On 10/4/2017 11:36 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 04 Oct 2017 10:15:18 -0400, John H
wrote:

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ensure the permit is still in good standing and has not been revoked for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.


What kind of permit are you speaking of. Can individuals make private sales without involving an FFL
holder, simply be going online and inputting the numbers?

That seems to be the loophole in the system. If you wanted to hide the
real transfer, you would just enter a few phony transactions.



You'd have to be a good guesser. The on-line systems checks for current
permit numbers versus names versus addresses. Sale isn't valid if
numbers don't match up.

When I moved I was required to send (by state law and by certified mail)
change of address forms to:

1. The police department in which the permit was issued.
2. The police department in the town I moved to.
3. The State of Massachusetts (some department that I've forgotten).

When I renew my permit it will be in the town to which I moved.

On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 13:01:44 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/4/2017 11:36 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 04 Oct 2017 10:15:18 -0400, John H
wrote:


What kind of permit are you speaking of. Can individuals make private sales without involving an FFL
holder, simply be going online and inputting the numbers?

That seems to be the loophole in the system. If you wanted to hide the
real transfer, you would just enter a few phony transactions.



You'd have to be a good guesser. The on-line systems checks for current
permit numbers versus names versus addresses. Sale isn't valid if
numbers don't match up.

I wonder how "secret" that list is?
In a world where just about anything has been leaked to the web, I
can't imagine it would be hard for a serious criminal to get some
valid names and numbers.
The problem is, nobody would know until a gun was recovered and
traced. That assumes someone really wants to hide a gun's provenance.
Of course if you are a criminal, you just sell the gun and don't tell
anyone. It will usually move around in the black market for a while
before it pops up again at a crime scene or ends up in Boston Harbor
with a body or two on it.

On 10/4/2017 1:57 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 13:01:44 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/4/2017 11:36 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 04 Oct 2017 10:15:18 -0400, John H
wrote:


What kind of permit are you speaking of. Can individuals make private sales without involving an FFL
holder, simply be going online and inputting the numbers?

That seems to be the loophole in the system. If you wanted to hide the
real transfer, you would just enter a few phony transactions.



You'd have to be a good guesser. The on-line systems checks for current
permit numbers versus names versus addresses. Sale isn't valid if
numbers don't match up.

I wonder how "secret" that list is?
In a world where just about anything has been leaked to the web, I
can't imagine it would be hard for a serious criminal to get some
valid names and numbers.
The problem is, nobody would know until a gun was recovered and
traced. That assumes someone really wants to hide a gun's provenance.
Of course if you are a criminal, you just sell the gun and don't tell
anyone. It will usually move around in the black market for a while
before it pops up again at a crime scene or ends up in Boston Harbor
with a body or two on it.



Heh. I know you love to find faults with just about any government rule
or regulation but the private sale system has been in operation here for
many years and seems to work well. You don't hear too many gun nut
issues originating out of MA.

Makes me wonder how you were able to handle being a building inspector.
All those codes, rules, regulations, etc. :-)

On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 13:01:44 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 10/4/2017 11:36 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 04 Oct 2017 10:15:18 -0400, John H
wrote:

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.


What kind of permit are you speaking of. Can individuals make private sales without involving an FFL
holder, simply be going online and inputting the numbers?

That seems to be the loophole in the system. If you wanted to hide the
real transfer, you would just enter a few phony transactions.



You'd have to be a good guesser. The on-line systems checks for current
permit numbers versus names versus addresses. Sale isn't valid if
numbers don't match up.

When I moved I was required to send (by state law and by certified mail)
change of address forms to:

1. The police department in which the permit was issued.
2. The police department in the town I moved to.
3. The State of Massachusetts (some department that I've forgotten).

When I renew my permit it will be in the town to which I moved.


This is simply a permit to own a gun? Can anyone get such a permit, or is it restricted to those
with a 'special' need?

On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 12:55:12 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 10/4/2017 10:15 AM, John H wrote:
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.


What kind of permit are you speaking of. Can individuals make private sales without involving an FFL
holder, simply be going online and inputting the numbers?



In MA it's called a Class "A" Concealed Carry Permit. The Class A
permit allows you to own just about anything except a machine gun. As
I've mentioned before, it allows me to own high capacity mags as well.
Only problem is ... it's illegal buy one, transport one into the state
or have it shipped. But, I can own one. :-)

MA also had a Class "B" permit at the time I got my Class "A". It
didn't allow concealed carry and was basically for home defense and
transport to a shooting range only.

Then, there is a long gun permit for rifles and shotguns. These permits
are "shall issue" permits rather than "may issue" for the Class A and B
but subject also to a background check.

They even have permits for mace and pepper spray.

Yes, individuals can make private sales but only to another resident of
MA. A FFL is not required. The buyer must have a current permit (number
must be provided) for the type of firearm to be sold and the serial
number, make and model is required. Seller's info is also required.
You can fill out the form online and submit it. If no problem, a
receipt is issued.

I haven't sold (or purchased) a firearm in several years, so the private
sale rules may have changed or even been done away with. I have a
couple of handguns I'll probably never use again but I think I'll just
take them back to the FFL dealer and see what he'll give me for them.


I just looked at the requirements put out by the Cambridge, MA, police department. I'm surprised
that the ACLU, NAACP, Jesse Jackson, and all the liberals who complain about voter ID requirements
being 'racist' don't jump all over the requirements to get a LTC permit.

It would be interesting to see a racial breakout of how the LTC's are distributed in the state.

On 10/4/2017 3:34 PM, John H wrote:
On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 13:01:44 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 10/4/2017 11:36 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 04 Oct 2017 10:15:18 -0400, John H
wrote:

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.


What kind of permit are you speaking of. Can individuals make private sales without involving an FFL
holder, simply be going online and inputting the numbers?

That seems to be the loophole in the system. If you wanted to hide the
real transfer, you would just enter a few phony transactions.



You'd have to be a good guesser. The on-line systems checks for current
permit numbers versus names versus addresses. Sale isn't valid if
numbers don't match up.

When I moved I was required to send (by state law and by certified mail)
change of address forms to:

1. The police department in which the permit was issued.
2. The police department in the town I moved to.
3. The State of Massachusetts (some department that I've forgotten).

When I renew my permit it will be in the town to which I moved.



This is simply a permit to own a gun? Can anyone get such a permit, or is it restricted to those
with a 'special' need?


It's not special but it's up to the town or city police chief as to what
type of permit you can get. He can also impose restrictions on it
if he is so inclined. That's the "may" issue part. For rifles and
shotguns MA is a "shall" issue state, assuming no issues with a
background check.

I have the Class A with no restrictions. I can carry concealed and, as
I've mentioned before, am permitted to own just about any firearm made
and large capacity magazines. Only exception is a sub-machine gun.
However, as previously mentioned, it doesn't mean anything because you
can't buy many guns or magazines over 10 round capacity anyway here.

For many years it was almost impossible for the average Joe to get a gun
permit in most of MA but people started suing towns, citing 2nd
Amendment rights and the towns started allowing permits to be issued
more freely. Still have to pass an FBI background check though.

Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...
On Tue, 3 Oct 2017 10:48:32 -0700 (PDT), Its Me
wrote:

On Tuesday, October 3, 2017 at 12:03:20 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 3 Oct 2017 08:34:20 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:


I am definitely in favor of mandatory, universal background checks for
firearm purchases. I know others disagree but I think it's only
commonsense. Like most complex issues in a diversified society, some
level of compromise is required to advance the welfare and safety of the
whole.

That is some nice feel good legislation but most of the mass shooters
passed background checks and hard core criminals have other avenues
for getting the guns they want.
Although this guy would have had no problem filling out a Form 4 and
getting the FBI/BATF to sell him a stamp, it appears his machine guns
were illegally obtained/modified.
I heard some reports this morning saying he had a couple of "bump fire" stocks on AR's. At that point it's still a semi-auto with a stock that makes your finger hit the trigger much faster than you could do it manually.
I am really waiting for the actual facts but the fire did sound more
regular than I would expect from a bump fire stock. To be honest I
have never actually fired a gun like that. You can waste ammo faster
by just throwing it in the trash.
Ammo wasn't wasted. The gun nuttery worked quite well.
59 dead.
It that right, Kevin?

John H wrote:
On Tue, 3 Oct 2017 19:33:50 -0400, Alex wrote:

wrote:
On Tue, 3 Oct 2017 10:48:32 -0700 (PDT), Its Me
wrote:

On Tuesday, October 3, 2017 at 12:03:20 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 3 Oct 2017 08:34:20 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:


I am definitely in favor of mandatory, universal background checks for
firearm purchases. I know others disagree but I think it's only
commonsense. Like most complex issues in a diversified society, some
level of compromise is required to advance the welfare and safety of the
whole.

That is some nice feel good legislation but most of the mass shooters
passed background checks and hard core criminals have other avenues
for getting the guns they want.
Although this guy would have had no problem filling out a Form 4 and
getting the FBI/BATF to sell him a stamp, it appears his machine guns
were illegally obtained/modified.
I heard some reports this morning saying he had a couple of "bump fire" stocks on AR's. At that point it's still a semi-auto with a stock that makes your finger hit the trigger much faster than you could do it manually.
I am really waiting for the actual facts but the fire did sound more
regular than I would expect from a bump fire stock. To be honest I
have never actually fired a gun like that. You can waste ammo faster
by just throwing it in the trash.
Could have been a double tap trigger.
Bump stock.

That's what it turned out to be.

I am hoping that congress will someday pass some sort or reciprocity bill whereby a state will be required to recognize a Concealed Carry license or permit from other states.

Right now the other 49 states recognize my Michigan drivers license. As to my Concealed Carry Permit there are 8 states + some territories that do not reciprocate and recognize my carry permit.

Right now I can conceal carry in all but California, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Guam, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, New York City, Oregon, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, Virgin Islands, American Samoa, N. Mariana Islands

A reciprocity bill would take care of that situation.

On 10/5/2017 12:30 AM, RGrew176 wrote:
I am hoping that congress will someday pass some sort or reciprocity bill whereby a state will be required to recognize a Concealed Carry license or permit from other states.

Right now the other 49 states recognize my Michigan drivers license. As to my Concealed Carry Permit there are 8 states + some territories that do not reciprocate and recognize my carry permit.

Right now I can conceal carry in all but California, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Guam, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, New York City, Oregon, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, Virgin Islands, American Samoa, N. Mariana Islands

A reciprocity bill would take care of that situation.



I agree. True to form, Massachusetts doesn't recognize a permit from
any other state. Maybe if they changed their attitude, other states
would recognize a MA permit.