this idiot writer. They can both go to hell and that’s as “honey” as I can put it. Idiots.

  • Infidel762x51 June 9, 2017, 7:57 am

    You can’t gain anything by giving anything to the ban guns crowd. No matter what you give them they will always come back for more.

  • Tom June 9, 2017, 7:16 am

    Not the 1st bad ass to make a stupid statement and he wont be the last. Opinions are like AHoles…

  • Kevin Schmersal June 9, 2017, 5:50 am

    Pat McNamara is absolutely one of the finest firearm trainers in existence, but I’d like to know just how in hell he justifies a three day waiting period and universal background check.

    • Leighton Cavendish June 9, 2017, 10:45 am

      Because he does not have to go through them…he has access to anything he wants…unlike the vast majority of us out there…

  • Dr Motown June 9, 2017, 5:29 am

    He lost me when he didn’t challenge the “30,000 gun deaths/year” mantra. We all know that 22,000 are suicides, and only about 5000 are actual murders. We can have disagreements on the value of UBC’s and “waiting periods,” but the 30,000 figure of bulldung statistics MUST ALWAYS be corrected when it’s brought up.

  • Shawn June 9, 2017, 4:42 am

    I had no idea who this McNamara was until I read this unfortunate article. While he has a right to his opinion, everyone else has a right to blacklist and boycott him. And they should. I certainly will.

    As to the author’s defense of this McNamara, I would point out that Dick Metcalf lost his job for a similar story on “common sense” laws. And that was after his boss requested him to write the piece.

    On that basis, perhaps Blannelberry’s time as a “gun writer” should end as well.

    • Steve June 9, 2017, 7:56 am

      This article did not defend any sort of “common sense” gun laws, in fact it pointed out the flaws in UBC’s and waiting periods. The article promoted reeducation and dialog over blacklisting., If members of the gun community blacklist everyone we disagree with, we loose our chance to share our beliefs and understandings which will inevitable lead to a shrinking of 2A supporters since the anti gun side will always be vocal in media and public sector. Open discussion and open exchange of ideas is the only way we can redirect the misguided understandings of the opposition.

      • Duane Perry June 9, 2017, 10:47 am

        If you support those that agree to “common sense” gun laws, you can. I will not. Rights are lost when “common sense” laws come into play. He wasn’t having a discussion, he was giving his opinion. My opinion is don’t give him any of your money.

    • Richard Kennedy June 9, 2017, 8:12 am


Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend