Do you think private gun sales should go through a FFL?

[Core]

I ask because lots of ads here ask for more than the law requires. Why would anyone selling a firearm via private sale require documentation from the buyer? Is it just me or is that crazy?


Edit to ad: your used firearms are not worth more than new firearms.FFS

No sales should be required to go through FFL. NICS should be an elected service by the FFL if they choose to do background checks. Arms sale to citizens is already protected and guaranteed. The Fed os overstepping.

 

[STPHomie]

I ask because lots of ads here ask for more than the law requires. Why would anyone selling a firearm via private sale require documentation from the buyer? Is it just me or is that crazy?


Edit to ad: your used firearms are not worth more than new firearms.FFS

I don't think the FFL program should exist, so no.

 

[ncwg2boatguy]

I do a bill of sale between me and the purchaser. Not transfer it through an FFL. Especially if you purchased it through a store or online because it's binding to you by paper work. If anything happens you want proof that you sold it and who you sold it to.

 

[gunslinger06]

To address the OP’s original question:
I, and I think most of the firearms community, do not believe private transactions should be REQUIRED to go through an FFL for a couple of reasons:
1. It ads to the cost of the transaction. The average dealer in my area charges $40 to receive a firearm. This would be the same process for an in-person transfer. I can’t imagine the same fee or more would not be imposed on a buyer/seller.
* I recognize you may have “a guy”, but I live in a rural area and options are limited. I also realize splitting that fee is only $20. Not the point. The point is you raised the cost of that $100 shotgun 40%.
2- A distrust of government. I’m not talking about a militia group ready to take down the 3rd Infantry division. I’m talking about the local sheriff who is dealing drugs. The deputy stealing from citizens. Mayor who doesn’t like you writing an article about him. Fill in the blank here, Louisiana has plenty of historical options.
3- We don’t have to. The Feds have no right to regulate a private sale within a states borders. There is no compelling national interest(regardless of what CNN says) and the Commerce Clause doesn’t apply. The question of “why would you not want background checks” is the wrong question. The question is “why does your government want to know exactly where every LEGALLY OWNED firearm lives?” Make no mistake, background checks are absolutely useless in keeping criminals from getting guns. People with records aren’t buying at gun shops anyway. People without a record who intend to commit a crime are impossible to detect with or without a check.

 

[Roystu]

I ask because lots of ads here ask for more than the law requires. Why would anyone selling a firearm via private sale require documentation from the buyer? Is it just me or is that crazy?


Edit to ad: your used firearms are not worth more than new firearms.FFS

No, private sales are just that,,, Private

 

[SVT Bansheeman]

"Do you think private gun sales should go through a FFL?"

No. I dont even like signing a bill of sale ( or going through an FLL for a private sale) when I bought guns from people here.

 

[Magdump]

No, I don't miss the back and forth and I'm not trying to start it anew. But you made a claim as if the proof were obvious. All I asked for was one example. If you can't provide a situation by now, that's cool.

 

[BDClone]

Personally I think we shouldn't have FFLs. For years we could order guns through the mail, at a hardware store, or other retail store. When it comes to private sales we have laws in place to regulate that. A quick summary.... there are penalties for buyers and sellers if the firearm was sold to an ineligible person, selling a defaced firearm or selling a restricted firearm (explosive weapon, machine gun), which can result in different criminal charges including and up to a felony criminal charge.
There are responsibilities for both parties. If a seller has conditions is doing this because he wants to make sure everything is on the up and up. If you don't like those conditions, have a discussion with them and work things out or don't buy it. I personally think people should have several guns they paid cash for through a private sale so that it is untraceable. That is how much faith I have in the ATF.

 

[pptpe45]

My 2 cents worth. If I am selling a firearm to someone I DO NOT KNOW, I am going thru an FFL. IF the buyer uses it illegally I have documentation that I did a check. If I am buying a gun from some I DO NOT KNOW, I am getting a BOS with the sellers info. If the gun somehow turns up as stolen or used in a crime I have a name to go with it. This is common sense that should be used by all of us law abiding gun owners to ensure, as best we can, guns are being kept out of the hands of bad people. Many are right about it not happening...YET. But I can assure you if myself or a family member is a victim 'gun violence' and if turns out the perp got his gun from someone who DID NOT DO A BACKGROUND check, I will be lining up lawyers to sue them into oblivion. WE as responsible gun owners have a responsibility to protect our rights by dong what we can to stop criminals from getting guns. I know I may get flamed but I stand by what I've said. Also in case someone tries to 'read' more into this, I do not believe in going thru and FFL if selling to family member or good friend.

 

[70mikenike70]

I was actually reading some of these posts and then everything started getting ridiculous… What everyone needs to understand is that if you are exchanging text messages with a person and you ask them the age question and if they are a law abiding citizen not under conviction and they respond with the correct answers then that is all the proof you need. Take pictures of serial numbers and the text messages are your bill of sale that can’t be thrown away or lost. If you are ever questioned by the police you have all the information you need to prove your transactions were legal…. It’s common sense lol… Problem solved…

 

[70mikenike70]

My 2 cents worth. If I am selling a firearm to someone I DO NOT KNOW, I am going thru an FFL. IF the buyer uses it illegally I have documentation that I did a check. If I am buying a gun from some I DO NOT KNOW, I am getting a BOS with the sellers info. If the gun somehow turns up as stolen or used in a crime I have a name to go with it. This is common sense that should be used by all of us law abiding gun owners to ensure, as best we can, guns are being kept out of the hands of bad people. Many are right about it not happening...YET. But I can assure you if myself or a family member is a victim 'gun violence' and if turns out the perp got his gun from someone who DID NOT DO A BACKGROUND check, I will be lining up lawyers to sue them into oblivion. WE as responsible gun owners have a responsibility to protect our rights by dong what we can to stop criminals from getting guns. I know I may get flamed but I stand by what I've said. Also in case someone tries to 'read' more into this, I do not believe in going thru and FFL if selling to family member or good friend.

Double standards???

 

[70mikenike70]

It seems as a seller, you do not want to ask for any documentation. How are you able to verify the buyer is of age and a citizen of the state without any documentation?

It's difficult to know with certainty the buyer is not a criminal. But the buyer knowing you will have his information would certainly deter a number of criminals.

Now going through an FFL may be overkill. Having said that, I did sell my ex-wife a handgun and we went through an FFL. We were still cordial at the time but she was an ex for a reason.

 

[DBMJR1]

Let's quickly review a list of all of the ATF record keeping requirements for private parties.

This is a comprehensive list:

---

---

 

[gunslinger06]

View attachment 140762

I’ll toss one reason-protection from government intrusion. An individual may not want a stack of BOS’s lying around in case one day the ATF decides anyone who sells more than 2 guns a decade has to be licensed. A bit of an exaggeration there, I’m sure the ATF would not arbitrarily change its own rules then prosecute someone for doing what they initially said was legal.

The bottom line is that the choice to do a BOS or having a background check done is a personal CHOICE and should remain that way.

Here is a crazy thought- if the ATF is only concerned with felons getting guns, why not make the NICS system available to private citizens? Why make us go to an FFL? Could it be because a dealer is required to keep a record of all transactions and the record is what they are after, not the background check? Hmmmmmm

 

[Deacon]

But the odds are still there. And mass murderers are not the only people prohibited from possessing firearms. A mass killer/prohibited person is more likely to buy a gun from a private sale than through an FFL.

Yes, but there are better odds I will die in an automobile today. Yet, I still drove to work.

 

[pptpe45]

Double standards???

Double standards???

What double standard 70mikemike?

 

[Deacon]

Yes. Also, there are greater odds I will die in automobile today. Yet, I still drove to work.

 

[thperez1972]

I was actually reading some of these posts and then everything started getting ridiculous… What everyone needs to understand is that if you are exchanging text messages with a person and you ask them the age question and if they are a law abiding citizen not under conviction and they respond with the correct answers then that is all the proof you need. Take pictures of serial numbers and the text messages are your bill of sale that can’t be thrown away or lost. If you are ever questioned by the police you have all the information you need to prove your transactions were legal…. It’s common sense lol… Problem solved…

The text message links the conversation to a phone number. It does not, however, link the phone number to a person. If the text messages were made using a pre-paid phone, there could easily be no way to subpoena a cell phone company to get a name linked to the phone number. And text messages are not linked to a weapon's serial number unless you sent that serial number in a text.

A bos links the serial number to a person.

 

[thperez1972]

Yes, but there are better odds I will die in an automobile today. Yet, I still drove to work.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say.

 

[thperez1972]

I’ll toss one reason-protection from government intrusion. An individual may not want a stack of BOS’s lying around in case one day the ATF decides anyone who sells more than 2 guns a decade has to be licensed. A bit of an exaggeration there, I’m sure the ATF would not arbitrarily change its own rules then prosecute someone for doing what they initially said was legal.

The bottom line is that the choice to do a BOS or having a background check done is a personal CHOICE and should remain that way.

Here is a crazy thought- if the ATF is only concerned with felons getting guns, why not make the NICS system available to private citizens? Why make us go to an FFL? Could it be because a dealer is required to keep a record of all transactions and the record is what they are after, not the background check? Hmmmmmm

While I understand what you are saying, it's tough to view that "what if" as a reasonable excuse. Using 2 guns per year as a limit seems a little out there. Using 2 guns per 10 years seems pretty extreme. And even then the change would need to be made retroactive.

I would suggest having to make up an extreme example only shows there are not any reasonable negatives to getting a bos.