Closing Gunshow Loopholes/Private Sales [Poll Within]

[xRUSTYx]

Wow!  3 Pages!  Thanks for all your thoughts!

 

Several of you bring up a good point.  To actually make this work - Gun Registration, or a database would have to be set up, which I am entirely against.  If no database is set up, private sales would continue to happen whether lawfully or not because the feds couldn't double check to see whether or not someone went through an FFL for the purchase.

 

This won't stop mass killings, and it won't stop criminals from getting firearms.  But what it will do, is perhaps curb gun violence just a tad IMO.  Whether that be .5% or 5% ... It gives less ammunition to the Anti's about "Gun Show Loopholes", and give's peace of mind to the buyer/seller.

 

But -- As stated .... Its a slippery slope as more & more gun legislation is passed.  This may be the tip of the iceberg, but once the Anti's get this, they'll try and go after more.

 

I've thought more on it today .... I would still support it, but am also fine using the system we have now :)

Edited January 15, 2013 by xRUSTYx

[Guest Nutts&Bolts]

I think everyone needs to research how and why our forefathers set this country up. Read extensively about why you should own and have access to firearms.
Dealers?
Background Checks?
Registration ?

They didn't have them....don't you think they would've wrote them in if they were needed?

[c.a.willard]

There was a thread that ended up talking about this subjecct shortly before the shooting at sandy hook.  I said this then and ill say it again.  New gun laws are highly likely to be passed.  By refusing sensible laws we will only serve to alienate our position.  There is room for middleground on this issue.   Heres what i see likely being passed,  a ban on private sales and potentially implementation of a national registration system.  Obviously even stricter laws will be proposed and some may very well pass. 

 

Here is some legitimate middle ground.  State level registration only made available to LE upon issuance of a warrant.   Allowing individuals to obtain a purchase permit usuable in private sales.  All those without a Private purchase pemit must go through FFL.  For simplicity purposes a HCP could also serve as a purchase permit.  Private sales must be reported within 3 business days.  

 

 

Yes i already know many of you will disagree with this, however none of it would infringe on your ability to own a firearm. 

[mikegideon]

Registration will be challenged.

[c.a.willard]

Mike  your right registration will be challenged however there is case law that supports it being lawfull.

[Mark@Sea]

Registration inevitably leads to confiscation.  I would fight it as I would fight confiscation.

 

Would I support a simple "phone in, no firearm info, no fee" check?  Certainly, as long as you can assure me there will be no lasting record of any sort.  As Congress couldn't get the NCIS center to destroy their daily backups, I kind of doubt you can assure me of that - but feel free to try!  I feel certain most gun owners would give it a whirl, just for peace of mind.  I am equally certain the criminal element will continue to get their firearms as before - burglary and straw purchases, usually - and won't be bothered by this in the least.

 

Purchase permit?  It isn't "shall not be greatly infringed".  It says "shall not be infringed".  Now why do you suppose? 

 

Again, this law is predicated on the belief that criminals can be trusted to obey the law, but law abiding citizens can't, and therefore must be tracked, registered, permitted.

 

In short, NO.

[Jonnin]

Wow!  3 Pages!  Thanks for all your thoughts!

 

Several of you bring up a good point.  To actually make this work - Gun Registration, or a database would have to be set up, which I am entirely against.  If no database is set up, private sales would continue to happen whether lawfully or not because the feds couldn't double check to see whether or not someone went through an FFL for the purchase.

 

This won't stop mass killings, and it won't stop criminals from getting firearms.  But what it will do, is perhaps curb gun violence just a tad IMO.  Whether that be .5% or 5% ... It gives less ammunition to the Anti's about "Gun Show Loopholes", and give's peace of mind to the buyer/seller.

 

But -- As stated .... Its a slippery slope as more & more gun legislation is passed.  This may be the tip of the iceberg, but once the Anti's get this, they'll try and go after more.

 

I've thought more on it today .... I would still support it, but am also fine using the system we have now :)

 

Not really.    If you sell a LOT of your "personal" firearms as a business venture, even a year ago, you would eventually get caught at it.  There have been any number of times this has happened.   And that is without registration.   What happens is someone gets cocky, starts to do it big time, and begins to buy a LOT of guns in a short amount of time, which DOES red flag the NICS system, I think its more than 10 a month or something?    Someone here will know.   They also get caught by just being dumb, of course.  

