Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 4/8/2009 9:35:07 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/8/2009 9:39:40 PM EDT by Tony7189]
all private sales requiring a NICS check. The AWB is a very politically charged issue. Now I'm not saying a new AWB WON'T happen especially with a lot of dick sucking commies running DC, so don't label me naive. I think that the "Blue Dogs" fear a fight against any contenders in their bids for reelection and will shun a renewed AWB. However doing something shitty like requiring NICS checks for ALL firearms sales would be something "Blue Dogs", "Rhinos"and  "Soccer Moms" alike would think is kosher.


Fire away and bash me.


ETA: I am still going to actively fight any AWB proposals by phoning, mailing, and e-mailing my reps, as I suggest you to do as well
Link Posted: 4/8/2009 9:38:41 PM EDT
I agree
pushing for NICS or making transfers go through a FFL would be a easy sell
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 3:17:22 AM EDT
It has been done in CA and law for all firearm transfers (dealer and private) to go through an FFL since 1991. And on top of that a 10-day waiting period. CA law usually becomes federal law like how McCarthy tried to push for HR1022 which is mainly based off of CA  SB23
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 3:25:31 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Tony7189:
all private sales requiring a NICS check. The AWB is a very politically charged issue. Now I'm not saying a new AWB WON'T happen especially with a lot of dick sucking commies running DC, so don't label me naive. I think that the "Blue Dogs" fear a fight against any contenders in their bids for reelection and will shun a renewed AWB. However doing something shitty like requiring NICS checks for ALL firearms sales would be something "Blue Dogs", "Rhinos"and  "Soccer Moms" alike would think is kosher.


Fire away and bash me.


ETA: I am still going to actively fight any AWB proposals by phoning, mailing, and e-mailing my reps, as I suggest you to do as well


I'd take some pretty serious restrictions on BR's before NICS checks on private sales.  The latter is being pushed as a way to establish a "need" for registration.  And we all know where that leads.

Jane
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 3:30:09 AM EDT
I always thought that when thinking of any new laws and or restrictions..

Closing the "gunshow loophole".

and

Tax the shit out of ammo,a good Liberal must first think of a way to grow government when coming up with new legislation.
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 4:16:12 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Tony7189:
all private sales requiring a NICS check. The AWB is a very politically charged issue. Now I'm not saying a new AWB WON'T happen especially with a lot of dick sucking commies running DC, so don't label me naive. I think that the "Blue Dogs" fear a fight against any contenders in their bids for reelection and will shun a renewed AWB. However doing something shitty like requiring NICS checks for ALL firearms sales would be something "Blue Dogs", "Rhinos"and  "Soccer Moms" alike would think is kosher.


Fire away and bash me.


ETA: I am still going to actively fight any AWB proposals by phoning, mailing, and e-mailing my reps, as I suggest you to do as well

I agree. There might be case law obstructing the regulation of private sales, but if they ignore the Constitution, I imagine they'd have no problem ignoring the courts in this matter...
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 4:30:08 AM EDT
Originally Posted By TRPPRO1911:
It has been done in CA and law for all firearm transfers (dealer and private) to go through an FFL since 1991. And on top of that a 10-day waiting period. CA law usually becomes federal law like how McCarthy tried to push for HR1022 which is mainly based off of CA  SB23

We'll see what happens to CA law.  DC adopted CA's safe handgun list laws/regulations and have already been sued because the two-tone XD is not on the list.

Kharn
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 4:34:46 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Tony7189:
all private sales requiring a NICS check.......However doing something shitty like requiring NICS checks for ALL firearms sales would be something "Blue Dogs", "Rhinos"and  "Soccer Moms" alike would think is kosher.




Can you elaborate?  What would that change?  

In other words, as a CCW, would one still get a NICS check for each purchase?  What about like having a handgun permit in a state like NC.  That permit is all the gun store needs to sell you a handgun as of 2009.  Are you talking about legislation that would supercede that sort of thing, or is there a large segment of guns being sold new in the box legitimately right now that are not being checked for some other reason?

Link Posted: 4/9/2009 4:35:58 AM EDT
I've been saying for a while now that we should be worried about Obama closing the gun show loophole (which results in registration) and repealing the Tiahrt amendment.  And with all this stuff about gun smuggling to Mexico, I can't imagine they won't use that as an excuse to repeal the Tiahrt amendment.  I think either of these will see less opposition than a ban, and do more damage.
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 4:36:33 AM EDT
And I say fight both so we see neither...

The Essential "Stop the AW Ban" Contact List & Sample Letter Thread!  

If not you, who? If not now, when?
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 4:40:26 AM EDT



Originally Posted By FreeFloater:



Originally Posted By Tony7189:

all private sales requiring a NICS check.......However doing something shitty like requiring NICS checks for ALL firearms sales would be something "Blue Dogs", "Rhinos"and  "Soccer Moms" alike would think is kosher.









Can you elaborate?  What would that change?  



In other words, as a CCW, would one still get a NICS check for each purchase?  What about like having a handgun permit in a state like NC.  That permit is all the gun store needs to sell you a handgun as of 2009.  Are you talking about legislation that would supercede that sort of thing, or is there a large segment of guns being sold new in the box legitimately right now that are not being checked for some other reason?





Think "closing the gunshow loophole."  If I want to sell to you, personally, the sale would have to be done through a FFL with a background check.  Also, The CCW license/permit would no longer suffice by itself when buying from a dealer.  They would still have to call in the background check.



At least I THINK this is what he's talking about.
 
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 4:43:45 AM EDT
Originally Posted By jbombelli:

Originally Posted By FreeFloater:
Originally Posted By Tony7189:
all private sales requiring a NICS check.......However doing something shitty like requiring NICS checks for ALL firearms sales would be something "Blue Dogs", "Rhinos"and  "Soccer Moms" alike would think is kosher.




Can you elaborate?  What would that change?  

In other words, as a CCW, would one still get a NICS check for each purchase?  What about like having a handgun permit in a state like NC.  That permit is all the gun store needs to sell you a handgun as of 2009.  Are you talking about legislation that would supercede that sort of thing, or is there a large segment of guns being sold new in the box legitimately right now that are not being checked for some other reason?


Think "closing the gunshow loophole."  If I want to sell to you, personally, the sale would have to be done through a FFL with a background check.  Also, The CCW license/permit would no longer suffice by itself when buying from a dealer.  They would still have to call in the background check.

At least I THINK this is what he's talking about.


 



I don't think that I realized private sales don't have to use an FFL.  I figured to make a private sale "legit" it had to be transferred using an FFL.  Anything else seems like a borderline straw purchase...but I guess intent is as the heart of straw purchases isn't it?  I also assume private sales must be limited to a certain number of transactions per year?
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 5:28:39 AM EDT
Originally Posted By FreeFloater:


I don't think that I realized private sales don't have to use an FFL.  I figured to make a private sale "legit" it had to be transferred using an FFL.  Anything else seems like a borderline straw purchase...but I guess intent is as the heart of straw purchases isn't it?  I also assume private sales must be limited to a certain number of transactions per year?


As long as the buyer and seller both reside in the same state, there is no federal requirement for the use of an FFL for that transfer.  A few states will have more strict laws, but most do not.
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 5:41:14 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/9/2009 5:44:41 AM EDT by st0newall]
hum...gonna play devils advocate here...

let me ask a question...

i take one of my pistols, voyage into ghetto land.. start asking around.. 'anyone want a glock fotay'?

individual approaches me. he appears to be 30 years of age .. so no age violation here... he also looks like this:


or for racial equality... this :

so you're ok with this?

or put another way... folks like this getting fireams is sorta what they want to prevent (cho types too of course).. how do you address this issue?

ETA.. as gun owners.. its also in our interests that such folks dont end up with firearms if they would be prevented for doing so, based on .. say them being felons.. and for me in my trip to the ghetto.. there is no way for me to know...criminal history check by a gun dealer addresses this issue....
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 5:45:33 AM EDT
Originally Posted By SnoopisTDI:
Originally Posted By FreeFloater:


I don't think that I realized private sales don't have to use an FFL.  I figured to make a private sale "legit" it had to be transferred using an FFL.  Anything else seems like a borderline straw purchase...but I guess intent is as the heart of straw purchases isn't it?  I also assume private sales must be limited to a certain number of transactions per year?


As long as the buyer and seller both reside in the same state, there is no federal requirement for the use of an FFL for that transfer.  A few states will have more strict laws, but most do not.


OK.  Does one even need to document who it was sold to?
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 6:45:00 AM EDT
Originally Posted By st0newall:
hum...gonna play devils advocate here...

let me ask a question...

i take one of my pistols, voyage into ghetto land.. start asking around.. 'anyone want a glock fotay'?

individual approaches me. he appears to be 30 years of age .. so no age violation here... he also looks like this:
http://www.streetgangs.com/magazine/040408.jpg

or for racial equality... this : http://blog.wired.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/04/23/hells_angels2040_2.jpg

so you're ok with this?

or put another way... folks like this getting fireams is sorta what they want to prevent (cho types too of course).. how do you address this issue?

ETA.. as gun owners.. its also in our interests that such folks dont end up with firearms if they would be prevented for doing so, based on .. say them being felons.. and for me in my trip to the ghetto.. there is no way for me to know...criminal history check by a gun dealer addresses this issue....


Then go ahead and donate to the brady center. They seem to be in line with your liberal beliefs, and you have already bought into the fallacy that restrictions on gun owners will somehow magically reduce crime.

I don't care who has a gun, as long as I do. I'd rather keep my liberties, and take my chances. Any free man should be willing to do the same, if he wishes to remain free.



Link Posted: 4/9/2009 7:39:45 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/9/2009 7:40:34 AM EDT by jbombelli]





Originally Posted By st0newall:



hum...gonna play devils advocate here...





let me ask a question...





i take one of my pistols, voyage into ghetto land.. start asking around.. 'anyone want a glock fotay'?





individual approaches me. he appears to be 30 years of age .. so no age violation here... he also looks like this:


http://www.streetgangs.com/magazine/040408.jpg





or for racial equality... this : http://blog.wired.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/04/23/hells_angels2040_2.jpg





so you're ok with this?





or put another way... folks like this getting fireams is sorta what they want to prevent (cho types too of course).. how do you address this issue?





ETA.. as gun owners.. its also in our interests that such folks dont end up with firearms if they would be prevented for doing so, based on .. say them being felons.. and for me in my trip to the ghetto.. there is no way for me to know...criminal history check by a gun dealer addresses this issue....
Personally, I'm okay with that.  What he does with it is his business.  In my view, EVERYONE (including felons) have the right to keep and bear arms.  The 2nd Amendment doesn't say "...shall not be infringed, except for criminals."




I'd rather keep all of my rights, rather than give ANY of them up, just to deprive SOMEONE ELSE of THEIR rights.  I carry a gun, too.  
 
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 7:42:58 AM EDT
I agree that they will make all sales go through an FFL.  Then they will make FFL's imposible to get/renew via new impositions, increased fees, loss of rights for being an FFL, etc.
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 7:44:49 AM EDT
Funny how a lot of the most heinous shootings occur in states with the tightest gun laws.
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 7:45:16 AM EDT
You will see a amnesty bill passed first.That gets 12-25 million voters on the Demcratic party.The Dems can steamroll any ban they want after that.
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 7:46:24 AM EDT
Originally Posted By SnoopisTDI:
Originally Posted By FreeFloater:


I don't think that I realized private sales don't have to use an FFL.  I figured to make a private sale "legit" it had to be transferred using an FFL.  Anything else seems like a borderline straw purchase...but I guess intent is as the heart of straw purchases isn't it?  I also assume private sales must be limited to a certain number of transactions per year?


As long as the buyer and seller both reside in the same state, there is no federal requirement for the use of an FFL for that transfer.  A few states will have more strict laws, but most do not.


What makes you think either of these two citizens are unable to own a pistol?
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 7:58:42 AM EDT
and they are going to enforce this? not without nationwide registration. guns purchased before the law goes into effect could very easily be sold without a NICS check FTF and a bit of "creative dating" on the bill of sale. there are a lot of democrats that know if they vote for something like that they are going to start 2011 as an unemployment statistic.
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 8:01:20 AM EDT
Originally Posted By st0newall:
hum...gonna play devils advocate here...

let me ask a question...

i take one of my pistols, voyage into ghetto land.. start asking around.. 'anyone want a glock fotay'?

individual approaches me. he appears to be 30 years of age .. so no age violation here... he also looks like this:
http://www.streetgangs.com/magazine/040408.jpg

or for racial equality... this : http://blog.wired.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/04/23/hells_angels2040_2.jpg

so you're ok with this?

or put another way... folks like this getting fireams is sorta what they want to prevent (cho types too of course).. how do you address this issue?

ETA.. as gun owners.. its also in our interests that such folks dont end up with firearms if they would be prevented for doing so, based on .. say them being felons.. and for me in my trip to the ghetto.. there is no way for me to know...criminal history check by a gun dealer addresses this issue....


Do you have a reasonable suspicion that the person might be a felon? Its already illegal to sell it to them. Oh, you dont? sell away. If you really want to be sure you can require that they show you a concealed pistol permit.
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 8:02:10 AM EDT
Frankly, I'm surprised we haven't seen a "grandma in the 'hood  (ab)using a C&R to supply the whole area with Nagant revolvers, SKSs, and Makarovs" story-seems like it'd fit nicely in a "hard hitting news at 11" investigative story complete with the reporter getting a C&R and having a bountiful UPS delivery on their porch and a LEO claiming "how deadly" all of these weapons are to police officers.
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 8:05:02 AM EDT
Originally Posted By FreeFloater:


I don't think that I realized private sales don't have to use an FFL.  I figured to make a private sale "legit" it had to be transferred using an FFL.  Anything else seems like a borderline straw purchase...but I guess intent is as the heart of straw purchases isn't it?  I also assume private sales must be limited to a certain number of transactions per year?



Someone has probably corrected you already, but your understanding or private, face to face sale, straw purchases and limits on transactions is grossly wrong.

I'll read on and see if the details have been covered.

Link Posted: 4/9/2009 8:08:37 AM EDT
Originally Posted By st0newall:
hum...gonna play devils advocate here...

let me ask a question...

i take one of my pistols, voyage into ghetto land.. start asking around.. 'anyone want a glock fotay'?

individual approaches me. he appears to be 30 years of age .. so no age violation here... he also looks like this:
http://www.streetgangs.com/magazine/040408.jpg

or for racial equality... this : http://blog.wired.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/04/23/hells_angels2040_2.jpg

so you're ok with this?

or put another way... folks like this getting fireams is sorta what they want to prevent (cho types too of course).. how do you address this issue?

ETA.. as gun owners.. its also in our interests that such folks dont end up with firearms if they would be prevented for doing so, based on .. say them being felons.. and for me in my trip to the ghetto.. there is no way for me to know...criminal history check by a gun dealer addresses this issue....


Good luck going into the 'hood' as a skinny white boy, talking stupid and trying to sell a gun.

They may end up with your gun.  Unlikely you'll end up with any cash.

FWIW - I looked like your second picture for many years.   I was a legal gunowner (and NRA member) then and now.   Your predujices leading you to want more restrictions on gunowners is silly.  

There are 20,000 gun laws now.  One more won't make a difference to the bad guys.
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 8:15:49 AM EDT
I'll bet Tookie up there^ pushed mad nix shit in.  

This will be effective as soon as they find a way to tax whores...
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 8:18:16 AM EDT
Only problem I see with this mandatory trip through the FFL is that for so many years it hasn't been required they will have no way to enforce this properly. No doubt the Democrats will clamp down on guns hard while they are in power. I expect to see some serious new anti-gun laws before Obama leaves office in January 2013 when he's fucked up the country so bad he won't win re-election. Just hope the next President and congress can help undo the damage. Unfortunately we all know when you give the government an inch they take a mile. We will likely only get half a mile back to where we were so damage will still be done.
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 8:29:09 AM EDT
I can see the "gunshow loophole" being closed very easily... especially since it would pass the standards set forth by the Heller decision.
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 8:41:05 AM EDT
Unless they do both at once.
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 8:50:01 AM EDT
Originally Posted By PlaneJane:
Originally Posted By Tony7189:
all private sales requiring a NICS check. The AWB is a very politically charged issue. Now I'm not saying a new AWB WON'T happen especially with a lot of dick sucking commies running DC, so don't label me naive. I think that the "Blue Dogs" fear a fight against any contenders in their bids for reelection and will shun a renewed AWB. However doing something shitty like requiring NICS checks for ALL firearms sales would be something "Blue Dogs", "Rhinos"and  "Soccer Moms" alike would think is kosher.


Fire away and bash me.


ETA: I am still going to actively fight any AWB proposals by phoning, mailing, and e-mailing my reps, as I suggest you to do as well


I'd take some pretty serious restrictions on BR's before NICS checks on private sales.  The latter is being pushed as a way to establish a "need" for registration.  And we all know where that leads.

Jane


Exactly what I was thinking.  That requirement opens the registration door wide open.
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 8:55:14 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Tony7189:
all private sales requiring a NICS check. The AWB is a very politically charged issue. Now I'm not saying a new AWB WON'T happen especially with a lot of dick sucking commies running DC, so don't label me naive. I think that the "Blue Dogs" fear a fight against any contenders in their bids for reelection and will shun a renewed AWB. However doing something shitty like requiring NICS checks for ALL firearms sales would be something "Blue Dogs", "Rhinos"and  "Soccer Moms" alike would think is kosher.


Fire away and bash me.


ETA: I am still going to actively fight any AWB proposals by phoning, mailing, and e-mailing my reps, as I suggest you to do as well


Agreed...

However the AWB will probably happen after they get "re-elected", this is the reason I am surprised the "talk" started this early. Either they think they are going to loose and might as well make the changes before then, or they were hoping for more support out of this and it backfired on them.
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 8:56:14 AM EDT
Originally Posted By LoginName:
I can see the "gunshow loophole" being closed very easily... especially since it would pass the standards set forth by the Heller decision.


What are these "standards set forth by the Heller decision?"
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 8:59:37 AM EDT
Originally Posted By SnoopisTDI:
I've been saying for a while now that we should be worried about Obama closing the gun show loophole (which results in registration) and repealing the Tiahrt amendment.  And with all this stuff about gun smuggling to Mexico, I can't imagine they won't use that as an excuse to repeal the Tiahrt amendment.  I think either of these will see less opposition than a ban, and do more damage.

There isn't a gun show loophole to close. The social-fascists just want to outlaw private transactions.
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 9:18:13 AM EDT
Originally Posted By jt325i:
Only problem I see with this mandatory trip through the FFL is that for so many years it hasn't been required they will have no way to enforce this properly. No doubt the Democrats will clamp down on guns hard while they are in power. I expect to see some serious new anti-gun laws before Obama leaves office in January 2013 when he's fucked up the country so bad he won't win re-election. Just hope the next President and congress can help undo the damage. Unfortunately we all know when you give the government an inch they take a mile. We will likely only get half a mile back to where we were so damage will still be done.


I agree completely that giving an inch is giving a mile...and while I don't support government tracking of my firearms, there is a solid argument in the point that it is in our interests as gun owners to make sure those that will not use their weapons responsibly should not acquire them in the first place. The very few can have a big negative effect on the rest of us. I don't think enforcement is that big of an issue––  the law would be self-regulating to a large degree; if there was a law that required a check on a private person, I'd engage the process diligently and document the hell out of the transaction–– otherwise, it's pretty obvious that the seller would enjoy a share of whatever liability was caused by providing an unauthorized buyer to take possession of a firearm. In other words, ignore the process, sell a gun to someone without the proper check, and kiss everything you own good bye when they decide to do something stupid (the firearm would be traced to the original seller, bet on it). So, I would not only require someone to submit to a check, but I'd go so far as to call the local sheriff to verify current validity of any CHL presented as a substitute for a NICS check (in Oregon your CHL can be used in stead of a background check, I believe this is common in many states).

It's a tough issue, and I'm not sure if giving that inch is worth it (I'm a pragmatist...I can't stand feel-good, do-nothing legislation). That said, I don't like the idea of criminals being able to walk into a gun show and walk out with whatever someone is willing to sell them. I haven't felt like my freedoms have been expanded or restricted by what goes on at gun shows, so why would we treat such a venue as anything different than walking into a retail store? It should be one rule either way–– checks for every transfer, or none whatsoever.
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 9:38:02 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/9/2009 11:22:45 AM EDT by Riotgun]
Originally posted by streamcatcher:

That said, I don't like the idea of criminals being able to walk into a gun show and walk out with whatever someone is willing to sell them.



Why?
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 9:39:56 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/9/2009 9:40:59 AM EDT by dcdreamboat]
Originally Posted By st0newall:
hum...gonna play devils advocate here...

let me ask a question...

i take one of my pistols, voyage into ghetto land.. start asking around.. 'anyone want a glock fotay'?

individual approaches me. he appears to be 30 years of age .. so no age violation here... he also looks like this:
http://www.streetgangs.com/magazine/040408.jpg

or for racial equality... this : http://blog.wired.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/04/23/hells_angels2040_2.jpg

so you're ok with this?

or put another way... folks like this getting fireams is sorta what they want to prevent (cho types too of course).. how do you address this issue?

ETA.. as gun owners.. its also in our interests that such folks dont end up with firearms if they would be prevented for doing so, based on .. say them being felons.. and for me in my trip to the ghetto.. there is no way for me to know...criminal history check by a gun dealer addresses this issue....


Damn talk about judging a book by its cover.

st0newall, I want both of those men to have guns. Not just the semi-autos, but machine guns, mortars, and artillery. Because I trust both of those guys to "refresh the tree of liberty" much more enthusiastically than some big-mouthed fatass stroking his AR and picking his nose over Gunbroker auctions and internet forums wearing nothing but briefs in his mother's basement.
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 9:43:42 AM EDT
Originally Posted By st0newall:
hum...gonna play devils advocate here...

let me ask a question...

i take one of my pistols, voyage into ghetto land.. start asking around.. 'anyone want a glock fotay'?

individual approaches me. he appears to be 30 years of age .. so no age violation here... he also looks like this:
http://www.streetgangs.com/magazine/040408.jpg

or for racial equality... this : http://blog.wired.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/04/23/hells_angels2040_2.jpg

so you're ok with this?

or put another way... folks like this getting fireams is sorta what they want to prevent (cho types too of course).. how do you address this issue?

ETA.. as gun owners.. its also in our interests that such folks dont end up with firearms if they would be prevented for doing so, based on .. say them being felons.. and for me in my trip to the ghetto.. there is no way for me to know...criminal history check by a gun dealer addresses this issue....



And why would that still not happen, even if I couldn't conduct private sales?
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 10:09:16 AM EDT
Uninforceable without "universal registration".

So you can believe that registration of all firearms would be part of this.
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 10:44:25 AM EDT
Yeah, I think they will start registering actual serial numbers instead of handgun/long gun/receiver during the NCIS checks right before they start requiring all sales to go through an FFL.

Lots of people think storing the serial number is a great idea, and it happens to be one of the worst and potentially most threatening ideas.  LE likes to find someone to stick the crime on in 24-48 hours, and having a registration number will just be TOO good an opportunity to stick someone in jail ("You DO own a handgun in the same calibre that was used to kill the victim...") in order to prove that progress is being made on a case.

I love America, but I don't necessarily trust anyone in it.

Link Posted: 4/9/2009 10:59:58 AM EDT

it would be politically unwise to attempt to reinstate the AWB, the dumbocrats know this.  i don't really care if they intitute a mandatory waiting period for rifles like the already have for pistols.  you can't wait 2 or 3 days?
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 11:05:03 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Draco223:
Originally Posted By Tony7189:
all private sales requiring a NICS check. The AWB is a very politically charged issue. Now I'm not saying a new AWB WON'T happen especially with a lot of dick sucking commies running DC, so don't label me naive. I think that the "Blue Dogs" fear a fight against any contenders in their bids for reelection and will shun a renewed AWB. However doing something shitty like requiring NICS checks for ALL firearms sales would be something "Blue Dogs", "Rhinos"and  "Soccer Moms" alike would think is kosher.

Fire away and bash me.

ETA: I am still going to actively fight any AWB proposals by phoning, mailing, and e-mailing my reps, as I suggest you to do as well

Agreed...

However the AWB will probably happen after they get "re-elected", this is the reason I am surprised the "talk" started this early. Either they think they are going to loose and might as well make the changes before then, or they were hoping for more support out of this and it backfired on them.


I don't think so:

In March, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said, "I, as a senator, supported measures to try and reinstate it. Politically, that is a very big hurdle in our Congress. But there may be some approaches that could be acceptable, and we are exploring those." from CNN of all places.  Poll: Fewer Americans support stricter gun control laws


Then there is Pelosi on ABC Good Morning America on April 7:

Roberts: Under the Bush administration, you pretty much said the ball was in their court when it came to reinstating the ban. Now, it's a Democratic President, a Democratic House. So, is the ball in your court where this is concerned?
  Pelosi: Yes, it is. And we are just going to have to work together to come to some resolution because the court, in the meantime, in recent months, the Supreme Court has ruled in a very- in a direction that gives more opportunity for people to have guns. We never denied that right. We don't want to take their guns away. We want them registered. We don’t want them crossing state lines...  Linky


Link Posted: 4/9/2009 11:06:34 AM EDT
Originally Posted By chevyrulz:

it would be politically unwise to attempt to reinstate the AWB, the dumbocrats know this.  i don't really care if they intitute a mandatory waiting period for rifles like the already have for pistols.  you can't wait 2 or 3 days?


What is this "waiting period" you speak of?  The longest I ever waited was about two minutes and that was before I got my CHL.
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 11:10:31 AM EDT
Originally Posted By SnoopisTDI:
Originally Posted By chevyrulz:

it would be politically unwise to attempt to reinstate the AWB, the dumbocrats know this.  i don't really care if they intitute a mandatory waiting period for rifles like the already have for pistols.  you can't wait 2 or 3 days?


What is this "waiting period" you speak of?  The longest I ever waited was about two minutes and that was before I got my CHL.
i've never purchased a pistol but i know @ the gun show you can't take home a handgun but you can take home a rifle or shotgun.  at the gunshow, if you buy a pistol, it get's mailed to you.  i'm not sure how it works honestly, i've never bought a handgun. my dad has so many i just use his.  i was under the impression it would be the same @ a gun store, in that you must wait 2 or 3 days for whatever reason.  maybe so you'll cool off if your buying it to kill yourself or someone else?  idfk

Link Posted: 4/9/2009 11:23:52 AM EDT
Originally Posted By chevyrulz:
Originally Posted By SnoopisTDI:
Originally Posted By chevyrulz:

it would be politically unwise to attempt to reinstate the AWB, the dumbocrats know this.  i don't really care if they intitute a mandatory waiting period for rifles like the already have for pistols.  you can't wait 2 or 3 days?


What is this "waiting period" you speak of?  The longest I ever waited was about two minutes and that was before I got my CHL.
i've never purchased a pistol but i know @ the gun show you can't take home a handgun but you can take home a rifle or shotgun.  at the gunshow, if you buy a pistol, it get's mailed to you.  i'm not sure how it works honestly, i've never bought a handgun. my dad has so many i just use his.  i was under the impression it would be the same @ a gun store, in that you must wait 2 or 3 days for whatever reason.  maybe so you'll cool off if your buying it to kill yourself or someone else?  idfk



That must be a state law.  Usually you walk in (whether it's the gun shop or a dealer at the gun show), fill out the form, they make a two minute phone call, you hand them money and walk out with your gun.  It's no different for a pistol or rifle.  If you're buying it from an individual you don't even have to do that - just exchange money for gun and you're done.
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 11:43:31 AM EDT
Originally Posted By SnoopisTDI:
Originally Posted By chevyrulz:
Originally Posted By SnoopisTDI:
Originally Posted By chevyrulz:

it would be politically unwise to attempt to reinstate the AWB, the dumbocrats know this.  i don't really care if they intitute a mandatory waiting period for rifles like the already have for pistols.  you can't wait 2 or 3 days?


What is this "waiting period" you speak of?  The longest I ever waited was about two minutes and that was before I got my CHL.
i've never purchased a pistol but i know @ the gun show you can't take home a handgun but you can take home a rifle or shotgun.  at the gunshow, if you buy a pistol, it get's mailed to you.  i'm not sure how it works honestly, i've never bought a handgun. my dad has so many i just use his.  i was under the impression it would be the same @ a gun store, in that you must wait 2 or 3 days for whatever reason.  maybe so you'll cool off if your buying it to kill yourself or someone else?  idfk



That must be a state law.  Usually you walk in (whether it's the gun shop or a dealer at the gun show), fill out the form, they make a two minute phone call, you hand them money and walk out with your gun.  It's no different for a pistol or rifle.  If you're buying it from an individual you don't even have to do that - just exchange money for gun and you're done.

i have a feeling that's a strictly Texas phenomenon.  the 2 minute phone call only applies to rifles and shotguns here in South Carolina.  for handguns there's definitely a waiting period, at least @ a gun show.

Link Posted: 4/9/2009 11:46:09 AM EDT
Originally Posted By www-glock19-com:
I agree
pushing for NICS or making transfers go through a FFL would be a easy sell


Would they actually enforce this new transfer law?  Or would the only enforce the law on us?  Would it apply to the inner city unlicensed pharmacists?  We have more than enough laws already.  Enforcement of existing laws is lacking.
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 11:51:54 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Riotgun:
Originally posted by streamcatcher:

That said, I don't like the idea of criminals being able to walk into a gun show and walk out with whatever someone is willing to sell them.



Why?



What kind of question is that?  Why do you support the idea of giving guns to criminals?
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 12:02:00 PM EDT
Closing the gun show loophole will do no good as long as there are MILLIONS of unregistered guns still on the streets. If they make private sales illegal, owning an unregistered firearm will become illegal. They go hand in hand...
Link Posted: 4/9/2009 12:07:51 PM EDT
Originally Posted By FreeFloater:
Originally Posted By Riotgun:
Originally posted by streamcatcher:

That said, I don't like the idea of criminals being able to walk into a gun show and walk out with whatever someone is willing to sell them.



Why?



What kind of question is that?  Why do you support the idea of giving guns to criminals?


Why are you afraid of felons owning guns?

Are you the type of scared white man that gave us GCA '68?

Link Posted: 4/9/2009 12:10:58 PM EDT



Originally Posted By FreeFloater:



Originally Posted By jbombelli:




Originally Posted By FreeFloater:


Originally Posted By Tony7189:

all private sales requiring a NICS check.......However doing something shitty like requiring NICS checks for ALL firearms sales would be something "Blue Dogs", "Rhinos"and  "Soccer Moms" alike would think is kosher.



Can you elaborate?  What would that change?  



In other words, as a CCW, would one still get a NICS check for each purchase?  What about like having a handgun permit in a state like NC.  That permit is all the gun store needs to sell you a handgun as of 2009.  Are you talking about legislation that would supercede that sort of thing, or is there a large segment of guns being sold new in the box legitimately right now that are not being checked for some other reason?





Think "closing the gunshow loophole."  If I want to sell to you, personally, the sale would have to be done through a FFL with a background check.  Also, The CCW license/permit would no longer suffice by itself when buying from a dealer.  They would still have to call in the background check.



At least I THINK this is what he's talking about.

 


I don't think that I realized private sales don't have to use an FFL.  I figured to make a private sale "legit" it had to be transferred using an FFL.  Anything else seems like a borderline straw purchase...but I guess intent is as the heart of straw purchases isn't it?  I also assume private sales must be limited to a certain number of transactions per year?



Private sales of firearms are unregulated in many states.  Some states like CA require all firearm transfers to go through an FFL.  Other states, like PA, require handgun sales to go through and FFL but private sales of long guns are OK.  In NC, with your crazy pistol permit nonsense, you probably have to go through an FFL for a pistol sale but you could buy a rifle/shotgun at a garage sale legally.



Believe it or not, most non-FFL firearm transactions involve two people that can pass the NICS check.  I'm sure some prohibited persons buy firearms FTF, but it's far from the majority.



 
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top