Question about Amish...

[sepe]

I was at Walmart getting an oil change and looking at the sporting goods section. There was an Amish guy there trying to buy a shotgun. He was told they weren't allowed to sell him a firearm because his state ID didn't have his picture. What is the rule on that? He mentioned that he had bought at that Walmart in the past using that same ID card with no picture. That is something I've never heard of and I've been at several shops picking up different things while an Amish person was buying shotguns.

 

[IndyMonkey]

Let him make a gun out of wood.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

That's the downside of having a religious objection to having your picture taken. Get the proper ID and come back or work around the problem some other way. He shouldn't be able to vote, either, without his picture on his ID.

 

[Cwood]

That's the downside of having a religious objection to having your picture taken. Get the proper ID and come back or work around the problem some other way. He shouldn't be able to vote, either, without his picture on his ID.

Discriminate much?

 

[IndyMonkey]

Discriminate much?

Do you still drive them around in the van?

 

[sepe]

lol I don't think he was one of the talented Amish. He definitely wasn't one of the smarter ones. He kept asking if he would be able to use a slug on a rabbit and if he'd have much meat left. He asked the guy at the counter twice and asked me once. He also asked if he'd be able to use 12g slugs in the 20g he wanted. I think he was one of the Amish men that has to stay inside the house with the children.

 

[Cwood]

Do you still drive them around in the van?

I was fired for cussing!

 

[sepe]

That's the downside of having a religious objection to having your picture taken. Get the proper ID and come back or work around the problem some other way. He shouldn't be able to vote, either, without his picture on his ID.

I did tell him that if he didn't want to get a picture ID, he should watch auction listings or watch classifieds and do a face to face.

 

[IndyMonkey]

Discriminate much?

If that happened to me I would push them all down and take their money on the last day. Bunch of non fighting sissys.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Discriminate much?

Excuse me? I believe the law says you need to provide proper identification purchase a weapon. If you don't produce the proper identification, you can't purchase the weapon. Same applies to voting. Has nothing to do with "discrimination" (although I suppose it _is_ discrimination in the sense of choosing between two courses of action).

Just because some other place chose not to enforce the law, doesn't mean this place should do so. I can respect most people's religious convictions, but there are consequences that go with obeying your religious convictions and this is a downside to the Amishman's convictions, apparently.

 

[Cwood]

Excuse me? I believe the law says you need to provide proper identification purchase a weapon. If you don't produce the proper identification, you can't purchase the weapon. Same applies to voting. Has nothing to do with "discrimination" (although I suppose it _is_ discrimination in the sense of choosing between two courses of action).

Just because some other place chose not to enforce the law, doesn't mean this place should do so. I can respect most people's religious convictions, but there are consequences that go with obeying your religious convictions and this is a downside to the Amishman's convictions, apparently.

Its a recognized religion in the USA, they have a religious belief against pictures, they are afforded that right and not to be discriminated against when trying to exercise their second amendment right along with their right to vote.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Its a recognized religion in the USA, they have a religious belief against pictures, they are afforded that right and not to be discriminated against when trying to exercise their second amendment right along with their right to vote.

I understand your point. I don't particularly agree with it, but I understand it, especially the Second Amendment comment. I don't have a problem with the Amishman and his religion, however, this isn't just about his religion. I doubt the ATF cares particularly about his religion, but let the store owner be caught disobeying the regs and guess who gets penalized?

We are all bound, to an extent, by laws, even if we don't agree with them. That was my point.

 

[Cwood]

What exactly does the ATF reg state regarding ID? I am not up to speed on it.

I am not saying that an Amish person nor a store owner should break a law. But if that law is discriminatory against someone religious belief then the law in unconstitutional!

 

[OneBadV8]

What exactly does the ATF reg state regarding ID? I am not up to speed on it.

I am not saying that an Amish person nor a store owner should break a law. But if that law is discriminatory against someone religious belief then the law in unconstitutional!

So would that mean we need to get an amish guy to buy a machinegun to repeal the NFA '34, GCA '68 and FOPA '86 ?



I'll pitch in...

 

[Cemetery-man]

Amish don't need the retail stores. Just go to the swap meets and see how many are there buying guns. They may have to pay more but there it's cash and carry, no ID required.

 

[rhart]

Originally Posted by Cwood
What exactly does the ATF reg state regarding ID? I am not up to speed on it.

It says valid goverment issued photo identification. (or at least it did when I was in the biz a few years ago)

 

[451_Detonics]

Simple enough...

It is their choice to not have a photo ID, however it means that some other rights might have to be amended. I do not agree with this but until the law is changed the clerk was right.

 

[Expat]

Wow, between this thread and the one about Amish Poop, I never realized the level of anti-Amishness alive in the world.

 

[451_Detonics]

I am not anti-Amish...I am just saying the law is the law whether I agree with it or not.

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]ATF Rul. 2001-5[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) has received numerous inquiries from Federal firearms licensees (FFLs) regarding the acceptance of identification documents that do not show the purchaser's current residence address. FFLs have asked whether they may accept other documents, such as tax bills or vehicle registration documents, to establish the current residence address of the purchaser.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] It has been ATF's longstanding position that licensees may accept a combination of documents to establish the identity of a firearm purchaser. ATF Rul. 79-7, ATFQB 79-1, 26, interpreted a licensee's obligation to obtain satisfactory identification from a purchaser in the manner customarily used in [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]commercial transactions, pursuant to the existing regulations under the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA). The ruling held that satisfactory identification of a firearms purchaser must include the purchaser's name, age or date of birth, place of residence, and signature. The ruling also held that while a particular document may not be sufficient to meet the statutory requirement for identifying the purchaser, any combination of documents that together disclosed the required information would be acceptable.[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] ATF Rul. 79-7 has been superseded by an amendment to the GCA. The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (Brady Act), which took effect in 1994, mandated the use of photo identification documents for transfers subject to the Act. Under the permanent provisions of the Brady Act, which went into effect on November 30, 1998, a licensed importer, manufacturer, or dealer is generally required to initiate a background check through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) prior to transferring a firearm to an unlicensed individual. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] The Brady Act requires a licensee to identify the nonlicensed transferee by examining a valid government-issued identification document that contains the photograph of the holder. See 18 U.S.C. 922(t)(1)(C). This requirement applies to all over-the-counter transfers, even where the transferee holds a [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]permit that qualifies as an exception to the requirement for a NICS check at the time of transfer. 27 CFR 178.124(c)(3)(i).[/FONT][/FONT]

) the name, address, and date of birth appearing on a valid
identification document (as defined in section 1028(d)(1) (!4))
of the transferee containing a photograph of the transferee and a
description of the identification used;

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Wow, between this thread and the one about Amish Poop, I never realized the level of anti-Amishness alive in the world.

That's sort of like saying that if I don't like 1911s, I must hate guns and gun owners...

Despite the knee-jerk "discrimination" remark made about me earlier, my initial comment had not much to do with the Amishman's choice of religion and lifestyle. He is as free to choose those things as the rest of us. Nor can it be said that I look down on him as a minority; I don't. This was as much about the seller following the law as anything else.

It's the same way with some Islamic women wanting to wear the full Burka for their Drivers License ID pictures. If their faces are covered up, how can you tell if they are who they say they are? The same applies to someone without a picture ID. If some sort of picture ID is required to validate the identity of a firearms buyer, the firearm is sold at the seller's peril.

How many times have I seen someone wanting to sell a firearm on this forum say: FTF, drivers license and LTCH? Would _you_ sell a firearm to someone in black clothing with a beard who _said_ he was Amish?