|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
May 25, 2014, 06:35 PM | #26 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,436
|
Quote:
Which exemplifies why the whole "knew or should have known" thing is such a can of worms. |
|
May 26, 2014, 12:09 AM | #27 | |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
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.
__________________
"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 |
|
May 26, 2014, 12:18 AM | #28 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 8, 2008
Location: 8B ID
Posts: 1,752
|
Quote:
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 |
|
May 26, 2014, 12:40 AM | #29 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
|
Quote:
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 |
|
May 26, 2014, 02:09 AM | #30 | |
Staff
Join Date: February 12, 2001
Location: DFW Area
Posts: 24,932
|
Quote:
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.
__________________
Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?
|
|
May 26, 2014, 02:40 AM | #31 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,436
|
Quote:
Pretty slick, I think! |
|
May 26, 2014, 07:46 AM | #32 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 23, 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,949
|
Quote:
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. |
|
May 26, 2014, 09:00 AM | #33 | ||
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,436
|
Quote:
Quote:
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. |
||
May 26, 2014, 09:21 AM | #34 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 23, 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,949
|
Quote:
I see no difference here. |
|
May 26, 2014, 09:28 AM | #35 |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,819
|
The big difference is that GM has an FFL.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
May 26, 2014, 08:23 PM | #36 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 23, 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,949
|
Quote:
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"? |
|
May 26, 2014, 08:46 PM | #37 |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
|
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 |
May 26, 2014, 09:41 PM | #38 | ||
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,436
|
Quote:
Quote:
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. |
||
May 28, 2014, 07:26 PM | #39 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 2, 2005
Posts: 1,196
|
"...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. |
May 28, 2014, 10:28 PM | #40 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 1, 2011
Location: Near St. Louis, Missouri
Posts: 864
|
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. |
May 29, 2014, 06:40 AM | #41 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 6, 2006
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,324
|
"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 Benefactor Member |
May 29, 2014, 10:06 AM | #42 |
Member
Join Date: June 3, 2013
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 98
|
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 |
May 29, 2014, 11:48 AM | #43 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 6, 2006
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 3,324
|
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 Benefactor Member |
May 29, 2014, 12:14 PM | #44 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 7, 2000
Location: AZ, WA
Posts: 1,466
|
Quote:
__________________
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 craven apathy; are miserable creatures who have no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the valor of those better than themselves. Gary L. Griffiths (Paraphrasing John Stuart Mill) |
|
May 30, 2014, 02:42 PM | #45 |
Member
Join Date: June 3, 2013
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 98
|
That makes sense then Microgunner, I shouldn't have tried to put logic into a govt regulated thing...
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|