No control, you say? I did not know that you can 3D print a carbine barrel and a plastic feed ramp. I'm glad I'm learning something new everyday. And for pistols, I guess they can print slides these days. Who needs tempered metal when you have the polymers, right? 10 years later: Pistol slides made from Swiss cheese. "Where's control?"
It seems like a feeble attempt at sounding like lawyer. I say feeble, because if this flowery language were accompanied by reasonable puctuation, it would be more believable.
Hey, another unregulated activity; gifting to a friend or a relative. You can literally by federal law, hand out guns to all your friends and relatives for free, and there are no restrictions or regulations on the gifter. Heck, you can meet anyone, claim they’re a friend if any fed asks, and hand them your AR15. Just play dumb and don’t ask questions, you can hand weapons to every member of a Street gang. The dumber you pretend to be, the less regulated you are in gifting firearms.
Criminals can and will do this regardless of any law, because they're already breaking the law to do so.
As long as they can fined unregulated buyers to sell them guns, of course they will.these unregulated buyers appear in private sales magazines and at gun shows....they are readily available and unregulated.
Simply because a physical activity can be engaged in, does not mean it is legal to do so. There is nothing in the united states, or any other country, to physically prevent a murder from being committed by someone who simply does not care what the law may or may not say. the same applies to firearms trafficking. Even the ATF has verified such as being the case. Observe: https://www.atf.gov/docs/undefined/cawebsite17183919pdf/download Last year in the united states, in the state of California, forty one thousand five hundred and twenty seven firearms found in possession of prohibited individuals were traced by the ATF. According to their data, seventeen thousand three hundred and ninety seven of those firearms, forty one percent were originally sold within the state of California. What this means is that four out of every ten firearms acquired and possessed by prohibited individuals, were acquired in a state where all firearms are registered, all firearm acquisitions require a permit from the state, and all firearm transactions are subject to background check requirements, no exceptions whatsoever. What this ultimately means is that the position of yourself is factually incorrect. These requirements are doing absolutely nothing to prevent or even discourage the illegal acquisition of firearms by those who cannot legally possess them.
They are totally regulated in states like New York, New Jersey, California, Oregon, Washington and Colorado, yet criminals in those states still sell guns to other criminals while ignoring the requirement that all private sales must take place through an FFL.
That doesn't matter. Guns procured inside one of the states legally are then sold illegally to criminals inside the same state to a criminal illegally. The law requiring that private sales go through an FFL in order to prevent these sales cannot prevent these sales. A national law would make no difference.
Explain why the seller should be required to verify that the prospective buyer can legally possess a firearm, and why they should be subject to prosecution for failing to do such.
There is no federal regulation anywhere that requires the private seller be regulated when selling a gun to an out of state resident. . You really don’t understand the difference between the law and enforcement of law do you ? Regulating ALL parties involved is what law enforcement is about. Criminals drive across state lines from regulated states by state law where all sellers, private and FFL, are regulated to enforce BGC which are required. In states that do not regulate the seller, the weak federal law does not require a BGC by the seller in the private sale either. He-she is STILL unregulated. When there is no requirement on the part of a seller to submit proof of any task to authorities, they remain unregulated. You guys are obviously ignorant of the difference, but ignorant by choice. Unregulated sellers can legally sell guns to felons across state lines in private sales and at gun shows.. Your gun advocate web sites are filled with advice on how remain unregulated. I reposted one. Their advice is always the same. Don’t ask, don’t tell, any information with respect to the buyer and his residence, and ID. The seller then remains unregulated by not “ knowingly” selling a firearm to a felon ( or any person) across state lines. The ONLY way your foolish argument works , is if the criminal buyer across state lines, regulates himself for his criminal activity. You guys are joking . Automobile drivers are regulated. The law that requires you own a valid drivers license is not an enforceable law at that point. The law becomes enforceable with the regulation that continues with following requirement; that you must carry it at all times and submit it to enforcement upon request. Private gun sales are federally unregulated for private sellers because they can easily avoid being regulated. Sales to felons and out of state buyers then continues anabated. Everyone else is not as ignorant of federal regs as you appear to be proud of.
Selling a firearm to an individual who is not a resident of the state in question is a felony offense for violating interstate commerce. Just as it is illegal for an individual to attempt to purchase a firearm outside of their state of residence through a private seller. The ATF has stated that the opinion of yourself is factually incorrect. Since they are the experts on the matter, their position wins in this case. Explain why such matters, when the prohibited individual is committing at least one felony offense regardless of such circumstances. Explain why such matters. Why must the seller be subjected to regulations and restrictions, when the prohibited individual who is illegally attempting to acquire a firearm, is committing a felony offense in the process? Why do you have no interest in prosecuting the one attempting to acquire the firearm, while instead focusing on the one selling the firearm? Operation of a motor vehicle on a public right of way is a privilege granted by government, not a constitutional right. Beyond such, the license requirements exist solely for matters of taxation, not for matters relating to safety. Even if federal regulations could be implemented, they could never be enforced. So-called "universal" background check cannot, under any circumstances, actually be enforced without the corresponding registration of every single firearm in existence. Without such registration, there is no way of knowing when any particular firearm was purchased, or by whom.
Regulation does not exist if it doesn’t apply to BOTH PARTIES. We aren’t talking about the purchaser. We’re talking about the private seller. How long have you had this PROBLEM ? For someone who thinks they know everything about gun regs you are pretty naive . You guys do what you usually, you don’t read and you can’t think. If the person is unknown to the private seller, you are unregulated. FFL dealers are regulated, they are required to obtain proof of residency, while private sellers are not required to obtain proof of residency from unknown buyers ; that makes them unregulated and they committ no federal offense selling the firearm to that unknown person REGARDLESS WHAT STATE HE’s FROM. “Selling a firearm to an individual who is ( unknown by you) not a resident of the state in question is NOT a felony offense
You're really strange. The AFT has never stated any thing about my opinions. If you’d “talk” English, maybe someone would take you seriously. Btw, Using "yourself" and "ourselves" in these contexts is incorrect. "Yourself," "ourselves," and "myself" are reflexive pronouns. Stop pretending you’re a legal expert.
Not to you. You want the freedom of everyone to sell your guns to felons, young children and the mentally insane. You can do that now as a private seller. Why would you want to be regulated nationally. You’ll want what the NRA tells you to want.
Regulations are not needed when one party is legally prohibited from engaging in the exchange under any circumstances. Explain the reason behind the obsessive focus on the private seller. All of the above pertains exclusively to those who are engaged in the legal business of selling firearms. The law was never intended to apply to private individuals who are liquidating their own private property, and who are not basing their income around such. The law was not intended to apply to these individuals, as it was understood that such an application was physically impossible to compel, since there is no way of tracking privately owned firearms. It does not need to be when the acquisition of the firearm is a felony offense. Explain why there is no desire on the part of yourself to prosecute the prohibited individual who is attempting to acquire the firearm, while instead focusing exclusively on the private seller who has no criminal record.
Without the corresponding registration of every single firearm in existence in the united states, it is physically, absolutely, impossible to attempt to enforce requirements on the private sale of firearms between private parties.
The ATF releases annual trace data on firearms submitted to them for tracing. Generally it is firearms found at the scene of crimes, or taken from criminals who have been arrested and in possession of a firearm. And in each and every single case, in every single state, the largest number of firearms are traced back to the state where the trace request was submitted, rather than outside of the state. This is the case even in states such as California, and New York. The reasoning behind the manner of addressing others utilized by the one behind this account is of no relevance to the discussion at hand.
Private sellers are not required to turn in any information on any sale they make. They are unregulated. Case closed. You are now on a ramble to change the subject because you’re wrong again. There is no reasoning behind being a phoney. ,
