Who cares what you’ve seen? Nobody is interested in the pinkie promises of the pro-gun community – they want actual regulations with actual enforcement but every step of the way, corporate interests and useful idiots are there to block them.
Background checks are optional. Gun safety is optional. This is what the pro-gun community insists on time and time again.
Except no. Background checks by FFLs are required. There is no gun show loophole. There is a private sale loophole (which is sometimes exploited at gun shows, but is not exclusive to them). This confusion in terminology is pointing to the wrong problem.
If you want to make effective regulations, then you need to understand what regulations already exist, how guns work, and how loopholes are exploited. Otherwise, you get another AWB that bans a bunch of cosmetic features that really don’t matter.
Semantic bullshit designed to drag out the conversation instead of addressing the problem. Nobody has gloves in their glove compartment
Multiple attempts have been made to close this loophole and have been blocked by the pro-gun community, rendering background checks optional – if you don’t want your background checked, buy privately.
If you want to make effective regulations, then you need to understand what regulations already exist, how guns work, and how loopholes are exploited.
There is no gun control legislation that the pro-gun crowd will support. It doesn’t matter how minor, or how perfectly written.
Otherwise, you get another AWB that bans a bunch of cosmetic features that really don’t matter.
No problem, we’ll just ban all sales of semi-automatic weapons and firearms under a certain length (such as revolvers). After 20+ years, it’s clear the pro-gun crowd has no solution.
You don’t have to convince the pro-gun crowd. You have to convince a political majority. Starting that fight without knowing what you’re talking about matters.
I just have to wait. One day, the millions of school children that Republicans, gun owners and the gun lobby sold out will have to send their own children to school.
As the other person mentioned, I was specifically asking about the legality more if it was possible.
I do appreciate the insight though and must say I’ll never not find it odd that you call people aliens.
Would an American living abroad call themselves an alien? Much like people in my home of the UK would call people immigrants but the second they move abroad they’re suddenly expats.
In practical (non legal) terms possibly if it was an actual private party and not a licensed dealer.
Alien is definitely a unique way of putting it. I guess it makes sense in that they are “alien to the nation”. But If I were to ever be forced to move to a different country I’d probably go by ex-pat.
Although I’d say we have more of a culture (increasingly so) of acknowledging immigrants as Americans first. Probably due to the whole melting pot thing. My view of it is anyone who immigrate to the US is an American. But if I moved to another country, like Japan, I don’t think they’d consider me Japanese.
Also that reminds me alien ≠ immigrant. Aliens would be people in the country either temporarily or illegally. Someone who got a green card by marrying an American wouldn’t be an alien for example. If you do the whole immigration thing you’re just an American not an alien.
Now this is going to sound more and more like this is my intention, but I’m honestly just a curious dude.
I think you could get it home through the mail no? Properly wrapped. Like they ain’t scanning all packages otherwise I’d have had more drug shipments blocked back when I used to order on the DarkWeb markets.
I’m sure it depends on the country. Here in Canada, you are gambling between safely importing an illegal firearm vs. an indictable offense which can lead to three years in jail (for the first gun). And that’s assuming the firearm is otherwise legal in Canada.
Obviously it happens - most handguns used in crimes in Canada are illegally smuggled in from the US. Just understand though, that you’d be setting yourself up for a world of hurt.
You’d have to be pretty stupid to try mailing it. Shipping of firearms is heavily regulated. The import and export even more so. You’d probably have to commit fraud by declaring that it’s something other than a firearm.
They don’t scan every package but do scan a lot. I’d be surprised if they don’t have heuristics based on other aspects—like weight and size—to help them decide which to scan.
My guess would be dealers and companies covering their asses just in case but maybe not required? I know the sporting goods store I used to work at did background checks on every single sale, and that’s deep in the heart of Texas where people think you just need cash in hand and walk out with a Glock.
Sporting goods stores absolutely need them. Licensed firearms dealers at shows absolutely need them. Those are not the issue because according to the Brady Act, if a vendor is a federally licensed firearms dealer (FFL), they are required to perform a background check prior to completing the sale of the firearm.
Speaking purely of Texas because that’s where I know things, the issue is that there are some (quite a few) shows that allow “private collectors” to sell at the shows and that’s perfectly legal. Even if they don’t technically allow it there are folks who walk around shows with a card so if they see you are interested in a certain firearm they’ll try to sell you one from their “collection”. These private collectors have loads of inventory and contacts with other private collectors so they can point you to their friend and get a kickback or buy one off their friend and immediately sell it to you. So technically it’s a private sale which does not require a background check but these people are definitely running a business in all but name.
It’s estimated that in Texas that somewhere between 25-50% of sales from gun shows currently constitute private sales. That’s a wide range because these private sellers are not required to report or record their sales.
I’ve been to gun shows, the only way you’re buying one is from another private person who’s there. No one with a table is selling one without a nics check
However, I also am in the heart of Texas and have been with people that went to a gunshow with cash and walked out specifically with a glock. They sold it to him unassembled but they aren’t that hard to put together.
Sometimes referred to as the Brady bill loophole,[9] the Brady law loophole,[10] the gun law loophole,[11] or the private sale loophole,[12][13][14] the term refers to a perceived gap in laws that address what types of sales and transfers of firearms require records and or background checks, such as the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act.[15] Private parties are not legally required by federal law to: ask for identification, complete any forms, or keep any sales records, as long as the sale is not made in interstate commerce (across state lines) and does not fall under purview of the National Firearms Act. In addition to federal legislation, firearm laws vary by state.[16]
I am not a lawyer. I do not sell firearms.
The gist I get is that this opens up enough loopholes to permit unlicensed mules/fences on either side of the transaction. Depending on what political leanings and circumstances are in play, this legal framework might actually encourage that behavior.
It’s not a loophole, it’s a private sale exception. A loophole would be an unintended result, but private sales have were intentionally exempted from background checks.
Anyway, the problem isn’t that private sales don’t require background checks, it’s that some people are running businesses pretending to be private sellers. Those are the people the Biden administration is trying to target, not random people selling off a few old guns from their private collection.
I’ve never been to a gun show that did not require a NICS check before a firearm purchase.
Who cares what you’ve seen? Nobody is interested in the pinkie promises of the pro-gun community – they want actual regulations with actual enforcement but every step of the way, corporate interests and useful idiots are there to block them.
Background checks are optional. Gun safety is optional. This is what the pro-gun community insists on time and time again.
Except no. Background checks by FFLs are required. There is no gun show loophole. There is a private sale loophole (which is sometimes exploited at gun shows, but is not exclusive to them). This confusion in terminology is pointing to the wrong problem.
If you want to make effective regulations, then you need to understand what regulations already exist, how guns work, and how loopholes are exploited. Otherwise, you get another AWB that bans a bunch of cosmetic features that really don’t matter.
Semantic bullshit designed to drag out the conversation instead of addressing the problem. Nobody has gloves in their glove compartment
Multiple attempts have been made to close this loophole and have been blocked by the pro-gun community, rendering background checks optional – if you don’t want your background checked, buy privately.
There is no gun control legislation that the pro-gun crowd will support. It doesn’t matter how minor, or how perfectly written.
No problem, we’ll just ban all sales of semi-automatic weapons and firearms under a certain length (such as revolvers). After 20+ years, it’s clear the pro-gun crowd has no solution.
You don’t have to convince the pro-gun crowd. You have to convince a political majority. Starting that fight without knowing what you’re talking about matters.
I just have to wait. One day, the millions of school children that Republicans, gun owners and the gun lobby sold out will have to send their own children to school.
I’ve been to plenty.
Last one, guy didn’t even ask for my id until I asked for a receipt.
This blows my mind. And maybe a few school childrens’ depending on the kind of person you are.
Sadly, we’ll never know now…
The sales mean more to them than someone else’s children.
Could a tourist in holiday go to a gun show and buy a gun?
I don’t plan on doing this, my days of coming to America are over, just a curious thought.
Dunno, probably depends on how “foreign” you look to the seller.
I’m white but have a British accent so would look quite foreign.
In that case I would recommend the Sig, but the Glock is also very popular. I’m afraid we only accept US dollars.
Tldr it depends. Slightly longer generally no, but there’s an exception for hunters.
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/may-aliens-legally-united-states-purchase-firearms#:~:text=An alien legally in the U.S. is not,possession of a valid hunting license or permit.
I don’t think they are asking whether it’s legal, just whether you could reasonably expect to obtain one at a gun show.
Correct.
Thanks.
As the other person mentioned, I was specifically asking about the legality more if it was possible.
I do appreciate the insight though and must say I’ll never not find it odd that you call people aliens.
Would an American living abroad call themselves an alien? Much like people in my home of the UK would call people immigrants but the second they move abroad they’re suddenly expats.
In practical (non legal) terms possibly if it was an actual private party and not a licensed dealer.
Alien is definitely a unique way of putting it. I guess it makes sense in that they are “alien to the nation”. But If I were to ever be forced to move to a different country I’d probably go by ex-pat.
Although I’d say we have more of a culture (increasingly so) of acknowledging immigrants as Americans first. Probably due to the whole melting pot thing. My view of it is anyone who immigrate to the US is an American. But if I moved to another country, like Japan, I don’t think they’d consider me Japanese.
Also that reminds me alien ≠ immigrant. Aliens would be people in the country either temporarily or illegally. Someone who got a green card by marrying an American wouldn’t be an alien for example. If you do the whole immigration thing you’re just an American not an alien.
Almost certainly. But getting it home would be a problem, as almost every other country on earth has stringent firearm import laws to navigate.
True.
Now this is going to sound more and more like this is my intention, but I’m honestly just a curious dude.
I think you could get it home through the mail no? Properly wrapped. Like they ain’t scanning all packages otherwise I’d have had more drug shipments blocked back when I used to order on the DarkWeb markets.
I’m sure it depends on the country. Here in Canada, you are gambling between safely importing an illegal firearm vs. an indictable offense which can lead to three years in jail (for the first gun). And that’s assuming the firearm is otherwise legal in Canada.
Obviously it happens - most handguns used in crimes in Canada are illegally smuggled in from the US. Just understand though, that you’d be setting yourself up for a world of hurt.
You’d have to be pretty stupid to try mailing it. Shipping of firearms is heavily regulated. The import and export even more so. You’d probably have to commit fraud by declaring that it’s something other than a firearm.
They don’t scan every package but do scan a lot. I’d be surprised if they don’t have heuristics based on other aspects—like weight and size—to help them decide which to scan.
My guess would be dealers and companies covering their asses just in case but maybe not required? I know the sporting goods store I used to work at did background checks on every single sale, and that’s deep in the heart of Texas where people think you just need cash in hand and walk out with a Glock.
Sporting goods stores absolutely need them. Licensed firearms dealers at shows absolutely need them. Those are not the issue because according to the Brady Act, if a vendor is a federally licensed firearms dealer (FFL), they are required to perform a background check prior to completing the sale of the firearm.
Speaking purely of Texas because that’s where I know things, the issue is that there are some (quite a few) shows that allow “private collectors” to sell at the shows and that’s perfectly legal. Even if they don’t technically allow it there are folks who walk around shows with a card so if they see you are interested in a certain firearm they’ll try to sell you one from their “collection”. These private collectors have loads of inventory and contacts with other private collectors so they can point you to their friend and get a kickback or buy one off their friend and immediately sell it to you. So technically it’s a private sale which does not require a background check but these people are definitely running a business in all but name.
It’s estimated that in Texas that somewhere between 25-50% of sales from gun shows currently constitute private sales. That’s a wide range because these private sellers are not required to report or record their sales.
I’ve been to gun shows, the only way you’re buying one is from another private person who’s there. No one with a table is selling one without a nics check
However, I also am in the heart of Texas and have been with people that went to a gunshow with cash and walked out specifically with a glock. They sold it to him unassembled but they aren’t that hard to put together.
They are federally required by the federal government to be performed by dealers even at gun shows. Or any other venue for that matter.
I mean, the article we are commenting under would beg to differ
The author is wrong on that point.
Per the Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms, Tobacco and Explosives:
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/must-licensees-conduct-nics-background-check-sale-firearms-nonlicensees-gun-shows#:~:text=Must licensees conduct a NICS background check for,sale were taking place at the licensed premises.
Exactly. And while we’re educating the forum here, Wikipedia has the details on the loophole that circumvents this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_show_loophole#Provenance
I am not a lawyer. I do not sell firearms.
The gist I get is that this opens up enough loopholes to permit unlicensed mules/fences on either side of the transaction. Depending on what political leanings and circumstances are in play, this legal framework might actually encourage that behavior.
It’s not a loophole, it’s a private sale exception. A loophole would be an unintended result, but private sales have were intentionally exempted from background checks.
Anyway, the problem isn’t that private sales don’t require background checks, it’s that some people are running businesses pretending to be private sellers. Those are the people the Biden administration is trying to target, not random people selling off a few old guns from their private collection.