Skip to comments.Federal Interstate Handgun Sales Ban Ruled Unconstitutional [is this hugh or what?]
Posted on 02/11/2015 10:59:05 AM PST by NewJerseyJoe
In another excellent victory for civil rights by attorney Alan Gura, United States District Court Judge Reed OConnor struck down the federal interstate handgun sales ban earlier today, finding it unconstitutional (both facially and as-applied) under the Second Amendment and the Fifth Amendments Due Process Clause.
(Excerpt) Read more at firearmspolicy.org ...
The 1968 Gun Control Act was DOA until the NRA stepped in with Charlton Heston and other actors taking to TV to drum up support for it.
I’m pretty sure that is the law which just got struck down.
Now, if they would just apply the same logic to BUYING INSURANCE.
Or I could be confused. ...which would be indicative of the sheer idiocy of the law, as I’ve spent considerable time studying this particular issue. If I can’t figure it out, something is very wrong with its wording and/or reasoning.
Try not to misunderstate what the problem was/is. The 1968 GCA allowed adjacent interstate sales of long guns but required that handguns be purchased by non-licensees in their state of residency. This ruling just knocks out the difference between long and hand-gun. So far I can’t tell if it knocks out the contiguous state provision. In either case it’s a large deal.
So Californians can now but a gun in Nevada?
It is huge.
Even though the Court found that strict scrutiny was the proper standard of review for the type of burden on Constitutionally-protected conduct imposed by the challenged laws (18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(3), 18 U.S.C. § 922 (b)(3), and 27 C.F.R. § 478.99(a)), it also noted that the law failed even the relatively-deferential intermediate scrutiny test.
Easy there Beagle-—most FFLD’s aren’t going to be interested in receiving an out-of-state mail order gun and passing it on for 25 bucks. Especially if they have one just like it on their rack. Over the past four plus decades I’ve occasionally received an antique or otherwise special/valuable gun as a favor to the buyer but it does not make a good business model——too much liability for zero profit incentive.
Every dealer around my area does the transfers, $25 is the going rate.
And the Good Guys win yet ANOTHER one.
THIRD Feel-Good story of the day!
Victory for State’s rights.
God’s way of telling us we may need all of these guns....
ABQ Guns on the west side of Albuquerque will do the same for $15. Good group of folks in that shop.
Hugh Who ??
I don’t know a single dealer that doesn’t do transfer sales, and they have no problem with it.
It brings in business because they buy scopes, ammo, etc at the same time.
That’s exactly what it means.
If the ruling stands, it will now be legal to purchase a handgun outside of your home state from an FFL.
After reading the ruling, long gun purchase face-to-face out of state was not at issue. What was at issue is a couple from Washington, D.C. attempting to purchase a handgun from an FFL dealer in Texas, and the only way the couple could take possession of the firearm was to have it transferred to the one and only FFL dealer in Washington, D.C. who wanted to charge $125 per gun for the transfer.
This ruling would just bring the laws regarding handguns in line with the existing laws regarding long guns.
Now we need to get the unconstitutional background checks overturned. Background checks turn a God given right into a government granted privilege. As felons already get any gun they want this is logical.
“apply the same logic to BUYING INSURANCE.”
Well, so much for logic.
The differences in insurance laws from state to state make that difficult.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.