Closing Gunshow Loopholes/Private Sales [Poll Within]

[xRUSTYx]

I'd like to start a poll to see how many of us would be "OK" with closing the gunshow loophole & private sales.  Instead of person-to-person without paperwork, a meetup would have to be setup at a local gun store to run a check on the firearm and the person.

 

I see and understand both sides to this debate, and I've seen several references that up to 75% of NRA members are open to closing the said loophole.

 

[As I See It]

Pro's of Closing Gunshow Loophole/Private Sales:

1)  Gun check to make sure it hasn't been stolen or wanted in relation to a crime.

2)  Buyer check, to make sure they are legally able to purchase & own a firearm.

3)  Less opportunity for convicted felons and criminals getting firearms abusing the loophole/private sale.  I'd hate to see one of my firearms previously owned, used in a crime.

 

Con's of Closing Gunshow Loophole/Private Sales:

1)  Cost would go up.  $10 for TICS, and whatever the shop may charge for the transfer ($10 - $25)

2)  Possible infringement on a law abiding citizens right to bear arms.

3)  This is just the start of a "slippery slope" leading to more and more regulations & "gun control"

 

To be honest and for full disclosure - I'm open to closing the loophole and moving to have private sales done through an FFL.  I like the protection it guarantee's on purchase, and the fact that less people will flip guns left & right (like what we are currently seeing in these gun grab times).  I also like the fact that it will allow more consumers to get in to mom & pop gun shops putting more $$$ in to local economies {my small business mind at work}

 

I understand and know many will not agree with my outlook, but that's the beauty of America, and a great forum like this.  To discuss & try to learn/better understand the opposition :)

 

So, without further adieu ... The Poll!  Would love to hear your comments as to why you picked your certain viewpoint! 

Edited January 15, 2013 by xRUSTYx

[xRUSTYx]

I'd also like to add - Votes are Private, not public :)  Can't wait to hear what you guys have to say!  Thanks for participating!

[TMF]

Closing "loopholes" as the antis want it will absolutely restrict my ability to buy sell and force me to be at the whim of a private business when it comes to that. Perhaps if it was done through your local LEO at no charge I wouldn't be so vehemently against it, but if they changed the law it would be an additional 50 bucks (or a lot more since gun stores could really stick it to you then) just to purchase an item.

There has to be a responsible way we can restrict sales to felons without screwing over law abiding citizens, but the latter doesn't seem to be a concern.

[xRUSTYx]

Perhaps if it was done through your local LEO at no charge I wouldn't be so vehemently against it, but if they changed the law it would be an additional 50 bucks (or a lot more since gun stores could really stick it to you then) just to purchase an item.

 

Thanks for your thoughts TMF!

 

I disagree with this though ... I don't think FFL transfer fee's would go up.  I use D&T every time I have a gun transferred in, and its $25 out the door.  Is $25 too much to check out a potential gun/buyer?  I think its a small price to pay for peace of mind :) 

[CQB Elite]

In Criminology we learned of the "Balloon Effect" in reference to anti-crime efforts. Take a balloon that is half full of air and push your finger into it. What happens? The balloon will sink in around your finger but rise everywhere else. Those that study crime trends have proven this over and over. Focus on efforts on burglaries and robberies will go up, etc.

If we close the loophole the not-so-nice people will still get their hands on guns- by breaking into homes, stores, cars, etc, and taking them.

[xRUSTYx]

GREAT illustration EB-SF, and something I hadn't really thought about!  Thanks for sharing!

 

I would have loved to study Criminology :) 

[TMF]

I disagree with this though ... I don't think FFL transfer fee's would go up. I use D&T every time I have a gun transferred in, and its $25 out the door. Is $25 too much to check out a potential gun/buyer? I think its a small price to pay for peace of mind :)

I guess what I mean is I don't want a private business to regulate the cost of a personal sale. I already do this for guns I have shipped in the mail and have to drive 45 minutes because one local gun shop won't do it and the other charges $100. You have to think big picture, not just within your corner where you have the benefit of a dealer with a degree of ethics.

[TMF]

Oh, and the place I used to drive 45 minutes to has since burned down.

[CQB Elite]

I would have loved to study Criminology :) 

Criminology was a program for those of us not smart enough to major in anything else.

[glockster157]

Closing the loophole is a registration scheme. I can guarantee you that if every gun transferred is ran across a computer data base, at some point that data base will be used against gun owners.

[Mike.357]

if the law would change anything in regard to criminal actions I might be persuaded that it is good.

 

It will not stop the criminal from acquiring a gun.  So what is the point?

[SonnyCrockett]

I support blocking private sales at gun shows,it should be for licensed gun dealers only who paid for the show 

good luck telling people what they can and cant do in the parking lot and  behind closed doors........

 

I have never seen a criminal with a gun obey the law

I have never seen a drug addict on heroin obey the law

I have never seen a drunk driver obey the law

 

you catch the drift.......our problems are not our laws,its the people breaking the laws

Edited January 15, 2013 by SonnyCrockett

[frankmako]

i just don't see what the loop hole is.  if you buy a gun at a gun show from a dealer that is showing his goods at the gun show he run the checks and you fill out the paperwork.  if you buy a gun from someone in the parking lot/across the street/etc,, it is a private sale,,, just like any other private sale of anything made.  they are trying to stop private sales.  it is all about control, control of you. 

[DaveTN]

It’s not a “Gun show loophole” in this state. Call it what it is; you want to outlaw private gun sales.

 

I don’t have a problem with it but couldn’t say yes or no without knowing the price. You couldn’t just let the FFL’s charge anything they want; gun transfers would be $200 in Murfreesboro.

[Erik88]

I have mixed feelings on this topic. Since %40 of all guns are supposedly purchased without a background check I find it hard to believe that by eliminating private sales it wouldn't help keep the guns out away from certain people. Obviously there is no way to do this without infringing on the rights of everyone else.

 

Remember, a lot of these nut job are cowards. I don't think they would have the balls to break into a house or car to steal a firearm. I also don't believe that the crime rate will drop dramatically once private sales are outlawed.

 

One thing I would be ok with is only allowing private sales between people who both have their HCP/CCW. I also like the idea of private sales being done at your local PD with a background check provided by them at little to no charge. Obviously this may not be feasible. 

 

 

Like I said, I have really mixed feelings. I can see both sided of the argument. 

[Glenn]

Until I see some proof that a lot of criminals are getting guns this way, I say no. It will just be registration.

[Oh Shoot]

I didn't vote because it doesn't matter whether I "support" it or not -- if  only one proposal passes this time around, it's gonna be the end to private sales.

 

The devil will be in the details of how it's to be handled nationwide, the biggest of course being whether a permanent registry will go along with it.

 

On a minor note, I wonder if our little TICS fee might get a bit of federal scrutiny in the process.

 

- OS

Edited January 15, 2013 by Oh Shoot

[swim615]

I would not support legislation.

 

If you are worried only sell to someone with a HCP or go to your local FFL and transfer it that way.

 

You can do that now if you are worried.

 

Seems like a new tax coming to me, a well as registration to see what I am doing.

[Jonnin]

I would be all for it under the condition that the government pays 100% of the fee.  That is it, period.   I do not think it will help much, but it does no harm to me and COULD prevent me from buying  stolen gun from some shady guy at a show, or from selling one to a criminal (far less likely, but it could happen, it DID happen, guy that shot a LEO here got his at a show from a shady "private sales" dealer who was actually doing tons of xfers without ffl).  

 

There should be an inheritance variation where the beneficiary is simply checked but not all the guns by number.

 

It will not stop thugs from selling stolen guns to each other.   It will not stop gun-runners like the BAFTE who sell to crimnals, or other organized crime.  But if it were free, it would protect ME from the off chance that I deal with a criminal unknowingly.  

 

If the government is unwilling to pay the fees, then the measure is not worth doing --- the money is more important to them, then its more important to me too, and I will protest it loudly. 

[peejman]

if the law would change anything in regard to criminal actions I might be persuaded that it is good.

 

It will not stop the criminal from acquiring a gun.  So what is the point?

 

 

Exactly.  Only a politician could come up with a crime prevention bill that has no hope of preventing crime.

[Guest CigarGuy]

Exactly.  Only a politician could come up with a crime prevention bill that has no hope of preventing crime.

I guess it would allow the ignorant to feel better?  Not sure that's a reason to do it, though?!

[Guest Wildogre]

I am against this one. 

 

First I doubt the 40% figure, I just do not see that number of firearms being sold at the shows let alone that number of private sales going on at the shows. For the 40% number to be true I would think that I would have seen a lot more firearms walking out the door than I have. 

 

I personally have only done one private sale and we both showed our HCP and the money changed hands. 

 

The Libertarian in me is against it, but then I am also against set belt laws and helmet laws for the same reason. I do like the idea of insuring that the firearm is not stolen and the person I would be selling it to is legally able to buy it. 

 

Do I think it will happen yes. Do I think it will keep firearms out of the hands of criminals, no. It will only stop those who would wear their name on a shirt when robbing a bank.

 

So will it pass, yes. Will it do anything constructive, no. 

 

So unless someone can point to numbers and show X number of firearms were purchased by criminals at private sales from legal owners.  I would have to be against it on principal.

[Guest Nutts&Bolts]

All that needs to be done is give everyone the phone number to do a background check.....
Pretty simple huh?
I should run for President.

Btw, I was told by a dealer their is NO fee for the check. It's a toll free number... Edited January 15, 2013 by Nutts&Bolts

[DennyB]

It seems to me, that if a gun sale is between two Tennessee residents, the federal government should have no jurisdiction of that sale since no state lines were crossed.

Tennessee state laws should be the only ones relevent.

[Oh Shoot]

Btw, I was told by a dealer their is NO fee for the check. It's a toll free number...

 

There's no federal charge. But the dealer charges for his time to run one for a gun he didn't sell. You expect all FFLs to give gawd knows how free time and effort out of the goodness of their pea pickin' little hearts?

 

Oh yeah, and there's that  little 10 clams per pop from the state of TN, too.

 

- OS