Posted on 12/19/2009 5:18:58 AM PST by marktwain
Manassas, VA, - -(AmmoLand.com)- Anyone who does not hold an FFL and sells a firearm to someone he doesn’t know well is incurring a certain amount of liability. And, a bit of bad judgment could cause trouble not just for the seller, but for the rest of the gun owning community as well. There is no question that individuals have the right to buy, sell, and trade firearms between themselves without government infringement. But there are laws on the books and failing to know and follow them is just asking for trouble. A prudent trader will take into account not only the legal technicalities, but the political environment also.
Title 18, Section 922 of the U.S. Code, the 1968 Gun Control Act, covers sales and transfer of guns. The law forbids transfers between residents of different states except through an FFL in the buyer’s state. Of course it is also illegal for a federally “prohibited person” – a felon, fugitive, someone dishonorably discharged from the service, etc. – to purchase a firearm from anyone, FFL dealer or not. If the seller has any indication that the prospective buyer is a “prohibited person,” selling the gun is a crime. It is also illegal for anyone to purchase a firearm on behalf of someone else – even if that someone else could legally purchase it himself – and a seller can again be held criminally responsible if they had any indication that such a “straw” transaction was taking place.
Any sale in violation of the 1968 Gun Control Act and its subsequent amendments exposes traders to serious criminal liability – as much as five years and $5,000 for every violation. And when those sales happen at a gun show it does grave harm to the gun show industry and the entire Second Amendment movement.
Given the legislative threats and the political climate – with Bloomberg and his anti-gun mayors, the Brady Bunch, and various reporters and other scoundrels routinely targeting gun shows with hidden cameras and sting operations – it is wise for traders and gun show promoters to engage in some self-regulation to keep the government from coming in and doing the regulating for us. The trick is to solve, or at least mitigate the problem without creating worse problems in the process.
As with most problems, the solution here begins with education, so smart gun show promoters are making an effort to make sure that everyone selling at their shows understands the basics of the laws. The next step is procedural: Making sure sellers always ask the tough questions and get clear answers. Some promoters are solving that problem with a simple form issued to non-FFL sellers. A good form is like an abbreviated 4473. It informs the buyer of the legal requirements while it asks them disqualifying questions and collects identifying information. The seller keeps the part with the drivers license number and signature, the buyer gets a part with the sellers ID as a receipt, and the gun show checks receipts at the door. Nobody else gets a copy. By mandating use of such forms gun show promoters protect themselves and their business as well as providing some legal cover for their sellers. Since there is no government involvement and no centralized storage of records, the privacy of both buyer and seller are also protected.
Most sellers won’t make a sale if they catch a hint of impropriety, and smart sellers always take down the buyer’s drivers license information as a precaution. But not all sellers are that prudent. A foolish few think they are “safe” if they take a “don’t ask, don’t tell” approach, avoiding any question of the buyers’ legal status and studiously not noticing if the buyer says something that might indicate ineligibility. They delude themselves. Even though it is highly unlikely that a buyer is breaking the law or that a particular gun will ever be remotely connected to a crime, that rare exception can not just ruin your day, it can ruin your decade, and provide ammo to the enemy. Anyone making a private sale to anyone they don’t know well should always get a signed statement of eligibility and a drivers license number. Buyers should be concerned about identifying the seller as well, just in case.
The public’s lack of understanding of the so-called gun show loophole issue, and the complexity of trying to explain it, has placed gun shows and all private transactions in the political crosshairs. If gun show promoters, exhibitors, and attendees don’t accelerate efforts to mitigate the issue, the gun shows – and all private transfers – could be just a fond memory in the not too distant future.
About: The Firearms Coalition is a loose-knit coalition of individual Second Amendment activists, clubs and civil rights organizations. Founded by Neal Knox in 1984, the organization provides support to grassroots activists in the form of education, analysis of current issues, and with a historical perspective of the gun rights movement. The Firearms Coalition is a project of Neal Knox Associates, Manassas, VA. Visit: www.FirearmsCoalition.org
We only need to look at how the 4473 forms have been used by the anti-freedom folks to see that this is a bad idea.
Agreed. Also stop calling gun show purchases between individuals a loophole.
Since the current policy around here is that weapons can check in, but never leave, I’ve no experience in actually selling.
That said, if I were to do so, I’d probably ask for the license, to verify an instate sale, and inspect it in detail.
If the picture matched the face in front of me, I’d hand it back, collect the cash, and pass the weapon.
But I’d not keep any paper record, with an exception for the C&R stuff, of course.
Before I shot off ALL my ammo and sold ALL my guns last week,I purchased from private individuals as much as possible just so as to keep the Damned government out of MY business.
Jeff Knox:
If the seller has any indication that the prospective buyer is a “prohibited person,” selling the gun is a crime.
Whoa.
And what if the seller's 'indication' is wrong? Can you spell 'lawsuit' Mr Knox?
Especially if said 'indication' is from a prospective buyer whose a member of a protected minority group.
Why?
You’re spot on. Why take a step in the direction to make it possible for an intrusive government to sidestep its way into registration?
“Especially if said ‘indication’ is from a prospective buyer whose a member of a protected minority group.”
I don’t think private sales between individuals would be an issue, and refusing to sell to someone you reasonably believe “not qualified” would be prudent. I’d want witnesses.
Not really,
Been stockpiling both for ever.
'cause guns are icky?
If I were selling a legally bought handgun I would follow the letter of the law.
If that handgun is used in a crime some time in the future the Feds will be coming to see YOU.
“It was stolen” won’t likely cut it if you don’t have a police report.
If I were buying a handgun I would want the seller to have as little info as possible.
If he insisted on info then I would follow the letter of the law.
State laws vary, here in NC you need a Pistol Permit to buy a handgun, unless you hold a CCL.
You need one even if you buy from a private party and are required to receive one if you sell a handgun.
Actually per Federal Law it is an issue. Sales to 'prohibited persons' by anyone is a Federal Crime.(the article mentions that too).
*** refusing to sell to someone you reasonably believe “not qualified” would be prudent. I’d want witnesses ***
It may seem prudent, but it also may violate that person's right if he/she in NOT a 'prohibited person' (You can't say 'I don't sell my guns to Blacks'). And witnesses may help you eventually win, but you could still be looking at HUGH lawyer costs.
Case in point:
There's a Gun Shop in the South Suburbs of Chicago (Chuck's Guns, Riverdale, IL). They do a brisk business and many of their sales are to Blacks from the South Side of Chicago. Every sale is legal, FBI checks done, and they buyers all have our STOO-PID™ mandatory IL FOID Card.And even if I make a private sale, I have to see a valid IL FOID Card from the buyer. Even if its my next door neighbor who we've known for decades. And if there's no FOID Card, its no sale. That's the only way I can be 'prudent'.YET many of 'his guns' wind up being used by criminals as they're traced back to his store. Naturally it follows that Mayor Daley, Jesse Jackass, that ijit 'Father Pfleger' are all after him and try everything to shut him down. Even the Cook County Board is after his store, trying to pass illegal laws aimed at him, but would effect every gun shop in the county. (the ATF has also checked all his a paperwork and its all clean)
So Chuck's Guns is damned if they sell, and sued, broke and out of business if they don't -- all from following the law to the letter. (If it wasn't so far from me, I'd go there just to spite Daley and Jesse)
“It is also illegal for anyone to purchase a firearm on behalf of someone else – even if that someone else could legally purchase it himself”
Does this mean you can’t purchase a firearm to give your wife/brother/father/etc. as a gift?
Not at all true. It's perfectly legal to purchase a gun as a gift, as Sarah Brady herself has done. The 4473 forms themselves actually state this.
No, but you can tell them you sold it, and if there's no requirement to check purchasers in private sales, what can they say?
“State laws vary, here in NC you need a Pistol Permit to buy a handgun, unless you hold a CCL.”
So in other words you need a license to exercise a Constitutional right.
““It was stolen” won’t likely cut it if you don’t have a police report.”
Thats silly. There is no requirement to document private gun sales. At most you would need a bill of sale but even that wouldn’t be necessary.
What are they gonna do if you can’t prove you sold the gun? You’re saying you have to prove yourself innocent.
Respect for law enforcement seems to have led to a consensus that if you don’t cooperate with the police then you are guilty.
I would cooperate to the extent it would help them catch a real criminal. however they might just decide something you say makes it easier to pin the crime on you. Many (some) cops/prosecutors aren’t so finicky about putting the wrong person in jail. They just want a conviction.
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.