 

Also, straw purchases WOULD begin to be a serious problem.  If you bought it and cannot produce it when the cops come, and have no record of selling it via a background check to another person, you can be (and should be) prosecuted.   A few people in jail for doing this,  and people will wise up and stop doing the straw buys.

 

Obviously, they cannot track every gun in the country.  But the above stuff is already being done to the extent they can do it, they just cannot prosecute a straw sell from person to person if the seller simply says "duhh? I didnt know he was a felon, I asked and he said no!" --- case dismissed.   They cannot prosecute the guy selling his collection without warning you first either, as I understand it, they *Have* to say "you are buying and selling too many, get an FFL".    Actually, if they allow anyone to access the database --- the entire concept of FFL would go away!  There would be no need for them anymore...

[Andyshowfan]

I really do not believe I could support it. It only seems to end private sales between private citizens and just like the many laws/regulations/mandates in force now, the criminal element isn't going to respect any new laws. If you feel the gun may be stolen call your local PD or SD and have them run the S# if you think the person is not allowed to legally purchase the firearm, go to a local FFL and transfer it. Either way a person buying/selling shouldn't have any issue with it unless he/she can't legally purchase one. IMO any "crook" would most likely not want to pay/sell at fair market value anyway, throwing up a red flag (to me anyways).

[xRUSTYx]

 IMO any "crook" would most likely not want to pay/sell at fair market value anyway, throwing up a red flag (to me anyways).

 

From my limited research, I recall reading something that stated, "Hott" Guns on the black market actually sell for or above retail. 

[mcurrier]

There was a thread that ended up talking about this subjecct shortly before the shooting at sandy hook.  I said this then and ill say it again.  New gun laws are highly likely to be passed.  By refusing sensible laws we will only serve to alienate our position.  There is room for middleground on this issue.   Heres what i see likely being passed,  a ban on private sales and potentially implementation of a national registration system.  Obviously even stricter laws will be proposed and some may very well pass. 

 

Here is some legitimate middle ground.  State level registration only made available to LE upon issuance of a warrant.   Allowing individuals to obtain a purchase permit usuable in private sales.  All those without a Private purchase pemit must go through FFL.  For simplicity purposes a HCP could also serve as a purchase permit.  Private sales must be reported within 3 business days.  

 

 

Yes i already know many of you will disagree with this, however none of it would infringe on your ability to own a firearm. 

 

Where is the "dislike" button?  Sorry C.A., I don't dislike you, but there are already tons of laws on the books that every time each one was implemented it was supposed to be the end-all law that would solve everything.  They don't enforce most of the laws that we already have and they don't prosecute criminals, they baby them and give them a revolving door in and out of prison.  Mo law is going to fix anything unless you enforce it, and they have too many as it is.  Their end goal time is NOT to solve any "safety" issue or to protect anyone, it is for full banning and confiscation so that they are then free to do anything they want without anyone stopping them.  Plain and simple.

[c.a.willard]

Like i said when i typed it i knew several people would disagree.  Registration does not infringe, it in no way limits what you may own.    And if you want to look at it from a logical standpoint sincethe purpose of the 2nd Amendment was to allow for an armed population to ensure the effectiveness of the milita, would in not make sense that in order to best activate individuals as part of the militia the government would need to know what types of firearms they own.  

[mcurrier]

Like i said when i typed it i knew several people would disagree.  Registration does not infringe, it in no way limits what you may own.    And if you want to look at it from a logical standpoint sincethe purpose of the 2nd Amendment was to allow for an armed population to ensure the effectiveness of the milita, would in not make sense that in order to best activate individuals as part of the militia the government would need to know what types of firearms they own.  

 

Registration A-L-W-A-Y-S leads to confiscation.  Guaranteed.  Historical Fact.

[Jonnin]

Yep.  If they want registration, no can do.

[charlessummers]

My thoughts on this is: I'm all for making sure that my firearms end up in the right hands if I decide to sell one or two. I do not like the idea of having to go through a FFL for each and every sale since the transfer fees can get out of control unless regulated, and who needs more regulations? What I would like to see is in these days of instant information is a website that people can go to and perform a "background check" instantanously. This background check would of course require that both parties are present, both providing a person identifier (SSN?), and the only result that are returned are "Approved" or "Denied". No personal reasons for the denial, just a yes/no flag. With the tecchnology that we have today, I do not see how this wouldn't be possible. It would give peace of mind to the seller, and if the buyer has nothing to worry about, both parties can be happily on their way in a matter of minutes.

 

Of course, there should be an app for that for all the smartphones.

[Moped]

I am totally against it.  It's just another form of registration. 

[Rickey]

The trouble I have is that just about all of these gun crimes is be felons anyway why are they out of jail to start with. There trying to cure a problem without addressing the real problem it's like there trying everything else but the root cause..

[CQB Elite]

Simply put...this would have no effect but to withold my right to sell my private property and allow the BATFE to completely have access to all purchases and transfers. Not saying that isn't most likely the case now, but this will not deter a criminal, will not do anything but restrict us as individuals.
 
Just may opinion.

Yep, that was my point. Closing the "loophole" will only hurt law abiding citizen like you and me & will do nothing to prevent guns from falling into the wrong hands.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Mike  your right registration will be challenged however there is case law that supports it being lawfull.

Case law can be challenged just like anything else that conflicts with the Constitution. It's just rare.

NFA toys shouldn't be on a registry. Maybe some day.

[TripleDigitRide]

Although I think something like this is on the lighter side of what could happen, I'm still against it. Like many have said before me, the criminals, insane, and criminally inane don't give a damn about silly loopholes.

[cyh1830]

I don't have anymore guns. Sold'em all via the gun show loophole!

 

But .... if the Obummer regs. come to fruition, I think I'll start a "Meet Up Group" so we can loo... , uh, talk about our "former" gun collection!

 

HGP only! ;)  

[LCPfraTN]

First, I can't believe someone on a gun forum is using the term " gunshow loophole."  We all know there is no such thing, just the media's misinterpretation of the private sales that go on around gunshows since that is where a lot of interested buyers and private sellers gather. 

 

I also don't believe the the 40% number that the media keeps spitting out is accurate either, especially when they say it includes sales through the internet.  We all know that sales through the internet have the same FFL transfer requirements that any other sale requires. In fact, I would venture to say that internet sales are more likely to go through an FFL than any other form of private transfer. So, when the media regurgitates the anti-gun group propaganda it makes me doubt the validity of the information even more.  

 

I really cannot support changes to private sales since criminals won't abide by the law anyway...it will just make it more difficult for law abiding citizens to transfer a gun.  If a system could be developed where you could voluntarily have a background check done on an unfamiliar buyer or determine whether or not a firearm has been stolen, I could possibly support that.

 

In the alternative, If carry permit holders or C&R license holders were allowed to bypass any background checks on gun purchases and trades, I might be more willing to consider requirements for background checks on other transfers. I'd still have some issues with requiring checks for family gifts/trades and similar transfers, but perhaps that could be exempted too. Above all else though is that registration of our guns is an absolute deal breaker.        

[BBdown]

Having to use a FFL for every sale would be the equivalent to registration in my book.  

[Worriedman]

I'd like to be able to run a background check on the kid asking to date my daughter.  How about making it legal for anyone to run a check on any one else?  Pay the $10.00 and get your fact check sheet.

 

Will volunteer to pay for the first one on the current POTUS...

[Guest Nutts&Bolts]

Worried I like the way you think ...

[Guest 6.8 AR]

First, I can't believe someone on a gun forum is using the term " gunshow loophole."  We all know there is no such thing, just the media's misinterpretation of the private sales that go on around gunshows since that is where a lot of interested buyers and private sellers gather. 

 

I also don't believe the the 40% number that the media keeps spitting out is accurate either, especially when they say it includes sales through the internet.  We all know that sales through the internet have the same FFL transfer requirements that any other sale requires. In fact, I would venture to say that internet sales are more likely to go through an FFL than any other form of private transfer. So, when the media regurgitates the anti-gun group propaganda it makes me doubt the validity of the information even more.  

 

I really cannot support changes to private sales since criminals won't abide by the law anyway...it will just make it more difficult for law abiding citizens to transfer a gun.  If a system could be developed where you could voluntarily have a background check done on an unfamiliar buyer or determine whether or not a firearm has been stolen, I could possibly support that.

 

In the alternative, If carry permit holders or C&R license holders were allowed to bypass any background checks on gun purchases and trades, I might be more willing to consider requirements for background checks on other transfers. I'd still have some issues with requiring checks for family gifts/trades and similar transfers, but perhaps that could be exempted too. Above all else though is that registration of our guns is an absolute deal breaker.        

His whole intent is on making more criminals. The more there are, the easier to control the masses. Hitler, to me.