Unintended Consequences

[SharpDog]

Walmart Ceasing New Mexico Firearm Sales Because of Gun Control

Walmart is ceasing firearm sales in the state of New Mexico because of the state’s newly instituted universal background check law.
On March 9, Breitbart News reported that Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D) signed legislation that criminalized private gun sales via universal background checks. That legislation took effect on July 1, and Walmart is ceasing firearm sales in the state as a consequence.

KOAT reports that Walmart is concerned the new law would force the retail giant to handle types of guns they do not sell.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...new-mexico-firearm-sales-because-gun-control/

 

[Tommygunn]

This must be "virtue signaling," because, otherwise, I just don't see why Wal Mart would do this ... .... ..... ..... ....

 

[captain awesome]

That doesn't make a whole lot of sense...did I miss something? How would that force Walmart to change anything?

 

[SharpDog]

That doesn't make a whole lot of sense...did I miss something? How would that force Walmart to change anything?

I think that the law must include a provision to require FFLs to process private transactions.

 

[pdsmith505]

I think that the law must include a provision to require FFLs to process private transactions.

New Mexico Senate Bill 8 as signed into law states in part that:

(2) a prospective firearm seller who does not hold a current and valid federal firearms license issued pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 923(a) shall arrange for a person who does hold that license to conduct the federal instant background check. A federal firearms licensee shall not unreasonably refuse to perform a background check pursuant to this paragraph;

https://www.nmlegis.gov/Sessions/19 Regular/final/SB0008.pdf

 

[Deanimator]

Any impediment to non-criminal citizens buying guns is a purely INTENDED consequence.

 

[SharpDog]

Any impediment to non-criminal citizens buying guns is a purely INTENDED consequence.

Yeah, but the UNINTENDED part would be the reduced choices for Walmart customers that must go elsewhere to LEGALLY buy their guns.

<sarcasm>And since this will stop criminals from illegally transferring arms then it must be good</sarcasm>

Or does it only affect those that are already law-abiding?

 

[herrwalther]

Wal-mart doesn't want to do extra work. Every Wal-Mart I have been to across numerous states it is normally a chore to get someone to the sporting goods counter in the first place. Paying someone to stand their longer to do a 4473 transfer for a private sale? Hurts the bottom line.

 

[Ignition Override]

herrwalther: maybe that makes sense, that Walmart and other retailers would gain the share of legal gun business which is lost by private transactions on the outer edges of parking lots etc

Do most citizens actually believe that this will prevent psychos and regular thugs from stealing or buying guns on the black market?

 

[Wisco]

If I had an FFL I’d give it up immediately if according to state law I had to accommodate background checks for people I didn’t want to.

 

[captain awesome]

Right to refuse service to any one for any reason...or is that a myth?

 

[JONWILL]

From what I understand Walmart would have to handle transfers between individuals.

Example. I wanted to sell a gun to someone else. Go to Walmart and have them run the background check so I can sell it.

They have just chosen to not deal with this altogether. I understand why they don't want to do this

This is one of the provisions that send people to the LGS to do the transactions.

 

[earlthegoat2]

There will be a fee involved to NICS check the buyer of a private sale firearm.

The FFL will get to set that fee I assume...so there will be competition among other FFLs for this pleasure...or they will price themselves out of the market.....on purpose.

Nonetheless the price of guns just went up in that state and whatever other states have adopted this.

I would charge whatever I charge for any transfer.

My local and favorite LGS charges $40 for transfers. That is generally high. It is well worth it to me for the few guns I buy from afar because he cuts me great deals all the time.

 

[GAF]

The unintended consequence may be that the LGS gets more sales and can stay in business.

 

[alsaqr]

The law has exemptions for firearm sales to family members or between law enforcement personnel. FFL holders are allowed to charge up to $35 for the background check.

https://nmlegis.gov/Sessions/19 Regular/final/SB0008.pdf

The new NM law is feel good stuff.

BTW: NM also outlawed coyote shooting contests.

 

[hso]

A federal firearms licensee shall not unreasonably refuse

What is "unreasonably"? Wouldn't a "not purchased here" rule be reasonable?

 

[alsaqr]

Wouldn't a "not purchased here" rule be reasonable?

Sounds quite reasonable to me.

 

[Sistema1927]

There is a reason why most of our Sheriffs spoke out against this stupid law. Criminals will ignore it, enforcement will be impossible, and it will only deter the law abiding.

More progressive liberal Democrat bovine scat.

 

[Speedo66]

If you want to transfer a gun to someone via an FFL, does the FFL have to put it into their books? I believe the answer is yes.

So some plaintiff's lawyer may construe this to mean the FFL, Walmart in this case, now "owns" the gun. You can see where this is going.....

No doubt Walmart's lawyers told them they were opening themselves up to potential liability suits if the gun they then transferred to a new owner has problems or causes injuries. Probably a smart move on their part.

With an outfit the size of Walmart you can imagine the figures the lawyer would be looking for. "Jurors, they knew or should have known this gun was defective and they thoughtlessly transferred it to my client anyway. Johnny here was catastrophically injured while loading a clip into this M-1 Garand Walmart sold him.

The bolt came flying forward at terrifying speed, causing him to loose a thumbnail and three years of work. We believe you should find Walmart owes him 50 million dollars for his loss of $75,000 in wages, but more importantly, for all his pain, suffering, psychological damage, and loss of consortium."

 

[pdsmith505]

What is "unreasonably"? Wouldn't a "not purchased here" rule be reasonable?

Since the law points to licenced FFLs to do the check and gives them a cap on the fee, I'd say that the courts would likely say that refusing to provide the service called out for in the law is unreasonable.

 

[Speedo66]

Since FFL's are licensed by the Feds, not the state, does the state have the power to tell them what to do and set rates?

 

[Rule3]

Does New Mexico have gun registration??

 

[FlSwampRat]

If you want to transfer a gun to someone via an FFL, does the FFL have to put it into their books? I believe the answer is yes.
So some plaintiff's lawyer may construe this to mean the FFL, Walmart in this case, now "owns" the gun. You can see where this is going.....
No doubt Walmart's lawyers told them they were opening themselves up to potential liability suits if the gun they then transferred to a new owner has problems or causes injuries. Probably a smart move on their part.

That's one sticking point, yes. One of the reasons we don't facilitate face to face sales between individuals. Seemed to us like playing catch with porcupine instead of a ball.
I and the powers that be in our corporation considered this when we were setting up selling guns. When an ffl transfer comes in we have to add it to our inventory which I do locally in the bound book and the corporate guys who oversee the inventory of all the company's stores enter it into the electronic gun log as part of entering the item into our inventory. Whether that's done locally in a single store or in a company like ours with multiple stores, someone has to enter it into our inventory. We have to check out all used guns coming in to be sure they seem to be working properly for the above mentioned liability aspect.
The other aspect we took into consideration was what if it's a delayed approval? Now the gun goes into our safe until such time as we get an approval, there is no more Brady release after X number of days. Time spent checking in with FDLE looking for that approval. I've had sales get tied up over 30 days, which times out the first check and 4473. Then when the sale finally goes through we take it out of our inventory. Much time involved for the small amount we can charge and out of that charge comes the $5 for FDLE for the background check in the first place.
Just not worth it. Luckily we don't have universal checks here and we're not forced by law to do person to person sales oversight.

 

[Sistema1927]

Does New Mexico have gun registration??

No, not yet.

That is one of the reasons why this is a totally unenforceable law. Once the antigunners figure that out, registration will be next.

 

[Walkalong]

That is how it has worked other places, put unenforceable laws in place, and when they fail, say, oh, we need registration. The antis motives are easy to see if you pay attention, back off, and look at the big picture.