Nationwide ability to purchase firearms

[leadcounsel]

Like many others, I tire of the silly rules that prohibit you from purchasing the exact same weapon in 49 states that you could lawfully buy in your own state (I am uniquely able to buy in 3 states at the moment due to military location, state of residency, etc.). Or- you can purchase it with a note from you FFL which incurs additional red tape and fees.

I think that in modern mobility society this is a law that is long overdue to change.

I think the first step to changing this is to form a wedge on the issue. For instance, as a CCW holder, you should be able to purchase a handgun in any state that honors your CCW. In todays' tough economy that should increase firearm sales and revenue (albeit many of the gun sales will likely be FTF). But imagine you are on an out-of-state trip and you lose or break your gun for whatever reason. You are now defenseless! And that just isn't right.

My activism proposal is for you to write your congressmen with the notion that gun purchases are a fundamental 2A right that transcends artificial state boundaries.

 

[General Geoff]

My activism proposal is for you to write your congressmen with the notion that gun purchases are a fundamental 2A right that transcends artificial state boundaries.

A good baby step that would be easily digested by a majority of congresscritters, would instead be to amend the 1968 GCA to allow a citizen of any state to purchase any type of firearm in any other state, as long as local/state laws are being followed.

And by baby step, I mean it's a small (but good) step towards eliminating the 1968 GCA altogether.

 

[desidog]

Since the movement to centralize government record-keeping systems (easier with computers vs paper) in the post-9/11 era, and the bill(?) to reduce government paperwork a few years ago, i think you're on to a good idea that could effectively cut down on state-by-state redundancy and bureaucracy. However, CA, CT, MA, NJ etc could throw a stick into the spokes of a national system.

I do not enjoy paying $50 to CT FFL's for 5 minutes of paperwork and a phone call; that's the cheapest within two hours drive. Of course, here in CT we have an issue with drive-by-bayonettings with semi-autos too...bayo lugs are still legal on bolt-guns, which is ironic since you'll run out of ammo with one and resort to a bayonet quicker than you would an M1A &20rds.

 

[jeepguy]

when i found out about this a few yrs ago i could not believe it. it is a federal background check. so why should it matter? if it were a state background check i could understand but it is federal. what about people in the service? when i was in the usaf i was stationed in flaorida but i kept my ohio residence, so would i have to have gone backl to ohio to buy a firearm becuse of that?

 

[John Parker]

When you are in the military you take your CAC and copy of your current permanent orders.

 

[hirundo82]

A good baby step that would be easily digested by a majority of congresscritters, would instead be to amend the 1968 GCA to allow a citizen of any state to purchase any type of firearm in any other state, as long as local/state laws are being followed.

Exactly. The residency requirement is pointless since the introduction of the NICS check.

 

[kostyanj]

"when i found out about this a few yrs ago i could not believe it. it is a federal background check. so why should it matter? if it were a state background check i could understand but it is federal. what about people in the service? when i was in the usaf i was stationed in flaorida but i kept my ohio residence, so would i have to have gone backl to ohio to buy a firearm becuse of that?"

Actually that's not necessarily true. In NJ, they use the state police, not a federal check.

 

[FourteenMiles]

I was under the impression that one could buy longarms nationwide, no?

 

[hirundo82]

One can purchase long guns from an FFL in another state if the transaction is legal under the law of both the FFL's state and the buyer's state of residence.

 

[IndispensableDestiny]

I agree that the rules are silly. An AR-15 is regulated in Maryland, but not in adjoining states. Still, I'd rather not erode any more states rights than have already been eroded. You need to be careful as too how much Federal control you ask for.

 

[easy]

You need to be careful as too how much Federal control you ask for.

Bingo!

 

[rm23]

This will be called the "gun shop loophole."

 

[ldcarson]

Didn't they recently have a bill in congress that would have made a concealed carry licenses valid in all 50 dates just like your drivers licenses is? I believe it was defeated by a rino vote? (1 or 2 votes)> I wonder if that would have given permission to purchase just as buying a car in any 50 states is.

 

[hso]

No, and not likely to pass at this point.

 

[jbrown50]

I agree that the rules are silly. An AR-15 is regulated in Maryland, but not in adjoining states. Still, I'd rather not erode any more states rights than have already been eroded. You need to be careful as too how much Federal control you ask for.

How would amending the 1968 GCA (or repealing it altogether) to allow a citizen of any state to purchase any type of firearm in any other state adversely affect state's rights?

 

[Demitrios]

Idealogically this sounds great, but any time you bring the government in and centralize something you're taking a big risk. Case-in-point I live in NJ and don't many of the same rights of purchase as other citizens in other states. You universalize firearms purchase you also run the risk of universilize restrictions as well.

 

[Hoxviii]

This wouldn't be giving the feds any more power or the states any less.

GCA68 already has the residency restriction. Get it removed from the GCA or get that portion amended to allow interstate transfers without an FFL and that's it. Feds still have their fingers in it as much as before, possibly even less as there is now one less law for them to enforce.