But, if he buys with the intent of re-selling illegally, which is what buying in one state, and selling in another is without going through a FFL for pistols, he is already buying illegally, so none of the purchases are legal. They all meet the definition of a "straw purchase" which is illegal. And also means that the buyer is lying on the background form 4473.
It seems to me that you may be a little misinformed on what is ALREADY law.
We ALREADY have common sense gun laws that work VERY well at keeping your average-joe criminal from walking into a gun store and purchasing a firearm legally.
As buckeye pointed out.. If you are buying a firearm with the intention of selling or giving it to someone else who cannot legally buy for him or herself, then you are ALREADY committing a crime (and you haven't even taken possession of the firearm yet).
Buying for someone who cannot own legally is a straw purchase and against the law.
It is illegal for felons to own or possess firearms.
It is illegal for persons to sell across state lines.
It is illegal to purchase a firearm to give or sell to someone who cannot legally buy a firearm for himself.
These are ALREADY laws .. what I would call "common sense" gun regulations.
And there are systems in place to catch these people.
In VA, if you purchase more than 5 firearms in a day the dealer has to submit a "multiple purchase" paper detailing the guns you bought, your information, etc. That has to be sent immediately to the ATF (or was it FBI, I don't remember now) and.. guess what? If any of those firearms turn up in any street corner shootings, you can bet your britches someone is going to get a knock on the door real soon.
You keep talking about these multiple purchases being transported and sold and so many accusations but you've repeatedly ignored requests for viable information to support those claims.
We keep hearing this fear-mongering that firearms are legally being bough and then sold across state lines... Where's the proof? Where's the proof that this is happening and the proof that a one-gun-a-month law would stop it?
Please, I'm very willing to discuss the matter but I want a little more than theory if I'm to be convinced this is worth my time and consideration.
Let me guess...this poll is your way of determining that your beliefs and your values are not in alignment with the majority of members on this forum.
Sounds like you probably want to continue to "argue" your position on imposing regulation as an attempt to restrict the powers of the US Constitution. Since this forum is dedicated to helping individuals who are interested in discussing defensive carry issues and it seems like you might be an intelligent person, I'm sure you should have no trouble finding and joining an appropriate forum which is dedicated to the topic of altering the US Constitution. I wish you luck with your search.
- Federal Form 4473 requires the purchaser to swear under penalties of perjury that all answers given are truthful. Think that's an effective deterrent?
- FFL's are held accountable in the cases of "straw purchasers". Does that stop straw purchases?
- Limiting gun sales to one a month - in states with that limitation, has that stopped illegal sales?
- Do speed limits effectively prevent speeding?
If you can come up with one, single rule or law or restriction that actually has a chance of keeping guns out of the hands of people who will misuse them, I'd be willing to listen and give it serious consideration. But if you were to come up with such a rule, I would demand that all other "inconveniences" (as you call them) be terminated. You absolutely need to sunset ineffective laws before enacting new ones. Otherwise, you set the stage for increasingly restrictive rules for gun ownership which deny the protections of our Constitution yet which in fact do little to prevent illegal use but make legislators (like Carolyn McCarthy and Chuck Schumer) feel good.
Just how many gunshops do you have in Queens?Quote:
id rather force criminals to steal guns, buy them from shady characters.....or even not buy them at all...than sell to them at the local gun store.
And,I'm having a hard time understanding that statement of yours...
It would seem that you lump law abiding gunowners in the same group as felons.
that means jerks are buying lots of handguns in other states, driving to our city...and selling guns to anyone who wants a gun.
if this illegal gun dealer could only legally buy one gun a month...or every 2-weeks, his criminal enterprise would shut down very quickly.
if someone is transporting guns across state lines for the sole purpose of profit...you know that it is already ILLEGAL without an FFL right?
Just how exactly would passing another law impede them?