gun show loop hole

[BigMatt]

Follow the money? FFLs aren't required to charge you a transfer fee.

Couldn't a new BGC law require a fee for each call in? How are they going to pay for a 40% increase in 4473's without some sort of fee?

 

[netsecurity]

At gun shows anyone can rent a table and sell their goods. FFL dealers must run background checks just as they do in their brick and mortar store. If a private collector rents a booth he/she does not run background checks just as anyone would not when selling through a private transaction. In my opinion the only way to close the "loophole" is to require gun registration. Then all sales would have to go through a FFL dealer for the required background checks and we would have to pay for this. I also don't care for the fact that the govt will be keeping a database of any firearms I might own. All of this nonsense would not of prevented what happened in Connecticut so it really pi$$es me off. It's so obvious that the Democrats are taking advantage of this horrible situation in order to push there anti-gun agenda.

If Dems were interested in just fixing this at gun shows, as the name "gun show loophole" clearly implies, then I would be fine with that. But all they are really interested in is universal registration (and eventual confiscation as the end game, even if it isn't in our lifetime).

Note that doing an FFL transfer, which is what they want, goes far beyond just a NICS check, and involves the 4473 file with names, addresses, and serial numbers--and they want this info added to a central database, and not just stored on paper at gun shops as it is now.

 

[NathanJefferson]

If Dems were interested in just fixing this at gun shows, as the name "gun show loophole" clearly implies, then I would be fine with that. But all they are really interested in is universal registration (and eventual confiscation as the end game, even if it isn't in our lifetime).

Note that doing an FFL transfer, which is what they want, goes far beyond just a NICS check, and involves the 4473 file with names, addresses, and serial numbers--and they want this info added to a central database, and not just stored on paper at gun shops as it is now.

If that's all they want to do, according to the way it's often described, they have the laws on the books to do so already. If you are 'in the business' and doing it for profit you are a dealer and they could start cracking down on people.

But, that isn't what they want. They want universal BGC on ALL private sales so they have the data in their database. It is the first step to registration. Which is the first step in...

So what if there is a law that says they have to delete NICS data daily, but before then it is shared with other agencies and there isn't any law saying those other agencies have to delete it. Besides, since when has anyone in the .gov cared about laws?

 

[williamsburg]

They aren't required to charge a fee, but as a business owner would you want your (or your staff) time overseeing your business or donating your time to oversee the business of others.

Also, who is required to hold paperwork if the gun shop is doing the background check? Are they also eventually going to be responsible then for checking the the serials on these non-customers' guns to see if they were reported stolen or not?

Depending on how this is implemented, this is just as big (or bigger) of a headache for FFLs than it is for private joe schmoe who wants to sell his gun.

My local dealer told me right now he charges $10.00 for a transfer. He said if it went through with "all sales thru FFL" he would have to raise that. He
said he would have man hours involved with everything from the check to records keeping.
Also he said there may also be the fact that sales taxes are possible with this too. Of course we here already have to pay the state $10.00 for thier background check on top of everything else.

 

[MrsGungho]

My local dealer told me right now he charges $10.00 for a transfer. He said if it went through with "all sales thru FFL" he would have to raise that. He
said he would have man hours involved with everything from the check to records keeping.
Also he said there may also be the fact that sales taxes are possible with this too. Of course we here already have to pay the state $10.00 for thier background check on top of everything else.

there is no state background check

 

[williamsburg]

So what if there is a law that says they have to delete NICS data daily, but before then it is shared with other agencies and there isn't any law saying those other agencies have to delete it. Besides, since when has anyone in the .gov cared about laws?

Exactly.

there is no state background check

I live in TN. We have the state ran TICS here. It's all about $$$. They still use the NICS but use the TN system.

 

[MrsGungho]

Exactly.



I live in TN. We have the state ran TICS here. It's all about $$$. They still use the NICS but use the TN system.

gotcha. IN does not have a state check so I was a tad confused

 

[indiucky]

just what is the gun show loophole?/QUOTE]

It's what some would call "The 10th Amendment." (I think that's the one.)

"Congress shall pass no law regarding intrastate commerce.". Gun Grabbers call it "The Gun Show Loophole." It's easier to give up that when you word it like that.

 

[BlueEagle]

It just ticks me off that I have to involve a third party in a two-person transaction. And how are family heirlooms going to work then...will every generation have to pay $20 more on each heirloom rifle/shotgun? Give it another few generations, and those weapons will have more money put into them than some new rifles!

 

[achilles]

I have a feeling the use of gun trusts will start ramping up dramatically if any of BO's nonsense starts to get traction.

 

[gklatv]

I trully believe that universal BGC would mean a mandatory registration with all sub-intended consequences Eventually.

 

[rnmcguire]

You can't rationalize with irrational people. If gun owners give an inch the anti-gun folks will take a mile. I'm not ok with anymore laws period. This country needs less laws not more as our forefathers intended it. Repeat after me........WE ARE FREE MEN!!! The govt should fear the people not the other way around. The Constitution has already been trampled on and it's time for law abiding citizens of this country to push back against the progressives trying to change the core of our nation. If they don't like what America is founded upon I urge them to find another place to live.

 

[Titanium Man]

Liberals don't like it when law abiding citizens can sell to one another, in a centralized gathering place.

 

[SERparacord]

Close the loop hole. *runs off to INGO ads to buy more guns*

 

[JettaKnight]

Ready for a Federal Firearm Owner's ID?

Which is worse:
Making ALL transactions go to a dealer and filing a F4473 or having a each firearm owner/purchaser apply for a FOID that is to be validated during all sales.

Here's how it works: Bob wants to buy my gun. I take Bob's FOID, make a call to WV, "Hi, I'm selling a long gun to Bob Robertson, FOID #54291-12".
"OK, he's clear, proceed"
Bob hands me $8000 and I hand Bob an AR.

FOID:
1. It's a required federal license
2. May involve application fees / renewal fees
3. Replaces F4473
4. Allows all people to instantly validate the buyer

F4473:
1. Requires are dealer (FFL01)
2. Dealers maintain records of sales
3. Extends current system
4. All transfers require instant check

Two issues about an FOID that kills it:
1. There's no licensed "supervisor" like a dealer to be responsible for making a phone call, because I'm way too stupid to do it myself.
2. There no way to trace firearms unless you told the operator the make, model, S/N, and she records it in a fed. dB.

One thing that's pretty realistic, if FTF deals are nixed, expect a whole lot of BATFE stings to happen.

 

[mullebarap]

On a federally mandated background check for intrastate person to person sales, this is the problem: The Constitution authorizes the Federal government to "regulate interstate commerce." This is the basis for most/all of our Federal gun laws.

A person-to-person sale of a firearm within a state is NOT interstate commerce. This means that such a federal requirement necessitates Constitutional amendment. This issue has more to do with the 10th Amendment than the 2nd Amendment. Without Constitutional amendment, Federal requirements for intrastate person to person sales is not legal.