School me on the "gun show loophole"

[O-gre 7]

What I am hearing in the media and what I am reading are miles apart.

[Krdshrk 3,877]

What I am hearing in the media and what I am reading are miles apart.

 

Because it is

[Springfield1911 22]

What I am hearing in the media and what I am reading are miles apart.

 

The only state I know of a "gun show loophole" is Virginia. Private sales are not regulated from what I understand. Basically you can buy a gun from a private party and not submit to any type of background check.

[ruger9 0]

The only state I know of a "gun show loophole" is Virginia. Private sales are not regulated from what I understand. Basically you can buy a gun from a private party and not submit to any type of background check.

 

A friend told me also TX? Said he saw a documentary on TV showing someone buying guns in a TX gunshow, no background check, going out into the parking lot, and selling them for a profit to mexicans...?

[DirtyDigz 1,812]

I believe that when most say the "gun show loophole" they're really talking about the fact that a transfer between two non-FFL parties does not require a NICS check in most (every?) states.

 

Some of these transfers occur at gun shows, but some just happen at ranges, homes, parking lots, etc.

[kesslyk 0]

When I live in Phoenix, AZ, private sales at gun shows weren't regulated either. I may have changed as I haven't lived there since '99.

[Springfield1911 22]

A friend told me also TX? Said he saw a documentary on TV showing someone buying guns in a TX gunshow, no background check, going out into the parking lot, and selling them for a profit to mexicans...?

 

I am not sure about TX. I only know about Virginia because I have family that lives there. It's only for private party sales. If you buy from a legit FFL dealer then you have to submit to a background check. Remember in VA there are no permits like here in NJ. You can freely purchase firearms between private party just like we do here just without the hassle of the permit.

[1563621 388]

Basically FTF sale. Only in other states it is a little looser. This would end gun shows and private sales. no more face to face sales. They want a background on every sale. NJ nics would be flowing in money. Gun stores would be profitable.

[BlueLineFish 615]

It isn't all that unreasonable to outlaw ftf sales. Especially in very lax states like Virginia

[O-gre 7]

I think a uniform national law would be beneficial to us. Especially CC

[O-gre 7]

So with Nj being so restrictive already it could be possible that we actually benefit from a uniform national law.

[TheSmokingGun 0]

Let's be honest here, S&W and Ruger don't ship crates of guns to the "street dealers" that pro-gun people claim criminals buy their "illegal guns" off of.

 

Most of the country has little or no regulations on private sales. People buy a gun privately at a gun show, from an acquaintance/friend, and bring it back to an area where there are restrictions on guns. most of NYC's crime guns come from VA. If you live in NYC and have a cousin in VA, you've pretty much got yourself all you need to buy/sell guns "on the street".

 

Unless we're talking Russian Mobsters with international arms-dealer connections, most "illegal guns" enter the "street" via the legal market. And to say otherwise, pro-gun or not, is to be a bit naive IMO.

[woodentoe 14]

It isn't all that unreasonable to outlaw ftf sales. Especially in very lax states like Virginia

 

Wouldn't you prefer a mechanism for you to initiate a NICS check as part of your ftf transaction?

 

At gun shows, there could be a NICS area set up where buyers and seller could complete their transactions with a NICS check. either sponsored by the show or paid for by the buyer. Seems a glaring omission for that mechanism not to be in place. If the check is identical, why be forced to pay an FFL AND pay NICS?

[1563621 388]

There is the federal NICS, no fee, NJ is just a middle man charging the fee and using the FED. NICS.

[1563621 388]

Eliminating the gunshow loophole is all well and good, but no more FTF sales, or transfers.

[TheSmokingGun 0]

There is the federal NICS, no fee, NJ is just a middle man charging the fee and using the FED. NICS.

 

NICS is only available to FFL holders. You cannot contact NICS and receive their service on a private transaction. In most parts of the country, people sell firearms privately at gun show tables as well as in the lot, plus all sorts of internet or acquaintance private sales, with no real idea of knowing if the person they are selling to is Ned Flanders, or Satan himself.

[PeteF 1,044]

NICS is only available to FFL holders. You cannot contact NICS and receive their service on a private transaction. In most parts of the country, people sell firearms privately at gun show tables as well as in the lot, plus all sorts of internet or acquaintance private sales, with no real idea of knowing if the person they are selling to is Ned Flanders, or Satan himself.

 

Well maybe that should be the "meaningful discussion", open Federal NICS up to all, since we are paying for it anyway.

[woodentoe 14]

Well maybe that should be the "meaningful discussion", open Federal NICS up to all, since we are paying for it anyway.

 

This. was my point.

[Spartiati 63]

Basically FTF sale. Only in other states it is a little looser. This would end gun shows and private sales. no more face to face sales. They want a background on every sale. NJ nics would be flowing in money. Gun stores would be profitable.

 

Why would this end gun shows? Every gun show I have been to in PA requires a NICS check when you buy from an FFL with a table. It is a private sale betweem two non-FFL parties we are talking about.

 

I personally feel private transactions should go through an FFL, even though the criminals won't do this. If this were a requirement I think it could help gun shows as there are a number of FFL's that could aid the transaction.

[woodentoe 14]

I think that if the FFL's have tables at a gun show, there should be a NICS table where you can conduct FTF transactions with NICS. I think it is unreasonable for private sellers to be prohibited from selling a legal possession simply because there is no mechanism in place for them to run a background check. What is special and unique about being an FFL that would preclude the private seller from contacting NICS and running the check? There may be something I'm not aware of. Any FFL members care to chime in?

[mcbethr 42]

It isn't all that unreasonable to outlaw ftf sales. Especially in very lax states like Virginia

 

The only problem I have in outlawing FTF transactions is that it basically makes it impossible to use firearms in agriculture.

 

There are still plenty of places in this country where pigs are still slaughtered with a .22 rifle. There are plenty of farmers who hand a rifle to their ranch hands and tell them to get rid of the gophers in the field.

 

I wouldn't mind requiring a background check for FTF transaction if the proper exceptions were made for family gifts and employment-based transfers. In NJ, we don't have this problem because everybody has an FID and you know that the person you are selling to passed a background check at one point in time.

[woodentoe 14]

I wouldn't mind requiring a background check for FTF transaction if the proper exceptions were made for family gifts and employment-based transfers.

 

I have heard this once before and asked about it. I never got a response. I understand the employment based transfer. but why not for family gifts or inheritance. If a person is a prohibited person, they are whether you give them a gift or not. 'splain, lucy.

[1563621 388]

What I was refering to is a nics call should be available for no charge on a FTF transaction.

[Krdshrk 3,877]

Yanno - that's one thing that I think NJ has pretty right - the CoE - it's not that big a deal and does help establish a potential paper trail.... that's all the government wants - better tracking.

[TheSmokingGun 0]

even though the criminals won't do this.

 

Here's a fun question - who are "the criminals"?

 

A person with lawfully owned guns, your typical guy, moves from one state to another, decides to bring a couple magazines along with him for the heck of it. He figures, they may be "illegal" in NJ, but what if he moves back to OH one day, so he figures he'll hold onto em quietly and stash em in the basement.

 

A guy who got wrongfully convicted of a Domestic Violence 15 years ago because his crazy **** wife lied to the cops and said he hit her, decides to quietly buy a handgun off a friend for personal protection in the home after he is threatened by an angry co-worker.

 

At what point do you define "criminal"? A lot of people here own guns based on "interpretations" of law - "interpretations" that have never been tested in a court, only mused about on a gun forum with copy/pasted statutes by no one with a law degree. Are they "criminals" too?

 

This is why trying to brand an entire subset of people as second-class citizens is a bad idea.

[TheSmokingGun 0]

I wouldn't mind requiring a background check for FTF transaction if the proper exceptions were made for family gifts and employment-based transfers.

 

Much like how people abuse the NFA "trust" or "LLC" provisions, you can expect people to abuse this the same way as well.

 

For those unaware, obtaining an NFA firearm requires, even in states that allow it, the signature of the Chief Law Enforcement Officer which the applicant resides in. Even in states that allow it, many towns/counties will not sign off on NFA weapons, or only do so for people who are connected.

 

To circumvent this, individuals form a "trust" or LLC legally, and use the corporation/trust as a means to obtain the firearm for an organization, not an individual. Even though the organization consists of....only them.

 

See where I'm going with this?

[halbautomatisch 60]

What I was refering to is a nics call should be available for no charge on a FTF transaction.

^^^^THIS^^^^

 

If they are going to require a NICS for all transactions, the seller should have direct access to it, or if not, your local PD should have to do it for you free of charge with reasonable daily hours of availability.

[TheSmokingGun 0]

passed a background check....at one point in time.

 

Key words being, "at one point in time"

 

How do you know that someone had an FID legally 7 years ago, then they got convicted and jailed for a felony, but they still have the FID card with them and live at the same address. And then they come and buy a gun off you, because while they have an FID, their record is not compatible with "lawful" ownership.

[halbautomatisch 60]

In my business, we do a lot of digging, we are required by law to call for a utilities markout before digging. This service is provided free of cost to the caller, why? because the want people to actually follow the law.

[this_is_nascar 162]

Here's a fun question - who are "the criminals"?

 

A person with lawfully owned guns, your typical guy, moves from one state to another, decides to bring a couple magazines along with him for the heck of it. He figures, they may be "illegal" in NJ, but what if he moves back to OH one day, so he figures he'll hold onto em quietly and stash em in the basement.

 

A guy who got wrongfully convicted of a Domestic Violence 15 years ago because his crazy **** wife lied to the cops and said he hit her, decides to quietly buy a handgun off a friend for personal protection in the home after he is threatened by an angry co-worker.

 

At what point do you define "criminal"? A lot of people here own guns based on "interpretations" of law - "interpretations" that have never been tested in a court, only mused about on a gun forum with copy/pasted statutes by no one with a law degree. Are they "criminals" too?

 

This is why trying to brand an entire subset of people as second-class citizens is a bad idea.

 

 

That's easy. Based on the current laws, they are both criminals.