Chaffetz: Background checks ‘will obviously become an issue’

A former Utah congressman told Fox News background check proposals will get renewed interest in the wake of Sunday’s shooting in Las Vegas.

Jason Chaffetz, once the Republican chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee who served Utah’s third congressional district for eight years, said Tuesday during an interview on America’s Newsroom the idea of expanding background checks and other hot-button gun control policies often percolate to the surface of the public debate after such tragedies.

“I do think that background checks will obviously become an issue,” he said. “I do think there is something we could do on the mental health front, but again, I think it’s too early to do that and it wouldn’t necessarily have prevented what tragically happened in Las Vegas.”

Authorities in Las Vegas still don’t know why a lone gunman opened fire into a crowded country music festival from the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino Sunday, killing 59 and wounding more than 500 others. The shooter, identified as a 64-year-old retired accountant and prolific gambler named Stephen Paddock, killed himself before the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department entered his two-room suite, where he’d gathered 23 firearms — a dozen of which were equipped with bump stocks — and thousands of rounds of ammunition.

Read More



  • old codger

    What is this FREAKING moron spouting????? If I’m wrong someone please correct me BUT I don’t know of ANY State that DOES NOT require a NIC check!

  • disqus_PeRYgPx0Bk

    This guy must have passed several background checks — probably one of almost every gun he bought, maybe even one for each “bump stock” he bought. There is no evidence he has “mental health” issues (according to the hookers who claim he utilized their services he was “cheap and had no personality” but that is not a mental health diagnosis. The Second Amendment exists for when government gets too weak and there is anarchy and for when government is too strong and there is tyranny. The price of having this is very rarely some guy with a gun will commit bad acts. This is a price worth paying when the consequences of not having it are so much more dire.

  • George Baktis

    As a law full gun owner I believe in doing back round checks, but for a different reason than must people. The reason is it protects the seller, if the government tells you to proceed with the transaction it takes the liability off of the seller. No honest person would sell a firearm to a prohibited person knowing the firearm would be used to commit a crime. So now all the liberal anti gunners are calling for more gun control. I have a simple question for them NAME ONE LAW THAT EVER PREVENTED A CRIME. I won’t hold my breath waiting for a answer.

    • James Brooks

      Just because someone buys a gun does not mean it will be used in anything Illegal nearly all shooters did not have criminal backgrounds.

    • Front Sight

      Background checks are a panacea.
      The bad-guys (criminals) are criminals because they don’t “obey” the laws already on the books. Civilian ownership of machine guns has been against FEDERAL law since 1934 NATIONAL FIREARMS ACT. On May 19, 1986, as part of the Firearm Owners’ Protection Act (FOPA), Congress banned the transfer and possession of machine guns, with two exceptions:
      The first exception to the federal machine gun ban is that machine guns lawfully possessed prior to May 19, 1986 may continue to be possessed and transferred, provided they are registered in accordance with requirements of the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA).18
      The second exception is that machine guns may be transferred to or by, or possessed by or under the authority of, the federal government or a state, or a department, agency, or political subdivision thereof.

  • Ethan

    When my wife and I bought a revolver for personal protection we didn’t walk out of the store with it, we had to wait five days. The wait was to be sure we weren’t planning some crime and needed a piece to carry it out. An automobile is also a lethal weapon in the wrong hands but one may drive it right off the lot. The left uses all shootings to push their anti-gun legislation, the gun smoke had not yet blown out of Las Vegas before the Democrats began screaming. The heinous act and the loss of life were not the issue for them, it was the fact firearms were used.

    Incidentally, private ownership of machine guns has been illegal since 1930, I’m not against legislation prohibiting making machine guns out of ordinary semi-automatic firearms. Let’s just enforce the laws already enacted and stop with the hysterics.

  • James Brooks

    We should do away with the Brady Law and background checks,none of these shooters even had criminal backgrounds,it was just another way to take a way our right to own a gun,I myself lost my right to be able to protect myself and my family over a stud little insodent, and millions are in the same boat as me,it’s very wrong,we have never had any problems involving guns.If they can take our guns then they should take their away from these greedy lawmakers.

  • Alan404

    When last I looked, there already was a background check regime, which by the way, was and remains objectionable, so what in blazes are people talking about now. By the way, when I ask what are people talking about, I do not posed the question generically, I pose an exact and precise question, that requires equivalent answers.

  • Background checks are an essential tool to weed out felons and we he gave them in Virginia, I thought they were everywhere.