Gun Violence Prevention Bill of 2013

[tman]

I think without the permit you have to notify the buyer's sheriff and are responsible for one year.

Not quite.

You are liable for one year, unless you do a background check. You can do a background check by seeing a PTP, a PTC, or submitting a report to the police chief or sheriff.

Even with a background check or a PTP/PTC, a seller may be liable if they knew or should have known that the gun was going to be used in a felony crime of violence. A perfect example would be you selling a gun to your next door neighbor who tells you that she's "afraid of an ex-boyfriend." Then she kills him with it.

Murder, or self-defense?

And you just provided the firearm, "knowing" the reason for its use...


just sayin' be careful.

[Snakeman721]

I think without the permit you have to notify the buyer's sheriff and are responsible for one year.

Not quite.

You are liable for one year, unless you do a background check. You can do a background check by seeing a PTP, a PTC, or submitting a report to the police chief or sheriff.

Even with a background check or a PTP/PTC, a seller may be liable if they knew or should have known that the gun was going to be used in a felony crime of violence. A perfect example would be you selling a gun to your next door neighbor who tells you that she's "afraid of an ex-boyfriend." Then she kills him with it.

Murder, or self-defense?

And you just provided the firearm, "knowing" the reason for its use...


just sayin' be careful.

Exactly why I'm not planning on selling any of my guns....ever. I like what I have and don't feel a need to sell them to strangers.

[xd ED]

I think without the permit you have to notify the buyer's sheriff and are responsible for one year.

Not quite.

You are liable for one year, unless you do a background check. You can do a background check by seeing a PTP, a PTC, or submitting a report to the police chief or sheriff.

Even with a background check or a PTP/PTC, a seller may be liable if they knew or should have known that the gun was going to be used in a felony crime of violence. A perfect example would be you selling a gun to your next door neighbor who tells you that she's "afraid of an ex-boyfriend." Then she kills him with it.

Murder, or self-defense?

And you just provided the firearm, "knowing" the reason for its use...


just sayin' be careful.

Using your scenario and an FFL transfer; Is the seller fully, or even better protected from liability?
not disputing your assertion, just curious.

[jshuberg]

The term "internet sale" means something in this day and age. It means that you purchased something on the internet that you had shipped to you, it means that the transaction itself occurred online via a shopping cart. While people can and do purchase firearms online this way, they always go through an FFL that does a NICS check.

What St. Olaf is describing is a face-to-face transaction, where the buyer and seller found each other via a classified ad. The fact that the ad was online, doesn't matter, it could have been via the Star Trib or magazine. A face-to-face transaction described as an internet sale is completely dishonest. This is exactly what the anti-gun cultists have to do in order to make their position appear reasonable - they have to lie.

[St. Olaf]

A face-to-face transaction described as an internet sale is completely dishonest.

I agree, but because the transaction originated on the internet, they are not lying and can get away with saying guns are purchased through the internet without a background check.

That's the critical distinction and we should all be aware of it before attacking it as a lie.

It may be a willful distortion, but if you describe it as a lie they will kick your ass with the truth.

[St. Olaf]

Exactly why I'm not planning on selling any of my guns....ever. I like what I have and don't feel a need to sell them to strangers.

This is wisdom.

If I need to get rid of a gun I will trade it in to a dealer or sell it to a dealer.

You get the reputation of buying and selling guns and you set yourself up to have your guns stolen.

The word gets around and sometimes it gets to unscrupulous people.

[ex-LT]

If I need to get rid of a gun I will trade it in to a dealer or sell it to a dealer.

And get 1/3 to 1/2 of the gun's actual value (at best). Personally, I'd rather sell it via a private party transaction and put more money in MY pocket. Same reason I don't do trade-ins on vehicles.

[jshuberg]

they are not lying and can get away with saying guns are purchased through the internet without a background check.

But in this situation the guns are *not* purchased through the internet, they are purchased face-to-face. How the people involved in the transaction met is completely irrelevant. They could have met via a craigslist ad, here on this forum, in a coffee shop, growing up as kids, or neighbors across a backyard fence.

I see your point, but what they are doing is intentionally confusing how people met (on the internet) with how a gun sale took place (face-to-face). Since the solution they are calling for is background checks on how firearms are sold (and not on how people meet) I consider it nothing short of a boldfaced lie.

If they were to say that they want to ban the private sale of firearms, and require all firearm sales to go through a licensed dealer, then they would be framing what they want to do honestly.

[St. Olaf]

If I need to get rid of a gun I will trade it in to a dealer or sell it to a dealer.

And get 1/3 to 1/2 of the gun's actual value (at best). Personally, I'd rather sell it via a private party transaction and put more money in MY pocket. Same reason I don't do trade-ins on vehicles.

Vehicles are not guns.

As I said, getting a reputation as one who sells guns--or even placing an ad that you have a gun for sale--can set you up to have your guns stolen.

Selling a car does not set you up to have your car stolen.

It's risky to sell guns unless you can do it very quietly to close friends or relatives.......maybe not all relatives, either.

[St. Olaf]

they are not lying and can get away with saying guns are purchased through the internet without a background check.

But in this situation the guns are *not* purchased through the internet, they are purchased face-to-face. How the people involved in the transaction met is completely irrelevant. They could have met via a craigslist ad, here on this forum, in a coffee shop, growing up as kids, or neighbors across a backyard fence.

I see your point, but what they are doing is intentionally confusing how people met (on the internet) with how a gun sale took place (face-to-face). Since the solution they are calling for is background checks on how firearms are sold (and not on how people meet) I consider it nothing short of a boldfaced lie.

If they were to say that they want to ban the private sale of firearms, and require all firearm sales to go through a licensed dealer, then they would be framing what they want to do honestly.

It's a distortion, but certainly not a bald-faced lie.

It is a fact that people find guns on the internet and then buy them without a background check.

That IS a fact and also a half-truth, and certainly does not qualify as a lie.

If you call it a lie, you're telling a half-truth yourself.

[illbits]

Vehicles are not guns.

As I said, getting a reputation as one who sells guns--or even placing an ad that you have a gun for sale--can set you up to have your guns stolen.

Selling a car does not set you up to have your car stolen.

It's risky to sell guns unless you can do it very quietly to close friends or relatives.......maybe not all relatives, either.

You're obviously not speaking from experience. I think you have a pretty distorted view of the reality of the situation. Selling a gun FTF is no riskier than a typical Craigslist transaction. And frankly I've had sketchier Craigslist transactions then armslist transactions. But hey, fear is popular these days, live it up!

[St. Olaf]

Oh, I speak from experience, as I've sold a lot of guns and know the risks well.

You go ahead. It may never come back to bite you in the ass.

Then again.....it might.

[grousemaster]

Oh, I speak from experience, as I've sold a lot of guns and know the risks well.

You go ahead. It may never come back to bite you in the ass.

Then again.....it might.

This isn't the only thread he is spreading lies without any type of actual proof of his position.

[XDM45]

Exactly why I'm not planning on selling any of my guns....ever. I like what I have and don't feel a need to sell them to strangers.

This is wisdom.

If I need to get rid of a gun I will trade it in to a dealer or sell it to a dealer.

You get the reputation of buying and selling guns and you set yourself up to have your guns stolen.

The word gets around and sometimes it gets to unscrupulous people.

I agree with both of you.

This is one reason why I don't sell guns. What I buy, I keep. IF for some reason I ever did sell one, I'd require to see a PTC, make a copy of it and the driver's license, and sell it through an FFL with proof of doing so. I believe in doing all of that, my butt is covered legally.

[Erud]

Exactly why I'm not planning on selling any of my guns....ever. I like what I have and don't feel a need to sell them to strangers.

This is wisdom.

If I need to get rid of a gun I will trade it in to a dealer or sell it to a dealer.

You get the reputation of buying and selling guns and you set yourself up to have your guns stolen.

The word gets around and sometimes it gets to unscrupulous people.

I agree with both of you.

This is one reason why I don't sell guns. What I buy, I keep. IF for some reason I ever did sell one, I'd require to see a PTC, make a copy of it and the driver's license, and sell it through an FFL with proof of doing so. I believe in doing all of that, my butt is covered legally.

To be fair though, you've only owned 2 guns and for less than a year. If you went back in time one year, you could have looked at this same discussion and said;

"this is one reason I don't buy guns".