The Firing Line Forums

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 10, 2013, 11:19 AM   #1
Don P
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 17, 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,792
A question to the members

My question is this,

Would you support legislation that requires all firearms transactions to go through a FFL?
My reason for supporting this is as follows,
Where have all the illegal guns in the hands of criminals come from?
What percentage of guns have been stolen from homes or gun shops?
What percentage have been bought and sold over and over again without the paper trail?
I sold a gun at a show here in FLA. Licensed CCW holder buys said gun and receipts signed by buyer and seller. Gun is used in a robbery in NJ.
How did this occur? Through the serial # and 4473 the sheriff is at my front door.
Just MY OPINION
Whats the thoughts of the members?
__________________
NRA Life Member, NRA Range Safety Officer, IDPA Safety Officer
As you are, I once was, As I am, You will be.
Don P is offline  
Old January 10, 2013, 11:44 AM   #2
Pahoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 16, 2006
Location: IOWA
Posts: 5,576
Not as a requirement on personal property

Quote:
Would you support legislation that requires all firearms transactions to go through a FFL?
I would not but have bought guns from private sellers that requested that is be done in such a manner. On all occasions, the seller paid for the transaction. I had no problem with this. ...

If it comes to this; so be it !!

Be Safe !!!
__________________
'Fundamental truths' are easy to recognize because they are verified daily through simple observation and thus, require no testing.
Pahoo is offline  
Old January 10, 2013, 11:51 AM   #3
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,426
I believe that the government shouldn't contract that out to third parties. If they want to monitor and oversee the transaction in the same manner as the NICS check, that's fine, but not at the expense of paying a third party for their overhead, FFL aquisition, etc. It's one thing when that "fee" is part and parcel of a business transaction with the FFL holder, either as they wholesale and then retail the gun, or as an intermediary for someone else who does.

I have no intention of buying a gun at a gun show, not the least reason is to do so around here you have to be a member of the group that hosts the gunshow, and I'm not particularly impressed with the group. I have no doubt that if this were the case they would require using their FFL who would have a monopoly, and be able to set outrageously inflated fees. Additionally, I don't particularly like the level of information required for a 4473 form being in the hands of an FFL you don't "know" where they "live". When/If I buy one on the 'net and have it shipped to Local Gun Store, they have a brick and mortar location. I'm comfortable enough in knowing who/where they are if I end up with identity theft issues traceable to a 4473 form.

If, however, local law enforcement were required to do these checks for private buyers for the cost of the check, I have no issues.
JimDandy is offline  
Old January 10, 2013, 11:57 AM   #4
Hal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 9, 1998
Location: Ohio USA
Posts: 7,435
Quote:
Would you support legislation that requires all firearms transactions to go through a FFL
No.
There's no interstate commerce involved, therefore I don't want the federal goverment to open that Pandora's box.

Even this unholy alliance of anti gun senators understands the importance of the interstate commerce clause:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:S.35:


And you want to hand that to them on a platter?
(The ability to regulate intrastate commerece)
Hal is offline  
Old January 10, 2013, 11:59 AM   #5
scpapa
Member
 
Join Date: December 23, 2007
Location: Central South Carolina
Posts: 68
I don't support the idea of going through FFL's or NICS for legal face to face purchases. I don't have to when I buy a car, furnace, stove, etc. I han even buy an axe or knife with no government interaction. Why should I endorse more government involvement?

Rick
__________________
NRA Training Counselor
NRA Advanced Pistol Instructor
NRA RTBAV Regional Counselor
NRA Benefactor Member
scpapa is offline  
Old January 10, 2013, 12:01 PM   #6
Don P
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 17, 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,792
Quote:
There's no interstate commerce involved, therefore I don't want the federal goverment to open that Pandora's box.
Understood, now the gun I sold locally used 1,000+ miles away illegally owned and used in commission of a crime. Somewhere along the line interstate commerce comes into play.
__________________
NRA Life Member, NRA Range Safety Officer, IDPA Safety Officer
As you are, I once was, As I am, You will be.
Don P is offline  
Old January 10, 2013, 12:12 PM   #7
Pahoo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 16, 2006
Location: IOWA
Posts: 5,576
Do debates !!!

