Private gun transfer limit

Philly3458

Philly3458

Joined
May 7, 2010
Messages
476
Likes
11
Feedback: 45 / 0 / 0
What is the risk if you transfer more than 4 firearms through the Efa10 process?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Is this something the state even enforces? Let's say you loose count and do 5 transfers?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I have heard that question several times and I keep wondering.

Just how do you loose count of something like this?
 
Philly3458 said:
Is this something the state even enforces? Let's say you loose count and do 5 transfers?
Click to expand...

How many people speed, don't stop at stop signs, etc. Do the police even enforce these laws?

Same sort of questions. People get away with lots of "crimes" without getting caught. Some do get caught and some of those are made into an example for others.

How lucky do you feel?

Also they aren't kidding about state officials (not the type who are gun owner's friends) do troll this forum for intel and some people have suffered for it.

I keep track of what I buy and sell for my own purposes (insurance, in case of any loss, etc.) which is not a bad idea. I know that if I sold x guns in a calendar year, I'd know which guns and could count how many of them were sold. YMMV
 
Len-2A Training said:
I keep track of what I buy and sell for my own purposes (insurance, in case of any loss, etc.) which is not a bad idea. I know that if I sold x guns in a calendar year, I'd know which guns and could count how many of them were sold. YMMV
Click to expand...

I do the same thing for pretty much the same reasons. If you know that there is a limit/restriction on what you can do, it is only prudent to find some way to insure that you keep within those limits.

End of story.
 
I dont like to sell guns. Each one I sell is one less than i have...

PS What do you have for sale? [smile]
 
Philly3458 said:
Is this something the state even enforces? Let's say you loose count and do 5 transfers?
Click to expand...

Jail not very realistic.... in the past CJIS used to detect this somehow and you'd get a nastygram in the mail from them.

-Mike
 
The funniest thing is people who buy & sell repeatedly in the classifieds here who are clearly either ignorant of this or too stupid to realize the mountain of evidence publicly available. I can see having trouble remembering if you did a sale in Dec or Jan and accidentally doing 5 transfers in Nov but having 8 posted transactions in March is a bit ridiculous.

And yes I know you can do transfers at an FFL but I know for a fact isn't the way it happened... I just find it funny that's all.
 
bigblue said:
The funniest thing is people who buy & sell repeatedly in the classifieds here who are clearly either ignorant of this or too stupid to realize the mountain of evidence publicly available. I can see having trouble remembering if you did a sale in Dec or Jan and accidentally doing 5 transfers in Nov but having 8 posted transactions in March is a bit ridiculous.

And yes I know you can do transfers at an FFL but I know for a fact isn't the way it happened... I just find it funny that's all.
Click to expand...

Most of the frequent flyers I know use an FFL for like 95% of their transfers. It makes life easier most of the time.

-Mike
 
drgrant said:
Most of the frequent flyers I know use an FFL for like 95% of their transfers. It makes life easier most of the time.

-Mike
Click to expand...

Agreed Mike.
What I'm referencing was a specific person that I wanted to buy something from and was flabbergasted that they didn't feel the need to go through an FFL after 8 sales.
 
drgrant said:
Jail not very realistic.... in the past CJIS used to detect this somehow and you'd get a nastygram in the mail from them.

-Mike
Click to expand...

Since 3/15 when they insisted that ALL transfers go thru electronically, it's very simple for their computer program to kick out the names of offenders and if they so desire, to send them to LE for prosecution. Whether or not their software can do this or whether they desire to flag and prosecute are entirely different questions.

I'd guess the odds of slipping by when it was paper and scanned in at FRB were probably a lot better.
 
No one has been caught yet but who wants to be first?
Just another stupid law to make criminals out of nothing. Why arbitrarily 4? How is 4 less scary and evil than 5? oh the humanity they sold 5 guns.
 
cfbackrow said:
why take the risk/draw attention to yourself to save $25-$30 is way beyond me
Click to expand...

Bc some thought that by doing per transfers they were somehow "sticking it to the man" and avoiding detection. Sorry that just makes me laugh.
 
Last edited:
FPrice said:
Just how do you loose count of something like this?
Click to expand...

"Did I sell five guns or only four?" Well to tell you the truth in all this excitement I kinda lost track myself. But being this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world and would blow your head clean off, you've gotta ask yourself one question: "Do I feel lucky?"
 
FPrice said:
Just how do you loose count of something like this?
Click to expand...

It's pretty easy to lose track if you unload a bunch of guns in a year and send some through FFLs and some via FTF.

