Another new "rule" incoming? No more private sales without a ffl involved?

[apollo11capcom]

Especially if they're stored together unchaperoned. Opened the safe one day and the population inside had doubled.

I love it when that happens. My wife doesn't believe it though, she thinks I'm going out and buying them.

 

[WebSnyper]

And some will do it but screw you over. I think its Indiana Gun Club that charges a premium for doing a transfer for any gun they sell that you buy from someone else. I think it was like $25 if its not something they can get, but $50 or $75 if you just chose not to buy from them.

That's their rules of how the want to conduct their business. As long as they are upfront with it, it is what it is.

First rule of FFL is call them and understand their rules/costs before having anything shipped to them.

 

[11infantryb]

I was recently reading up on this subject. I get why people want to be able to sell their private property to others. But I also know that selling a firearm to a guy in a Lowes parking lot and checking his DL isn't necessarily the end all be all to make sure he's not a felon. Cudos to those that check for pink card licenses, but you don't need those anymore (constitutional carry kind of ruined that) and a person could have a lifetime permit and have received a felony afterward. I'm not against ending private sales but I'm not against having to go through a FFL. As that would also help boost some of our LGS who lose a lot of business to online retailers.

 

[Mgderf]

I was recently reading up on this subject. I get why people want to be able to sell their private property to others. But I also know that selling a firearm to a guy in a Lowes parking lot and checking his DL isn't necessarily the end all be all to make sure he's not a felon. Cudos to those that check for pink card licenses, but you don't need those anymore (constitutional carry kind of ruined that) and a person could have a lifetime permit and have received a felony afterward. I'm not against ending private sales but I'm not against having to go through a FFL. As that would also help boost some of our LGS who lose a lot of business to online retailers.

Absolutely not.
No.
End discussion.

 

[Creedmoor]

And some will do it but screw you over. I think its Indiana Gun Club that charges a premium for doing a transfer for any gun they sell that you buy from someone else. I think it was like $25 if its not something they can get, but $50 or $75 if you just chose not to buy from them.

Heres a question, if you owned a gunshop would you transfer a firearm for a $25.00 fee when you have one on the shelf or you can get, that you would make $50.00 to $250.00 on?

 

[11infantryb]

Absolutely not.
No.
End discussion.

Very informative, thanks for the value added. Please feel free to elaborate because comments like yours are not helping fight against anti 2A agendas.

 

[Creedmoor]

I was recently reading up on this subject. I get why people want to be able to sell their private property to others. But I also know that selling a firearm to a guy in a Lowes parking lot and checking his DL isn't necessarily the end all be all to make sure he's not a felon. Cudos to those that check for pink card licenses, but you don't need those anymore (constitutional carry kind of ruined that) and a person could have a lifetime permit and have received a felony afterward. I'm not against ending private sales but I'm not against having to go through a FFL. As that would also help boost some of our LGS who lose a lot of business to online retailers.

If thats how you really feel, I would suggest you move to say, NJ, MD, NY, RI, OR, WA, Minn, Ill.
They have the same beliefs as you sir.

 

[Creedmoor]

I was recently reading up on this subject. I get why people want to be able to sell their private property to others. But I also know that selling a firearm to a guy in a Lowes parking lot and checking his DL isn't necessarily the end all be all to make sure he's not a felon. Cudos to those that check for pink card licenses, but you don't need those anymore (constitutional carry kind of ruined that) and a person could have a lifetime permit and have received a felony afterward. I'm not against ending private sales but I'm not against having to go through a FFL. As that would also help boost some of our LGS who lose a lot of business to online retailers.

Very informative, thanks for the value added. Please feel free to elaborate because comments like yours are not helping fight against anti 2A agendas.

Loads of Irony sir in that top post.
You might want to read that 2nd Amendment again sir.

 

[Ark]

I was recently reading up on this subject. I get why people want to be able to sell their private property to others. But I also know that selling a firearm to a guy in a Lowes parking lot and checking his DL isn't necessarily the end all be all to make sure he's not a felon. Cudos to those that check for pink card licenses, but you don't need those anymore (constitutional carry kind of ruined that) and a person could have a lifetime permit and have received a felony afterward. I'm not against ending private sales but I'm not against having to go through a FFL. As that would also help boost some of our LGS who lose a lot of business to online retailers.

Nobody should have to have a "background check" to exercise a basic constitutional right.

If someone is a felon, they're the ones committing a crime, not you. I am not interested in being forced to pay middlemen for a service I don't want.

 

[11infantryb]

Loads of Irony sir in that top post.
You might want to read that 2nd Amendment again sir.

I am very familiar with it. I am for civilians owning anything they want. But there is a fine line between a well regulated militia and letting anyone own/buy firearms without background checks. If you can show me where it says that in the second amendment I'll buy you a beer.

 

[Creedmoor]

I am very familiar with it. I am for civilians owning anything they want. But there is a fine line between a well regulated militia and letting anyone own/buy firearms without background checks. If you can show me where it says that in the second amendment I'll buy you a beer.

Here's a Grunt that's gonna teach you something.
"SHALL NOT INFRINGE"
A background check is an Infringement. Thanks for playing.
Oh, and I don't drink beer.

 

[11infantryb]

Nobody should have to have a "background check" to exercise a basic constitutional right.

If someone is a felon, they're the ones committing a crime, not you. I am not interested in being forced to pay middlemen for a service I don't want.

I 100% agree with you. Again, I am trying to just have an informative conversation. What if it was free, would that change your mind (if the feds made them free)? There are those that are willfully ignorant and are willing to sell to anyone to make a buck and I don't think that should be the case.

 

[TheGrumpyGuy]

I am very familiar with it. I am for civilians owning anything they want. But there is a fine line between a well regulated militia and letting anyone own/buy firearms without background checks. If you can show me where it says that in the second amendment I'll buy you a beer.

Can you show me where in the 2nd A it calls for background checks?

 

[Ark]

I am very familiar with it. I am for civilians owning anything they want. But there is a fine line between a well regulated militia and letting anyone own/buy firearms without background checks. If you can show me where it says that in the second amendment I'll buy you a beer.

Can you show me where in the Second Amendment it says the right is conditioned on a permission slip from the government and a laundry list of requirements and disqualifiers?

Behold how the Overton Window moves. Do you know that until the mid 1990s, nobody had ever filled out a 4473 asking for permission to buy a gun?

 

[11infantryb]

Here's a Grunt that's gonna teach you something.
"SHALL NOT INFRINGE"
A background check is an Infringement. Thanks for playing.
Oh, and I don't drink beer.

So you are for violent criminals owning machine guns legally? Because your statement would imply that.

 

[Creedmoor]

I 100% agree with you. Again, I am trying to just have an informative conversation. What if it was free, would that change your mind (if the feds made them free)? There are those that are willfully ignorant and are willing to sell to anyone to make a buck and I don't think that should be the case.

I'm from Maryland, The more you post the more I really believe you would be quite happy where I grew up at.

 

[Creedmoor]

So you are for violent criminals owning machine guns legally? Because your statement would imply that.

Freedom , true Freedom is a uncomfortable scary thing. As it should be.
That comes with "Shall Not Infringe"

You honestly think that criminals of any sort don't have illegal automatic weapons now?
LOLOLOLOLOLOL.

 

[11infantryb]

Can you show me where in the Second Amendment it says the right is conditioned on a permission slip from the government and a laundry list of requirements and disqualifiers?

Behold how the Overton Window moves. Do you know that until the mid 1990s, nobody had ever filled out a 4473 asking for permission to buy a gun?

My brother in Christ your laundry list of "requirements and disqualifiers" is like 12 questions and really has to do with 3 things. 1. Are you a criminal 2. Are you a citizen 3. Are you addicted to any substances

 

[maxipum]

I was recently reading up on this subject. I get why people want to be able to sell their private property to others. But I also know that selling a firearm to a guy in a Lowes parking lot and checking his DL isn't necessarily the end all be all to make sure he's not a felon. Cudos to those that check for pink card licenses, but you don't need those anymore (constitutional carry kind of ruined that) and a person could have a lifetime permit and have received a felony afterward. I'm not against ending private sales but I'm not against having to go through a FFL. As that would also help boost some of our LGS who lose a lot of business to online retailers.

Nope

 

[actaeon277]

So you are for violent criminals owning machine guns legally? Because your statement would imply that.

No.
Violent criminals should not be released back to society.