[Poco Loco]

On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 20:17:51 -0400, KC wrote:

On 10/31/2014 7:45 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 15:38:20 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/31/2014 3:24 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 15:11:24 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/31/2014 2:56 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 14:10:31 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/31/2014 12:54 PM, John H wrote:
On Friday, October 31, 2014 12:27:40 PM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/31/2014 12:12 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 10:05:10 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:

On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 06:07:39 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

Not bad for the whole deal John. I'll ask my brother about where he got his and see if it came with the whole kit. Pricing too

I have a son-in-law who loves guns. Might make him a nice Christmas
present.

Dick would make it illegal for you to give it to him.



Not at all. If John's son-in-law has had a background check, is legally
permitted to own a firearm and the serial number is registered in his
name upon transfer... all is good.

None of which is required, although I'll probably have a transfer record for myself. This: http://www.beararms.com/PDF/FTUP.pdf



To me, (and understanding it's a federal law), this is just plain dumb.
I believe everyone who owns a gun should be licensed or permitted.
Ya, I know the criminals don't bother but you aren't a gun criminal
until you use one in a crime.

Licenses or permits should be issued following a background check and a
formal safety course. Guns should be registered by serial number to the
owner with records in a national or state data base. Transfers should be
updated to the data base.

Please don't tell me about growing up in North Dakota or Texas or some
wild west place and having a .22 rifle since you were knee-high to a
grasshopper. This isn't the 1800's.



BTW, this is what I find:

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]


Q: From whom may an unlicensed person acquire a firearm under the GCA?

A person may only acquire a firearm within the person’s own State,
except that he or she may purchase or otherwise acquire a rifle or
shotgun, in person, at a licensee’s premises in any State, provided
the sale complies with State laws applicable in the State of sale and
the State where the purchaser resides. A person may borrow or rent a
firearm in any State for temporary use for lawful sporting purposes.

[18 U.S.C. 922(a)(3) and (5), 922(b)(3), 27 CFR 478.29 and 478.30]

https://www.atf.gov/content/firearms-frequently-asked-questions-unlicensed-persons#gca-unlicensed-transfer

Maybe you've found something different?



Nope, I read the same thing at the link you provided.

I just think the law is dumb.

Maybe it's due to a reading comprehension on my part but what does:

"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"

mean to you?

Sounds to me that it's ok to transfer or sell the firearm if you *don't*
know if he's prohibited from having one.


It means, to me, if I know the guy is a wife beater, junkie, felon,
drunk, sociopath, Harry Krause, etc, then I should not sell or give
him a firearm.



Right. But it's ok to transfer or sell it to him if you *don't* know
he's a wife beater, junkie, felon, drunk, sociopath, or ...

It gets *you* off the hook but it doesn't prevent someone who is or
should be prohibited from having a gun from getting it.

That's what's dumb, IMO.


And unless the guy has been convicted, most of those things won't show
up on a background check anyway.


As much as I hate to admit it because my credit is not that great, I
think it's a good way of checking on someones character. In CT you can
go to the State Police and get a "character check" done on someone who
signs a paper. It shows not only convictions, etc, but any involvement
with police that was noted in a police report....

Maybe I should have added 'police reports' to 'convicted'. Again, many
of those, if not the great majority, will not show up under either
scenario.

[KC]

On 10/31/2014 8:29 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 20:17:51 -0400, KC wrote:

On 10/31/2014 7:45 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 15:38:20 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/31/2014 3:24 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 15:11:24 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/31/2014 2:56 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 14:10:31 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/31/2014 12:54 PM, John H wrote:
On Friday, October 31, 2014 12:27:40 PM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/31/2014 12:12 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 10:05:10 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:

On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 06:07:39 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

Not bad for the whole deal John. I'll ask my brother about where he got his and see if it came with the whole kit. Pricing too

I have a son-in-law who loves guns. Might make him a nice Christmas
present.

Dick would make it illegal for you to give it to him.



Not at all. If John's son-in-law has had a background check, is legally
permitted to own a firearm and the serial number is registered in his
name upon transfer... all is good.

None of which is required, although I'll probably have a transfer record for myself. This: http://www.beararms.com/PDF/FTUP.pdf



To me, (and understanding it's a federal law), this is just plain dumb.
I believe everyone who owns a gun should be licensed or permitted.
Ya, I know the criminals don't bother but you aren't a gun criminal
until you use one in a crime.

Licenses or permits should be issued following a background check and a
formal safety course. Guns should be registered by serial number to the
owner with records in a national or state data base. Transfers should be
updated to the data base.

Please don't tell me about growing up in North Dakota or Texas or some
wild west place and having a .22 rifle since you were knee-high to a
grasshopper. This isn't the 1800's.



BTW, this is what I find:

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]


Q: From whom may an unlicensed person acquire a firearm under the GCA?

A person may only acquire a firearm within the person’s own State,
except that he or she may purchase or otherwise acquire a rifle or
shotgun, in person, at a licensee’s premises in any State, provided
the sale complies with State laws applicable in the State of sale and
the State where the purchaser resides. A person may borrow or rent a
firearm in any State for temporary use for lawful sporting purposes.

[18 U.S.C. 922(a)(3) and (5), 922(b)(3), 27 CFR 478.29 and 478.30]

https://www.atf.gov/content/firearms-frequently-asked-questions-unlicensed-persons#gca-unlicensed-transfer

Maybe you've found something different?



Nope, I read the same thing at the link you provided.

I just think the law is dumb.

Maybe it's due to a reading comprehension on my part but what does:

"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"

mean to you?

Sounds to me that it's ok to transfer or sell the firearm if you *don't*
know if he's prohibited from having one.


It means, to me, if I know the guy is a wife beater, junkie, felon,
drunk, sociopath, Harry Krause, etc, then I should not sell or give
him a firearm.



Right. But it's ok to transfer or sell it to him if you *don't* know
he's a wife beater, junkie, felon, drunk, sociopath, or ...

It gets *you* off the hook but it doesn't prevent someone who is or
should be prohibited from having a gun from getting it.

That's what's dumb, IMO.


And unless the guy has been convicted, most of those things won't show
up on a background check anyway.


As much as I hate to admit it because my credit is not that great, I
think it's a good way of checking on someones character. In CT you can
go to the State Police and get a "character check" done on someone who
signs a paper. It shows not only convictions, etc, but any involvement
with police that was noted in a police report....

Maybe I should have added 'police reports' to 'convicted'. Again, many
of those, if not the great majority, will not show up under either
scenario.


I don't know if all states allow that... I can run a report on a
perspective tenant if they sign a paper...

[Mr. Luddite]

On 10/31/2014 7:45 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 15:38:20 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/31/2014 3:24 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 15:11:24 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/31/2014 2:56 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 14:10:31 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/31/2014 12:54 PM, John H wrote:
On Friday, October 31, 2014 12:27:40 PM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/31/2014 12:12 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 10:05:10 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:

On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 06:07:39 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

Not bad for the whole deal John. I'll ask my brother about where he got his and see if it came with the whole kit. Pricing too

I have a son-in-law who loves guns. Might make him a nice Christmas
present.

Dick would make it illegal for you to give it to him.



Not at all. If John's son-in-law has had a background check, is legally
permitted to own a firearm and the serial number is registered in his
name upon transfer... all is good.

None of which is required, although I'll probably have a transfer record for myself. This: http://www.beararms.com/PDF/FTUP.pdf



To me, (and understanding it's a federal law), this is just plain dumb.
I believe everyone who owns a gun should be licensed or permitted.
Ya, I know the criminals don't bother but you aren't a gun criminal
until you use one in a crime.

Licenses or permits should be issued following a background check and a
formal safety course. Guns should be registered by serial number to the
owner with records in a national or state data base. Transfers should be
updated to the data base.

Please don't tell me about growing up in North Dakota or Texas or some
wild west place and having a .22 rifle since you were knee-high to a
grasshopper. This isn't the 1800's.



BTW, this is what I find:

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]


Q: From whom may an unlicensed person acquire a firearm under the GCA?

A person may only acquire a firearm within the person’s own State,
except that he or she may purchase or otherwise acquire a rifle or
shotgun, in person, at a licensee’s premises in any State, provided
the sale complies with State laws applicable in the State of sale and
the State where the purchaser resides. A person may borrow or rent a
firearm in any State for temporary use for lawful sporting purposes.

[18 U.S.C. 922(a)(3) and (5), 922(b)(3), 27 CFR 478.29 and 478.30]

https://www.atf.gov/content/firearms-frequently-asked-questions-unlicensed-persons#gca-unlicensed-transfer

Maybe you've found something different?



Nope, I read the same thing at the link you provided.

I just think the law is dumb.

Maybe it's due to a reading comprehension on my part but what does:

"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"

mean to you?

Sounds to me that it's ok to transfer or sell the firearm if you *don't*
know if he's prohibited from having one.


It means, to me, if I know the guy is a wife beater, junkie, felon,
drunk, sociopath, Harry Krause, etc, then I should not sell or give
him a firearm.



Right. But it's ok to transfer or sell it to him if you *don't* know
he's a wife beater, junkie, felon, drunk, sociopath, or ...

It gets *you* off the hook but it doesn't prevent someone who is or
should be prohibited from having a gun from getting it.

That's what's dumb, IMO.


And unless the guy has been convicted, most of those things won't show
up on a background check anyway.





But what if he *is* a convicted felon, sociopath, junkie or whatever but
neglected to tell you. According to that Federal Transfer Form, you are
free to hand him a gun because you didn't know.

[Mr. Luddite]

On 10/31/2014 9:17 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 15:38:20 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Right. But it's ok to transfer or sell it to him if you *don't* know
he's a wife beater, junkie, felon, drunk, sociopath, or ...

It gets *you* off the hook but it doesn't prevent someone who is or
should be prohibited from having a gun from getting it.

That's what's dumb, IMO.


Most "wife beater, junkie, drunk, sociopath" types will still pass a
background check.
Felons should be stopped, if they present their real ID but if the
number of illegal aliens with "good ID" is any indication, fake IDs
are very easy to get. The last I heard from the people at my wife's
golf course, a green card, an SS card and a driver's license was
around $500. (good enough to pass E-verify)



If someone is convicted of domestic violence, they are prohibited from
having a firearm by Federal law. There are many loopholes in the
Federal law however and many States have enacted much tougher laws.

In some, including mine, a court restraining order means you turn over
your guns until it is lifted.

[Mr. Luddite]

On 10/31/2014 9:21 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 16:06:21 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/31/2014 3:56 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 15:20:15 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Yes, I know, criminals will still have access to guns and people who
pass background checks can still go off their rocker. But at least it
creates a traceable paper trail of ownership.

And those people won't still be dead?



add "and potential liability" to my last sentence.


What liability? These "nutty" guys usually shoot themselves when it is
all over and the criminals end up in jail for the rest of their life.
Not much to sue for there..


I guess it depends on where you live. Here, if you made that firearm
easily available by neglect, you can be found partially liable. The
laws I mentioned before covering locks and safes apply.

Yes, I know locks can be removed. Safes can be broken into. That's not
the point. The point is that if you took reasonable action in
accordance with the scope of the law, to secure your firearms, you won't
be liable. If you leave it out, unlocked and someone steals it, you may
find yourself in court.

[RGrew176]

Originally Posted by Poco Loco

....or not?

http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/p...ional+Arms+Inc.
--

"The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument
with a liberal."

....Peter Brimelow (Author)
(Thanks, Luddite!)

I paid $179 for mine so this is a pretty decent deal. Where I bought mine Gandermountain they are now selling them for $199. I love mine.

[RGrew176]

Looking again at the ad if you get everything that is pictured there you are doing OK in my opinion. I did not get the sling or ammo pouch with mine. I will need to order a sling soon.

[Poco Loco]

On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 21:44:05 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/31/2014 9:17 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 15:38:20 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Right. But it's ok to transfer or sell it to him if you *don't* know
he's a wife beater, junkie, felon, drunk, sociopath, or ...

It gets *you* off the hook but it doesn't prevent someone who is or
should be prohibited from having a gun from getting it.

That's what's dumb, IMO.


Most "wife beater, junkie, drunk, sociopath" types will still pass a
background check.
Felons should be stopped, if they present their real ID but if the
number of illegal aliens with "good ID" is any indication, fake IDs
are very easy to get. The last I heard from the people at my wife's
golf course, a green card, an SS card and a driver's license was
around $500. (good enough to pass E-verify)



If someone is convicted of domestic violence, they are prohibited from
having a firearm by Federal law. There are many loopholes in the
Federal law however and many States have enacted much tougher laws.

In some, including mine, a court restraining order means you turn over
your guns until it is lifted.


Greg's point is the same one I made earlier...*most* "wife beater,
junkie, drunk, sociopath" types will still pass a background check"
because they've not made a paperwork trail.

[Poco Loco]

On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 21:27:32 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/31/2014 7:45 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 15:38:20 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/31/2014 3:24 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 15:11:24 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/31/2014 2:56 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 14:10:31 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/31/2014 12:54 PM, John H wrote:
On Friday, October 31, 2014 12:27:40 PM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/31/2014 12:12 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 10:05:10 -0400, Poco Loco
wrote:

On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 06:07:39 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

Not bad for the whole deal John. I'll ask my brother about where he got his and see if it came with the whole kit. Pricing too

I have a son-in-law who loves guns. Might make him a nice Christmas
present.

Dick would make it illegal for you to give it to him.



Not at all. If John's son-in-law has had a background check, is legally
permitted to own a firearm and the serial number is registered in his
name upon transfer... all is good.

None of which is required, although I'll probably have a transfer record for myself. This: http://www.beararms.com/PDF/FTUP.pdf



To me, (and understanding it's a federal law), this is just plain dumb.
I believe everyone who owns a gun should be licensed or permitted.
Ya, I know the criminals don't bother but you aren't a gun criminal
until you use one in a crime.

Licenses or permits should be issued following a background check and a
formal safety course. Guns should be registered by serial number to the
owner with records in a national or state data base. Transfers should be
updated to the data base.

Please don't tell me about growing up in North Dakota or Texas or some
wild west place and having a .22 rifle since you were knee-high to a
grasshopper. This isn't the 1800's.



BTW, this is what I find:

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]


Q: From whom may an unlicensed person acquire a firearm under the GCA?

A person may only acquire a firearm within the person’s own State,
except that he or she may purchase or otherwise acquire a rifle or
shotgun, in person, at a licensee’s premises in any State, provided
the sale complies with State laws applicable in the State of sale and
the State where the purchaser resides. A person may borrow or rent a
firearm in any State for temporary use for lawful sporting purposes.

[18 U.S.C. 922(a)(3) and (5), 922(b)(3), 27 CFR 478.29 and 478.30]

https://www.atf.gov/content/firearms-frequently-asked-questions-unlicensed-persons#gca-unlicensed-transfer

Maybe you've found something different?



Nope, I read the same thing at the link you provided.

I just think the law is dumb.

Maybe it's due to a reading comprehension on my part but what does:

"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"

mean to you?

Sounds to me that it's ok to transfer or sell the firearm if you *don't*
know if he's prohibited from having one.


It means, to me, if I know the guy is a wife beater, junkie, felon,
drunk, sociopath, Harry Krause, etc, then I should not sell or give
him a firearm.



Right. But it's ok to transfer or sell it to him if you *don't* know
he's a wife beater, junkie, felon, drunk, sociopath, or ...

It gets *you* off the hook but it doesn't prevent someone who is or
should be prohibited from having a gun from getting it.

That's what's dumb, IMO.


And unless the guy has been convicted, most of those things won't show
up on a background check anyway.





But what if he *is* a convicted felon, sociopath, junkie or whatever but
neglected to tell you. According to that Federal Transfer Form, you are
free to hand him a gun because you didn't know.


As I said earlier, if the dude approaches me on the street, I'll
suggest we go to the nearest FFL guy and do the transfer. But that's
only because I'm a law abiding type guy. If I were a Chicago hood, I'd
just sell the firearm for cash and be on my way - law or no law.

[Poco Loco]

On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 05:27:23 +0000, RGrew176
wrote:


Poco Loco;1016080 Wrote:
....or not?

http://tinyurl.com/njwvfdl.
--

"The modern definition of 'racist' is someone who's winning an argument
with a liberal."

....Peter Brimelow (Author)
(Thanks, Luddite!)

I paid $179 for mine so this is a pretty decent deal. Where I bought
mine Gandermountain they are now selling them for $199. I love mine.

I don't really have a use for it, and the price dropped to $171 while
discussing it. So I ordered it yesterday. I think one of my SILs will
love it. He's the one who made the three trips to the mideast.