Having a background screening program in place will encourage applicants to be more forthcoming about their behavior history. It will encourage them to be more forthcoming about their health history in order to ensure that it is not disclosed. It will discourage them from taking advantage of a false sense of security because they are aware that they are not welcome here. I have been an attorney for thirty-eight years, and I understand how people come to trust attorneys to help them.

I want to stress this point because if there are not good background screening programs in place to identify people who may be susceptible to blackmail, or may be inclined to sell confidential information, there will be bad actors, and that’s why so many decide to go with private solutions, since now a days you can go online to find the best background check services which offer a professional and precise work in this area.

So as Attorney General I am going to have a task force that looks at all those things. It is going to be a national task force. I will convene that task force in January of 2013, with input from both federal law enforcement and private sector leaders. We want to get this right. We will work very closely with our partners in the private sector to implement a very effective background check system that is robust, works, and is also consistent with the Constitution.”

As the New York Times reported last year, “Most gun dealers do not do criminal background checks. Those who do sometimes charge $200 or more, which can be prohibitive for most gun buyers, particularly those who can’t pass a check easily.” The federal background check system has a 97 percent failure rate, and the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence’s 2007 analysis of FBI-reported crime data indicates that background checks don’t keep guns out of the hands of those with criminal records, drug and alcohol problems, and other concerns.

The NRA also argued that states have the authority to regulate the sale of guns and ammunition, but some courts have questioned this, noting that the Second Amendment provides “an individual right to keep and bear arms” but does not give states the power to ban certain weapons or ammunition. The Supreme Court will rule on that dispute next term.

In an interview, Rep. Joe Barton (R-Tex.) said the Supreme Court should reverse those cases.

“It’s been a long time since the Second Amendment was written and interpreted and applied in an individual sense,” he said. “And I think it’s time to say, ‘Let’s take a look at it.’ ”

The National Rifle Association has fought against the new guidelines, saying they would give federal authorities a “blanket license” to ban firearms.

“These changes will inevitably lead to more confiscation,” said executive director Wayne LaPierre. “Americans have a constitutional right to bear arms, and nothing in this proposal will infringe on that right.” LaPierre called the changes “politically driven” and warned that they could create a federal registry of gun owners. The Department of Justice will have discretion over what guns it regulates and what types of firearms can be sold in the United States. If guns made after Jan. 1, 2000 are banned, the Department of Justice would be given the authority to create its own system of registration, in order to regulate firearms.

The Department of Justice’s announcement comes at a time of intense debate over gun control, and the Obama administration faces opposition from Republicans who claim the administration is usurping legislative authority by usurping the authority of the federal gun registry.