"Gun show loophole" in NH?

[EcHo]

So this morning in my school paper there was an article about how there are "gun show loopholes" that allow prohibited persons to buy firearms. It was filled with your typical liberal anti-gun propaganda, and nothing would make me happier than to write a response (that would be published on Thursday) pointing out the flaws in the arguments made against gun shows. Basically, the author said the following:

1) Anyone can go to a MA gun show and buy guns because private sellers are not required to ask for ID or do a NICS check on the purchaser. This would allow for prohibited persons to buy guns.
2) Anyone can drive up to NH and buy guns at the gun shows since the private sellers there are not required to ask for ID or do a NICS check. This would allow for prohibited persons to buy guns.

Now while statement #1 is semi correct, it is not the full truth. Private sellers aren't required to do a NICS check but they have to look at the buyer's LTC/FID before carrying out the transaction. By law, only persons allowed to have firearms can have an LTC and if you become a prohibited person you will lose your LTC and therefore be unable to buy or own any more guns. This counter-point I'm confident in making because its correct.

Statement #2 on the other hand I can't so confidently refute. I know that residents of other states cannot buy firearms from private sellers in NH because federal law requires an FFL for interstate transfers. What is required for a FTF transfer in NH to legally take place? Is the seller required to verify the buyer lives in NH so they aren't breaking interstate sale of firearms laws? The author of the article claimed no ID is required so its very easy for non-residents to buy guns at gun shows. Is there any truth to that statement? Would any of you be able to direct me to the NH law that requires private sellers to check the residency/age of the buyers? Is a residency check all that is required?


Thanks

 

[vellnueve]

NH law does not allow anyone to sell a firearm privately unless they know the person personally or are reasonably sure that the person would not otherwise be prohibited from purchasing that firearm. I would imagine a quick check of the DL to ensure that they're an NH resident would be a reasonable check to ensure compliance with the residency requirement.

 

[strangenh]

NH law does not allow anyone to sell a firearm privately unless they know the person personally or [STRIKE]are reasonably sure that the person would not otherwise be prohibited from purchasing that firearm[/STRIKE]. I would imagine a quick check of the DL to ensure that they're an NH resident would be a reasonable check to ensure compliance with the residency requirement.

While the crossed-out bit gets the spirit of the RSA in question, the actual requirement is they be licensed under that chapter - i.e., the buyer must be personally known to the seller or have a NH "Pistol and Revolver License" (CCW license) or be a NH-licensed firearms dealer. And of course as you indicate, the Federal requirement of both being residents of the same state applies as well.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XII/159/159-14.htm

 

[upStomp]

I'd love to see this article. Can you scan and post it?

Also, you might want to mention FA-10's. Those still apply if either party is from MA.

 

[EcHo]

The article is online: http://dailycollegian.com/2010/02/16/how-a-umass-student-bought-a-gun-without-i-d/

 

[strangenh]

What a peculiar article.

On the one hand, it says of the seller:

"When he neglected to check my ID, he committed a federal felony."

Yet in the next paragraph it says the seller

"...was not required to check."

Obviously, the seller WAS required to tell if the person was not a resident of the seller's state, and didn't, either out of ignorance or intent. The seller committed a felony if he had "reasonable cause to believe [the buyer did] not reside in... the State in which the transferor resides".

Moreover, the buyer - the author - would have, under 18 USC 922 (a)(3), had he brought it into MA.

The writer confuses laws with education. Another law requiring the seller to do something the seller doesn't know about or intentionally will ignore isn't going to stop him. And the buyer... well why would it stop a buyer if it won't stop a seller?

NOTE the RSA cited in my previous response above applies to handguns; long guns do not require the buyer have a license or be personally known to the seller; however the federal law requiring same-state residency for a private transfer still applies.

 

[Kevlar]

The seller committed a felony.

Yup, under 18 U.S.C. 922(a)(5)

 

[strangenh]

I think if he brought it into MA, it would have been in violation of 18 U.S.C. 922(a)(4), but isn't he already in violation of 18 U.S.C.(a)(3)?

922(a)(4)? Did I miss that this was an SBS or DD? I believe the author only would have violated (a)(3) if he actually brought it back into MA (or otherwise received it there without one of the exceptions applying).

http://frwebgate5.access.gpo.gov/cg...SdocID=354682146778+0+1+0&WAISaction=retrieve

 

[cb1]

"I bought a double-barreled shotgun from another attendee for cash only. When he neglected to check my ID, he committed a federal felony"

How is this a loophole if it is already illegal? If the seller was willing to break the laws already on the books then the author of this article would likely still have been able to purchase the shotgun even if background checks were required. Criminals, by definition, do not follow the law. This one simply fact makes his entire argument irrelevant.

"I turned my weapon in to local police. I committed no crime."

If he did not have the proper license at the time he was in possession of that shotgun, then yes he did indeed commit a crime.

 

[The_Chuck88]

Yeah I saw this little article this morning too.
Going to write a response if I can find the time.

 

[Kevlar]

922(a)(4)? Did I miss that this was an SBS or DD? I believe the author only would have violated (a)(3) if he actually brought it back into MA (or otherwise received it there without one of the exceptions applying).

http://frwebgate5.access.gpo.gov/cg...SdocID=354682146778+0+1+0&WAISaction=retrieve

My mistake, you're absolutely right.

 

[bostonasphalt2]

"loophole" is a buzz wrd the media and gun grabbers came up with to scare people, A loophole is a way to circumvent the ,aw to accomplish something. Nothing here is a loophole, it is either a buyer or seller BREAKING A LAW THAT ALREADY EXISTS.

 

[bostonasphalt2]

I love the line in his trailer for his film, "I couldve gone ot prison for many years."

Why is he not already going t prison for attempting to illegally purchase a handgun?!? This little cockboy should be in prison IMHO.

 

[strangenh]

Another interesting point - NH came up as the origin for only about 11% of ATF "crime gun" traces for guns used in MA crimes in 2007, according to BATFE's own numbers. Heck, you can get the trace docs right from the Mayors against guns pages. http://mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/trace/atf_2007.shtml
That doesn't seem like they're such the hot item with Boston-area gangs, given NH is right next door.

 

[groundscrapers]

I wonder what the UMass dean of students would have to say about students openly committing crime. I believe those are reasons for dismissal from the school.

http://www.umass.edu/dean_students/contact/

or the president of umass.

http://www.massachusetts.edu/contactus.html

oooor the board of trustees.

http://www.massachusetts.edu/bot/members.html

 

[EcHo]

922(a)(4)? Did I miss that this was an SBS or DD? I believe the author only would have violated (a)(3) if he actually brought it back into MA (or otherwise received it there without one of the exceptions applying).

The student who wrote this article lives in NH, so had he brought the gun into MA he only would have been guilty of possession without an FID/LTC. I believe (a)(3) only applies if you go into another state to buy a gun from a private party and then return to your home state with it. Upon crossing state lines (a)(3) is violated.

I wonder what the UMass dean of students would have to say about students openly committing crime. I believe those are reasons for dismissal from the school.

Since no crime was actually committed by the student, I don't think anything will come of this.

 

[strangenh]

.

 

[groundscrapers]

Lol@ the facebook comments...

Alisha Allen: Damn dude did you read those comments??

Daniel Entrikin: Yeah. Those people came out of the woodwork from wacky pro-gun sites. They aren't at all right about the legal issues at hand.

 

[groundscrapers]

The student who wrote this article lives in NH, so had he brought the gun into MA he only would have been guilty of possession without an FID/LTC. I believe (a)(3) only applies if you go into another state to buy a gun from a private party and then return to your home state with it. Upon crossing state lines (a)(3) is violated.



Since no crime was actually committed by the student, I don't think anything will come of this.

I wouldn't be so sure bout him living in NH. If you hop on facebook and flip through his friends and do a little eStalking you can then discount all the umass amherst friends and start looking at the others and you will see a trend of friends from

Medfield Senior High School
www.medfield.net
24 Pound Street
Medfield, MA 02052-2698


So unless his family moved to nh as soon as he got out of HS he is still a MA resident.

 

[bostonasphalt2]

The student who wrote this article lives in NH, so had he brought the gun into MA he only would have been guilty of possession without an FID/LTC. I believe (a)(3) only applies if you go into another state to buy a gun from a private party and then return to your home state with it. Upon crossing state lines (a)(3) is violated.

In the trailer for "loophole" embedded in the article, he states he could not furnish a NH ID. While that in and of itself is not an indicator of not living in NH, it is the damned closest thing. I am not convinced he lives in NH whatsoever.

 

[EcHo]

I saw the line

Instead, I visit a gun show in my home state, and with an ID, purchase a gun in a private sale.

and that lead me to believe he lived in NH. However now as I re-read the article I see that line was proceeded by

Consider a hypothetical scenario:

So I guess while it is true that the "hypothetical" situation mentioned in this article could take place, the author still allowed a NH resident to break federal law by permitting the resident to sell him a shotgun. Is there any federal law about knowingly buying a gun from a private citizen of another state? Knowingly allowing another person to break federal law?

 

[EcHo]

does 18-922 (a)(9) say that anyone who resides in one state may not receive a firearm while in another state? Or does it say that any person who isn't a resident of any state (illegal immigrant?) may not receive firearms?

"It shall be unlawful ... for any person, other than a licensed importer, licensed
manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector, who does
not reside in any State to receive any firearms unless such
receipt is for lawful sporting purposes."

 

[groundscrapers]

Back to what I said before. Felony -> expulsion.

 

[EcHo]

Back to what I said before. Felony -> expulsion.

Was a felony actually committed? I don't see a federal/state law prohibiting the actions of the author. At least none that are clearly written enough for me to understand. Do you know of one?

 

[bostonasphalt2]

does 18-922 (a)(9) say that anyone who resides in one state may not receive a firearm while in another state? Or does it say that any person who isn't a resident of any state (illegal immigrant?) may not receive firearms?

It is a federal felony to purchase a handgun out of state. You need an FFL in your home state to receive the gun and transfer it to you. Long guns can be bought out of state, but an FA-10 must be filed within x time (7 days?) of returning to MA with the long gun.

 

[namedpipes]

So exactly what is the loophole? That he can break the law successfully?

Wouldn't a loophole be: "I did something that is against the law but in a way that I can't get in trouble?" I guess he did, since he is still walking the streets.

I'm not sure why some people think a face-to-face transaction at a gun show is any different than a face-to-face transaction conducted at the local PD or at Dunkin Donuts (well, Starbucks, I guess) or at your own home... If it WERE a loophole, would that make it a F2F loophole and not a gun show loophole?

The kid is loopy.

 

[EcHo]

It is a federal felony to purchase a handgun out of state. You need an FFL in your home state to receive the gun and transfer it to you. Long guns can be bought out of state, but an FA-10 must be filed within x time (7 days?) of returning to MA with the long gun.

So it is legal for me, a MA resident, to go to a private citizen in NH and purchase a rifle/shotgun from them? I know its illegal for them to transfer me the gun, but is it illegal for me to buy it? I also know that crossing the MA border with it is a felony since it wasn't purchased from an FFL.

 

[EcHo]

So exactly what is the loophole? That he can break the law successfully?

Wouldn't a loophole be: "I did something that is against the law but in a way that I can't get in trouble?" I guess he did, since he is still walking the streets.

I'm not sure why some people think a face-to-face transaction at a gun show is any different than a face-to-face transaction conducted at the local PD or at Dunkin Donuts (well, Starbucks, I guess) or at your own home... If it WERE a loophole, would that make it a F2F loophole and not a gun show loophole?

The kid is loopy.

He thinks the loophole is to following scenario:

A NH resident who is a convicted felon goes to a private seller and tries to buy a rifle/shotgun. The seller asks to see an ID to verify NH residency and age, and when these two things check out the seller sells the convicted felon the rifle/shotgun. Since the buyer is a NH resident, the seller is legally allowed to transfer the gun to them. If the felon isn't a NH resident then the seller has committed a crime by selling to a non-resident, but the buyer hasn't done anything wrong. That is the point the guy was trying to make.

 

[strangenh]

So it is legal for me, a MA resident, to go to a private citizen in NH and purchase a rifle/shotgun from them? I know its illegal for them to transfer me the gun, but is it illegal for me to buy it? I also know that crossing the MA border with it is a felony since it wasn't purchased from an FFL.

Talking only fed law here: In the sale, the onus is on the seller. In the receipt interstate, the onus is on the buyer. Basically, 18USC922 on private sales looks to direct the actions of whoever is in possession. The goal is to prevent the interstate transfer of firearms without an FFL involved.

Note that as a buyer, if you conspired with or tried to talk a NH resident into selling to you in violation of the fed law, you could still get brought up on charges of soliciting the commission of a felony, and other accessory-type charges, conspiracy, etc.

 

[strangenh]

He thinks the loophole is to following scenario:

A NH resident who is a convicted felon goes to a private seller and tries to buy a rifle/shotgun. The seller asks to see an ID to verify NH residency and age, and when these two things check out the seller sells the convicted felon the rifle/shotgun. Since the buyer is a NH resident, the seller is legally allowed to transfer the gun to them. If the felon isn't a NH resident then the seller has committed a crime by selling to a non-resident, but the buyer hasn't done anything wrong. That is the point the guy was trying to make.

The buyer would be a felon in possession, so, no, the buyer most certainly has done something wrong.