The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 25, 2014, 06:35 PM   #26
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Ettin
I would suspect that in the case you describe the engineer quickly got out of the suit. As someone not involved in the construction, he arguably had no duty, and certainly no power, to do anything.
It has been a long time and I no longer have any documentation on the case, but my recollection is that his professional liability carrier elected to settle (pay). In other words (as you know but some others may not), they made a calculation that paying was cheaper than defending.

Which exemplifies why the whole "knew or should have known" thing is such a can of worms.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old May 26, 2014, 12:09 AM   #27
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 6,830
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo
The problem is, the Brady Campaign has already won a lawsuit along these grounds....
As I read the article, they didn't win the case. They won on an interlocutory appeal on a matter of law. Essentially the case was dismissed on a matter of law at a preliminary stage at the trial court level. That was appealed, and now goes back to the trial court.

The end result is that the plaintiffs can proceed with the case. So the plaintiffs still have a number of hurdles to clear in order to finally win. And they might not.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old May 26, 2014, 12:18 AM   #28
Crankylove
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 8, 2008
Location: The land of green Jello and vanilla icecream
Posts: 1,309
Quote:
at a show there are so many loopholes to get weapons its unreal

You sound just as bad as the anti gun crowd. There aren't "loop holes".

There is following the law, and not following the law. Buying a firearm at a gunshow while following all applicable state and federal laws isn't exploiting a loophole, it simply legally purchasing a firearm. If I go to a gunshow, buy a gun from a private party or vendor that chooses not to do a background check that is not required by local or federal law, it isn't using a loophole, it isn't skirting or bending the law.

When you talk of loopholes and buyers avoiding paperwork for a firearm purchase, you make it sound like anybody at a gunshow is a criminal.

Comments like that don't help us present gun owners as law abiding citizens.
__________________
The answer to 1984 is 1776
Crankylove is offline  
Old May 26, 2014, 12:40 AM   #29
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,512
Quote:
The end result is that the plaintiffs can proceed with the case. So the plaintiffs still have a number of hurdles to clear in order to finally win. And they might not.
Ah. Thanks for the correction. There's also this one.

Most gun dealers don't have enough money to fight a lawsuit backed by a high-profile lobbying group backed by effective legal counsel. Many will settle simply to get out of the line of fire, as they did in the face of Bloomberg's lawsuits. The Brady Campaign doesn't have to win; they just have to wear folks down through legal attrition.

It's certainly a cheaper and easier tactic than bringing product liability lawsuits against manufacturers.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old May 26, 2014, 02:09 AM   #30
JohnKSa
Staff
 
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 18,481
Quote:
There aren't "loop holes".

There is following the law, and not following the law.
In fact, it would be far more accurate to say that the federal laws relating to firearm purchase are based on a loophole rather than the other way around.

The federal government is limited as far as its ability to impose legal restrictions on intrastate sales. It's only because anti-gun legislators were able to cleverly exploit a loophole in the interstate commerce clause that the law hasn't been struck down.
__________________
Did you know that there is a TEXAS State Rifle Association?
JohnKSa is offline  
Old May 26, 2014, 02:40 AM   #31
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,584
Quote:
There aren't "loop holes".

There is following the law, and not following the law.
I exploit loopholes every day. On roads with 55 MPH speed limits, I drive at 55 MPH. I take advantage of the loophole that driving at the speed limit is legal, and that way I don't get speeding tickets.

Pretty slick, I think!
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old May 26, 2014, 07:46 AM   #32
steve4102
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 23, 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by captneil19
I have purchased weapons pistols rifles at gun shows, the guy with the booth says you paying cash, yep ok heres your gun no questions asked,right next to him is a guy with a booth who has a lic an you want to buy the same weapons ,you have a ton of paper work to fill out,why would anybody want to do business with him ?????here in ms. it happens all the time at the gun shows an its totally legal, you rent a booth an you sell what ever you have for sale except fully auto weapons, then you need a ffl lic
These seem more like words from someone that gets his/her info from CNN, than someone who has actually purchased firearms.

