Closing Gunshow Loopholes/Private Sales [Poll Within]

[flyfishooltewah]

I am just catching up on all this today and I have several questions.  How do they conduct the background check?  

 

Do I give my co-worker my SSN for him to enter in enter through a Interactive Voice Response system for that Kimber he has been trying to sell? I have known him for years.  Seems like private property is not private.

[manegarm]

I'm originally from Massachusetts and they already have something like this in place (they still go by the '94 AWB if that tells you anything). Every gun sale is recorded on a form made by the commonwealth of Massachusetts and sent to an office which is supposed to keep them all on file and enter them into a database. Private sales don't have the background check, but you were still required to record the sale on the form and mail it in. You're supposed to have it post marked within 7 days of the sale or you supposedly face fines, etc. You're only allowed (4) person-to-person transfers per calendar year and then you must go through an FFL and go through the background check just like a new gun purchase (at $50 each time). If that's not bad enough, you must have a license for firearms and there's 2 types - one for rifles/long guns and one for pistols (which is your LTC and it covers all the other firearms). Without the pistol permit, you CANNOT purchase a handgun - new or used - in the state of Massachusetts. The licenses are given out at the discretion of your local police chief and he/she doesn't have to approve it even if you pass the background check. So, if you're in a town where the police chief hates giving out the licenses, you can't purchase firearms. Unfortunately, there are quite a few of those towns there. I moved to TN for a reason and definitely don't want to go back to that kind of system.

Edited January 16, 2013 by manegarm

[Oh Shoot]

I am just catching up on all this today and I have several questions.  How do they conduct the background check? 

 

Well, unless they change the existing system somehow, presumably buyer and seller would have to do it through a FFL dealer.

 

Perhaps will spark a whole new industry, the FFL who makes house calls like doctors used to. As long as they have internet access, they can do it from anywhere.

 

- OS

[Worriedman]

I thought the background checks were done by phone?  Guess I have dated myself about how long it has been since I bought a gun.

Edited January 17, 2013 by Worriedman

[Oh Shoot]

I thought the background checks were done by phone?  Guess I have dated myself about how long it has been since I bought a gun.

 

Not so many anymore. Mostly puter. Most all gun shows provide WiFi, for example.

 

- OS

[Caster]

If they want registration, I've never understood why they don't register the owner, NOT the gun.
You get a drivers license to drive a car. No one cares what kind of car you drive. From a yugo to a vette. If you can afford a Bentley go for it. If all you afford is a beat up f150 go for it.
If you act like a fool with your car, you lose your license. Drive without a license, go to jail.

Explain where the inherent flaws in that process would be for gun ownership. We went through the process for our carry permits. Why not just make a cover all license? Got a license? Then you can go right down to the store and buy a suppressed SBR with selective fire. Or a bolt action 22. Whatever.

Do something foolish, lose your license and potentially go to jail. Get caught with a gun without a license, g to jail for a LONG time...even life depending.

I know the first knee jerk reaction is "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" but get real. They can, do and will continue to infringe and the only thing we do is make compromises. It'd be nice to make a compromise that actually DOES SOMETHING. If they did this and made the penalties for criminal possession so ungodly brutal and I think we'd see a major shift in gun related violence.

Maybe I'm way off. Doesn't matter. There will NEVER be a sensible solution to any problem in this country gun related or not.

[Guest travr6]

^ you should not have to register to exercise a constitutional right.

They don't require a background check not be a slave (13th).

Women are not required to have a background check in order to vote (19th)

Why is it ok to have all of the laws infringing on your 2nd amendment rights when people would flip out if they required the same for any other one?

 

 

 

 

 

I am completely agains it.

 

1. I see it as an infringement of your 2nd amendment rights

2. It will raise the cost of each purchase

3. The govt does not need to know what I own. Katrina and the Journal news proved that

4. You would have to go track down an FFL every time you wanted to sell a gun.

5. The govt would definitely keep a list.

 

 

How about this. I am not a huge fan of it but since we already have CCDW licenses, Why not keep it legal for anyone that has a license to sell to another person that has a license.

You wouldn't have to go to an FFL and both parties have already passed a background check.

I am against that as well but it is better than running my name through a federal database every time I make a purcahse.

 

I think if you have a CCDW then you should not have to have a background check ever again.

Personally I don't think we should ever have to get one in the first place.

Edited January 17, 2013 by travr6

[m16ty]

The only way to enforce ending private sales it through gun registration.

 

You are also kidding yourself if you think this will keep the guns out of bad guy hands. The black market is already around but it would be much bigger if you end private sales.

 

With all that said, IMO the measure would be much better than any bans as long as registration wasn't included with it.

 

For what it's worth, I voted "no" in the poll

Edited January 17, 2013 by m16ty

[Oh Shoot]

I think if you have a CCDW then you should not have to have a background check ever again.

 

Trouble is, that's not only an individual state's call, but also the fed's.

 

Even the states where this is enacted are on the list of the ones that the BATF allows that to happen. All depends on their requirements for the permits, how long between renewals (which run federal check) and how up to date they keep the database. TN is on the list that can enact it, if they choose, I'm pretty sure. Of course, here, that would cost the state ten clams per pop.

 

Also, in the states where the permit serves to exempt the federal check, it is my understanding that the state carry permit database is checked at the time of purchase,  to make sure the permit is still valid.

 

Which is all to say, no way the feds are gonna let every state's carry permit suffice for a background check, unless there becomes a national carry permit, which I do not favor. At all.

 

- OS

Edited January 17, 2013 by Oh Shoot

[GoneBallistic]

For this to work, registration has to be implemented. We all know the next step after registration...

 

We also all know that this isn't about stopping crime. It never is. ANY TINY LITTLE PIECE OF LEGISLATION IN THIS AREA IS A PIECE OF THE PUZZLE WORKING TOWARD ONE COMMON GOAL---THE DISARMING OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC.

 

That being said, we cannot compromise. Not on anything. If we do we are just letting them get closer to total confiscation. If you let them have one thing, they'll take five more. I realize we as measly, worthless citizens can't do a whole lot but we can at least protest it and try to educate people on what the real goal here is. We're headed for a dictatorship people.

Edited January 17, 2013 by GoneBallistic

[sgjay]

For this to work, registration has to be implemented. We all know the next step after registration...

 

We also all know that this isn't about stopping crime. It never is. ANY TINY LITTLE PIECE OF LEGISLATION IN THIS AREA IS A PIECE OF THE PUZZLE WORKING TOWARD ONE COMMON GOAL---THE DISARMING OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC.

 

That being said, we cannot compromise. Not on anything. If we do we are just letting them get closer to total confiscation. If you let them have one thing, they'll take five more. I realize we as measly, worthless citizens can't do a whole lot but we can at least protest it and try to educate people on what the real goal here is. We're headed for a dictatorship people.

Absolutely right! The few felons that I know (no I don't hang out with criminals!) are not the violent, armed robbery type guys. Even if a felon bought a gun this way, the fact that he is buying from a non criminal, who would obey such a law, says he won't likely use it in a crime.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

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.  

How can you say it doesn't when it restricts? Any restriction is an infringement. The 2nd was put there for that reason: to

prevent any governmental intrusion in the process. If the 2nd was placed in the Constitution to allow a citizen to be able

to fight back against tyranny, the government has no business when it wants to register, tell you how many bullets you

can have, type of weapon, whether you have to have a childproof lock, or any other condition other than some defect

of citizenship like being a convicted criminal or otherwise. If you hold yourself accountable for your actions, you and I should

be able to own whatever you damn well please. Any law passed against that amendment is an infringement.

 

What's so reasonable about registration, if at one time in the future your once friendly government, run by a tyrant, comes

looking for your guns? It is also outside of their constitutional authority according to the original document. I guess there's

a reason for those restrictions to governmental authority, don't you?

 

If you want to further allow the government to strip away your rights, do it on your own, please. :D Just like a liberal wanting

to raise our taxes, if you want to pay higher taxes, you can always volunteer to give more of yours while leaving mine alone.

 

Bad law have consequences that will terrorize you into submission.

Edited January 17, 2013 by 6.8 AR

[owejia]

Not all liars are politicans,but all politicans are liars. How do I know, ask anyone who served in Viet Nam. You can never trust a politican.

[Guest carter]

I wouldn't mind doing a back ground check on someone i was selling a gun to... I do NOT want to have to go to a FFL to have it done...they need to make something accessible to the public... I think enough people have a smart phone now days...what about an app... you type the persons DL and name in and it checks the system...how hard is that to make sure you're not selling to a shady individual... or even a number to call... an app would be easier though... 

[Guest PapaB]

On Fox and Friends yesterday they had a piece by William La Jeunesse about where criminals obtain their guns. In that piece he said a poll of 18,000 criminals showed 40% bought them on the street, 40% came from friends and relatives, 4% came from pawn shops and 1% came from flea markets and gun shows. Yeah, they had to put flea markets and gun shows together to get 1%.

They also mentioned the Commie Appeal in Memphis listing HCP holders in Tennessee. He said, when they did that, crimes in zip codes with few HCP's went up while crimes in zip codes with more HCP's went down.

I tivo'd the piece to watch it but can't find a link to it online. He interviewed criminals at the Maricopa County, Arizona jail during the segment.

[Moped]

Well, unless they change the existing system somehow, presumably buyer and seller would have to do it through a FFL dealer.

 

Perhaps will spark a whole new industry, the FFL who makes house calls like doctors used to. As long as they have internet access, they can do it from anywhere.

 

- OS

 

I don't think legally that could happen since you are supposed to do business at a specific location, by law.  I could see individuals obtain an FFL to do nothing but background checks for a fee though, especially if all this crap goes down. I think if this crappy law were to pass, the demand for such a service would be steady, especially, if your price was reasonable.  And you don't have to keep inventory on hand.  Could be a good business!  I've thought about it, but I'm not sure I want to deal with the ATF ever again.  Been down the FFL road once.

 

Which is all to say, no way the feds are gonna let every state's carry permit suffice for a background check, unless there becomes a national carry permit, which I do not favor. At all.

 

- OS

 

It would be just another form of registration.  Totally against that too.

Edited January 18, 2013 by Moped

[mikegideon]

I wouldn't mind doing a back ground check on someone i was selling a gun to... I do NOT want to have to go to a FFL to have it done...they need to make something accessible to the public... I think enough people have a smart phone now days...what about an app... you type the persons DL and name in and it checks the system...how hard is that to make sure you're not selling to a shady individual... or even a number to call... an app would be easier though... 

 

They don't trust the public. We have to be controlled.

[machinist]

I'll support closing the "loop hole" if it also requires a background check, photo ID, proof of citizenship with a birth certificate or naturalization papers, and a $10 fee to vote.

[Oh Shoot]

[ re: "Perhaps will spark a whole new industry, the FFL who makes house calls like doctors used to. As long as they have internet access, they can do it from anywhere."]

 

 

I don't think legally that could happen since you are supposed to do business at a specific location, by law. ..

 

I certainly don't know the finer points involved with the FFL license, but once you have one for a given state, you can do biz at more locations than your brick and mortar. Otherwise a dealer couldn't sell at a gun show.

 

Also, employees of an FFL can do the checks without the actual license holder being present, so I guess a dealer could have any number of traveling folks bopping around,  too.

 

But I guess the larger point is, no telling what laws would be tweaked if private sales are ended.

 

And more than likely, whatever the changes, there would have to be further tweaks down the road when real world implementation meets the intent of the legislation. And it doesn't always take further congressional action,  can be changed by the agency under whose jurisdiction a particular USC is enforced -- that's the CFR part of federal law.

 

- OS

Edited January 18, 2013 by Oh Shoot

[GoneBallistic]

I'll support closing the "loop hole" if it also requires a background check, photo ID, proof of citizenship with a birth certificate or naturalization papers, and a $10 fee to vote.

That's a very interesting thought. If we could get it done without closing the "loop hole" I would be all for it. :)  We don't need any type of registration, no matter what we get in return. And it's not like requiring all that stuff at the polls would do any good anyway. They would still cheat. 100% voter turnout and 100% voted for Hussein Osama in several counties in Ohio??? B**** please!! :shake: