MitchSchaft
member
I , too, am impressed by oldfart's speech. There's nothing more inspiring than to hear from someone who's been there and done that and has some stories to tell.
back ground check for private sales
- Thread starter answerguy
- Start date
- Status
larry_minn
Member
I know a gent who sold a handgun and a few yrs later wound up being dragged out of his bed half asleep near naked (he had a pair of underwar on) and cuffed in hallway before he knew what happened. Neighbors walked by and his GF was only wearing a robe. Seems he sold a gun about 4yrs before and it was used in a robbery/shooting and dropped.
He was hauled in with only sweat pants on and tennis shoes no socks. About 5 hrs later released with no ride back to his apt or even a apoligy.
He was hauled in with only sweat pants on and tennis shoes no socks. About 5 hrs later released with no ride back to his apt or even a apoligy.
TallPine
Member
oldfart, you can move over here and be my neighbor any old time 
Then there would be two "old farts"
And ... wasn't it a bunch of "old white farts" that wrote the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution ?
And I always wondered about that "concealed" thing ... if it's concealed, nobody sees it, and if somebody sees it, it's not concealed.
Then there would be two "old farts"
And ... wasn't it a bunch of "old white farts" that wrote the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution ?
And I always wondered about that "concealed" thing ... if it's concealed, nobody sees it, and if somebody sees it, it's not concealed.
rock jock
Member
I wasn't referring to oldfart's story, but rather to the tone of his first post. Sorry, but I get a little tired of the "high and mighty" attitude of those who profess to rise above constraints of tyranny and look down with derision on those who don't conform to their standards of liberty. Oh sure, they don't openly carry guns in a prohibited area or on airplanes (seems they have a convenient excuse for avoiding direct confrontation with those JBT nasties), or perhaps they avoid air travel altogether (as if this were any different because they are still allowing the govt. to dictate the restrictions on their lives), but they are quick to look down on you because you are nothing but a sheeple for filling out a 4473. Not impressed at all.
spacemanspiff
Senior Member
well if the firearm didnt get logged on the 4473 when you came into possession of it, thats one thing, oldfart. but all but one of mine is logged with the 4473, so in the unlikely event that i do sell any of my guns, i'll be drawing up a bill of sale just to cover my end.
oldfart
Member
rock_jock:
Where, in any of my posts, have I indicated a desire to impress you? I've simply given my thoughts on a subject-- same as you have. If you don't like my thoughts you should skip over to the next post and find something you like better.
And Matis, what I was imperfectly trying to point out is the fact that I lost it a long time ago.
As for the rest of you: Thank you for your comments. I wish I were worthy of them. More, I wish my wife held your views too.
As an aside, there used to be a gunshop just down the street from me. The owner was somewhat less than personable, usually downright nasty, but when he died suddenly and all his records were tossed into a drop-box and hauled off to a paper mill, many of us gun owners in the neighborhood somehow forgot to tell the people cleaning the place up that those yellow sheets were supposed to be sent to the government.
A terrible slip of our collective memories, that.
Where, in any of my posts, have I indicated a desire to impress you? I've simply given my thoughts on a subject-- same as you have. If you don't like my thoughts you should skip over to the next post and find something you like better.
And Matis, what I was imperfectly trying to point out is the fact that I lost it a long time ago.
As for the rest of you: Thank you for your comments. I wish I were worthy of them. More, I wish my wife held your views too.
As an aside, there used to be a gunshop just down the street from me. The owner was somewhat less than personable, usually downright nasty, but when he died suddenly and all his records were tossed into a drop-box and hauled off to a paper mill, many of us gun owners in the neighborhood somehow forgot to tell the people cleaning the place up that those yellow sheets were supposed to be sent to the government.
A terrible slip of our collective memories, that.
I wouldn't want the ability to do a background check as a private citizen selling to another. Once it's available, it becomes twisted into something a "reasonable and prudent" person would do, so failure to get a background check on your prospective buyer becomes negligent, and YOU are named as a defendant in a victim lawsuit, just like the gun stores, pawn shops, etc. are. Kiss your savings, and maybe car, house, retirement, and a large percentage of your future earnings goodbye - attorneys fees and, God forbid, satisfaction of an adverse judgment, will blow right through them.
MitchSchaft
member
You da man!Southla1
Member In Memoriam
Well OldFart and Tall Pine I may move by y'all then there will be 3 "Old Farts". I guess the older ya get the less horse stuff you are inclined to take.............no matter who it comes from...............the government or otherwise.
Harold Mayo
Member
Nah, no background checks. I could care less. If I don't feel like selling to someone, then I don't...if I do, I do. That's that.
People can tell all the horror stories that they want about being dragged out of bed, etc., etc. but the fact of the matter is that giving the government MORE influence over your life and decisions instead of making sure that it has LESS will eventually lead a society down the ugly road that countries like Germany, the Soviet Union, and China (and many others) have trodden or are tredding. We are, too. I keep hearing "It would never happen here"...but it will. That's what they say before it gets bad.
People can tell all the horror stories that they want about being dragged out of bed, etc., etc. but the fact of the matter is that giving the government MORE influence over your life and decisions instead of making sure that it has LESS will eventually lead a society down the ugly road that countries like Germany, the Soviet Union, and China (and many others) have trodden or are tredding. We are, too. I keep hearing "It would never happen here"...but it will. That's what they say before it gets bad.
mjustice
Member
I agree with Oldfart. But, unfortunately, I was born 40 years too late, and so my name and vitals are all over my guns.
I tend to only buy and sell guns from people who I know personally or know enough about to be reasonably certain that the guns was not knowingly stolen.
New York requires all handguns to be registered, and so when I buy or sell a handgun I have to provide a reciept or bill of sale in the case of a private-party transaction. Since I do this for handguns, I see no reason not to do it for longarm transactions. If I don't know the buyer personally, I take their details and DL/Pistol License number.
If the police ever do have a reason to knock on my door asking about a gun that I sold, I'd like to have something to send them on their merry way with.
MJ
I tend to only buy and sell guns from people who I know personally or know enough about to be reasonably certain that the guns was not knowingly stolen.
New York requires all handguns to be registered, and so when I buy or sell a handgun I have to provide a reciept or bill of sale in the case of a private-party transaction. Since I do this for handguns, I see no reason not to do it for longarm transactions. If I don't know the buyer personally, I take their details and DL/Pistol License number.
If the police ever do have a reason to knock on my door asking about a gun that I sold, I'd like to have something to send them on their merry way with.
MJ
Sam Adams
Member
I once sold a gun to someone at a gun show - for cash. He was obviously over 21, so I didn't ask for his license. In retrospect, I should've asked to see it, and written down his name and the license number. If I sell another gun (and that's fairly unlikely - I'm in buying mode), I would never reveal that info to anyone UNLESS the boys in blue showed up at my door and asked why a gun that I had purchased was used in a crime. That's just sensible CYA.
I am totally against the idea of the government being involved with my private business. If a crime is involved (a real, immoral, crime like robbery, murder, etc., not some crime created by the stroke of a pen), then the government has a right (and a duty) to make inquiries. Otherwise, MYOB is the order of the day.
As to ex-cons owning firearms, here's my philosophy: If they are so dangerous that society doesn't want them to own guns, why were they released? And if they're not that dangerous and have "paid their debt to society," then why have they suddenly lost the right to protect themselves and their families? Also, does anyone seriously believe that an ex-con couldn't obtain some weapon with which to hurt others? I seem to remember from my readings of history that there were plenty of crimes of violence committed prior to the invention of firearms - it ain't the weapon you should worry about, its the person.
Oldfart - thanks for your musings. It is always nice to hear from those who remember how things were pre-'68 GCA. People like you are much better equipped to comment about things as they are now, since you have different circumstances to compare today's BS against.
I am totally against the idea of the government being involved with my private business. If a crime is involved (a real, immoral, crime like robbery, murder, etc., not some crime created by the stroke of a pen), then the government has a right (and a duty) to make inquiries. Otherwise, MYOB is the order of the day.
As to ex-cons owning firearms, here's my philosophy: If they are so dangerous that society doesn't want them to own guns, why were they released? And if they're not that dangerous and have "paid their debt to society," then why have they suddenly lost the right to protect themselves and their families? Also, does anyone seriously believe that an ex-con couldn't obtain some weapon with which to hurt others? I seem to remember from my readings of history that there were plenty of crimes of violence committed prior to the invention of firearms - it ain't the weapon you should worry about, its the person.
Oldfart - thanks for your musings. It is always nice to hear from those who remember how things were pre-'68 GCA. People like you are much better equipped to comment about things as they are now, since you have different circumstances to compare today's BS against.
