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

[maxipum]

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

Well…… what you spelled out IS anti 2A.

 

[Ark]

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

We had lower crime and fewer murders when it was no things.

Is the creep of disqualifiers going to be no big deal to you when they finally add one that disqualifies you?

 

[Creedmoor]

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?

4473 started just after the 1968 gun control act my friend.
Wheres that Millennial video at...

 

[Creedmoor]

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

And all are.... drum roll........ INFRINGEMENTS

 

[11infantryb]

We had lower crime and fewer murders when it was no things.

Is the creep of disqualifiers going to be no big deal to you when they finally add one that disqualifies you?

Where are you getting your statistics? A quick duck duck go or google search will show you there was a steady rise in violent crime from 1960 to approximately 1992, and from 1992 to present it has been on the steady decline.

 

[femurphy77]

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

Did your wife REALLY buy that B.S.?

 

[Ark]

4473 started just after the 1968 gun control act my friend.
Wheres that Millennial video at...

NICS and the FFL background check requirement came from the Brady Bill in the 90s. Due to not being literally old as a fossilized T-Rex, I was not around to remember the original yes/no form from 68 which basically took your word for it. I did not actually know that existed prior to NICS. I did know that the original prohibited persons categories came from 68 GCA.

 

[Creedmoor]

NICS and the FFL background check requirement came from the Brady Bill in the 90s. Due to not being literally old as a fossilized T-Rex, I was not around to remember the original yes/no form from 68 which basically took your word for it. I did not actually know that existed prior to NICS. I did know that the original prohibited persons categories came from 68 GCA.

LOL. I was 10 in 1968.

 

[Rookie]

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.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

 

[Mgderf]

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

 

[Expat]

 

[KLB]

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

Sure. It is owning the gun that is an issue for criminals. Committing a crime is the problem. Laws prohibiting a convicted felon from owning a gun does nothing but give the government a way to stick them back in jail. As Act said, if they are that dangerous, they should not be on the street to begin with.

 

[Gingerbeardman]

The above post is a good point I had not really considered before. It reminds me of the guy's shirt in Happy Gilmore- "guns don't kill people-i kill people" you just can't make shirts like ya used to...

As a gun store owner I think I would try to incentivize purchasing from me but wouldn't punish a transferee financially unless they were habitual. After about the third transfer where they bought a gun I had or could get, I'd say c'mon man, buy from me I'll give you a discount.

 

[chipbennett]

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. Non-starter.

You're more than welcome to go through an FFL if you choose to do so. There's absolutely no reason for, or benefit in, the government mandating it.

You don't need the government making every decision for you.

 

[chipbennett]

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

Alternate perspective: the one proposing an infringement on the rights of the law-abiding is the one who bears the burden to justify and to demonstrate the utility of that infringement.

We, the law-abiding asserting our rights, get the benefit of the status quo. We are fully justified in saying "no", without further explanation.

 

[chipbennett]

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.

The well-regulated militia is something of concern for the state. It has nothing to do with, and no bearing on, the people individually exercising the natural, constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms.

Where does 2A say anything about "letting anyone own/buy firearms without background checks"? Let's start with shall not be infringed.

 

[chipbennett]

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.

What percentage of criminals acquire their firearms in private sales/transfers from law-abiding third parties?

You've got a solution in search of a problem. No, thanks.

 

[chipbennett]

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

Violent criminals are going to do whatever they choose to do, regardless of laws. That's kind of what it means to be a criminal.

Infringing upon the rights of the law-abiding has never changed that, will never change that, and cannot change that.

 

[chipbennett]

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

[Hunter Biden has entered the chat.]

 

[chipbennett]

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

This Is The Way