On Tue, 3 Oct 2017 20:31:49 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/3/2017 8:13 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 3 Oct 2017 17:09:18 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/3/2017 12:14 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 3 Oct 2017 09:34:33 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:


I agree but if a universal background check system could stop even *one*
of these events from happening, it would be worth it. A background
check is really not an inconvenience.

It is certainly not a problem for people at a dealer in the city but a
rancher in Montana might disagree if he just wants to give his son an
old gun.


I could accept and understand exceptions for in-family "gifts".

How about selling it to your neighbor?



Nope.

I don't know how it works in other states but here in MA a background
check is done when you apply for a permit. Once issued, it is good for
six years after which you apply for a renewal and a check is done again.

During the time you hold the permit a quick state check (via phone or
computer) is done by the FFL dealer whenever you purchase a firearm to
ensure the permit is still in good standing and has not been revoked for
any reason. Private sales may be made to other MA residents by going
on-line, providing both his and your permit numbers, the firearm type
and serial number and current addresses. If no issues, you are done and
the sale is legal.


You are assuming a rural state really wants to spend money maintaining
a system like that for such a small number of transactions and such a
low crime rate, thus a low rate of return on the investment.
In the places that drive the national crime rate, guns are still
illegally trafficked with no problem.

If we are going to pass a law, why not just make murder illegal?