When someone is at a gun show -- IT SHOULD BE REQUIRED. There's the loophole you guys deny.

[Hoyt]

Gun shows attract people trolling for new deadly weapons to add to their caches. To allow folks to sell at gun shows -- by claiming they are not a dealer since it's only part-time (or some other such BS), but who are acting just like a dealer by displaying their deadly weapons for the trolls to drool over -- should be a crime and the promoter should be held accountable as well.

No, I'm not suggesting someone "bribe an FFL." When my dad died and left me a number of nice target weapons, I sold them on a gun auction site. Then, I called up gun shops locally and found one that would charge me $35 to handle the transfer and shipment legally and with a friggin background check.

You are the one misinformed and biased.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

1. What you believe it should be...

...and what it in actuality IS are two different things.

People selling personal firearms at a gun show are not dealers, no matter what you may want to believe. Someone who sells a gun or two and is not actively involved in the business of firearms sales is not going to get an FFL. Period. You don't like it? Take it up with the BATFE.

Its no different than selling your used car at a car show - doesn't make you a dealer.

What you're discussing is an interstate transfer of firearms through an FFL. A gun show is an INTRAstate private party sale. Two radically different things.

There is no loophole. I am denying nothing. It is you who is woefully misinformed and biased - and nearly every post you make merely confirms that.

[gejohnston]

2. only 35 bucks?

it cost me $45 to receive.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

3. Then there's the whole thing...

...about the difference between interstate and intrastate private transfers...the former requiring an FFL and the latter legally excluded from the whole FFL process...

[Hoyt]

13. That's one of the things people call a "loophole" . . . . . . because the law needs to be changed.

[Hoyt]

6. So, for less than $100, you are opposed to requiring involvement of FFLs? Besides,

increase the use of these transfers and someone will lower price to gain market share. Might even give post office something new to do.

[PavePusher]

18. Poll tax, much? n/t

[Callisto32]

14. My FFL charges $20 for a transfer.

Guess shit really is cheap around here.

[oneshooter]

15. 15$ here. 10$ if you have a Texas CHL. n/t

[Callisto32]

16. That's pretty awesome.

[PavePusher]

4. It's not a fucking "loophole", it's a specific construction of fucking law.

"You are the one misinformed and biased."

Mirror, mirror, on the wall.....

[Hoyt]

7. Pave, however you want to characterize it -call it Hoyt Crap if you like- No BG sales are wrong.

[PavePusher]

17. Then get the law changed so we are ALLOWED and COMPELLED to do them.

Most here would not object to that.

But for now, you are blaming us for something it is illegal and impossible for us to do.

This does not characterize you as an honest debater.

[one-eyed fat man]

5. You could not have sold them

legally across a state line without an FFL in the receiving state doing the transaction.

There is no Federal requirement that an FFL in your state ship to an FFL in the other state. It maybe easier for you to have your local FFL do the transaction for you, or you might live in a state where you are required by State law to do it, but there is no Federal requirement.

You have been told before, the ATF maintains a website at great expense to the taxpayer so you could look stuff up before committing conspicuous stupidity in a public place.

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/unlicensed-persons.html#gca-unlicensed-transfer

Q: To whom may an unlicensed person transfer firearms under the GCA?

A person may sell a firearm to an unlicensed resident of his State, if he does not know or have reasonable cause to believe the person is prohibited from receiving or possessing firearms under Federal law. A person may loan or rent a firearm to a resident of any State for temporary use for lawful sporting purposes, if he does not know or have reasonable cause to believe the person is prohibited from receiving or possessing firearms under Federal law. A person may sell or transfer a firearm to a licensee in any State. However, a firearm other than a curio or relic may not be transferred interstate to a licensed collector.

{18 U.S.C. 922(a)(3) and (5), 922(d), 27 CFR 478.29 and 478.30}

The receiving FFL does the NICS check on the buyer, not yours.

"You are the one misinformed and biased."

[Hoyt]

8. One-eye, I chose to do better than the law by having FFL involved on both ends.

If you guys weren't always looking for a way to get right up to the envelope, we wouldn't have the issues we have now.

When I sold the gun, the deal was I'd pay whatever fee applies on my end and he would pay whatever fee applied on his end. Easy transaction.

Step away from targets and look at the trees.

[one-eyed fat man]

9. I- w-i-l-l-- t-y-p-e---s-l-o-w-e-r

Unless you have a state law that makes you use a local FFL to ship to an out of state FFL there is no valid reason or legal requirement to do so.

I will send you back again to the ATF.gov website.

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/unlicensed-persons.html

Q: May a nonlicensee ship a firearm through the U.S. Postal Service?

A nonlicensee may not transfer a firearm to a non-licensed resident of another State. A nonlicensee may mail a shotgun or rifle to a resident of his or her own State or to a licensee in any State. The Postal Service recommends that long guns be sent by registered mail and that no marking of any kind which would indicate the nature of the contents be placed on the outside of any parcel containing firearms. Handguns are not mailable. A common or contract carrier must be used to ship a handgun.

{18 U.S.C. 1715, 922(a)(3), 922(a)(5) and 922 (a)(2)(A)}
Q: May a nonlicensee ship a firearm by common or contract carrier?

A nonlicensee may ship a firearm by a common or contract carrier to a resident of his or her own State or to a licensee in any State. A common or contract carrier must be used to ship a handgun. In addition, Federal law requires that the carrier be notified that the shipment contains a firearm and prohibits common or contract carriers from requiring or causing any label to be placed on any package indicating that it contains a firearm.

{18 U.S.C. 922(a)(2)(A), 922(a) (3), 922(a)(5) and 922(e), 27 CFR 478.31 and 478.30}

You may directly transfer a firearm to an FFL in another state. When the FFL in that state transfers that firearm to a NON-LICENSEE, he must perform a NICS check. No NICS check is required to transfer the gun to an FFL. So your dealer did no NICS check because he did not have to do one.

Nor could your FFL do a NICS check on the ultimate out of state buyer if he wanted to. The out of state FFL has the buyer fill out the ATF Form 4473 at the point of delivery and calls NICS just as if he sold it out his stock.

Having your FFL handle the shipping for you might have made your life simpler but it did not make the sale extra legal.


Put it another way, just because you stop for green lights too does not make you a safer driver!

[Hoyt]

10. Yes, there is a reason, so I don't have to worry about doing something wrong or it not

being handled properly. But thanks for the long post. I'll stick with my method because I think it is cleaner and less likely for guns to get in the wrong hands. But, you keep pushing things right to the envelope and you'll get to see tougher restrictions in your lifetime.

[one-eyed fat man]

11. You really don't pay attention do you?

I specifically said, "Having your FFL handle the shipping for you might have made your life simpler..."

What you refuse to believe is that"...it did not make the sale extra legal."

As for pushing the envelope, that is a horseshit accusation, and you know it!

Restrictions in my lifetime? Yes, I remember guns in Sears and Western Auto. I bought guns by mail. I would buy ammo and dynamite at the local hardware when I was 12.

Been told countless times how every new restriction was crucial to stop crime. Bastards have been lying to me for 60 years. Calls for ever more onerous restrictions continues unabated.

[Hoyt]

12. No, OShooter, you aren't paying attention.