Around here their are two types of vendors at a gun show. A business owner that has a valid FFL and Joe citizen who does not.

The vendors with valid FFL will only sell to an individual that passes the NICS background check, no exceptions, cash or card. There is NO so called loop hole here.

Joe citizen is selling his own used personal stuff. He usually is not set up for CC transaction and only accepts cash. Buying a firearm from him at a show is no different than buying from him elsewhere, it is simply a Private Sale. No loop hole here, just a Legal Private sale.

Private sales also come with some responsibility and liability. No loop hole there.

Last edited by steve4102; May 26, 2014 at 08:23 AM.
steve4102 is online now  
Old May 26, 2014, 09:00 AM   #33
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve4102
Private sales also come with some responsibility and liability. No loop hole there.
While I agree there is potential liability for private sellers, as well as responsibility, I think the legal responsibility is less than you seem to imply. At least according to federal law, the requirement is:

Quote:
Originally Posted by 18 U.S. Code § 922
(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person
(1) is under indictment for, or has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;
(2) is a fugitive from justice;
(3) is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802));
(4) has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution;
(5) who, being an alien—
(A) is illegally or unlawfully in the United States; or
(B) except as provided in subsection (y)(2), has been admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa (as that term is defined in section 101(a)(26) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 (a)(26)));
(6) who [2] has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions;
(7) who, having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced his citizenship;
(8) is subject to a court order that restrains such person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner of such person or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child, except that this paragraph shall only apply to a court order that—
(A) was issued after a hearing of which such person received actual notice, and at which such person had the opportunity to participate; and
(B)
(i) includes a finding that such person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child; or
(ii) by its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against such intimate partner or child that would reasonably be expected to cause bodily injury; or
(9) has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.
This subsection shall not apply with respect to the sale or disposition of a firearm or ammunition to a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector who pursuant to subsection (b) of section 925 of this chapter is not precluded from dealing in firearms or ammunition, or to a person who has been granted relief from disabilities pursuant to subsection (c) of section 925 of this chapter.
Note that the law does NOT impose on a private seller any affirmative duty (or "responsibility") to take any particular steps to verify whether or not a buyer is a prohibited person. It simply says that if the seller knows or has reasonable cause to believe that a buyer is prohibited, the seller is not allowed to make the sale.

Yes, I know responsible gun owners generally take some steps to cover this, such as asking for a carry permit or FOID even if the firearm is a rifle or shotgun not affected by the carry permit or FOID. That's a good idea, even ... but it's beyond what the law actually requires.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old May 26, 2014, 09:21 AM   #34
steve4102
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 23, 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aguila Blanca
Originally Posted by 18 U.S. Code § 922
(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person—
Is this not similar to why GM is being sued right now? Should GM had "reasonable cause to believe"?

I see no difference here.
steve4102 is online now  
Old May 26, 2014, 09:28 AM   #35
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 5,158
The big difference is that GM has an FFL.
__________________
A gunfight is not the time to learn new skills.

If you ever have a real need for more than a couple of magazines, your problem is not a shortage of magazines. It's a shortage of people on your side of the argument. -- Art Eatman
Spats McGee is offline  
Old May 26, 2014, 08:23 PM   #36
steve4102
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 23, 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spats McGee
The big difference is that GM has an FFL.
How does the FFL make a difference in the Law.

The Law says "reasonable cause to believe", Licence, no license, private party, friend, no friend, acquaintance or stranger, how does the fact that one holds or does not hold an FFL change the "reasonable cause to believe"?
steve4102 is online now  
Old May 26, 2014, 08:46 PM   #37
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,512
FFL's are held to a higher standard of scrutiny, which is why they have to process 4473's and conduct NICS checks.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old May 26, 2014, 09:41 PM   #38
Aguila Blanca
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 6,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve4102
Is this not similar to why GM is being sued right now? Should GM had "reasonable cause to believe"?
I dunno -- should they? If you think they should have ... why?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve4102
How does the FFL make a difference in the Law.
FFLs are also covered by a different section of that law I quoted. The portion I cited comes immediately after the part that applies to licensed dealers, and functions as an "in addition to the above" for them.

