There goes private transfers...

42!

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
6,177
Likes
3,403
Part of it is NICS falses so f***ing much that they don't want to spend the money/resources to investigate every
denial. The feds would have to hire thousands of agents just to do that.



Maybe in intent, but not in reality. The integrity of the results is "possibly maybe" and there's a lot of errors which
create false positives. For example some guy will get an expungement and despite the court honoring
it, it doesn't get processed correctly and there's a data gap. Then the feds only have made a decision
based on crap, old data..... and that's just the tip of the iceberg. I don't think that kind of error requires a guy
with a gun showing up at his doorstep to straighten it out.

Let's put it in these terms. In the 2017 NICS operating report there were like 30,000+ appealed denials (and uPin applications) of which like 3,977 were overturned on appeal. (although the abandonment rate in the process isn't shown, EG, potentially way more could be overturned but I would guess people just get frustrated with the process and say "f*** it" and just stopped bothering their jousting session with NICS... ).

Even if we averaged them out by month, that's a shitload of people for agents to manually investigate, and then either arrest or clear them. Good luck with that.... in terms of cost or doing it efficiently both are a non starter. That's part of the reason the feds don't bother investigating every denial, they are hoping people will just go away
so they don't have to waste time on them anymore.... They do hit the warrant or fugitive ones though because
those are an easy kill, and a lot of those aren't the feds problems anyways. On the other hand, can you think of
the resources wasted if every person who perjured themselves on a 4473 was arrested for doing so? It would be a total shit show and many of the USAs/AUSAs wouldn't even want to prosecute those cases because of the public
backlash... (not to mention "reasonable person" difficulties with the jury). I'm sure it would look great on their "score card" for busting an 80 year old guy/lady who got bagged doing something dumb like selling pot as a dealer in the 60s, and now is just trying to buy a gun to protect her home with...

-Mike
I'm aware of all that, my point was that they should fix the system, not pass more laws. They had the opportunity to make minor improvements to NICS (small incremental improvements, followed by observing the results, is how you fix a system), and they linked reciprocity, but the GOP dropped it when they had the votes and President to make it happen. I don't think they want it to work.
 

rkwjunior

NES Member
Rating - 100%
34   0   0
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
2,674
Likes
350
If you don't know the bona fides of your buyer, how do you know he won't rob you of your gun when you meet him to complete the sale?
By law, You are not required to know if said buyer is a felon. By law you are not required to do any sort of a background check or "homework" on the buyer. You just better be able to prove you didn't know him as a felon before you made the sale.
Thats it, end of story. That's called freedom.
Selling to an unknown person is a risk we all take, whether we are selling a firearm or a dinning room table.
But just remember, your not liable for anything done with either after that person walks away, unless you sell with a warranty on used furniture.
 
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
9,858
Likes
3,109
Location
Green Eggs and...
The way to solve this is to allow private citizens to voluntarily call a number just like an FFL and perform a background check. The premise is that no one wants to sell a gun to someone who will use it for illegal activity. Many would use this service as a CYA.

1) If a private citizen performs a voluntary BG check and gets a confirmation code they are given legal immunity to anything bad that happens with the gun they sold. To encourage participation have monthly drawings for guns/gear etc.

2) Even people who would never use the service would benefit by telling their customer that a voluntary BG check will be performed. Anyone who balks at that notion or asks that the BG check not be performed is a huge red flag that no sane person would ignore.

The only risk is that in the future the anti's could make the service mandatory. I think the law could be written so that any modifications automatically sunset the law and a brand new law would need to be passed. The only thing you give the anti's is data on how many gun owners are responsible and use the service.
It won't solve it, but it wouldn't hurt. I've long said something like this should be the "compromise" our side gives in exchange for concealed carry reciprocity, NFA being rolled back, hearing safety act, etc. I don't know that it would do much good... but I'd personally never sell a firearm to a stranger without a background check.

There is no "loophole". Background checks only apply to FFL transfers, per law.

Sooner or later, Americans will open their ears and eyes and realize that crazy people exist and you must protect yourself from them. Hopefully, they will vote accordingly.
No they won't. We are f***ed in the long run, our only hope is in the courts - but republicans and democrats have corrupted them for so long even that will only hold it off temporarily.
 

Randy Lahey

NES Member
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
May 14, 2013
Messages
425
Likes
190
Location
12 parsecs from Kessel
I really hate to write this. The guy who sold him the firearm may not have committed a crime, but was reckless in making the sale to someone he did not know. ATF rules say you can make the sale UNLESS you have reason to believe the buyer is prohibited by law from possessing firearms. From the standpoint of our rights, that's the correct legal policy. Maximum freedom, presumption of innocence.

Morally, the seller deserves a severe beating. You have to be an idiot to sell a firearm to someone you don't know without doing a reasonable investigation of him. In VA, where private sales are commonplace and the state's gun trading website for private sales is very active, the standard proviso in FS ads is "VA license and CHP" (also known as "good guy papers") required.

None of this should be interpreted as interpreting more .gov action. If an armed citizen had been at the right place at the right time, the murderer would have been stopped. If enough people can be expected to be carrying in any given place, the perps might realize the odds are heavily against them and not try at all. So part of the solution to the problem of mass murders is more widespread bearing of arms by our citizens. An armed society is a polite society.
How was the seller supposed to do a “reasonable investigation” of the buyer? Why is the seller responsible for the criminal actions of the buyer?
 

rkwjunior

NES Member
Rating - 100%
34   0   0
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
2,674
Likes
350
It won't solve it, but it wouldn't hurt. I've long said something like this should be the "compromise" our side gives in exchange for concealed carry reciprocity, NFA being rolled back, hearing safety act, etc. I don't know that it would do much good... but I'd personally never sell a firearm to a stranger without a background check.
The last time we "compromised" Mitt Romney Stuck a rake where the sun didn't shine.
I'll pass on compromise, especially if "it won't solve it"
 

Dadstoys

NES Member
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
13,873
Likes
8,425
Location
North Shore
Let's keep in mind that none of this is fact yet.
This was some "Anonymous source" crap .
(How he obtained the gun )
 

Admin

Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
NES Member
Rating - 100%
18   0   0
Joined
Feb 25, 2005
Messages
39,195
Likes
12,966
Location
Monadnock area, NH
I really hate to write this. The guy who sold him the firearm may not have committed a crime, but was reckless in making the sale to someone he did not know. ATF rules say you can make the sale UNLESS you have reason to believe the buyer is prohibited by law from possessing firearms. From the standpoint of our rights, that's the correct legal policy. Maximum freedom, presumption of innocence.

Morally, the seller deserves a severe beating. You have to be an idiot to sell a firearm to someone you don't know without doing a reasonable investigation of him. In VA, where private sales are commonplace and the state's gun trading website for private sales is very active, the standard proviso in FS ads is "VA license and CHP" (also known as "good guy papers") required.

None of this should be interpreted as interpreting more .gov action. If an armed citizen had been at the right place at the right time, the murderer would have been stopped. If enough people can be expected to be carrying in any given place, the perps might realize the odds are heavily against them and not try at all. So part of the solution to the problem of mass murders is more widespread bearing of arms by our citizens. An armed society is a polite society.
 

NewGuyRay

NES Member
Rating - 100%
11   0   0
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
861
Likes
308
Location
Just North of Boston
The simple fact is private gun sales have been legal in this country since 1791 when the US Constitution was ratified and we became a country.

I want to be clear that I don't support forcing background checks for private sales of personal property. If we were to have BGCs forced down our throats, aside from the antis' "gun registry" agenda, there would be no functional difference between performing the background check at a licensed dealer and having a system available for the seller to conduct a required check themselves. In both cases, the enforcement mechanism would be the same. Local, state, and federal law enforcement would need to conduct stings to catch people circumventing the system.
 

MaverickNH

NES Member
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
Nov 24, 2005
Messages
3,287
Likes
1,161
Location
SoNH
41E374B0-A813-4E10-9CDC-116D5DF5B7B9.png https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/suficspi16.pdf

Where prisoners got their guns - ~90% not anywhere there might have been a Background Check. Scratch Walmart and Kroeger now so that number will probably go >95% shortly.
 
Rating - 100%
8   0   0
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
9,858
Likes
3,109
Location
Green Eggs and...
The last time we "compromised" Mitt Romney Stuck a rake where the sun didn't shine.
I'll pass on compromise, especially if "it won't solve it"
I was speaking perfect scenario. X for Y. I laid out X and Y. I'm not talking about pretend compromises. Obviously that's dumb as shit.
 

PennyPincher

NES Member
Rating - 100%
12   0   0
Joined
Aug 27, 2007
Messages
11,978
Likes
4,401
Location
Texas
OK, the following idea was mentioned to me.
I don't have the ability, by law, to run a NICS as a private seller.
So if I'm selling a gun to a guy I don't know I have created a bill of sale. On that document I record the date, serial number, etc, and also record at least two forms of ID, preferably photo ID:
an LTC (if a handgun), a driver's license with name, address, DOB, DL license number etc and another confirming ID. I would then have a record of the buyer. If the buyer is reluctant, alarm bells go off and I refuse to sell. Thoughts? Is this a good practice in general? Does this cover my butt (more than not doing it)?

If I sell a vehicle there is a documented record through the state, DMV, etc., but it's not demanded that I run a BGC to see his DUI, reckless driving record first and if he is not a "prohibited driver".
you have pretty much everything you need to steal his identity right now. No farking way you are getting all that out of me.
 

42!

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
6,177
Likes
3,403
By law, You are not required to know if said buyer is a felon. By law you are not required to do any sort of a background check or "homework" on the buyer. You just better be able to prove you didn't know him as a felon before you made the sale.
Thats it, end of story. That's called freedom.
Selling to an unknown person is a risk we all take, whether we are selling a firearm or a dinning room table.
But just remember, your not liable for anything done with either after that person walks away, unless you sell with a warranty on used furniture.
I assume you mean under federal law, state laws differ.
 

FiremanBob

NES Member
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
Jan 22, 2009
Messages
3,435
Likes
6,353
I'm amazed, and disappointed, at the number of knee-jerk reactions to my post by people who clearly didn't bother to read its plain language. Some guys on our side are as obstinately emotionally driven as the antis.
 

MaverickNH

NES Member
Rating - 100%
6   0   0
Joined
Nov 24, 2005
Messages
3,287
Likes
1,161
Location
SoNH
I'm amazed, and disappointed, at the number of knee-jerk reactions to my post by people who clearly didn't bother to read its plain language. Some guys on our side are as obstinately emotionally driven as the antis.
I do see and understand your point. Two levels of personal scrutiny involved: 1) What *do* I know about a person that would legally require me to *not* transfer a gun to them, and 2) What *should* I know about a person that, having passed the minimum legal requirement, would lead to to chose to transfer a gun to a person.

The latter is the “reasonable man” kind of idea, but society is in great disagreement as to what is reasonable. Aside from a “needs” based approach, some states add that level of discretion to local authorities above and beyond a NICS check. That being, to know that if there was something to know about the transfer recipient, that there is nothing known “of concern.” A local law enforcement agency would know if there had been calls, visits, etc., suggesting there may be a “concern” that *might* be amplified with a gun involved. Once civil rights are allowed to be exercised based on arbitrary discretion, they are not rights. Some States, like MA, add more extensive checks with local mental heath authorities to see if a name is in their database, and why.

Private transfers to someone you personally know give you the greatest information upon which to base your choice. But even those range from the guys you’ve met at a club, sports, etc., and exchanged some words with, to a lifelong friend. The opposite extreme is somebody you’ve never met who drives up in a car. How did they connect? Usually answering an advertisement of “gun for sale.” Maybe they drive up, out-of-state license plates, buddies in the car, face tattoos, and you make some assumptions. Maybe it’s a Ronnie Howard young adult driving up in a Honda Civic, having told you he lives three towns over in Mayberry. Who’s a gang member, who’s a straw purchaser, who’s a regular Joe buying a used gun? You’ve read that former drug dealers are now running guns as MJ is legal? What does a gunrunner’s strawmen and mules look like? You just cannot know.

I usually indicate in a “Gun for Sale” ad that I’ll ask to see a NH-DL and NH Pistol & Revolver License, just so people know the qualifications. I’ve never had to ask to see them - they’ve been offered. Maybe forged - dunno. I don’t make copies or asked signed receipts, etc. I just log that gun sold with date and valid NH-DL/PRL checked in my records - no name. My choice to know (or think I know) beyond what is required by law.

The gap between legal and moral/ethical is almost imperceptibly narrowed by NICS background checks, and would not practically differ if made Universal. *You* might not sell a gun to someone on a list, but *they* would almost never come to buy your gun anyway.

Upwards of 400 million guns in the USA. About 40,000 firearms death in the USA annually. That’s 1 in 10,000 guns at most at the other end of a lethal bullet. For you manufacturing folks, that’s 100 in a million - better than 5 Sigma “defects” which is 230 defects per million. These aren’t airsoft or BB guns - if they cannot kill they are not firearms. It’s amazing something designed to kill is *so* defective that, handed out wildly nilly to anyone who wants one, only 1 in 10,000 kills someone!
 
Last edited:

jpk

Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Jan 5, 2013
Messages
15,516
Likes
9,336
I

Upwards of 400 million guns in the USA. About 40,000 firearms death in the USA annually. That’s 1 in 10,000 guns at most at the other end of a lethal bullet. For you manufacturing folks, that’s 100 in a million - better than 5 Sigma “defects” which is 230 defects per million. These aren’t airsoft or BB guns - if they cannot kill they are not firearms. It’s amazing something designed to kill is *so* defective that, handed out wildly nilly to anyone who wants one, only 1 in 10,000 kills someone!
I think its important to further qualify the numbers......

When having these discussions we need to point out % attributed to suicide vs violent crime vs accidental deaths.

When you pull out the suicide numbers you immediiately drop the overwhelming majority of the 40k

When you whittle it down to just homicide it comes in around 8400 annually for ALL firearms.

ALL Rifles in 2013 for example was a mere 285...........

In comparison that year:

blunt objects that year were 428
Knives 1490
Hands/Feet 687

At the same time

250k people died that year of medical malpractice
32,893 dies in motor vehicle accidents
~41,000 deaths due to smoking
~7300 deaths due to second hand smoke
More than 346 kids under the age of 15 drowned in pools (2014 data)
130 people died in school bus related accidents and over 24k were injured

Where's the hysteria from kids/school admins about evil busses?
 

headednorth

NES Member
Rating - 100%
17   0   0
Joined
Apr 9, 2012
Messages
10,646
Likes
7,556
Private sales will be illegal within 6 mos I bet. Sucks but I've never seen such a furor before. Republicans are running scared.
Who exactly are they running scared from? Their constituents dont want any new gun laws passed and the people who do arent voting for them anyway.
 
Rating - 100%
21   0   0
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
9,014
Likes
1,387
Location
in a building
I'm aware of all that, my point was that they should fix the system, not pass more laws. They had the opportunity to make minor improvements to NICS (small incremental improvements, followed by observing the results, is how you fix a system), and they linked reciprocity, but the GOP dropped it when they had the votes and President to make it happen. I don't think they want it to work.
The GOP demonstrated in the first two years of Trump that outside of a few outliers they are loyal members of the uniparty
 

zork51

NES Member
Rating - 100%
50   0   0
Joined
Apr 14, 2006
Messages
388
Likes
80
Location
N. Central Massachusetts
Some republicans are scared because most of us are sitting on our hands complaining instead of calling them to let them know we the majority oppose gun control

If anything is in fact passed it will purely be a function of people not getting off their arses and making their voices heard to trump and congress[/QUOTE

Currently, the only Republican I know in office that is for us is Dean Tran. I can call Markey and Warren and even Faker, but you're just talking to the snowflakes as politicians "filter".
 

Horrible

NES Member
Rating - 100%
16   0   0
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Messages
11,535
Likes
3,261
Location
Central MA
I was speaking perfect scenario. X for Y. I laid out X and Y. I'm not talking about pretend compromises. Obviously that's dumb as shit.
The left’s version of “compromise” is a the distance that they shove their crap up our collective arses.

The Republicans are pussies and will cave in the wake of all of the emotions with the hopes that they media and the left will not criticize them.

That won’t happen and these dumb laws that they pass will only serve to further infringe upon the rights of free people and not do a f***ing thing to stop or prevent a single crime. Same shit as the past 80+ years of gun control

The clinical insanity of the left continues as this continual belief that the next law (that 25,001st law) will be the one that stops a crime. Textbook Einstein insanity. Keep doing the same things and expect different results
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom