How do I know I'm not selling a gun to a felon?


PDA






Joe Link
October 13, 2006, 11:50 PM
This is something that really bothers me and I'm not sure what a good solution would be, or if there is one. If I'm selling one of my firearms and a private party comes to purchase it, there's nothing to stop them from lying when I ask if they have any felonies. Some say 'well you asked, that's all you can do', but if that gun was then used in a crime I'd feel horrible. I guess this is a good reason to never sell any of my collection :neener:

If you enjoyed reading about "How do I know I'm not selling a gun to a felon?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Ditchtiger
October 13, 2006, 11:53 PM
You can have a background check done, $10

FeebMaster
October 13, 2006, 11:55 PM
Don't ask. Don't tell.

plexreticle
October 13, 2006, 11:55 PM
Cause he paid for it.

Euclidean
October 13, 2006, 11:58 PM
What if, what if, what if... You'll never get anywhere doing nothing but what iffing. What if I wake up tomorrow and the whole world's turned into lime gelatin?

I can see your concern, but let's say you're selling a tire iron at a garage sale instead. It could be used easily to kill somebody, are you worried about that?

What if you sold knives? Or power equipment? Or chemicals?

It's your property, and the cornerstone of our rights rests on your ability to do whatever the hell you want with it.

rbernie
October 13, 2006, 11:58 PM
Asking to see a CHL isn't a bad way to verify that they're likely OK, if you feel anything might be squirrelly. Other than that, I just ask and take them at their word.

Werewolf
October 14, 2006, 12:00 AM
I am conflicted concerning the background of a private buyer just as you are hence I've never sold a gun to a private party.

My suggestion would be to just take a trip to your local FFL and pay for a NICS check/Transfer of the weapon. If the buyer isn't willing don't make the sale. That doesn't mean the buyer is a criminal or can't pass the check - more than likely he or she is as law abiding as any one of us. It probably just means they want an off the paper weapon - in other words when the day comes that the FEDS decide us sheep no longer should be permitted to own firearms those who bought from FFL's and never sold or traded their purchased weapons will be getting visits from the local government enforcers while those who bought in a face to face transaction will only have to turn in their form 4473 purchased weapons (that's assuming the enforcers don't just show up and tear the place apart knowing full well that one could have purchased out side of the system in the past).

DoubleTapDrew
October 14, 2006, 12:03 AM
You can go through a FFL and have them do the paperwork/check if you don't mind the gov't being involved and the $20 or so they'd charge.
Do you think YOU not selling them a firearm would have prevented the crime? A gun is a tool. If you need to pound in a nail, you'll find a hammer or suitable replacement one way or another. I see where you are coming from though, and if it was used in a crime that would be a bad deal.

deadin
October 14, 2006, 12:04 AM
So you are intimating that when I buy a gun on a 4473, I will never get rid of it? :uhoh:

Dean

progunner1957
October 14, 2006, 01:03 AM
My suggestion would be to just take a trip to your local FFL and pay for a NICS check/Transfer of the weapon. If the buyer isn't willing don't make the sale.
Either that or ask to see a valid CCW license and a gov't. issued ID of some type.

The list of people I would sell any gun to without a FFL transfer is damn short and it is only people I have personally known for 10+ years.

I understand the desire to have a gun with no "papers" on it - not a bad idea, really. Keep in mind though that if you sell a gun this way as far as The Government is concerned, it is still "on you".

oldfart
October 14, 2006, 02:04 AM
I was just being born back in '34 when the NFA was signed into law but I'm sure there were a lot of gun owners who thought the government was getting too intrusive then.
In '68 things got worse and started a slide into a morrass of forms and laws and the fear of violating some obscure rule or regulation.
This thread is strong evidence that all those laws seem to have had the desired effect.
I don't sell guns anymore. I like the ones I have and my wife and daughter like them well enough that they wouldn't let me sell them either. But if I were to sell one, I sure wouldn't worry about whether or not the buyer was a 'disenfranchised person' according to a law or regulation I don't believe should even be on the books. In my book, a "felon" lives in a prison and has armed guards to protect him from harm and us from him. Real 'felons' don't exist except in a prison or a brainwashed mind.
That said, I'd still try to make sure the buyer wasn't a psycho looking for a school. Though if he were to ask directions to one I'd probably send him to the Police Academy.

gunsmith
October 14, 2006, 02:32 AM
you can do a background check if you so desire.
It's not required though.
I've only sold to friends or friends of friends myself.
It's legal here, I'm not sure whatstate your in but ,for instance, CA requires you go thru a FFL.

Molon Labe
October 14, 2006, 09:07 AM
When I sell a gun, I couldn't care less if the person is a felon.

22-rimfire
October 14, 2006, 10:02 AM
You better care. You are why states like PA have legislated that NO handgun sales may be made be individuals unless the firearm sale is handled (ie. booked) by a FFL dealer and the NICs check performed (except to limited family members). If you knowingly sell a firearm to a felon, you have committed a crime.

Euclidean
October 14, 2006, 10:09 AM
The gun is his property. He can sell it to whoever he wants. End of story.

Granted I would encourage anyone to not do anything illegal. But when I'm king, that's how it will be.

Either that or we just might as well assume the state owns all of his property in reality and can tell him what to do with it.

orionengnr
October 14, 2006, 10:19 AM
Lots of good advice.

If the buyer has a CHL, that is evidence of law abiding citizenship status.

Conducting the transaction at an FFL (complete with 4473) is an option if the buyer is not a CHL holder.

If you are selling on the net, inter-state, that requires shipping to an FFL (talking handguns here).

I like the "don't sell, period" advice too. Wish I could afford to follow it. :rolleyes:

hammer4nc
October 14, 2006, 11:18 AM
NC requires a handgun purchase permit ($5 donation to the sherriff's Jim Crow memorial fund;) ) to be presented by the buyer, and retained by the seller in a private sale. Failure to do so is a class 1 misd. on both parties. CHP can substitute for the handgun purchase permit. Don't like it, not aware of prosecutions on it, but there ya go.

usaimages
October 14, 2006, 11:58 AM
Would you worry so much about selling your used car? What if the buyer was a convicted drunk who then got loaded and ran into a station wagon with a woman and her children and killed them all. Is that your fault also? As far as I'm concerned, a person can become a felon for just about anything anymore. You are a convicted felon only when you get caught, but when you are released from prison you become an "ex-felon". My point is, if you are now released back into society then the govt. has decided that you have "paid your debt to society" and are now perfectly safe to walk free among your fellow members of society. If you are still considered to be a "danger", they never should have let you free. I, for one, will not become a personal watchdog for the federal or state govt. If you want to be, that's just fine. By the way, I am not some guy with a record who is spouting off because I cannot legally own a gun. I'm a correctional officer who works an armed post in a prison, an ex-cop and a concealed handgun permit holder. Let the backlash begin.

STAGE 2
October 14, 2006, 02:49 PM
Draw up a simple contract stating that "I'm selling the following firearm to so and so for X dollars. By signing this document so and so agrees to this transaction and is representing that there are no local, state or federal law prohibiting so and so from owning a firearm."

Do that and felon or otherwise you're in the clear.

vynx
October 14, 2006, 02:57 PM
Does it worry you enough to take less money?

If so then sell it consignment through a gunshop - it may be different in some states but in California the shop will do all the paperwork but they usually take 20% of the selling price.

I wouldn't worry it is NOT the gun committing the crime its the person.

Zen21Tao
October 14, 2006, 02:59 PM
It probably just means they want an off the paper weapon - in other words when the day comes that the FEDS decide us sheep no longer should be permitted to own firearms those who bought from FFL's and never sold or traded their purchased weapons will be getting visits from the local government enforcers while those who bought in a face to face transaction will only have to turn in their form 4473 purchased weapons (that's assuming the enforcers don't just show up and tear the place apart knowing full well that one could have purchased out side of the system in the past).

When the day comes that guns are illegal I will have bills of sale written up for every gun I bought on a form 4473. ;) ;) :D

fjolnirsson
October 14, 2006, 05:01 PM
I don't sell guns anymore. I like the ones I have and my wife and daughter like them well enough that they wouldn't let me sell them either. But if I were to sell one, I sure wouldn't worry about whether or not the buyer was a 'disenfranchised person' according to a law or regulation I don't believe should even be on the books. In my book, a "felon" lives in a prison and has armed guards to protect him from harm and us from him. Real 'felons' don't exist except in a prison or a brainwashed mind.

OldFart,

You said it better than I could have. Felons are in prison. An ex-convict who has served his time is a free man, same as I am. He deserves the same rights and priveleges I have. If he is too dangerous to trust with a gun, the Gorram government shouldn't have let him out. I will never stand in the way of someone trying to defend themselves or their family. Think about it. As much as folks here gripe and grumble about the "right" to self defense, and how states that disallow carry are creating a society of victims, doesn't the law regarding felons and firearms do the same thing?
Or is it a "guns for me, but not for thee" thing, like the anti-gun politicians espouse?

plexreticle
October 14, 2006, 05:04 PM
The only paperwork I'm concerned about when I sell a gun is green.

River Wraith
October 14, 2006, 07:30 PM
Easy, just don't sell your guns.:neener:

MachIVshooter
October 14, 2006, 10:01 PM
The gun is his property. He can sell it to whoever he wants. End of story.

Pretty much, but the law read that if you knowingly sell to someone who is prohibited by law, you are committing a felony.

When I do private transfers, I generally use personal judement. If I don't know the person from Adam, I have form that I use. Basically just a bill of sale with make, model, caliber and S/N. But I get full name, address, DL # and phone #. It also has a two paragraph section at the end of which the buyer must sign. That section basically covers all the stuff you must answer no to on the 4473. If they refuse to do this, I don't sell b?c it is my arse if they go shoot a convenience store clerk with it the next day. Thus far I have never had anyone do this.

If I do know the buyer personally or on the reference of a friend I trust, I use a much simpler bill of sale with make, model and S/N plus their full name and phone #.

On the same note, I use the more formal version when I buy privately from someone I don't know. Since it contains both buyer and seller info and signatures, it clears me (the buyer) if the weapon was reported stolen.

MachIVshooter
October 14, 2006, 10:03 PM
The gun is his property. He can sell it to whoever he wants. End of story.

Pretty much, but the law read that if you knowingly sell to someone who is prohibited by law, you are committing a felony.

When I do private transfers, I generally use personal judement. If I don't know the person from Adam, I have form that I use. Basically just a bill of sale with make, model, caliber and S/N. But I get full name, address, DL # and phone #. It also has a two paragraph section at the end of which the buyer must sign. That section basically covers all the stuff you must answer no to on the 4473. If they refuse to do this, I don't sell b/c it is my arse if they go shoot a convenience store clerk with it the next day. Thus far I have never had anyone refuse to sign.

If I do know the buyer personally or on the reference of a friend I trust, I use a much simpler bill of sale with make, model and S/N plus their full name and phone #.

On the same note, I use the more formal version when I buy privately from someone I don't know. Since it contains both buyer and seller info and signatures, it clears me (the buyer) if the weapon was reported stolen. If seller refuses to sign, I don't buy. Had this happen once with a guy who was trying to unload a Ruger Vaquero .45 Colt for $150. Good deal, but I don't want to recieve stollen property, even if it is free.

Sleeping Dog
October 15, 2006, 12:06 AM
If I'm selling a rifle, I ask the guy if he's got a felony conviction and I take his word. Then I record all his driver license info, in case the cops come asking some day. No license, no sale.

Rarely, I just get a bad feeling about someone who wants to buy, so no sale. I hope I don't get sued violating somebody's rights.

Regards.

Molon Labe
October 15, 2006, 01:17 AM
If I'm selling a rifle, why should I care if the guy is a felon?

Hoppy590
October 15, 2006, 01:20 AM
idealogical differances from the .gov aside

you should care because it will be ur ass on the line in the end. we all know the law, how they interpet/MAKE UP the law,and what you will be arrested for are rarely the same thing

rhubarb
October 15, 2006, 11:46 AM
Here is an approximate transcript of my conversation with the guy who purchased a .22 rifle from me at a gun show a month ago. I walked in the door with the gun with a for sale sign on it and not two minutes later:

He: How much for the .22?
Me: $95 like it says on the sign.
He: Will you take $80?
Me: Sure, but the bolt and magazine in my back pocket are an additional $15.
He: Uhh
Me: Just kidding, I'll take $80.
He: 20, 40, 60, 80 - Here ya go.
Me: Thanks. Good luck.

Why should the government care what I buy and sell with another private citizen?

plexreticle
October 15, 2006, 12:14 PM
I'm more concerned about buying from a felon.

david_the_greek
October 15, 2006, 12:26 PM
I agree with it being an Individuals right, but I like to keep documents for my own record and because if something did ever happen, i'm off the hook. Lets not give anti's any ammo by saying "why should I care if I'm selling to a felon?" If you feel the need to get a backround check then by all means go for it. Personally I'd just like the persons drivers license info and a receipt of sale signed and dated. If the person seems ok (yes subjective, yes they can lie), and they willing give me info I ask for then I feel much more confident they are legit. I do not however, intend to ever give up that info to any angency unless I am being detained as a suspect for murder because my fomer firearm was found. but hey if you want to give your "evil" deadly fully automatic assault carbine with an endless 30rnd magazine (haha oh my) to someone with out proof, I'm sure some anti's would love to hear about it.

berettaman
October 15, 2006, 12:37 PM
Remember that a bill of sale is another paper trail. So what if you sell your private property to a felon.He broke the law,you didn't.Plus if you don't give the guy a reciept,when the law comes and askes if you sold a gun to a known felon you just say,let me see,no that guns missing,he must have stolen it,yes officer i'd like to press charges.The guys a felon and he lies and steals too.Who are they gonna believe?:evil: :evil: :evil:

ConstitutionCowboy
October 15, 2006, 01:30 PM
How do I know I'm not selling a gun to a felon?

Why should you worry about it in the first place? The state let this guy out of prison, didn't they? The state must consider this guy no longer a threat, so why should you concern yourself with whether this guy has a gun?

Let's get real and keep these guys locked up.

Woody

"Freedom is good for the individual, good for the human condition, and good for society as well. It is the only way individual accountability can be valid, for a person who is not free to do as he sees fit cannot be blamed... or genuinely rewarded." K.L.Dimond

Prince Yamato
October 15, 2006, 01:34 PM
Pretty much it's if you KNOWINGLY sell to a felon. If you unknowingly sell to someone who is deemed a public threat and you get on the news please respond with the following:

"If the person is that dangerous, what the hell are they doing out of prison?"

MachIVshooter
October 15, 2006, 01:52 PM
Rarely, I just get a bad feeling about someone who wants to buy, so no sale. I hope I don't get sued violating somebody's rights.

No one has a right to buy your used merchandise. Unless you blatently state that you will not sell to them because they are X-race or of this religion, etc., in which case they would be after you for defamation, no worries. Besides, how do youthink it would go over in a court of law if someone sued you for not selling them a gun when they were prohibited from buing one?

Although there have been cases of junkies calling the police because they thought their dealer ripped them off, and then being arrested when it turns out the drugs were authentic.........:rolleyes:

oldfart
October 15, 2006, 03:11 PM
Ok guys, suppose - just suppose you see someone breaking out the window on a car and getting in. Further suppose you whip out your legally carried gun and 'prone him out' on the ground, call 911 on your cellphone and wait until Officer Friendly gets there.
When he does get there, what does he do first, pat you on the back for doing such a good deed or 'prone you out' too?
Y'see, Officer Friendly doesn't like it when you do his job, especially if you do it better than he does. After all the dust has settled he'll give you back your gun (maybe) and haul away the bad guy. But he still doesen't like you doing his job!
So why do it? At best, you'll get of with only slightly less hassle than the toad that broke into the car and at worst, you won't get your gun back for days or weeks. Well, you do it because you think it's the right thing to do and you believe the police appreciate the help.
Wrong!!
So why bother to run background checks on face-to-face buyers? Sure, there's a slight possibility that the buyer is an idiot looking for a gun to use for holding up stores but how the heck can you know that? A few months ago some businessman in Reno took issue with the judge that presided over his rape, er, divorce and ventilated said judge with an AR clone after killing his ex-wife. He not only would have passed the NICS check but he - as an owner of a string of pawnshops - had initiated God only knows how many similar checks.
The guy that killed the Amish girls had passed the NICS as did a whole lot of other people who legally bought guns from stores and then changed their way of doing business by either killing someone or robbing them.
The background check only tells you if someone has done something wrong in the past, not whether they'll go bad in the future. I have personal knowledge of people who have had problems with the law at some point in their lives and then gone on to lead an exemplary life.
Remember, while the law is always the law, it isn't always right. If you're so worried about what might happen that you'll infringe on somebody's right to keep and bear arms you are the unpaid agent of an overreaching government and the not-too-distant relative of the 'block wardens' of Communist Russia.

LAR-15
October 15, 2006, 05:27 PM
I might look at someone's photo ID but that is it.

Any records I get will be lost by me eventually anyway and if I am not legally required to get/keep any, I will not do it.

I hate trying to keep records and keep them in order.

plexreticle
October 15, 2006, 05:39 PM
I'm not going to ID someone for a private sale. They want to buy it and I want to sell it. I may do a bill if the guy wants some kind of recipt.

Cops show up and ask me about the gun. I say; "I sold it at the gun show. Here is a copy of the bill of sale."

gezzer
October 15, 2006, 11:18 PM
If you are uncomfortable just sell through a dealer and pay the fee. Who cares what others want it is your sale and your rules.

vmfrantz
October 15, 2006, 11:56 PM
A felon wont buy your gun, they will probably steel it. You know, a zebra wont lose its stripes.

Davidq762
October 16, 2006, 12:12 AM
OldFart & fjolnirsson

You said it better than I could have. Felons are in prison. An ex-convict who has served his time is a free man, same as I am. He deserves the same rights and priveleges I have. If he is too dangerous to trust with a gun, the Gorram government shouldn't have let him out. I will never stand in the way of someone trying to defend themselves or their family. Think about it. As much as folks here gripe and grumble about the "right" to self defense, and how states that disallow carry are creating a society of victims, doesn't the law regarding felons and firearms do the same thing?

And both of you have hit the nail on the head. According to the TRUE RULE of Constitutional Law.

"All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void."
- Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (2 Cranch) 137 (1803).

All 'gun control' laws are Repugnant to the United States Constitution, which is the Supreme Law of the land, despite what nine Usurping monkeys with black robes and gavels in their paws 'stare decisis-ly decide. To Wit:

"It is a fortunate thing that the objection to the Government has been made on the ground I stated; because it will be practicable, on that ground, to obviate the objection, so far as to satisfy the public mind that their liberties will be perpetual, and this without endangering any part of the Constitution, which is considered as essential to the existence of the Government by those who promoted its adoption...."

"In some instances they assert those rights which are exercised by the people in forming and establishing a plan of Government. In other instances, they specify those rights which are retained when particular powers are given up to be exercised by the Legislature. In other instances, they specify positive rights, which may seem to result from the nature of the compact. Trial by jury cannot be considered as a natural right, but a right resulting from a social compact which regulates the action of the community, but is as essential to secure the liberty of the people as any one of the pre-existent rights of nature."

-James Madison, June 8, 1789 House of Representatives, Amendments to the Constitution (http://gunshowonthenet.com/2ALEGAL/Madison,6081789.html)

"This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty....The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Whenever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction."

- St. George Tucker, Blackstone's Commentaries (http://gunshowonthenet.com/BOOKS/BlackCommTucker/CommTuckerV1Index.html) (1803)

I. Natural Rights of the Colonists as Men;

"Among the natural rights of the Colonists are these: First, a right to life; Secondly, to liberty; Thirdly, to property; together with the right to support and defend them in the best manner they can. These are evident branches of, rather than deductions from, the duty of self-preservation, commonly called the first law of nature...."

"In short, it is the greatest absurdity to suppose it in the power of one,
or any number of men, at the entering into society, to renounce their
essential natural rights, or the means of preserving those rights; when the
grand end of civil government, from the very nature of its institution, is
for the support, protection, and defence of those very rights; the principal
of which, as is before observed, are Life, Liberty, and Property. If men,
through fear, fraud, or mistake, should in terms renounce or give up any
essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the grand end of
society would absolutely vacate such renunciation."

"The right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of man to alienate this gift and voluntarily become a slave."

- Samuel Adams, The Rights of the Colonists (http://gunshowonthenet.com/SecondAmend/RightsoftheColonists.html), (November 20, 1772)

Our right is a God-given, Inherent and Natural one (http://gunshowonthenet.com/2ALaw/LawsofNature.html). Shall not be Infringed means exactly what was written.

Neither the state or federal governments have any truly legal authority over our right. The only power they have is what has been illegally and unConstitutionally grabbed from us. The contention gov. has used, in error, is that they have control over our right because of the 'militia'. This is proven false here: "Rights of the citizen declared to be --" (http://gunshowonthenet.com/2ALEGAL/CitizensRight.html) and here: 'for the common defence' (?) (http://gunshowonthenet.com/2ALEGAL/Precedent/SenateJournal09091789.html).

It's all Constitutionally Proven here: The Right (http://gunshowonthenet.com/SecondAmend/TheRight.html)

One of the best quotes I've seen on the subject is this:

"You, Sir, triumph in the supposed illegality of this body;
but, granting your supposition were true, it would be a matter
of no real importance. When the first principles of civil
society are violated, and the rights of a whole people are
invaded, the common forms of municipal law are not to be
regarded. Men may then betake themselves to the law of nature;
and, if they but conform their actions, to that standard, all
cavils against them, betray either ignorance or dishonesty.
There are some events in society, to which human laws cannot
extend; but when applied to them lose all their force and
efficacy. In short, when human laws contradict or discountenance
the means, which are necessary to preserve the essential
rights of any society, they defeat the proper end of all laws,
and so become null and void."

- Alexander Hamilton, The Farmer Refuted (http://gunshowonthenet.com/2ALEGAL/FarmerRefutedHamilton.html), 23 Feb. 1775
Papers 1:86--89, 121--22, 135--36

The ONLY Constitutionally legal time that an American citizen can be disarmed, is if they have been legally imprisoned. If they have served their lawfully imposed sentence, and are set free, they are again in 'the state of nature' and entitled to defend themselves. Our Rights are "Inalienable" and "Perpetual".

Don't Tread On Me
October 16, 2006, 12:17 AM
Dunno if this is true, but in Florida, if their driver's license number ends in a "1" they have a felony. If it is a "0", they have never had a felony.

MechAg94
October 16, 2006, 12:22 PM
I just use my best judgment. If I don't knowingly sell to a felon, I am not breaking a law.

I too am more concerned with buying a stolen gun or one used in a crime.

Gordon Fink
October 16, 2006, 01:03 PM
Itís legal here, Iím not sure whatstate your in but ,for instance, CA requires you go thru a FFL.

For firearms less than 50 years old and all handguns.

Unfortunately, all my firearms were purchased illegally. :(

~G. Fink

jrou111
October 16, 2006, 02:14 PM
I only will sell to someone I already know.

If you enjoyed reading about "How do I know I'm not selling a gun to a felon?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!