Don P
Mr. Hal has answered your question and then some. Anything beyond this point, will turn into a spitting contest. We accept your post and reasoning and you should respect that. ......

Respectfully yours and;
Be Safe !!!
__________________
'Fundamental truths' are easy to recognize because they are verified daily through simple observation and thus, require no testing.
Pahoo is offline  
Old January 10, 2013, 12:14 PM   #8
Hal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 9, 1998
Location: Ohio USA
Posts: 7,435
So in other words. your all for just handing over federal control of everything that goes on in your state w/out so much as a whimper...
Hal is offline  
Old January 10, 2013, 12:20 PM   #9
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,426
FFL's are already required for in-state purchases on the basis that they MIGHT have been shipped interstate. There's a lot of dancing required to get there, but the Fed has gotten there before.

Even if they do want to follow the spirit AND the letter of the law, they can incentivize the States to enact a law requiring it, and throwing access open to state LEO's to do the check. He said legislation, not federal legislation. There are already locals that require some approximation of this.

Beyond that, I'm not sure interstate smuggling = interstate commerce.

Finally I would ask him to offer more options...

Support

Tolerate

Oppose

Civilly disobey...
JimDandy is offline  
Old January 10, 2013, 12:23 PM   #10
hogdogs
Staff In Memoriam
 
Join Date: October 31, 2007
Location: Western Florida panhandle
Posts: 11,071
Enforce, to the fullest, all the gun and violence laws we already allowed to be put on the books for ten years then come talk to me about what more is needed...

Until then, I am not for new gun laws...

Brent
hogdogs is offline  
Old January 10, 2013, 12:30 PM   #11
Hal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 9, 1998
Location: Ohio USA
Posts: 7,435
Quote:
FFL's are already required for in-state purchases on the basis that they MIGHT have been shipped interstate. There's a lot of dancing required to get there, but the Fed has gotten there before.
That's not at all the same thing.
Did you bother to read the link I posted above?

That's "the enemy" going to great lengths to justify how they can apply interstate commerce to any private intrastate gun sales.
They know that's going to be the single biggest hurdle for them to overcome.

And here,,,,so many are ready to just give them a free pass on that?
Hal is offline  
Old January 10, 2013, 12:31 PM   #12
zukiphile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 1,646
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hal
No.
There's no interstate commerce involved, therefore I don't want the federal goverment to open that Pandora's box.
Indeed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimDandy
FFL's are already required for in-state purchases
Just to clarify, an in-state transaction need not be performed through an FFL as a matter of federal regulation. I understand some states may have a different law.
zukiphile is offline  
Old January 10, 2013, 12:38 PM   #13
para.2
Member
 
Join Date: November 9, 2002
Location: Southwest USA
Posts: 91
I guess I have no quarrel with the NICS check per se, what bothers me about the whole scenario, and frankly I would have thought would bother the OP, is that the NICS call data may or may not be retained for an unspecified period of time, and the 4473 is retained forever, resulting in "The sherriff showing up at your door" weeks, months or even years later.

I don't believe there is, ever has been, or ever will be a legitimate law enforcement interest in any sort of tracking/registration/whatever.
para.2 is offline  
Old January 10, 2013, 12:45 PM   #14
NJgunowner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2009
Location: NJ
Posts: 1,085
When they stop charging me for a NICS check, we'll talk.
__________________
Sig 1911 Traditional reverse two tone, Sig p226 .40, Sig 556 Swat patrol, Baby Eagle/jerico steel .45
NJgunowner is offline  
Old January 10, 2013, 12:47 PM   #15
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,426
Do they charge you for a NICS check? If you go in, try and buy a gun, fill out a 4473 form, and get rejected, do you get a bil?
JimDandy is offline  
Old January 10, 2013, 12:47 PM   #16
Vanya
Staff
 
Join Date: July 7, 2008
Location: Upper midwest
Posts: 3,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by hogdogs
Enforce, to the fullest, all the gun and violence laws we already allowed to be put on the books for ten years then come talk to me about what more is needed...

Until then, I am not for new gun laws...
Exactly.

We also have to recognize that such enforcement will require additional funding for both state and federal authorities, if they're actually going to be able to do this -- as well some serious negotiating to balance privacy rights and the public interest. Lack of funding and conflicting privacy laws are the main reasons many states currently don't report the basic info that's required for the current background check system, for example, to work the way it's supposed to.

But talking about taxes... negotiating in good faith... they're just not as sexy as pontificating about so-called "assault weapons," or the Constitution, or the way kids are drugged nowadays. No fun at all. Darn.
Vanya is offline  
Old January 10, 2013, 12:50 PM   #17
sigcurious
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
Aside from the really big one of interstate commerce, there's the smaller issue of participation. Not all otherwise law abiding citizens will participate, either through ignorance or otherwise.

A good example is California, since 1991(maybe 92?) they have required all transfers(very few exceptions) to go through FFLs, but there are still guns in the hands of criminals there. So either all the guns get stolen, or no matter what the rules some people don't know them or don't care about them even if they are otherwise law abiding.
sigcurious is offline  
Old January 10, 2013, 12:51 PM   #18
TATER
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 19, 2002
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 909
No support here either….
So, you covered your self with a receipt. Paper trail on your end established.
"ultimately" You stop nothing…
"Straw purchases" That's one huge problem around here!!
I see it happen, I watch it, I know its going down and can't do a thing about it!!
You simply can't prove it.. And I Know more than likely you have seen it go down as well.
TATER is offline  
Old January 10, 2013, 12:54 PM   #19
sigcurious
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
Quote:
When they stop charging me for a NICS check, we'll talk.
This unfortunately is not the Fed's doing. That's the state because they've chosen to act as point-of-contact(middleman) instead of allowing FFLs to deal directly with the free NICS service.
sigcurious is offline  
Old January 10, 2013, 01:07 PM   #20
Spats McGee
Staff
 
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 5,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don P
. . . .Would you support legislation that requires all firearms transactions to go through a FFL? . . . .
For reasons already adequately expressed by others, no.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hal
Even this unholy alliance of anti gun senators understands the importance of the interstate commerce clause:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:S.35:
From the link quoted by Hal:
Quote:
`(38) GUN SHOW VENDOR- The term `gun show vendor' means any person who exhibits, sells, offers for sale, transfers, or exchanges 1 or more firearms at a gun show, regardless of whether or not the person arranges with the gun show promoter for a fixed location from which to exhibit, sell, offer for sale, transfer, or exchange 1 or more firearms.'.
By my reading of hte plain text of this paragraph, every person who takes a gun to a show, even if only to show it off, will be deemed a "gun show vendor."
__________________
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 January 10, 2013, 01:19 PM   #21
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,426
To be honest, I see more 1A problems then 2A in the bill. A fee to the AG for promoting a gun show. Sure it's philospohically similar to a parade license etc., but it's open to abuse.

Requiring an exhibitor that isn't going to sell to register, prove identity and so on...


I'd also like to know what "any part of the transaction" is. Does the guy who's window shopping, then buys a month later..
JimDandy is offline  
Old January 10, 2013, 01:28 PM   #22
Alabama Shooter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2012
Location: Sweet Home
Posts: 886
Quote:
Would you support legislation that requires all firearms transactions to go through a FFL?
Yes, but only for nominal fee and with no registration.

Quote:
Where have all the illegal guns in the hands of criminals come from?
The answers are as varied as "where do all the crimnals come from?"

Quote:
What percentage of guns have been stolen from homes or gun shops?
What percentage have been bought and sold over and over again without the paper trail?
No one keeps track of this type information and doing so would be futile.
__________________
Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday.
Alabama Shooter is offline  
Old January 10, 2013, 01:56 PM   #23
BGutzman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 4, 2009
Location: Frozen Tundra
Posts: 2,414
Quote:
Would you support legislation that requires all firearms transactions to go through a FFL?
No, why would I? Why does the government need to approve my use of my constitutional rights? It is not like my purchases are some march downtown some major city that requires blocking off streets and crowd controls...

Quote:
Where have all the illegal guns in the hands of criminals come from??
Not really my concern, I am not a law enforcement officer... I obey the laws and only concern myself with staying within the law... My off the cuff, un-researched guess would be theft from homes and cars...


Quote:
What percentage of guns have been stolen from homes or gun shops???
I would suggest that gun shops probably have less theft than you might think because hopefully the owner has take steps to reduce the risk... Bars on windows, cameras, alarm systems and open and concealed carry by employees. Still the root cause is a crime has been committed in the theft, not in the possession of the homeowner or business owner... Murders been outlawed for a long time, laws may reduce it to some degree but never end it, gun theft is much the same.

Quote:
What percentage have been bought and sold over and over again without the paper trail?
I think the better question is how do you propose to make any criminal follow the paper process you propose? By definition they wont.. Not being sarcastic but you will not modify criminal activity with a paper trail...

I applaud your concern for your fellow human beings but we already have too many freedom killing anti gun laws, rules and regulations... Enough is enough... We have to be able to expect adults to act as adults and when they break the law they need to be held to the punishments given... No one wants to pay for all the prisons and jails and no one want to exact the classical punishment of death for a felony... We have all these wants and because we as a people cant pull our britches up like big boys and girls and pay for and demand the appropriate punishments....

If our prisons were pure punishment, cold, hard work environments, we'd have a lot less repeat offenders... It is our very kindness to those that do us the most wrong as a society that leads to much of our repeat crime and our inability to deal with repeaters effectively.

If you want the source of all this crime, its ourselves in not exacting high tolls on those who commit the crimes and the glorification of crimes by our society. We don't need gun control, we need people to enforce the standards.
__________________
Molon Labe

Last edited by BGutzman; January 10, 2013 at 02:25 PM.
BGutzman is offline  
Old January 10, 2013, 02:14 PM   #24
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,426
Quote:
I would suggest that gun shops probably have less theft than you might think because hopefully the owner has take steps to reduce the risk... Bars on windows, cameras, alarm systems and open and concealed carry by employees. Still the root cause is a crime has been committed in the theft, not in the possession of the homeowner or business owner... Murders been outlawed for a long time, laws may reduce it to some degree but never end it, gun theft is much the same.
From a PBS news article of unknown reliability however it's not slanted in scope that I can tell.

Quote:
The report goes on to state that "over-the-counter purchases are not the only means by which guns reach the illegal market from FFLs" and reveals that 23,775 guns have been reported lost, missing or stolen from FFLs since September 13, 1994, when a new law took effect requiring dealers to report gun thefts within 48 hours. This makes the theft of 6,000 guns reported in the CIR/Frontline show "Hot Guns" only 25% of all cases reported to ATF in the past two and one-half years.
This study should go a long way towards answering some of that question. Basically Gun Shop and private home thefts aren't the most frequent way criminals get guns, but it's not a long shot for them either.. especially when they can just Steal from the LEO's
JimDandy is offline  
Old January 10, 2013, 02:30 PM   #25
Ben Towe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 6, 2009
Location: Middle Tennessee
Posts: 1,120
Quote:
Would you support legislation that requires all firearms transactions to go through a FFL?
Sure, I'll concede that. Now here's what we want. National reciprocity with no exceptions (i.e. I want to be able to carry everywhere, NYC, Chicago, L.A., the works), and I want NFA gone, kaput. No registration of machine guns, SBRs, suppressors, etc. Treat them as any other firearm.

We've given enough. If they want this, let them give us something.
__________________
'Merica: Back to back World War Champs
Ben Towe 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 10:28 PM.


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 0.11823 seconds with 7 queries