"Private sales" at gun shows ...

Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
150
Likes
15
Location
Ludlow, MA USA
Any ideas about the percentages of firearms at gun shows that are offered by private sellers versus FFLs? I'm guessing that this may vary significantly from state to state.

I would guess that FFLs would account for a disproportionate amount of inventory at gun shows, but that if you counted just sellers, private sellers might account for a larger percentage of sellers than firearms sold.

I understand that 17 states require instant background checks for private transactions.

Is there a good thread for law and actual practices for gun shows state-by-state?

I am confused also about whether FFLs have to background check AND 4473 (document) the transfer of every firearm, no matter the state where the gun show is located, and no matter if the buyer has the equivalent of an LTC for that state.

There is a mountain of misinformation and misunderstanding out there on these topics, but I'm betting it's been boiled down concisely in a thread here ...
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 6, 2013
Messages
3,009
Likes
668
Location
Near Worcester
*** Update Question already answered in Post #6 below

FFLs cannot transfer without 4473, gun show or not, regardless of state.
so this wikipedia article is wrong?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_show_loophole#Background


In 1986, Congress passed the Firearm Owners Protection Act (FOPA), which relaxed certain controls in the GCA and permitted licensed firearm dealers to conduct business at gun shows.[SUP][nb 1][/SUP] Specifically, FOPA made it legal for FFL holders to make private sales, provided the firearm was transferred to the licensee's personal collection at least one year prior to the sale. Hence, when a personal firearm is sold by an FFL holder, no background check or Form 4473 is required by federal law. According to the ATF, FFL holders are required to keep a record of such sales in a bound book.[SUP][18][/SUP][SUP][19][/SUP] The USDOJ said the stated purpose of FOPA was to ensure that the GCA did not "place any undue or unnecessary federal restrictions or burdens on law abiding citizens, but it opened many loopholes through which illegal gun traffickers can slip."[SUP][10][/SUP][SUP][20][/SUP][SUP][nb 2][/SUP]
 
Last edited:

cekim

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
29,885
Likes
4,683
Location
Clowns->Here<-Jokers
Gotta love antis - they write a law restricting the behavior of private individuals and they twist it into claiming it is a loophole because it doesn't restrict it enough.

If an FFL transfers to his private collection, they do a 4473 on themselves and it leaves their books. If they sell such a firearm within a year of such a transfer, then the have to do a 4473 and record such a transfer on their FFL despite it being private, personal property.

So, there is a heightened restriction for record-keeping on FFL's private behavior.

Has nothing to do with gun shows per se, their claim is presumably that there is a rash of dealers buying guns, taking them off the books, waiting a year and then selling them at gun shows I gather... Of course all of that is based on their bogus 40% sold without background check number obtained from a ridiculous sample before NICS existed.

politifact said:
The researchers estimated that about 40 percent of all firearm sales took place through people other than licensed dealers. They based their conclusion on data from a 1994 survey of more than 2,500 households. But it’s important to note that of the 2,568 households surveyed, only 251 people answered the question about the origin of their gun.
1. ludicrously small sample
2. 4 YEARS PRIOR TO NICS COMING ONLINE!
 
Rating - 100%
11   0   0
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Messages
6,387
Likes
2,112
Location
Deep in the woods of SC
No you just missed the relevant part.
Specifically, FOPA made it legal for FFL holders to make private sales, provided the firearm was transferred to the licensee's personal collection at least one year prior to the sale.
What your quote is saying is that, A FFL can sell one of their own firearms in a private sale like the rest of us.

It has zero bearing on transferring a gun between 2 parties, like at a gun show, since the FFL has to have owned the gun for at least one year. An FFL does take possession of the firearm during the transfer. So at that point it is "their gun". The one year requirement is to keep the FFL from being able to sidestep the 4473 every time they sell a gun just by claiming it is a private sale.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 6, 2013
Messages
3,009
Likes
668
Location
Near Worcester
Gotta love antis - they write a law restricting the behavior of private individuals and they twist it into claiming it is a loophole because it doesn't restrict it enough.

If an FFL transfers to his private collection, they do a 4473 on themselves and it leaves their books. If they sell such a firearm within a year of such a transfer, then the have to do a 4473 and record such a transfer on their FFL despite it being private, personal property.

So, there is a heightened restriction for record-keeping on FFL's private behavior.

Has nothing to do with gun shows per se, their claim is presumably that there is a rash of dealers buying guns, taking them off the books, waiting a year and then selling them at gun shows I gather... Of course all of that is based on their bogus 40% sold without background check number obtained from a ridiculous sample before NICS existed.


1. ludicrously small sample
2. 4 YEARS PRIOR TO NICS COMING ONLINE!
No you just missed the relevant part.

What your quote is saying is that, A FFL can sell one of their own firearms in a private sale like the rest of us.

It has zero bearing on transferring a gun between 2 parties, like at a gun show, since the FFL has to have owned the gun for at least one year. An FFL does take possession of the firearm during the transfer. So at that point it is "their gun". The one year requirement is to keep the FFL from being able to sidestep the 4473 every time they sell a gun just by claiming it is a private sale.
OK ,

Good to know guys, it seems like they've left out important details, or the details are lost in translation. This is really good information to know, as it is admittedly a bit confusing.

Anyone up for some edits to the Wiki Entry to reflect these actual facts?
 

Len-2A Training

Instructor
Instructor
NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 98.3%
59   1   0
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
52,058
Likes
10,058
Location
Escaping to NH
In MA, if you don't have an FFL the promoters won't rent you a table if they know that you'll be selling any guns at all. This is NOT true in "free America" and indeed some non-dealers regularly sell at shows.

Fed Law mandates that FFLs can ONLY sell at shows in the same state as their FFL is issued. So they usually arrange with a "local" FFL at a gun show to do a FFL-FFL transfer to the local dealer who will do the transfer to the buyer. In all cases, all guns transferred by any FFL MUST list it in their Bound Books and do a 4473 (and whatever the state requires, MIRCS-eFA-10 in MA) on every transfer.

The true "gunshow loophole" is the private sales/transfers that take place at non-MA gun shows where promoters will rent anyone a table to sell guns. I attend some NH shows and don't see private people selling guns at those shows either.

The number of people walking around a MA gun show with a gun and for sale sign on their backs is minuscule, noise level transactions and to be legal both parties must live in the same state, possess LTC/FID (for MA) and do the eFA-10.
 

EJFudd

NES Member
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
3,806
Likes
1,475
Location
Behind Enemy Lines
so this wikipedia article is wrong?
Google this section of the law: 27 CFR 478.125a An FFL holder does have the right to own a private collection and does have the right to sell guns from that private collection as a private seller in accordance with state law just so long as he/she complies with 27 CFR 478.125a.

As a practical matter, I don't see this happening a whole lot at a gun shows because the FFL holder is not supposed to mix guns from his/her personal collection with his business inventory. If he puts any of his personal guns back into his business inventory to sell, the sale of that gun would trigger a 4473 and a background check.

Lord knows that I am not a lawyer, but that is my understanding of the matter.
 

cekim

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
29,885
Likes
4,683
Location
Clowns->Here<-Jokers
both parties must live in the same state, possess LTC/FID (for MA) and do the eFA-10.
This is what makes this claim doubly stupid in MA. There is NO transaction of a firearm in MA that is not subject to record keeping. Dealer-to-dealer is Federal and dealer to private or private to private is FA10.

Outside of MA, there are still the pretense private property rights to use and dispose of your private property as you see fit (STILL SUBJECT TO FEDERAL LAW).

Federal law, EVERYWHERE, still restricts sales of hand-guns to people within your state of residence and prohibits you from selling any firearm, long or short, to someone you suspect or know to be a Prohibited Person.

So, there is NO loophole in the law. It is illegal for a PP to possess and illegal to sell to a PP. The issue is enforcement and they are happy to violate your Due Process rights and make you prove your innocence without cause to assuage their irrational fears.

A people presumed innocent "shall be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects" until cause can be shown according to the Constitution.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
150
Likes
15
Location
Ludlow, MA USA
Federal law, EVERYWHERE, still restricts sales of hand-guns to people within your state of residence and prohibits you from selling any firearm, long or short, to someone you suspect or know to be a Prohibited Person.

So, there is NO loophole in the law. It is illegal for a PP to possess and illegal to sell to a PP. The issue is enforcement and they are happy to violate your Due Process rights and make you prove your innocence without cause to assuage their irrational fears.
I was reading an ATF regulation somewhere and this is how I read what was on the page.

But apparently some states require no instant background checks at gun shows / no 4473 or equivalent on private sales? A wink-and-knod kind of thing?

If the ATF or some other agency is not there to oversee the private transactions, then what is to stop this, other than fear of what might happen when you get "back home"?

If you've only ever been a resident of a state like PRMA, then pretty much every firearm you've ever acquired will have been documented, or there will be an expectation that you had to document it and did not.

If you move to PRMA (heaven forbid), who's to say exactly when or how you acquired your collection? If you go to a gun show and come back with a firearm that was manufactured after your move, then that would be pretty obvious.

As long as there are private, undocumented sales at gun shows, it would seem that a relatively new PRMA resident would have a bit of wiggle room in terms of expanding a collection that's not already on that big FRB database ...
 

cekim

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
29,885
Likes
4,683
Location
Clowns->Here<-Jokers
I was reading an ATF regulation somewhere and this is how I read what was on the page.

But apparently some states require no instant background checks at gun shows / no 4473 or equivalent on private sales? A wink-and-knod kind of thing?
No, if they are dealers, they require a NICS check. If they are private sellers, then their private property rights, privacy, 4th amendment and general due process rights remain intact...

lasitter said:
If the ATF or some other agency is not there to oversee the private transactions, then what is to stop this, other than fear of what might happen when you get "back home"?
Is the only thing stopping everyone murdering and assaulting everyone they know the police? Would everyone inject Crocodil into their veins if not for the DEA?

This whole line of thinking is backwards. We don't live in a police state unless people allow it to become as such. We are presumed innocent and free and our actions not subject to question without cause.

lasitter said:
As long as there are private, undocumented sales at gun shows, it would seem that a relatively new PRMA resident would have a bit of wiggle room in terms of expanding a collection that's not already on that big FRB database ...
Doesn't matter - when new resident arrives and sells or buys - guess what? FA10. Done and done.

If they don't FA10 - guess what? Law is broken.
 
Last edited:
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
2,739
Likes
433
Location
Hopkinton, MA
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 6, 2013
Messages
3,009
Likes
668
Location
Near Worcester


THE FOLLOWING POST MAY CONTAIN MESSAGES OF FREEDOM AND LIBERTY THAT MAY BE SCARY AND IN SOME CASES CAUSE PTSD.
PLEASE DO YOUR BEST TO TAKE YOUR SOMA IMMEDIATELY BEFORE AND AFTER READING TO AVOID LONG TERM EFFECTS.


Is the only thing stopping everyone murdering and assaulting everyone they know the police? Would everyone inject Crocodil into their veins if not for the DEA?

This whole line of thinking is backwards. We don't live in a police state unless people allow it to become as such. We are presumed innocent and free and our actions not subject to question without cause.




Disclaimer:
NO CHILDREN OR BABY SEALS WERE HARMED IN THE MAKING OF THIS MESSAGE
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
223
Likes
17
"Fed Law mandates that FFLs can ONLY sell at shows in the same state as their FFL is issued. So they usually arrange with a "local" FFL at a gun show to do a FFL-FFL transfer to the local dealer who will do the transfer to the buyer. In all cases, all guns transferred by any FFL MUST list it in their Bound Books and do a 4473 (and whatever the state requires, MIRCS-eFA-10 in MA) on every transfer."

I went to a gun show in Marlborough (Mass.) some years ago, there was an out of state dealer there and among his wares he had a few non-MA compliant guns he couldn't sell to me.
WTF ????
 

dcmdon

NES Member
Rating - 100%
29   0   1
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
12,610
Likes
2,170
Location
Southeastern CT and Boston Metro West

dcmdon

NES Member
Rating - 100%
29   0   1
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
12,610
Likes
2,170
Location
Southeastern CT and Boston Metro West
I was reading an ATF regulation somewhere and this is how I read what was on the page.

But apparently some states require no instant background checks at gun shows / no 4473 or equivalent on private sales? A wink-and-knod kind of thing?

If the ATF or some other agency is not there to oversee the private transactions, then what is to stop this, other than fear of what might happen when you get "back home"?

If you've only ever been a resident of a state like PRMA, then pretty much every firearm you've ever acquired will have been documented, or there will be an expectation that you had to document it and did not.

If you move to PRMA (heaven forbid), who's to say exactly when or how you acquired your collection? If you go to a gun show and come back with a firearm that was manufactured after your move, then that would be pretty obvious.
Its not that simple. If the firearm was made before an off the books transaction, it could still show up in a reported transaction after your move. But that would require an otherwise unbroken record of custody from dealer to customer.
 
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Feb 7, 2013
Messages
667
Likes
86
OK ,

Good to know guys, it seems like they've left out important details, (Yeah) or the details are lost in translation. (Intentional) This is really good information to know, as it is admittedly a bit confusing. (Just the way they like it)

Anyone up for some edits to the Wiki Entry to reflect these actual facts?
Speaks to: Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, no one is entitled to their own facts.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
150
Likes
15
Location
Ludlow, MA USA
Doesn't matter - when new resident arrives and sells or buys - guess what? FA10. Done and done.

If they don't FA10 - guess what? Law is broken.
But ... new resident travels to out-of-state gun show, participates in a private trade, no background check, no 4473, no record of transaction ... how does the information ever make it back into the eFA10 database?

Nothing is perfect. I would even assume that cameras all over the event would record who was there, private buyers and sellers as well as the FFLs who are already recording their transactions.

If the chain of custody is intact up to the point where you purchase the firearm from the private seller, and then he says "I sold it to a short, fat, bald guy ...", whereupon they could search for your image on tape, run thru facial processing, match it against your LTC or driver's license, and there you go.

So how's your short fat bald guy disguise and how paranoid do you want to be?

I guess we're all paranoid here ...
 

cekim

NES Member
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
29,885
Likes
4,683
Location
Clowns->Here<-Jokers
But ... new resident travels to out-of-state gun show, participates in a private trade, no background check, no 4473, no record of transaction ... how does the information ever make it back into the eFA10 database?

Nothing is perfect. I would even assume that cameras all over the event would record who was there, private buyers and sellers as well as the FFLs who are already recording their transactions.

If the chain of custody is intact up to the point where you purchase the firearm from the private seller, and then he says "I sold it to a short, fat, bald guy ...", whereupon they could search for your image on tape, run thru facial processing, match it against your LTC or driver's license, and there you go.

So how's your short fat bald guy disguise and how paranoid do you want to be?

I guess we're all paranoid here ...
New resident has broken federal law selling handgun to out of stater.
- such a thing can and will be enforced just as other malum prohibitum laws are. Efficiency of prosecution is not a serious or viable concern to the Constitution.

New resident has broken state law if they buy anything and don't file an FA10 when they come back.
- see above

So, per your logic, we need to show ID and record every purchase of anything so that we can rule out illegal activity by process of elimination? We need to abandon the 4th amendment and all cash transactions because without 100% traceability of money something might slip through or be hard to stop?