Sam Adams
Member
DCR said: "I wouldn't want the ability to do a background check as a private citizen selling to another. Once it's available, it becomes twisted into something a "reasonable and prudent" person would do, so failure to get a background check on your prospective buyer becomes negligent, and YOU are named as a defendant in a victim lawsuit, just like the gun stores, pawn shops, etc. are. Kiss your savings, and maybe car, house, retirement, and a large percentage of your future earnings goodbye - attorneys fees and, God forbid, satisfaction of an adverse judgment, will blow right through them."
You had all better believe that this is the truth. I'm a lawyer (Estates & Trusts - I don't sue people, just try to save them trouble and money), and I know that the out-of-control tort lawyers will do exactly what DCR said. Just keep your own private records, just for CYA if a gun you sell is later used in a crime.
You had all better believe that this is the truth. I'm a lawyer (Estates & Trusts - I don't sue people, just try to save them trouble and money), and I know that the out-of-control tort lawyers will do exactly what DCR said. Just keep your own private records, just for CYA if a gun you sell is later used in a crime.
Southla1
Member In Memoriam
"YOU are named as a defendant in a victim lawsuit, just like the gun stores, pawn shops, etc. are. Kiss your savings, and maybe car, house, retirement, and a large percentage of your future earnings goodbye - attorneys fees and, God forbid, satisfaction of an adverse judgment, will blow right through them."
Thats EXACTLY one of the reasons I own! Let em come. See my earlier post about old and ornery.
Thats EXACTLY one of the reasons I own! Let em come. See my earlier post about old and ornery.
PATH
Member
If you don't buy on paper you don't sell on paper. One less thing that the government knows about. God knows they are into everything else. I don't as a rule sell my guns though. I guess CYA does make sense in terms of a bill of sale.
answerguy
Member
Another tough guy
Do I understand you correctly? If the police trace a gun to you because you were the retail buyer, even though you since have sold it, you're going to meet the police at your door with guns blazing? It's been nice knowing you.
Do I understand you correctly? If the police trace a gun to you because you were the retail buyer, even though you since have sold it, you're going to meet the police at your door with guns blazing? It's been nice knowing you.
Harold Mayo
Member
Just for the sake of argument...
Let's say that I keep meticulous records of my gun sales. I'm as good (or better) as any gun store at it (like I said...or better). A gun I sold is used in a murder. It is traced to me and I have records that I sold it to the murderer. What does this get me? I am basically like a gun store owner then...there are written records in my possession that I sold the guy the gun.
On the other hand, I sell a guy a gun and don't even get his last name (or his first, for that matter). It is used in a murder and is traced back to me. I honestly answer that I sold it to someone but don't know who he was. From there, I can either say that it wasn't the guy or that I don't recognize him but it could be or whatever. Doesn't any sort of burden of proof that I even sold it to a particular person rest on the prosecutor (if a criminal charge is brought up)? Civil proceedings would likely be murkier but wouldn't there still be a burden of proof on someone OTHER than me?
It doesn't really matter to me what someone does with a gun I sell. Callous? I guess, but I can't be someone else's keeper. If I sell a car and the guy kills someone with it, is it my fault because I sold it to him? Not in my mind and ONLY in the mind of some crawling tort lawyer...and maybe not then.
I trade around A LOT. I have guns that I keep and guns that I try. I mostly try and then get rid of them to try something else. I can honestly say that I know the names of only three people (other than friends and family) to whom I have sold guns and I will soon forget one of them because I have no reason to hang onto the memory or the e-mails. I have probably sold fifty guns over the past several years and that is all that I remember and then only because the two that will stick with me are unusual (one is a child psychologist with an unusual name in Las Vegas and the other is a member and moderator of a couple of forums who wrongly believes that I screwed up a trigger job on a custom gun I sold him). If approached by someone that I have sold a gun to in person at a gun show, I doubt that I could tell you that I've even seen the person before.
Ah, well...everyone has their opinions. I will NOT stick my nose into someone else's life because it is none of my business.
Let's say that I keep meticulous records of my gun sales. I'm as good (or better) as any gun store at it (like I said...or better). A gun I sold is used in a murder. It is traced to me and I have records that I sold it to the murderer. What does this get me? I am basically like a gun store owner then...there are written records in my possession that I sold the guy the gun.
On the other hand, I sell a guy a gun and don't even get his last name (or his first, for that matter). It is used in a murder and is traced back to me. I honestly answer that I sold it to someone but don't know who he was. From there, I can either say that it wasn't the guy or that I don't recognize him but it could be or whatever. Doesn't any sort of burden of proof that I even sold it to a particular person rest on the prosecutor (if a criminal charge is brought up)? Civil proceedings would likely be murkier but wouldn't there still be a burden of proof on someone OTHER than me?
