Sellers who require LTCH ???

[lordjackel]

The problem with "universal background checks" as proposed is that the govt ends up recording details on the participants in a transaction, not they it would help verify you are avoiding selling to a felon or person with known mental issues. Saying that people who want to see the LTCH are okay with universal background checks is just as accurate as saying those who don't want to see an LTCH are okay with selling to felons and the mentally disturbed.

That is where showing a LTCH provides a best compromise. So I do want to see an LTCH, but don't support universal checks and they are not the same thing. Keeping a private transaction private does not mean that you do not believe in due diligence.

Point noted...but to get the LTCH you had to have a background check done by the government, fingerprinted, etc. So by asking to see it, you are, in a way, relying on the government background check that approved the LTCH to begin with as your "Ok to sell"...otherwise why wouldn't just a DL be good enough to prove they live in the state if you don't really care about the person's background.

I guess it boils down to the question...how does you seeing my LTCH help you make a decision about selling to me? What does the LTCH mean to you that adds credibility to it...beyond the knowledge that I had a clear background check done when I received it?

No offense anyone...this question came up with some friends so playing devils advocate to understand the "why" behind asking for it at the personal selling level

 

[pudly]

THE ONLY requirements are that (regarding an INDIVIDUAL sale of a handgun or long-gun) is that
....
4) cannot be a felon or convicted of Domestic violence (can't remember the exact term). 5) Is not a illegal drug user or an Alcohol abuser. 6) Is sane, has not been commited to a mental institution. (I understand you cannot check this - but after a few minutes of conversation or communications you sure would week out the "crazies".

I guess it boils down to the question...how does you seeing my LTCH help you make a decision about selling to me? What does the LTCH mean to you that adds credibility to it...beyond the knowledge that I had a clear background check done when I received it?

No offense taken. However, I personally believe in the requirement as noted by LarryC. I don't think that I can judge a felon or all mental cases by a quick conversation. I agree that you can "get a bad feeling" about some, but I doubt I could catch even the majority of such people from a quick conversation. So no, it doesn't provide anything other than a best-effort to assure that I'm not contributing to the death or harm of someone else. If there was a better means to do this check privately, I'd be happy to do it.

Additional item: If it is really important to you that there is no paperwork on your gun ownership, including no LTCH, then you are just going to have to deal with the fact that there are some transactions you will be excluded from. If you are okay with having an LTCH in order to carry, then this really shouldn't be a problem anyway other than the OP's legitimate complaint about delays in issuing the license.

 

[Manatee]

Someone shows up with an LTCH and cash in one hand....and his wife's head in the other and it's OK?

The only safe way to do the transaction is to use an FFL. Anything short of that and you accept some possible civil liability. Even use of an FFL won't absolve you from defending yourself in court in a civil case.

If you own assets worth protecting, a private party transaction presents a risk. Whether the risk is worthwhile is up to you.

 

[jbrich]

I dont see anything wrong with asking for a DL or LTCH. One it proves that your an Indiana resident and two it shows that you have had a background check performed on you. It adds to the "peace of mind" factor and keeps you from a possible law violation as in selling to someone out of state. You really cant be to careful. Especially in this kind of political enviroment. Always CYA!!!

 

[lordjackel]

No offense taken. However, I personally believe in the requirement as noted by LarryC. I don't think that I can judge a felon or all mental cases by a quick conversation. I agree that you can "get a bad feeling" about some, but I doubt I could catch even the majority of such people from a quick conversation. So no, it doesn't provide anything other than a best-effort to assure that I'm not contributing to the death or harm of someone else. If there was a better means to do this check privately, I'd be happy to do it.

I dont see anything wrong with asking for a DL or LTCH. One it proves that your an Indiana resident and two it shows that you have had a background check performed on you. It adds to the "peace of mind" factor and keeps you from a possible law violation as in selling to someone out of state. You really cant be to careful. Especially in this kind of political enviroment. Always CYA!!!

Agree 100% with both comments...so we are saying because we want some level of protection, peace of mind, proof we followed the law, whatever you want to call it...we believe in background checks (AKA LTCH).

Since I too ask to see a person's LTCH I would have no issue with an instant (and free, non-recorded, non-FFL) background check system barring this seeing someone LTCH is the samething.

I get the points everyone makes when they say "no way to universal background checks" but we as the gun community in a way already do them (at least a lot of us and probably don't even realize it)

Personally I have no issue showing someone my LTCH for a firearm (to make everyone feel comfortable I am not a nut job) not to mention I have an LTCH and NFA items so there is no hiding for this boy from the government should they decide to do something stupid

 

[jgreiner]

I would require an LTCH to sell a gun to someone. At least then, I have made a good faith effort to sell it to a "proper" person.

 

[pudly]

I get the points everyone makes when they say "no way to universal background checks" but we as the gun community in a way already do them (at least a lot of us and probably don't even realize it)

I'll quibble with this statement. Universal background checks do two basic things: (a) provide some assurance (still imperfect) that you are selling to a proper person and (b) providing a govt record of the transaction. I'm okay with the first, but not the latter. I consider this check as part of being a responsible gun owner and realize precisely the implications including that I may not make a sale to someone who doesn't have or don't want to show an LTCH. I will always reject the statement that I'm in favor of UBCs. It is inaccurate and inflammatory.