Just Google up 18 USC 922 and read the whole thing. It's long, and it's legalese ... if you're not accustomed to that sort of stuff, it may take you awhile to navigate your way through it.
Aguila Blanca is offline  
Old May 28, 2014, 07:26 PM   #39
dajowi
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 2, 2005
Posts: 979
"...how many times I've noticed at a gun show that a female is filling out the paper work for a new gun purchase with her boyfriend/ husband sitting beside her. Wonder why that is?"

She offered to fill out the form and her printing is legible, that's why.
dajowi is offline  
Old May 28, 2014, 10:28 PM   #40
btmj
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 1, 2011
Location: Near St. Louis, Missouri
Posts: 787
About 40% of the guns in my safe were purchased by my wife, using her credit card, and she filled out the NICS paperwork. Why ?.... because those are her guns. She picked them out, she bought them. In every case, I was present in the gun shop, so I guess we looked pretty suspicious.

I don't need to own a 22 pistol, I just use one of my wifes... I don't need to own a 44 mag, I just use my wife's Super Redhawk.... If I want to bring a 30-30 lever gun with me to deer camp along with my bolt gun, I bring my wife's Marlin.

She does not need to own a 1911, or a glock, or an AR-15, or a walther pps, or a weatherby bolt gun, or a FNX-40, or a Ruger Vaquero... if she wants to shoot one of these, she just uses mine.

I can't believe that my family is that unusual.

Last edited by btmj; May 28, 2014 at 10:36 PM.
btmj is offline  
Old May 29, 2014, 06:40 AM   #41
Microgunner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 6, 2006
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,022
"She offered to fill out the form and her printing is legible, that's why.*"


Can't do that unless you have two people other than the dealer witness the signature.
__________________
Proud NRA Patron Member
Microgunner is offline  
Old May 29, 2014, 10:06 AM   #42
ThesNazud
Member
 
Join Date: June 3, 2013
Location: Marshall, IL
Posts: 61
If the information is that of the person signing their name, then why couldn't that be a valid reason... I know many people with crappy hand writing, and in a matter of preserving accuracy I can understand that line of thought...


Not trying to be difficult, just understand is all :P
ThesNazud is offline  
Old May 29, 2014, 11:48 AM   #43
Microgunner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 6, 2006
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,022
ATF rules. Who knows the reasoning.
The dealer is allowed to reprint the information in the space if the buyer's writing is illegible.
__________________
Proud NRA Patron Member
Microgunner is offline  
Old May 29, 2014, 12:14 PM   #44
Gary L. Griffiths
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 7, 2000
Location: AZ, IA, WA
Posts: 1,292
Quote:
I don't need to own a 22 pistol, I just use one of my wifes... I don't need to own a 44 mag, I just use my wife's Super Redhawk.... If I want to bring a 30-30 lever gun with me to deer camp along with my bolt gun, I bring my wife's Marlin.

She does not need to own a 1911, or a glock, or an AR-15, or a walther pps, or a weatherby bolt gun, or a FNX-40, or a Ruger Vaquero... if she wants to shoot one of these, she just uses mine.
And some versions of the UBC bills they keep trying to get past would make both of you felons for doing just that!
__________________
Violence is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and valorous feeling which believes that nothing is worth violence is much worse. Those who have nothing for which they are willing to fight; nothing they care about more than their own personal safety; are miserable creatures who have no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of those better than themselves. Gary L. Griffiths, Chief Instructor, Advanced Force Tactics, Inc. (Paraphrasing John Stuart Mill)
Gary L. Griffiths is offline  
Old May 30, 2014, 02:42 PM   #45
ThesNazud
Member
 
Join Date: June 3, 2013
Location: Marshall, IL
Posts: 61
That makes sense then Microgunner, I shouldn't have tried to put logic into a govt regulated thing...
ThesNazud is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.11644 seconds with 9 queries