It doesn't really matter to me what someone does with a gun I sell. Callous? I guess, but I can't be someone else's keeper. If I sell a car and the guy kills someone with it, is it my fault because I sold it to him? Not in my mind and ONLY in the mind of some crawling tort lawyer...and maybe not then.
I trade around A LOT. I have guns that I keep and guns that I try. I mostly try and then get rid of them to try something else. I can honestly say that I know the names of only three people (other than friends and family) to whom I have sold guns and I will soon forget one of them because I have no reason to hang onto the memory or the e-mails. I have probably sold fifty guns over the past several years and that is all that I remember and then only because the two that will stick with me are unusual (one is a child psychologist with an unusual name in Las Vegas and the other is a member and moderator of a couple of forums who wrongly believes that I screwed up a trigger job on a custom gun I sold him). If approached by someone that I have sold a gun to in person at a gun show, I doubt that I could tell you that I've even seen the person before.
Ah, well...everyone has their opinions. I will NOT stick my nose into someone else's life because it is none of my business.
oldfart
Member
In the "sue happy" climate we now live, perhaps CYA is a reasonable step. But let's look at another facet of this issue.
As I understand it, terrorism is force used against citizens to make a government change its ways. But, as we all know, governments can make citizens change their ways through similar tactics. Scarcely a month goes by without a report here or on another forum about some gun owner or collector being arrested or killed in a sudden midnight raid. All too frequently his original 'offence' was some simple paperwork error, but by the time the raid is publicized, his stash of surplus ammo and collection of classic firearms has been transformed into an "arsenal" and he is painted as a terrorist. We read these accounts, gulp, look over our shoulders and tell ourselves something like "they'll never do that to me."
So, instead, we rush to cover our posteriors! Which is what they want us to do. They want us to keep records of everything we buy, sell, eat, drink, use or misuse. That way, they can keep us so busy with trivia that we don't have time to address the larger picture. Instead of finding ways to avoid or throw off the bureaucratic tyranny, we cover our butts with bureaucratic paperwork. We don't beat 'em, we join 'em!
I'm in a better position than some of you. I don't own a business or a ranch or even a car, so I don't have much to lose. Those of you with more property will have to decide for yourselves how to act. But when you're dead, will it make a difference if you died in a soft, warm bed or a hole in the ground? Do you want to leave your kids money and property or freedom?
Somebody is reading this right now and getting ready to explode all over me with a claim that being cautious isn't an infringement on freedom. But being FORCED to be cautious is!!! It absolutely is! If a government can make you fearful enough to change the way you do things- that government has infringed upon your freedom to make a choice! I remember when things were done differently and I've watched our government terrorize us until we changed our way of doing things. Many of you-- perhaps most of you-- can't remember those days because you weren't alive then, but things really were better then than they are now.
Sure, cars go faster now than they did then, but we weren't in a hurry. We have tv and computers now, but we didn't need them then. Diseases killed more people then than now, but wars kill more now than then. Best of all, people were more self-reliant then-- even in the cities.
You guys do what you feel you need to do. Cover your fannies with bills of sale, background checks or whatever. Just remember, when you do so, you become part of the problem, part of the Matrix, and eventually the time may come when you will have to be disconnected from the Matrix. That could be painful.
As I understand it, terrorism is force used against citizens to make a government change its ways. But, as we all know, governments can make citizens change their ways through similar tactics. Scarcely a month goes by without a report here or on another forum about some gun owner or collector being arrested or killed in a sudden midnight raid. All too frequently his original 'offence' was some simple paperwork error, but by the time the raid is publicized, his stash of surplus ammo and collection of classic firearms has been transformed into an "arsenal" and he is painted as a terrorist. We read these accounts, gulp, look over our shoulders and tell ourselves something like "they'll never do that to me."
So, instead, we rush to cover our posteriors! Which is what they want us to do. They want us to keep records of everything we buy, sell, eat, drink, use or misuse. That way, they can keep us so busy with trivia that we don't have time to address the larger picture. Instead of finding ways to avoid or throw off the bureaucratic tyranny, we cover our butts with bureaucratic paperwork. We don't beat 'em, we join 'em!
I'm in a better position than some of you. I don't own a business or a ranch or even a car, so I don't have much to lose. Those of you with more property will have to decide for yourselves how to act. But when you're dead, will it make a difference if you died in a soft, warm bed or a hole in the ground? Do you want to leave your kids money and property or freedom?