 

[fallenangel1]

This is a fine line .. and I can see both sides .. and it is always up to the seller how they choose to handle their own transactions.

But...

The law states all that you need is (a drivers license) to prove residence and good faith that the buyer is legally able to purchase. But some people are taking it upon themselves to require more than the law requires. Saying that in order to buy from them you must PAY for a license and go through a 2, 3, 4, 5 or more month waiting period before they will sell to you. Basically adding restrictions that the government doesn't even have the power to enact even though the liberals are constantly trying!

What if any of you were pulled over or stopped out in public by a cop and they just decided to be on the safe side and search your car(s) and/or person(s) with no probable cause? The officer "just wanted to be safe" then he may take down all of your info and run it through the system "just to be sure" you weren't a trouble maker. The officer was acting towards the greater good and wanted to be sure criminals didn't enjoy the freedoms that the rest of us are afforded. How would you feel about him doing these things in a effort to keep criminals off the streets?

And I keep seeing this "it covers me, just in case ..." .. As long as the buyer doesn't outright say, "I probably couldn't pass a back ground check." Or something similar you are in the clear.

Either way I see if as adding more restrictions on top of the ones already in place. These extra restrictions serve no real purpose other than the seller saying that's what they want. Not to mention that if the govt told us that we HAD to do these checks 99% of us would be screaming foul and telling the govt to leave our freedoms alone!

 

[monitor51]

It has been mentioned several times, I do it for piece of mind. I don't know you and you don't know me. A felon can not get a LTCH. So if you have your LTCH you weren't a felon when it was issued. That doesn't mean this way of thinking isn't full of holes, but it is what I have for a FTF transaction.

It if far from perfect, but in my experience I find that people with their LTCH are decent very gun responsible folks. So, I don't know you, that little pink piece of paper can go a long way.

 

[GREEN607]

Agree 100% with both comments...so we are saying because we want some level of protection, peace of mind, proof we followed the law, whatever you want to call it...we believe in background checks (AKA LTCH).

Since I too ask to see a person's LTCH I would have no issue with an instant (and free, non-recorded, non-FFL) background check system barring this seeing someone LTCH is the samething.

I get the points everyone makes when they say "no way to universal background checks" but we as the gun community in a way already do them (at least a lot of us and probably don't even realize it)

Personally I have no issue showing someone my LTCH for a firearm (to make everyone feel comfortable I am not a nut job) not to mention I have an LTCH and NFA items so there is no hiding for this boy from the government should they decide to do something stupid

It truly surprises me, that the majority of responders here in this thread, are in favor of "asking for or requiring LTCH" for a private sale.....



..... when in the UBC poll thread here on INGO, 80% were fully against background checks as a further infringement on our 2A rights.

Go figure.

 

[fallenangel1]

It has been mentioned several times, I do it for piece of mind. I don't know you and you don't know me. A felon can not get a LTCH. So if you have your LTCH you weren't a felon when it was issued. That doesn't mean this way of thinking isn't full of holes, but it is what I have for a FTF transaction.

It if far from perfect, but in my experience I find that people with their LTCH are decent very gun responsible folks. So, I don't know you, that little pink piece of paper can go a long way.

True and I'm sure once I have my LCH I won't care one way or another. It's just the fact that I am being restricted in my purchasing for no real reason. Outside of the fact that the govt doesn't mind dragging it red taped feet and making us wait forever.

 

[pudly]

It truly surprises me, that the majority of responders here in this thread, are in favor of "asking for or requiring LTCH" for a private sale.....



..... when in the UBC poll thread here on INGO, 80% were fully against background checks as a further infringement on our 2A rights.

Go figure.

Apparently you didn't read my responses. There is a difference between UBC and a private seller asking for an LTCH. I think that difference is what surprises you.

 

[Rbadger]

I too am waiting on my LTCH. I have seen some of the deals available in the marketplace here and I wish the government would speed the process as well. That being said I FULLY agree with the seller requiring it before a sale. I think we are in to fragile a state with the current pending legislation to allow ourselves to become part of the problem by selling guns to someone who may use them for a nefarious purpose. The LTCH is just about the only tool we private citzens have to verify what type of background you have. Is it a perfect system? Of course not but it's better than nothing. I do like the idea someone had of taking the gun to an FFL and splitting the fee. I would even be willing to cover the cost myself since it is usually only about $25. I guess if you are really interested in a deal in the marketplace then offer to meet at any gun store nearby and offer to pay the FFL transfer fee.

 

[danbb]

What I would like to know, is for those who require a LTCH before a sale, and I'm still waiting for mine, and probably will be for several months, would most of you here be satisfied with seeing a receipt that shows I applied and paid the fee, and therefore, swore under threat of perjury that I am not prohibited from owning a gun? Or would you require the actual card as a confirmation of that?

 

[pudly]

Danbb- that would have to be an individual decision. Feel free to present that question to anyone that you want to deal with, but there is no requirement for them to accept it.

 

[GREEN607]

Apparently you didn't read my responses. There is a difference between UBC and a private seller asking for an LTCH. I think that difference is what surprises you.

I did read ALL of your responses. I just disagree with you..

Whether it's a Fed required UBC, or it's a private requirement of an LTCH, which is dependent on a background check..... it's just 2 different avenues to the same tube of Vaseline.... for our 2A rights.