The ability to break a law has zero bearing on our property and privacy rights. Period. You can try to construct the "perfect murder" all you like, but it is irrelevant. It has no bearing on the rights of those who neither mean nor accomplish harm of others.
 

MisterHappy

NES Member
Rating - 100%
15   0   0
Joined
Jul 28, 2009
Messages
21,630
Likes
6,646
Location
On the 16 yard line, shootin' for the Lewis!
"Fed Law mandates that FFLs can ONLY sell at shows in the same state as their FFL is issued. So they usually arrange with a "local" FFL at a gun show to do a FFL-FFL transfer to the local dealer who will do the transfer to the buyer. In all cases, all guns transferred by any FFL MUST list it in their Bound Books and do a 4473 (and whatever the state requires, MIRCS-eFA-10 in MA) on every transfer."

I went to a gun show in Marlborough (Mass.) some years ago, there was an out of state dealer there and among his wares he had a few non-MA compliant guns he couldn't sell to me.
WTF ????[/
QUOTE]

It's a gun show - some people bring stuff to show. The non-compliant gun may be sold to an out-of-state resident, assuming that they live in the same state as the "out-of-state" dealer, or in a free state, where it can be transferred to the purchaser.

I saw one guy with an Auto-Burglar gun (NFA short-barreled double shotgun) that he was just showing off - not for sale.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
150
Likes
15
Location
Ludlow, MA USA
New resident has broken federal law selling handgun to out of stater.
Actually, in my scenario, the new PRMA resident isn't selling anything. He's breaking the law by driving the firearm back into the state, vs ship to FFL, and never doing the eFA10 thing.

So, per your logic, we need to show ID and record every purchase of anything so that we can rule out illegal activity by process of elimination?
Don't know how you put me on the gun grabber side of this.

BTW: Electronic recording of every purchase started an eternity ago. All your grocery store purchase information goes to Catalina Marketing ...

http://www.catalinamarketing.com/

Where they look at your favorite brand of soap to print those competitive coupons that the sales clerk hands out at the register ...

Now they can tell you that they don't retain personal transaction information, but are you buying that? Unlike the feds, they just don't have your fingerprints ... yet.
 

Len-2A Training

Instructor
Instructor
NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 98.3%
59   1   0
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Messages
52,058
Likes
10,058
Location
Escaping to NH
Actually, in my scenario, the new PRMA resident isn't selling anything. He's breaking the law by driving the firearm back into the state, vs ship to FFL, and never doing the eFA10 thing.
You are wrong, read Cekim's response again.

PRIVATE transactions between 2 parties NOT resident of the same state is a Federal crime. They will punish you if you are caught.

Just like murder, some people aren't caught and get away with it, doesn't change anything however.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
150
Likes
15
Location
Ludlow, MA USA
PRIVATE transactions between 2 parties NOT resident of the same state is a Federal crime. They will punish you if you are caught.
I guess it all falls back to the chain of custody / documentation thing. Without the paper trail, how does anyone prove who bought something and who sold it? Wouldn't that be a required step in terms of proving residence and therefore proving non-same state transfer?
 

goodzilla

NES Member
Rating - 100%
11   0   0
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
2,990
Likes
512
Location
North Shore
I don't understand what you're trying to get at here. You're slicing and dicing this thing to the n-th degree on a strained hypothetical.

It is the responsibility of the two parties to know the laws and conduct the transfer within the laws. If one or more of the parties does not, it is the responsibility of the state or federal government to enforce the law.

If you murder someone in the woods and are really good at hiding a body, then maybe you'll get away with it. You still broke a law, if there's evidence that can tie you back to the crime in question, it will be prosecuted.

[ETA: ha, guess I'm on the same wavelength as Len with the murder analogy]
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom