The Private sale loophole.

[prof_fate]

Enforce the laws we have first, then consider adding/changing them. The loophole, as it's being called, was designed to allow collectors to sell/buy guns once in a while at shows. Fine. But that's not they way it's often being used these days.

And if there is a way around BG checks those that know they won't pass will use that loophole.

To just say "well, it's happening all the time so why bother checking anyone anymore" is a real cop out.

Well, people drink, people drive, drunks wreck and kill people. No law will stop it. But laws, and enforcing them, will reduce it.

Just like building codes on wiring hasn't stopped houses from burning down from bad wiring but I'd bet body parts it has reduced the number of fires. That does not mean the code doesn't work and should be abandoned.

[jce07a]

all it takes for these people to cover their butts is to create a bill of sale.
http://texasguntrader.com/billofsale.pdf
just use that and it pretty much clears your name if the person youre selling to IS a bad person. send a copy with them and keep a copy for yourself. take a pic of their license with your cell phone and print it out, staple it to your bill of sale and keep it in your safe. if the police ever come knocking saying your gun killed someone you have proof of who you sold it to and everything to find them.

[gvw3]

I was at a gun show a few weeks ago and a young man was selling guns and ammo in the parking lot. I almost bought some .357 ammo from him but in IL you can't buy without a FOID. He wasn't asking for that. Didn't look right to me.

Latter I heard from a friend at the gun shop that the ATF was there busting people and this guy was probably ATF.

[CampingJosh]

Originally Posted by jce07a

all it takes for these people to cover their butts is to create a bill of sale.
http://texasguntrader.com/billofsale.pdf
just use that and it pretty much clears your name if the person youre selling to IS a bad person. send a copy with them and keep a copy for yourself. take a pic of their license with your cell phone and print it out, staple it to your bill of sale and keep it in your safe. if the police ever come knocking saying your gun killed someone you have proof of who you sold it to and everything to find them.

If you tried to complete a transaction with me using that method, it wouldn't happen. I'm not giving my driver's license to anyone who does not have a bona fide reason to see it. If you don't have an FFL, you don't. And I'm especially not letting you take a photo of it.

If you want to cover your butt in a transaction with me, then let's meet at the local gun shop and I'll pay the transfer fee. I'll show them my license, but I won't show it to Joe Blow off the street just because he thinks that some form is going to prove that the gun is no longer his. A $25 transfer fee is worth not worrying that some idiot is going to publish my info and I'll be dealing with ID theft for the next several years.

[gvw3]

CampingJosh good point. At 1st it looked like a good solution but the ID issue changed my mind.

[StoneChimney]

We have a FFL, sales tax certificate, paid a special occupation tax, pay federal excise tax, etc. We also make the gun show circuit in East Texas and the DFW Metroplex. At every show we see the same people selling their 'private collection.' They also actively buy guns from people in the aisles and reprice them on their table. Guess they became part of the 'private collection.'

Just as bad are the wheeler-dealers who get there early and stay all day, buying and selling in the aisles. If you are going to be buying and selling guns to make money, get your FFL and jump through all the other hoops. I don't have any issue with a collector selling off duplicates or buying stuff, but nobody is going to convince me these guys are collectors.

As far as private sales go, I would not have a problem doing the transfer FOR FREE. To me, there is absolutely no reason to charge a transfer fee. You get a new firearm buyer in your store, for God's sake. Take the opportunity to make a return customer out of him/her.

[Inthewind1976]

Hope you enjoy the kool aid, Prof. What an outlook. PLEASE regulate me - PLEASE. I'm not going anywhere; and I'm not volunteering to let anyone, including Gubment, stick its nose under my tent. Sorry we cant agree; but we cant.

[prof_fate]

Originally Posted by Inthewind1976

Hope you enjoy the kool aid, Prof. What an outlook. PLEASE regulate me - PLEASE. I'm not going anywhere; and I'm not volunteering to let anyone, including Gubment, stick its nose under my tent. Sorry we cant agree; but we cant.

I guess there are a lot of paranoid gun owners out there...don't like the gubment involved and won't give their info on a private sale...

Sounds paranoid or criminal...nuts and felons if you use other words for the same thing...so yeah, a BG check is fine with me.

[01brian]

Interesting discussion...frankly, it’s impossible for legislation to remove guns from hands of criminals...Additional legislation is just more of a burden on the existing system which isn't enforcing the laws on the books in the first place. In addition, they (the DOJ) are breaking the laws themselves with the intent to provoke the general populace to allow more restrictions.

Calling it a "loophole" seems absurd when law abiding citizens engage in a legal transaction.

[Inthewind1976]

Amen, Brian, thats the center point of much of MY point. The transaction is NOT illegal, and making it "illegal" isnt going to improve anything, and anyone who THINKS that it is, still puts their teeth under the pillow. And FYI, I am neither nuts or a felon, and I am NOT paranoid; the "government" (meaning the pogues that the parasites in our population LOVE to elect to get more hand outs) IS dead set against private ownership of firearms, and will break the law, and create situations that cause the death of federal employees in order to "create" a reason for more gun bans (Gun Walker) so how in the HELL DO YOU THINK I AM PARANOID, "Professor" ? AND; whether you like it or not, the NFA 34 and GCA 68 are in DIRECT opposition to the Second Amendment. Frankly, I dont really personally care if you are madly in love with the concept of BG checks for everyone. People (idiots, actually) voted for Obozo, too, and I aint gonna agree with their wrong headedness either.

[prof_fate]

Are the in direct opposition to the 2A? You can have your opinion, but unless you can get the US Supreme court, or congress and the pres to agree, your opinion is just that, your opinion.

I see much more lax gun laws today that just about any point in the past 25 years...and I see more movement in that direction than in the opposite.

I think we all agree that criminals won't be stopped by new laws - by their very definition they pay no attention to the law. But most all of us break some law or another - speeding, not stopping completely at every stop sign, buying over the internet and not paying sales tax (as a PA resident you still owe the state sales tax on mail order/internet purchases).

The spirit of the law is another thing. The gun show loophole, as it's called, is there to allow collectors to buy/sell/trade. You and I know very well that's a small percentage of who's buying/selling guns. Legal? Sure. Ethical? Nope. Moral? Thats debatable.

People (idiots, actually) voted for Obozo, too, and I aint gonna agree with their wrong headedness either.

Spoken just like a republican congressman...I admire folks that have principals and stand by them, but to shout 'they're out to take away my guns' (when the facts of recent years say the exact opposite and there certainly has been plenty of media fodder for more restrictions)...if not paranoid then you're in the class of folks that believe Elvis is still alive.

[Inthewind1976]

So what you apparently are saying is..............if you think that Feinstein, and Schumer and Pelosi, and their ilk want to ban private ownership of firearms by American citizens, you apparently think that Elvis is still alive? Hmmmmmmmmm. Yep, you are right and I am wrong. Sorry. Where do I sign up to be a member of your sheeple organization? I seem to recall that the Supremes have indicated twice now, that the 2A is an individual right to keep and bear arms. So lemme see............yep, yep, the NFA34 and GCA68 were both intended to help us do that. Sorry I didnt see it the first 1000 times I have viewed em.

[prof_fate]

Feinstein, and Schumer and Pelosi, - None of them are Obama...you blamed Obama. Now you're changing who's at fault.
You must be a Romney fan, huh? He said two opposing things about the Blunt ammendment in interviews on wednesday 3 hours a part. Stupid. I don't want a stupid person to have the most powerful job on earth. I hope I'm not alone in that thinking.

Brady's org is about dead. If the admin was anti-gun I doubt that would be the case. And remember it was started because he/the pres got shot - you'd think with gifford and other shootings they'd have enough media frenzy to be growing, not bankrupt.
No clinton era bans or restrictions have been introduced that I"m aware of.
You can now carry in national parks
concealed carry permit reciprocity is on the table

NFA34...that was nearly 80 years ago. You cannot pin that on Obama, sorry. Or Feinstein, and Schumer and Pelosi. So I suppose your position is it's their fault it's not been repealed then??

GCA68 - again, a law passed 44 years ago. It has nothing to do with Obama.

In June 2010 the supreme court ruled against the states and in favor of 2A
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...001003,00.html

You need to get your info from something other than Fox and Limbaugh.

[Conman]

These types of people will not be happy until they tie up the gun transfer system to the point that I cannot give a gun to my son!!!

They want me to have to go through an FFL (The FFL's would love this also) for any transfer.

Then they create a National Firearms Database.........NO NO

The Peoples DemonKratic RepubliK of KaliforniaStan already have these draconian laws in place!!

I notice the younger generation on the forums don't seem to have a real issue with all this mess.....brainwash them while they are young!!!

[prof_fate]

I'm 50 so I'm not young by most measures.
I do have kids in school - and yes, chardon ohio is scary. I have friends that lived down the street from columbine back in the day too.
I've had a friend die from drunk driving. harsher laws on that haven't ruined anything.
A school bus driver at my daughters school was arrested last month for sexually assaulting 2 classmates of my daughter's (age 8) on the bus.

Am I for more restrictions? Sure. Or would you prefer none - let it be the wild west - so yeah, you can shoot the child molester or the drink that killed your wife - but they will also be more dangerous and armed.

I"m not for a nanny state, but there are more 'dangerous' folks out there than you may think, folks that shouldn't have guns (or knives or cars or internet for that matter).

I'm back into the sport, having left it in the 80s for college, house, wife, etc. Now I can afford to do it again I'm actually quite surprised how much easier it is to get a gun and a CCP. I didn't wait 3 days to pick up my pistol for example. Yes, the form is longer but I don't recall any more/different questions than in my youth.

[Inthewind1976]

BUT Prof, I assume that you are a decent, law abiding (except for rolling stops and speeding) citizen, and why SHOULD it be hard for YOU to get a firearm? Why should YOU have a waiting period? Thats what I am getting at. The intent of the far left side of the debate; the Brady, Schumer, et al, crowd, is to eliminate private ownership of firearms. Period. That HAS to be recognized in order for us to be able to prevent it from happening. As a result of this particular "movement" it is incumbent upon us to take a very skeptical look at firearms legislation as it develops and is proposed, because its not hard to see that any such additional legislation, and SOME THAT IS ALREADY IN PLACE, isnt proposed ultimately to "keep criminals from getting guns" any more than little podunk towns on a major highway system, with 20 mph speed limits for a quarter mile in the middle of a 100 mile 65 mph stretch, are intended for safety; they are PROPOSED in the NAME of safety, but their ultimate purpose is something different. I have absolutely NO problem with the fact that, assuming that you are not a "prohibited person" you can purchase a firearm with less complicated time consuming and pre-emptive red tape. Just as I am not troubled with the so called loophole, first and foremost because its NOT a loop hole. Its an unregulated sale scenario, and not every aspect of life needs to be regulated by government. I am NOT some sort of "shoot em all and let God sort em out" extremist; much to the contrary, BUT............I am also NOT supportive of additional intrusive regulation either. I

[Inthewind1976]

............AM NOT SUGGESTING that the speed limit scenario should be 65, before you jump on me for that one; but the 20mph thing isnt for safety its to generate revenue. Make the speed limit 35 or 45, if you dont have an ulterior motive.

[prof_fate]

Originally Posted by Inthewind1976

BUT Prof, I assume that you are a decent, law abiding (except for rolling stops and speeding) citizen, and why SHOULD it be hard for YOU to get a firearm? Why should YOU have a waiting period? Thats what I am getting at

How do YOU know I don't have some dark deep secret or issue? You don't. You can't know if I"m 'legal' or 'criminal'. Hence the BG check.

The bus driver that molested 2 third graders here in January had no criminal history (so the paper reported, teh tv stations...it made the news off and on for 2 weeks, the bus company, principal, school board all sent us letters too). He can't (legally) but a gun anymore. He's not going to look any different to a stranger today than he did in December.

Should he be allowed to have a gun? Well, he's proven he's got self control issues and hasn't much restraint in forcing others to do what he wants.

While I'm not a big fan of waiting period (aka cooling off period) I'd say for first time buyers it might not be a bad thing. I already own several guns so making me wait to 'cool off' is pointless. But say, if one of the parents of a molested child decided to seek revenge and went to buy a gun perhaps 3 days to 'cool off' would save him and everyone a lot of grief.

Our court system is designed to make sure no innocent person is sent to prison. They say it's better to let 10 bad guys go free than to lock up an innocent person. OK, so BG checks work in the same way, only reversed. The goal is to keep guns out of criminals' hands, and if that mean good people have to jump through hoops, so be it.

Why have a speed limit on roads? If you've got a good, well maintained car, are sober and skilled at driving, have a bit of common sense and pay attention there's no need for speed limits. Yet we have them and they enforce the hell out of them. Why? Because not everyone pays attention, can drive, has a well maintained car and well, common sense ain't so common.

