Toomey Folds - Joins Schumer, Manchin and Kirk on UBC Compromise

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sorry, fair point, when I hear online sale I usually think of interstate. For some reason selling online to in-staters just didn't occur to me while I typed that,
 
Of course in the past, they have defined gun shows in such a way that it covered pretty much all private sales, so who knows?

Who is "they"? Do you have a link?

There's a startling absence of solid information to make any kind of informed judgement as to what anyone is proposing. It is entirely possible no one knows what will come from this.
 
I have one for sale online now with no ffl if the buyer picks up at my home. So no you don't have to do a ffl sale online now.

So, if the gun is just listed in a printed paper, but not online, it wouldn't require a background check? How would that even be enforced? It sounds like it would make it effectively illegal for anyone without an FFL to list a gun for sale online.

Sounds like a winner to me. :banghead:

Matt
 
Here's a brief synopsis I found. No vote for Toomey for me next election cycle. I'll have to read the fine print but the HIPPA issue concerns me along with "violently mentally ill". Actually al of itll concerns me but why was HIPPA passsed if we can go around it and how is violent being defiend.

http://media.philly.com/documents/Toomey_gun_background_check_deal.pdf

From the doc:

The bill will not create a national registry; in fact, it specifically makes it illegal to
establish any such registry.

(emphasis from the doc)

Um. I thought it was already illegal to create a national registry regardless of whether this passes or not. Why tout it now? I already know the answer to that one:

"But Stan, this bill makes it illegal to create a national gun registry. That means that they won't make one."

"Phil. That's great!"

"Um, guys. They passed a law to make it illegal many years ago. They can pass a law just as easily to make it mandantory."

"Look at the paranoid, black-helicopter, freak!"

Matt
 
Bubba613 said:
Who is "they"? Do you have a link?

"They" would mean past politicians who have proposed "closing the gun show loophole" and offered legislation to do that. If you would ike to see examples of that, go to http://thomas.loc.gov and search starting around 1999 on the term "gun show."

At the press conference today, Sen. Toomey was offered the opportunity to define how "gun show" and "internet sales" were going to be interpreted. He declined to do so. That obviously worries me - especially since the Senate begins debate tomorrow and nobody has seen an actual draft of Toomey's proposed legislation. All we have is his press release claiming what it will do; but leaving many questions unanswered.
 
Since we all know the laws are the same whether you are at a gun show, on the internet, at a dealer, or on the PD's front lawn, it appears that no one actually has any clue what the "compromise" actually is.
 
The bill also claims that it will make NY stop arresting travellers with firearms stuck at LaGuardia; but FOPA did that in 1986 and the courts won't give the law its intent. Half of the "benefits" of the bill appear to be things we are already supposed to have under law.
 
It immunizes a private seller who had a background check done on the buyer, just like it does for dealers. Does that apply if you don't have it done in one of the "Exempted" transactions such as a gift to a family member?

I doubt it, at least if the Tort lawyers have anything to say about it.
 
Sounds rotten. Almost everything is an "internet sale" these days. When was the last time you made a FTF sale using nothing more than a classified add and a land-line telephone? And that kind of vague detail is ripe for BATFE manipulation. If you use a car you bought off CL to get your gun, then you have to go through a dealer. You know how these guys think!

Manchin strikes me as woefully out-of-touch not only with modern gun owners but with people who have internet connections. Get rid of him.
 
It appears they're going to be pushing this in as an amendment replacing the Schumer bill, presumably with Chucky's support. I don't like this ram-rodding. We'll have very little time to go over the details. As always we do better when calm heads prevail and people actually read things before they sign off.

We really need those NRA muscles right now.
 
Cos, are you suggesting that occasional private party sales that do not use internet, such as between a couple long time freinds or between people you do business with (co-workers) (not gun business) are exempt from the new rules?
 
Who knows? They haven't released the bill language. But between them I'm pretty sure the Dems have a better understanding of the internets than the dinosaurs speaking on our behalf. And when was the last time even friends arranged a FTF without at least some emails? It almost never happens anymore. I think Chucky is giggling over this one.
 
what "online" purchases do not require a background check. Every gun I have bought from Buds, Davidson's, ect require one
 
TennJed said:
what "online" purchases do not require a background check. Every gun I have bought from Buds, Davidson's, ect require one

Buying something advertised on Armslist, for instance, would classify as an online sale from my understanding. Basically, anything advertised online. E-mail is supposed to be exempt.
 
From the conversations above, it looks like they will finally really give us some stuff they promised long ago (FOPA, no double-secret registration through NICS) if we give up some more of our rights and trust them to work out the details later?

What could possibly go wrong?
 
What counts as a sale at a gunshow? Me walking down the aisle with a gun for sale on my shoulder? Me setting up a table to get rid of unwanted guns? Me selling one out of the trunk of my car in the parking lot? How about internet sales? If I list a gun in the classifieds here and sell it to another Arkansas resident is that an internet sale? How about if I make a facebook post selling a gun? Craigslist? Why would putting an ad on the internet be treated differently than putting an ad in the paper?
 
Toomey is a turn coat and a bum. He came into office with support of grass roots conservatives and has now joined the radical left's assault on the US Constitution and 2nd Amendment Rights of the American people.

The Democrats want a socialist,progressive, liberally transformed America where nothing traditional exist and any guarantees afforded by the Constitution are changeable at the whim of currently seated politicians.

Toomey is a RINO of the worst order and his constituents should vote accordingly when his term is up.

As far as an online sale - buy a hand gun off of Gun Broker, it already has to go through an FFL. This is nothing but smoke and mirrors to bring in registration. The left has even admitted without a paper trail, it won't work. How could you ever prove it occurred.
 
The whole thing stinks to me. We already have these "protections" on the books, but monarchist governors (Cuomo) ignore them and get away with it. Why would we be willing to give up freedoms to double down on ones we already have but are systematically ignored by certain states and governmental bodies? How many times do you have to get punched in the gut before you realize that you need to fight back?
 
"Internet Sales" is code for Private Transfer. No more FTF sales advertised on forums, Armslist, and so forth. Who could possibly be against criminals buying guns on the internet? The ordinary Joe Voter isn't against that, so it's an easy sell. And yes, you with the rifle on your back at the gun show, you'd have to use an FFL to sell your rifle under this legislation. How you'd prove you used an FFL is beyond me, but I'm guessing a stamp?, a bill of sale with the FFL's signature?, a REGISTRATION form?
 
Just got done blasting off emails to my two (D) Senators.

We should be ENCOURAGING people with mental health concerns to GET HELP... not scare them off by threatening to take their guns and/or prohibit them from being able to ever buy a gun.

This is UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES 101.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top