|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
July 23, 2013, 11:43 PM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 21, 2013
Location: Metro Denver Colorado
Posts: 227
|
So what are people in Colorado doing about FTF Background checks
Now we're obliged to do BGC's on person to person sales ... so how's that working out?
I was at Green Mountain Guns yesterday - just browsing . They won't do FTF BGC's. We chatted about it a bit and it seems they just aren't sufficiently comfortable about the law and its ramifications - nor is their legal counsel. I suppose the parties involved could both go to a gun show and run it there. Can private parties now run a CBI? Just want to be fully compliant dontcha' know By the way - this isn't just a Colorado Topic. Know that these laws are heading your way wherever you live.
__________________
"When the Going gets Weird the Weird Turn Pro" Hunter S. Thompson Last edited by LewSchiller; July 24, 2013 at 01:56 PM. |
July 24, 2013, 05:10 AM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 6, 2012
Location: Lakewood, CO
Posts: 1,057
|
All of the gun shops I frequent have adopted similar policies. I am unaware of any way for 2 citizens to do a CBI BGC without an FFL holder.
Our brilliant Colorado legislators have written and enacted some of the most poorly thought out and worded laws ever conceived. I need to look into this as well, as my father informed me that his firearms will be willed to me, we were discussing how to make that work under these terrible laws.
__________________
NRA Lifetime Member Since 1999 "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials." George Mason |
July 24, 2013, 07:23 AM | #3 |
Member
Join Date: February 26, 2013
Posts: 52
|
How is the law poorly constructed to make LGS uncomfortable?
It seems that they do BGCs all the time and most that I know have run BGCs on purchases shipped across state lines. What is new in this law that is different? |
July 24, 2013, 08:42 AM | #4 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 21, 2013
Location: Metro Denver Colorado
Posts: 227
|
Quote:
I should add - finding a dealer who will do transfers for out of state purchases has become a lot more difficult. The sources I've used in the past are no longer doing them except for one that now charges $75. Iraiam - You could do a Gun Trust and avoid all the fun. Just search Colorado Gun Trust, or go to the Tanner Gun Show where you'll find a few people offering services.
__________________
"When the Going gets Weird the Weird Turn Pro" Hunter S. Thompson Last edited by LewSchiller; July 24, 2013 at 10:07 AM. |
|
July 24, 2013, 11:33 AM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 6, 2012
Location: Lakewood, CO
Posts: 1,057
|
Thanks for the tip on the Gun Trust, I'll look it up. I also see that the gun trust is specifically exempted from the new "universal BGC" law.
I know one sticking point is, what happens when the person for some reason fails the background check, It's not their (the FFL holders) transfer so they won't touch it with a 10 foot pole. Another LGS is now requiring customers to submit to a BGC (free of charge) just to put a firearm on consignment at their store, they specifically stated that this was the advice of their attorney due to the very poor wording of the law, this screams of CYA. Some of the LGS I frequent say that the fee is capped at $10 for a private transfer, they won't do it because they figure it's not worth their time. They usually get $35 for a transfer fee, (FFL to FFL). Those are 3 specific issues with the law that I have heard.
__________________
NRA Lifetime Member Since 1999 "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials." George Mason Last edited by iraiam; July 24, 2013 at 11:43 AM. |
July 24, 2013, 12:04 PM | #6 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,059
|
Quote:
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
July 24, 2013, 12:18 PM | #7 |
Junior Member
Join Date: June 23, 2013
Posts: 12
|
The problem is, the gun is in the dealers possession, so they need to do a background check on the seller to be able to transfer it back to them.
What if, for some screwy reason, the seller also fails the check? |
July 24, 2013, 12:20 PM | #8 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 3,078
|
Quote:
|
|
July 24, 2013, 12:22 PM | #9 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,059
|
Quote:
Now, if the dealer has to keep the gun overnight, then it has to go on the books. A 4473 and background check are generally required to log it back out (to either party), which can be a problem if the original owner can't pass the check.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
July 24, 2013, 12:34 PM | #10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 21, 2013
Location: Metro Denver Colorado
Posts: 227
|
I dunno.
At gun shows you and your buyer go to an FFL who runs a check on the buyer. You give the gun to the FFL - then he runs the check. He holds it until the check is complete. If pass then the buyer pays you. You - or the buyer - pay the FFL for the BGC and the deal is done. I've never been involved in one wherein the buyer fails - but I'm sure its happened. Prior to July 1st I presume the FFL would just return the firearm to you as seller. Now it's entirely possible they'd have to run a BGC on you first. If you pawn a firearm they have to run a BGC before returning it to you. If you pawned a firearm with a magazine in excess of 15 rounds - as I understand it now - they can't return that magazine to you as they have taken possession of the firearm for the duration of the pawn. There is a "continuous possession" provision in the law.
__________________
"When the Going gets Weird the Weird Turn Pro" Hunter S. Thompson |
July 24, 2013, 12:48 PM | #11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 6, 2012
Location: Lakewood, CO
Posts: 1,057
|
A LICENSED GUN DEALER WHO OBTAINS A BACKGROUND CHECK
ON A PROSPECTIVE TRANSFEREE SHALL RECORD THE TRANSFER, AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 12-26-102,C.R.S., AND RETAIN THE RECORDS, AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 12-26-103,C.R.S., IN THE SAME MANNER AS WHEN CONDUCTING A SALE, RENTAL, OR EXCHANGE AT RETAIL.THE LICENSED GUN DEALER SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS, INCLUDING 18 U.S.C. SEC. 922, AS IF HE OR SHE WERE TRANSFERRING THE FIREARM FROM HIS OR HER INVENTORY TO THE PROSPECTIVE TRANSFEREE. Above is a copy/paste from the language of the bill that was signed into law. I bet most anyone can pick out the language that is the point of contention, have to do do it in "the same manner as retail", is very vague. I suspect it was made that vague on purpose in an attempt to snare dealers into violations.
__________________
NRA Lifetime Member Since 1999 "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials." George Mason |
July 24, 2013, 12:51 PM | #12 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 21, 2013
Location: Metro Denver Colorado
Posts: 227
|
The entirety of HB 1229 is here
Guidance to FFL's provided by the Colorado Bureau of Investigation is as follows - (Note that while many think that you can buy a Curio / Relic without a BGC - that's only true if the buyer holds a C&R permit. I've had sellers at Gun Shows tell me that there wouldn't be a check because it's a C/R.) If an FFL has received a denial on a background check requested pursuant to CRS 12-26.1-101 (i.e. on a transfer involving a firearm owned by a non-licensee), does the FFL have to request a background check on the owner of the firearm prior to returning it Although Colorado law does not require it, the FBI and BATF attorneys agree that federal law requires it. What if the prospective buyer and the non-licensed owner of the firearm are both denied? This is a situation that is occasionally encountered by FFL's in consignment situations. Attorneys for the BATF have recommended that you treat this situation as you would with a consignment. (Comment: Which is what?) Should an FFL collect a fee and conduct a check involving a non -licensed gun show vendor (seller) and a prospective buyer when the firearm is considered a curio or relic? Although Colorado law allows a non-licensed gun show vendor to transfer a curio or relic without a background check, federal law requires an FFL to conduct such a check if the transferee is not a licensed collector
__________________
"When the Going gets Weird the Weird Turn Pro" Hunter S. Thompson |
July 24, 2013, 12:53 PM | #13 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 21, 2013
Location: Metro Denver Colorado
Posts: 227
|
Quote:
__________________
"When the Going gets Weird the Weird Turn Pro" Hunter S. Thompson |
|
July 24, 2013, 01:03 PM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 6, 2012
Location: Lakewood, CO
Posts: 1,057
|
"AS IF HE OR SHE WERE TRANSFERRING THE FIREARM FROM HIS OR HER
INVENTORY TO THE PROSPECTIVE TRANSFEREE." AS IF? I Can't cay I would blame any LGS for opting out of this fiasco of a law.
__________________
NRA Lifetime Member Since 1999 "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials." George Mason |
July 24, 2013, 01:11 PM | #15 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,059
|
Quote:
I hate to sound like a jerk, but if I were in business in Colorado, I simply wouldn't do these checks at all.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
July 24, 2013, 01:16 PM | #16 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 21, 2013
Location: Metro Denver Colorado
Posts: 227
|
You don't sound like a jerk - you sound like a business owner making a rational decision.
There must be different issues in play than those at gun shows. We've had universal gun show BGC's for as long as I've been here and that system seems to work. Somebody must be doing P to P BGC's as CBI claims 171 or so have been done since the law went into effect 7/1/2013.
__________________
"When the Going gets Weird the Weird Turn Pro" Hunter S. Thompson |
July 24, 2013, 01:26 PM | #17 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 3,078
|
Quote:
Seriously - there's little reason for an FFL to perform these services if they bear any risk from the outcome. |
|
July 24, 2013, 01:28 PM | #18 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,059
|
Quote:
Ten bucks just doesn't cover the overhead and potential liability.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
July 24, 2013, 01:30 PM | #19 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 3,078
|
Quote:
|
|
July 24, 2013, 01:40 PM | #20 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 21, 2013
Location: Metro Denver Colorado
Posts: 227
|
I'll bet FtF transactions will take place between trusted individuals without a BGC just as they've always been done between criminals.
A simple system such as an online service by CBI in which you enter name address and drivers license number in order to get a go/no-go result would take care of all of this. Advertising that "I Check" would drive criminals away. But that's too easy.
__________________
"When the Going gets Weird the Weird Turn Pro" Hunter S. Thompson Last edited by LewSchiller; July 24, 2013 at 01:56 PM. |
July 24, 2013, 02:04 PM | #21 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Austin, CO
Posts: 19,578
|
Sounds like the dealers needs an agreement that all parties sign that says something like:
Dealer agrees to conduct NICS check on Purchaser B for sale of Firearm X from Seller A. Purchaser B understands that a denial from NICS will result in Dealer's inability to transfer the Firearm X to Purchaser B. Seller A understands that should Purchaser B be denied by NICS, Dealer will be required to conduct a NICS check on Seller A in order to transfer the Firearm X back to Seller A. Seller A agrees that should Seller A also be denied by NICS, Dealer will purchase Firearm X from Seller A for $Y The dealer should basically set the sale price at about 50% of the retail value. He gets good deals, in the rare event of a double denial, and he discourages sellers who know they would be denied from coming to him.
__________________
Nobody plans to screw up their lives... ...they just don't plan not to. -Andy Stanley |
July 24, 2013, 02:18 PM | #22 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 21, 2013
Location: Metro Denver Colorado
Posts: 227
|
That's one way - but he'd have to draft that...have it gone over by his legal counsel...have it signed...keep it on file forever and then run the BGC with all of its paperwork all... for $10.
__________________
"When the Going gets Weird the Weird Turn Pro" Hunter S. Thompson |
July 24, 2013, 03:34 PM | #23 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 7,523
|
Quote:
Quote:
Remember... Joe Ed may be prohibited from possessing a firearm for up to 2 years after violating CRS 18-12-112, effectively putting him out of the gun business. Speaking of being put out of the gun business, what if the gun is a Krieghoff Luger, and Joe Ed cleaned out his entire piggy bank paying the first half? I agree with Lew; if I were a CO FFL, I would find the CBI website statement regarding consignments to be cold comfort, as the CO Revised Statutes (presumably) don't address non-returnable consignments. If I were a CO FFL, I also wouldn't touch these transfers with the proverbial 3.05m pole. The risk-benefit analysis just doesn't stack up.
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak Last edited by carguychris; July 24, 2013 at 03:38 PM. Reason: minor reword... |
||
July 24, 2013, 03:46 PM | #24 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Austin, CO
Posts: 19,578
|
I don't see that happening. The negotiation for the price of the gun is completely separate. It's not like the dealer would say "Because this is a private sale and I can only charge you $10, I'm only going to pay you 50% of the fair price to make up for it." He's going to negotiate the price he's willing to pay for the gun, just like he negotiates the price of every other gun that he buys from a private party... which is probably little more than 50% of retail.
__________________
Nobody plans to screw up their lives... ...they just don't plan not to. -Andy Stanley |
July 24, 2013, 04:46 PM | #25 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 25, 2009
Posts: 566
|
It seems like this situation would be easier for all concerned if there were a way for a seller to run a background check on a buyer through an online service, perhaps even an app on a mobile device. Of course, following this line of thought, I would have to wonder why the ATF won't allow public access to their records of stolen firearms to reduce the number of stolen firearms being sold on the secondary market.
Because the boss likes holding all the cards, that's why. |
|
|