I have absolutely NO problem with the fact that, assuming that you are not a "prohibited person" you can purchase a firearm with less complicated time consuming and pre-emptive red tape.

I bought 2 guns this year, last gun I bought we in the mid 80s. Back then there was a one page (2 sided) yellow form. This time there was what appeared to be the same questions on a 4 page form..no idea why it got longer. Back in the 80s if you were buying a long gun you'd pay and walk out with it. I always that the background check was a joke - you had the gun and could lie on the form. Pointless really. A handgun sale meant you came back in 3 days.
This time around the person at the store went and made a phone call and read some info off the form, got an OK and I left with the gun. Took 15 minutes maybe. Less time than transferring a car to a new owner.

I don't know if this is the same process in all the states or each has it's own system ( I assume federal). I don't know why some folks get 'delays' - flaw in the system of some kind or these folks have 'yellow' flags on them for some reason. I bought my guns from different places in a 3 week span - no flags or delays.

Just as I am not troubled with the so called loophole, first and foremost because its NOT a loop hole. Its an unregulated sale scenario, and not every aspect of life needs to be regulated by government. I am NOT some sort of "shoot em all and let God sort em out" extremist; much to the contrary, BUT............I am also NOT supportive of additional intrusive regulation either.

If you but a gun at a 'yard sale' swap meet, etc the rules are different than if you go into a store to do it. Is that a big deal or not? Hard to say. Are criminals coming to shows to buy long guns? Probably not very many, so the 'harm' or potential harm, is likely small.

But there is a cost to us all for this in some way. The 'underground economy' avoids paying taxes, yet the things paid for by taxes are no less expensive - so those that pay their taxes end up paying more. Perhaps if all guns had to go thru a BG check there'd be less attention on the whole hobby/industry.

[gvw3]

In 1964 I went to a Western Auto store and bought my 1st gun. A 22 single shot rifle. There were no forms or waiting period. We were a lot free-er back then.

[Inthewind1976]

Im not selling you a gun Prof, so it doesnt matter what I know or not about your background.

I guess we are gonna have to agree to disagree, cause I dont support your position and you dont mine. I just hope NEITHER of our "positions" comes back to bite either of us in the southern region.

[Inthewind1976]

I also dont remember "blaming" Berry Hussein Obama for anything, actually. Oh, theres plenty to blame him for, and maybe its just the old age creeping in. What I am talking about are infringements on the 2A. And I still maintain that both NFA34 and GCA68 are just that, and that while I dont particularly like the BG check concept, I see its "intended purpose" and acknowledge that it may have stopped a hand full of criminals from getting guns, I think by and large its another feel good UNsuccess story. Do I want guns to be sold carte blanche to your bus driver? Nope, certainly not. Do I think that government should intrude into private sales next. HELL NO.

As for Rush, I like the guy. I really do. Havent listened to his radio show in years, but I still think that he is "righter" than he is wrong. I dont rely on he or Fox News for information however on any legislation or court decisions; nor on anyone else's interpretations of 'em. I read em in their entirety for myself. Im not a lawyer, thank God. Im just regular Joe. And there arent enough informed regular Joe's in the US these days. Part of the reason for THAT is, that the network news is presented in a totally slanted manner, and while I find Fox to be a 'better representation' I tend to research and interpret for myself. Im not quite sure how I gave you the impression that I was talking about Obama in particular, maybe I did say something unintelligent - probably wont be my last one either - but the things that bother me about that man aren't exactly firearms related; although I think he REPRESENTS the same think tank that would have disarmed us a long time ago if the 2A wasnt part of our Constitution as amended.

[Inthewind1976]

Hey Prof; do you follow any threads except the ones you think you "own?"

http://www.thefirearmsforum.com/showthread.php?t=86545

[Crawdaddy]

Originally Posted by prof_fate

Our court system is designed to make sure no innocent person is sent to prison. They say it's better to let 10 bad guys go free than to lock up an innocent person. OK, so BG checks work in the same way, only reversed. The goal is to keep guns out of criminals' hands, and if that mean good people have to jump through hoops, so be it

So your belief is that our courts are set up to make sure innocents are not punished but its OK to punish innocents with legislation and laws?

[Inthewind1976]

I think the Prof is secretly a member of the Democratic National Committee.

[jwrauch]

Its not a loophole, its called the 2nd Amendment, Stupid !!!!!!!!!!