Somebody is reading this right now and getting ready to explode all over me with a claim that being cautious isn't an infringement on freedom. But being FORCED to be cautious is!!! It absolutely is! If a government can make you fearful enough to change the way you do things- that government has infringed upon your freedom to make a choice! I remember when things were done differently and I've watched our government terrorize us until we changed our way of doing things. Many of you-- perhaps most of you-- can't remember those days because you weren't alive then, but things really were better then than they are now.
Sure, cars go faster now than they did then, but we weren't in a hurry. We have tv and computers now, but we didn't need them then. Diseases killed more people then than now, but wars kill more now than then. Best of all, people were more self-reliant then-- even in the cities.
You guys do what you feel you need to do. Cover your fannies with bills of sale, background checks or whatever. Just remember, when you do so, you become part of the problem, part of the Matrix, and eventually the time may come when you will have to be disconnected from the Matrix. That could be painful.
biere
Member
I also agree with a lot that oldfart said. I really agree about fearing the government. They are to be an entity doing things that protect the country. When they make you afraid, the problem is the gov. and nothing else.
I follow the laws of the state and the federal laws as well. I do tend to ask for id, I have been offered ccws as well and that is fine by me. But a fake id would not be noticed by me unless it really sucked.
I am not expected to know a fake id, I am not expected to run a back ground check, I am not expected to keep records. The state and fed laws tell me so.
For those who keep records, are they in your safe? On your computer? In a notebook? What you most likely have is enough to send a burglar to someones house since they bought or sold you a gun. What you have is possably enough to start identity theft. What happens if a fire destroys the records? You are now back where some of us feel you should be. What if the records are stolen or erased, you know there is a problem but have no way to contact someone to tell them YOU messed up.
I do not buy or sell from or to someone I do not trust. My choice.
I sure as heck do not trust anyone who wants my info to keep records on me.
For those who are worried about a gun you sold leading police to your place where they will drag you out of bed and take you to their station, I would have to say we need a lawyer's opinion about circumstantial evidence.
The problem with them dragging someone downtown in warm up pants and not offering a ride home is a problem with the police and how they do things these days. In my opinion, the fear of retaliation for doing what is legal to do would prove the terrorist tactics concept.
I follow the laws of the state and the federal laws as well. I do tend to ask for id, I have been offered ccws as well and that is fine by me. But a fake id would not be noticed by me unless it really sucked.
I am not expected to know a fake id, I am not expected to run a back ground check, I am not expected to keep records. The state and fed laws tell me so.
For those who keep records, are they in your safe? On your computer? In a notebook? What you most likely have is enough to send a burglar to someones house since they bought or sold you a gun. What you have is possably enough to start identity theft. What happens if a fire destroys the records? You are now back where some of us feel you should be. What if the records are stolen or erased, you know there is a problem but have no way to contact someone to tell them YOU messed up.
I do not buy or sell from or to someone I do not trust. My choice.
I sure as heck do not trust anyone who wants my info to keep records on me.
For those who are worried about a gun you sold leading police to your place where they will drag you out of bed and take you to their station, I would have to say we need a lawyer's opinion about circumstantial evidence.
The problem with them dragging someone downtown in warm up pants and not offering a ride home is a problem with the police and how they do things these days. In my opinion, the fear of retaliation for doing what is legal to do would prove the terrorist tactics concept.
1) I'm totally with oldfart.
2) answerguy, since you would feel in some way responsible for a criminal act committed by someone else with the gun you sold them, would you be willing to serve time alongside the person who ACTUALLY committed the crime?
Why or why not?
(Again, you feel partly responsible...)
2) answerguy, since you would feel in some way responsible for a criminal act committed by someone else with the gun you sold them, would you be willing to serve time alongside the person who ACTUALLY committed the crime?
Why or why not?
(Again, you feel partly responsible...)
answerguy
Member
There is a big difference between being legally responsible and morally responsible. I'm of course reffering to being morally responsible. So to directly answer your question; no I would not expect someone to spend time in jail for selling UNKNOWINGLY to a prohibited person.
So if it is agreed that selling to a felon is a bad idea ( I know, I know, some of you here have no problem with selling to a felon)and NICS checks weed out sales to felons why not let private individuals do NICS checks too?
Because that guy with the "clean" record could be buying for his felon buddy you just turned down. (Straw purchase.)
Oh, and also the fact that black market firearms are almost invariably cheaper than legally-purchased guns.
Does anyone know why?
I still don't understand your rationale behind denying felons firearms.
If they are so dangerous that you don't trust them with guns, why are they out on the street in the first place?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked