"Gun show loophole" in NH?

[Kevlar]

The SELLER is in violation of 18 U.S.C. 922(a)(5), but I can't find a federal statute that puts the PURCHASER in violation.

Is the buyer in violation of 27 C.F.R. 478.29a?

Title 27: Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms
PART 478—COMMERCE IN FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION
Subpart C—Administrative and Miscellaneous Provisions

§ 478.29a Acquisition of firearms by nonresidents.

No person, other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector, who does not reside in any State shall receive any firearms unless such receipt is for lawful sporting purposes.

[T.D. ATF–363, 60 FR 17451, Apr. 6, 1995]

 

[EcHo]

.

 

[strangenh]

I don't know where you got that language, but none of those sections actually say what you state.

A person may only acquire a firearm within the person’s own State, except that he or she may purchase or otherwise acquire a rifle or shotgun, in person, at a licensee’s premises in any State, provided the sale complies with State laws applicable in the State of sale and the State where the purchaser resides. A person may borrow or rent a firearm in any State for temporary use for lawful sporting purposes.

[18 U.S.C. 922(a)(3) and (5), 922(b)(3), 27 CFR 478.29 and 478.30]

At the very least he falls under the section of illegal possession in ma as he doesn't have a fid or ltc.

 

[strangenh]

A criminal background check would stop the sale.

As would have checking your ID. You conflate legal requirements with physical barriers. No new legal requirement will "stop" the sale once the parties are bent on breaking the law. What will work is if law enforcement more vigorously investigated dealers' reports of unlawful attempts to buy. Meanwhile, read the papers - felon in possession charges are not prosecuted or penalized nearly to the extent they could be, and are thus little, if any, deterrent to the very kinds of criminals one would not want in possession.

 

[Wildweasel]

I don't know where you got that language, but none of those sections actually say what you state.

From the ATF FAQ page. I guess they don't know what they are saying once again eh?

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/unlicensed-persons.html#gca-unlicensed-acquire

 

[Horrible]

Tis I! The masked man himself. Coincidentally, I asked about this very gun show on this forum.

I liked the letter to the editor. I encourage you to send it. I could maybe talk to Collegian staff about printing it. You bring up some valid points. I'd re-iterate my point about the over-21 Virginia man with a .38 on my campus. If he is charged with a felony, he can still buy the same handgun at a show in his home state. A criminal background check would stop the sale. His knowledge that he is a prohibited person will not stop the sale. To allow that sale to take place is wrong. His possession of the firearm after the fact would be illegal, but I'd rather not cross my fingers he's arrested in another traffic stop.

Hmmm. This is what we call free will. If someone is hell-bent on breaking the law, they are going to do it. Enacting new laws will not stop this occurance. This has been proven over and over again in MA.
http://www.northeastshooters.com/vb...man-accused-of-trying-to-pull-gun-on-officers

The only alternative to stopping this type of activity is to take away the free will of people (i.e. - not allow people to drive cars b/c they could go down to DownTown crossing and mow a bunch of people down with their vehicle. Or not allow people to play softball b/c they could use that Easton bat to pound someone's brains out). So the real alternative is to become a state where people's every move is tracked and all freedoms are sacraficed in the name of safety. Is this the society we really want to PROGRESS toward?

 

[strangenh]

From the ATF FAQ page. I guess they don't know what they are saying once again eh?

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/unlicensed-persons.html#gca-unlicensed-acquire

ATF guidance is not statutory, not itself regulatory, nor would it be useful in a case other than by the defense. In the FAQ cited, the assumption is that acquisition takes the real-world course - the person acquires it out of state and takes it home. Not acquires it and dumps it without leaving the foreign state. However, we're discussing what the writer of the op-ed did. I think he may have broken the law, but you're not citing one of the statutory provisions he actually may have broken.

Have a look at 18 U.S.C. 2.

 

[namedpipes]

Somehow I think any of *US* buying a handgun in another state and ditching it would get prosecuted.

 

[strangenh]

Somehow I think any of *US* buying a handgun in another state and ditching it would get prosecuted.

Under 18 USC 2, perhaps. Not under 18 USC 922(a)(3) or (5), or even 27 CFR 478.29 and 478.30 -- except by way of 18 USC 2.

 

[Wildweasel]

§ 478.29 IS the item referenced by the ATF in the link I first posted, as written where I found the copy of the law, His saving grace appears to be in not transporting it across the state line.
(where he would have been in conflict with mass state law and fed at that time. ) SO yes I will agree with you on that one Strangenh. Thanks for making me look it up.. lol

 

[EcHo]

Tis I! The masked man himself. Coincidentally, I asked about this very gun show on this forum.

I liked the letter to the editor. I encourage you to send it. I could maybe talk to Collegian staff about printing it. You bring up some valid points. I'd re-iterate my point about the over-21 Virginia man with a .38 on my campus. If he is charged with a felony, he can still buy the same handgun at a show in his home state. A criminal background check would stop the sale. His knowledge that he is a prohibited person will not stop the sale. To allow that sale to take place is wrong. His possession of the firearm after the fact would be illegal, but I'd rather not cross my fingers he's arrested in another traffic stop.

Enjoying the discussion I've prompted. Admittedly, the legal language relevant to much of this is pretty murky. Check out the 'known persons' clause on private NH sellers.

Cheers,
Daniel Entrikin

Check out 18 USC 2b: it prohibits you from willfully causing an act to be done which violates federal law. I would greatly appreciate you speaking with Collegian staff to get this printed, I think it would be doing the students of this University a great disservice to not get the other side of the story.

 

[ChargingCharlie]

Tis I! The masked man himself. Coincidentally, I asked about this very gun show on this forum.

I liked the letter to the editor. I encourage you to send it. I could maybe talk to Collegian staff about printing it. You bring up some valid points. I'd re-iterate my point about the over-21 Virginia man with a .38 on my campus. If he is charged with a felony, he can still buy the same handgun at a show in his home state. A criminal background check would stop the sale. His knowledge that he is a prohibited person will not stop the sale. To allow that sale to take place is wrong. His possession of the firearm after the fact would be illegal, but I'd rather not cross my fingers he's arrested in another traffic stop.

Enjoying the discussion I've prompted. Admittedly, the legal language relevant to much of this is pretty murky. Check out the 'known persons' clause on private NH sellers.

Cheers,
Daniel Entrikin

Your logic is very misguided. As others have mentioned...one who has no care for the law will find another way to break it and acquire guns without private sales. In MA a person selling a firearm privately must take down the buyers information along with their LTC or FID number and submit an FA-10 to the firearms record bureau. Perhaps this is why you didn't bother to try your "study" in the state you reside in? If your idea of banning private sales were to happen in MA, I can tell you without a doubt, that it would only cause a chain reaction of MORE illegal sales. In MA an FFL cannot sell a handgun that isn't on the approved roster even if it was legally acquired by the person wishing to sell it. So, if you ban private sales, one who owns one of these firearms can absolutely, positively NEVER sell it in or out of their own state. Instead of arguing back and forth with you I will ask you to go to this site http://gunfacts.info/ and download the PDF they offer for free. It debunks just about everything the Brady Campaign states and everything in it is backed up with references.

 

[namedpipes]

. . . You bring up some valid points. . . . . Daniel Entrikin

That's interesting. You made it quite clear on your facebook page that "those gun whackos" didn't have any idea about the law, that you had nothing to worry about. Perhaps if you are so "open minded" you would clarify some of the questions. Are you a NH resident or MA? At what PD did you turn in the gun? Did you TRY to purchase other guns, perhaps even handguns, before you bought the shotgun? Did you ever bring it back to Mass?

My guess is though, that like most trolls, you'll swagger away and tell your buddies how those guns nuts are on the run now you've exposed the "loophole"...

 

[BerkshireHunter]

Good job EcHo, I saw your OpEd in the Collegian today. It took up almost a quarter of a page and did a nice job of correcting Entrikin's gross mistakes. From a student too lazy to write in himself, thanks!

-BH

 

[EcHo]

Good job EcHo, I saw your OpEd in the Collegian today. It took up almost a quarter of a page and did a nice job of correcting Entrikin's gross mistakes. From a student too lazy to write in himself, thanks!

-BH

I do my best to correct the biased "facts" presented by the liberal extremists around here. By this point in my college career I'm too fed up with all the liberal crap around this school to let it go unchallenged. Depending how the editor is feeling on Thursday, you'll get to read about why we should be allowed to carry on campus. Mr. Entrikin wrote another misinformed article in the "Point-Counter-Point" section last week supporting the ban of CCW on campus. The guy who was "supporting" our rights and presenting the counter-point didn't do a very good job, so I thought I'd step in.

The funny thing was that The Collegian offered to set me up as a regular columnist or floating contributor after I submitted that piece that appeared today. Maybe there's hope for this paper after all...


Full article can be found at the following link, for those of you who aren't located in this town

http://dailycollegian.com/2010/02/21/laws-dont-stop-criminals/

 

[crazymjb]

As soon as I actually take care of getting my own LTC I plan to try to restart the Students for Concealed Carry group here and will need a lot of help. I figure it's senseless to actually put effort in starting it back up when I am not even 21 yet, and when I am going have to probably put a fair bit of effort into getting my license in my town of residence. If any of you guys want to start it up sooner Ill throw my support in 100%. I heard the last leader was bullied into pretty much closing shop by administration. I understand it is state legislation, but we have to start somewhere. Would be especially fitting given the current trend many gun control laws are following. This will be especially true of H2259 passes as well as if a decision from the Chicago case comes down in our favor.


Mike

 

[EcHo]

As soon as I actually take care of getting my own LTC I plan to try to restart the Students for Concealed Carry group here and will need a lot of help. I figure it's senseless to actually put effort in starting it back up when I am not even 21 yet, and when I am going have to probably put a fair bit of effort into getting my license in my town of residence. If any of you guys want to start it up sooner Ill throw my support in 100%. I heard the last leader was bullied into pretty much closing shop by administration. I understand it is state legislation, but we have to start somewhere. Would be especially fitting given the current trend many gun control laws are following. This will be especially true of H2259 passes as well as if a decision from the Chicago case comes down in our favor.


Mike

I'll jump on the bandwagon to help any pro-gun groups on this campus, but don't count on them getting too far. This past semester I tried to start an air rifling team here and the school would have none of it. They refuse to answer calls and emails regarding the issue as well. Typical liberal extremists....they're all for open mindedness and new ideas unless you disagree with them.

 

[Scrivener]

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

Which is precisely why the Great Gun Show Loophole is a fraud; a mendacity used by liiars to scare the ignorant.

 

[crazymjb]

I'll jump on the bandwagon to help any pro-gun groups on this campus, but don't count on them getting too far. This past semester I tried to start an air rifling team here and the school would have none of it. They refuse to answer calls and emails regarding the issue as well. Typical liberal extremists....they're all for open mindedness and new ideas unless you disagree with them.

Yea I was following that. I don't get it. How can a college that started out as an agriculture school not even allow an air rifling team to start up? Other schools in the metro areas have handgun teams.

I would honestly say I would be very surprised if I see carry on campus before my kids are in college (so hopefully a long way out considering I don't have kids yet). However, it is important to keep these issues front and center and not let them get washed away.

Mike