-Mike

- - - Updated - - -

cfbackrow said:
why take the risk/draw attention to yourself to save $25-$30 is way beyond me
Click to expand...

In a lot of cases its easier to sell a non compliant handgun via a personal transfer than it is to move it through an FFL. FTFs also allow for meetups at bizarre times or locations, too. (for example, selling a gun on a Sunday... yeah there are dealers open, but not nearly as
many. )

-Mike
 
Len-2A Training said:
Since 3/15 when they insisted that ALL transfers go thru electronically, it's very simple for their computer program to kick out the names of offenders and if they so desire, to send them to LE for prosecution. Whether or not their software can do this or whether they desire to flag and prosecute are entirely different questions.

I'd guess the odds of slipping by when it was paper and scanned in at FRB were probably a lot better.
Click to expand...

The people I encountered that got nastygrams got them long before E-FA-10 was even in regular use. These guys forgot and went one or two over. Nothing ever came out of it other than a letter from CHSB/CJIS.

Someone /could/ get prosecuted for it but the whole S128A/B stuff is a huge mess. I doubt a DA would push the issue unless it was a part of something larger. A fun example is think of all the numbskulls who probably erroneously use the E-FA-10 system. For example if a retard sells 7 stripped AR lowers and E-FA-10s each one CJIS's script thinks he broke the law but the reality is no such thing happened. In order to actually prosecute someone they have to prove it was actually a firearm under MGL and they also have to prove that the method of transfer was actually illegal. That's a lot of work to nail a one-off.

If I was going to make a WAG, CJIS probably doesn't report this stuff to a DA/LE unless there's a rampant pattern of abuse with it. Otherwise they'd be crapflooding the DAs with trash, considering the amount of people who probably go over 1 or 2 by accident, or the amount of people who use the system improperly. Years ago I heard an account of a guy who routinely -intentionally- abused the system getting a visit from the cops after which point he supposedly "went obedient" and they never bothered him again, supposedly he did it for years before anyone bitched about it. (My guess is that the Romney/Pre-Guida era had a lot less auditing going on because the people running the show weren't obsessed with hating gun owners. That particular account though I heard third hand and could never independently verify with the "accused" so its nothing more than an anecdote, really.

Not sure if its happened in the recent past but years ago I did a lot of scouring of gun law cases that were at least searchable, and I've never seen a single one with a 128A/B charge on it. I would bet that this was because the burden of proving an illegal transfer is probably too great.

Also might be just a hunch, but I would bet that CJIS is more likely to rat someone out to the feds if they see a lot of so called "illegal" transfers. It strikes me that its far easier for the feds to bag (or threaten) someone operating as a dealer w/o a license then it is to wail someone on a 128A/B violation. Hell I bet most of the DAs don't even truly understand much about S128A/B. (the wording in these two sections is absolutely 110% horrendous, and depending on how you dice them up and interpret them you can probably get a few different interpretations of the law. ) Even way back when Scriv was around here we would have 128A/B threads and he was mostly silent about it. My guess is there's a lot of backdoors/interpretations/strategy there that are beneficial to his practice and he didn't want to kill the goose that laid the golden egg by airing out the methodology in public. To say that S128A/B has a massive "swiss cheese factor" to it is an understatement. [laugh]

-Mike
 
Last edited:
I can tell you that Guida's predecessor definitely hates the idea of private citizen gun owners. He computerized the database back in 1997-8 before the actual law change. Prior to that, it was all paper in boxes and nobody knew who filed how many forms. Unsure if the 1st computerization could spit out those reports either.
 
On FB i witnessed a dumbass claim he had done 12 transfers efa10 "they dont keep track, blah blah" idiots, give them reasons to restrict us more.. ****ing pay 25$ for a transfer since you want to be an ffl anyway and learn from the inside of one
 

Similar threads

  • Locked
Private Sales Are Still GTG This post can be removed
2
Replies
30
Views
590
drgrant
drgrant
Glock Mass. portal transfer still ok with new Law?
2
Replies
35
Views
808
MAJoe
M
Legality of buying a private sale out of state
Replies
29
Views
833
M1911
M1911
Healey Suspends Enforcement of Long Gun Roster
14 15 16
Replies
459
Views
16K
pastera
pastera
  • Locked
According to new law even the pre 2016 (and post 94) Assault rifles wont be able to be privately transferred?
Replies
12
Views
1K
drgrant
drgrant
Back
Top Bottom