When conversations about gun control pop up, suddenly there is grave concern about deadly knives, swimming pools, cars and various other ways people have died other than firearms…but if there was such concern about these items causing so many deaths why is it we don’t see threads about those concerns started by those that raise them? They only seem to be brought up as a diversion, and not as an actual topic to be talked about on their own by those that profess such concern in threads like this one.
Easy. It’s pointless to advocate strenuous regulation for items that are already strenuously regulated about as much as possible. Doing so just contrasts with their refusal to do it for guns too.
Since we really don’t have any that aren’t full of holes to the point of being laughable, it’s really hard to answer that question.
Yes, but I was using them as a example of how even a very pro gun org states to it’s members that such is illegal. I have told you many times that selling to or buying a gun out of state is illegal unless done thru a FFL. You keep asking the question, I keep answering it.
**IT.IS. ILLEGAL. **
The doctors at the CDC came up with studies that used the case control method, traditionally an epidemiology research tool to study murders. That method has yielded results that have come under fire by noted *criminologists *who have studies that show just the opposite.
Criminologists are experts in * Crime. *
Doctors are experts in *Disease. *
So they were biased going in, and they used a method that noted experts in the field say can’t yield proper results.
Sure, as it was teaching evolution until Scopes came by.
Point here is that we do know why it became illegal to the CDC, it does not follow that it was a good idea or a good law, specially when it is either against science or to the scientific study of an issue.
It is clear to me that it was mostly because of ideology that we let the NRA to make the law. But then again, the law then can be changed and it should.
Look, those doctors did bad science to prove their point. That just is not acceptable.
What was bad about it other than their conclusions? :dubious:
You can’t just yell “Fake news!” without a cite, not here.
The doctors at the CDC came up with studies that used the case control method, traditionally an epidemiology research tool to study murders. That method has yielded results that have come under fire by noted criminologists who have studies that show just the opposite.
Criminologists are experts in Crime.
Doctors are experts in Disease.
So they were biased going in, and they used a method that noted experts in the field say can’t yield proper results.
Many of their controls were questionable.
Repeating what you have already said is not a cite.
Well, since I have cited well known criminologists before , and their criticism of said papers, I didnt think I needed to yet again.
It doesn’t matter whether you say it’s illegal. This is not like different religious sects arguing about whether something is a sin, or haram. You live in a society with positive laws. Sin, that’s an opinion. Law, that’s a matter of what the authorities say. It’s not a matter of opinion, unless there is some ambiguity in case law, and then it’s a matter of a judge’s opinion, not of propaganda from an industry lobby.
I dont understand. You asked if it was illegal. I said it was. I am not stating my personal opinion. It is a simple matter of federal law. Google it.
Does the law require me to ask the person I’m selling to if they live out of state?
The law doesnt say that* per se*, they just say that if you sell to someone from out of state, you are both in violation. So, I suppose you dont have to ask, but if you dont and they are from out of state, you have committed a federal crime.
https://www.atf.gov/resource-center/docs/0501-firearms-top-10-qaspdf/download2. M*ay I lawfully transfer a firearm to a friend who resides in a different State?
Under Federal law, an unlicensed individual is prohibited from transferring a firearm to an individual
who does not reside in the State where the transferee resides. Generally, for a person to lawfully
transfer a firearm to an unlicensed person who resides out of State, the firearm must be shipped to a
Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL) within the recipient’s State of residence. He or she may then
receive the firearm from the FFL upon completion of an ATF Form 4473 and a NICS background
check. More information can be obtained on the ATF website at www.atf.gov and
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/unlicensed-persons.html. The GCA provides an exception from this
prohibition for temporary loans or rentals of firearms for lawful sporting purposes. Thus, for
example, a friend visiting you may borrow a firearm from you to go hunting. Another exception is
provided for transfers of firearms to nonresidents to carry out a lawful bequest or acquisition by
intestate succession. This exception would authorize the transfer of a firearm to a nonresident who
inherits a firearm under the will of a decedent. See 18 U.S.C. 922(a)(5). *
Nope, you are still not showing that at all, and on top of that you can not explain why their research is still seen as valid and cited elsewhere.
The point I made stands: it was a political choice, not a scientific one and more reason then to change the law someday.
Well, I just looked it up, the law says “for any person (other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector) to transfer, sell, trade, give, transport, or deliver any firearm to any person (other than a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector) who the transferor knows or has reasonable cause to believe does not reside in (or if the person is a corporation or other business entity, does not maintain a place of business in) the State in which the transferor resides” (bolding mine).
So, if I don’t know the guy lives out of state, looks like it’s perfectly legal to sell him a gun.
Not just “know” but also "has reasonable cause to believe:.
If you think that will protect you, fine.:dubious: But the guy buying the gun knows he is from out of state, right? So he is violating the law.
Unless there is evidence to prove otherwise what you “know” is a bullet proof defense as long as you stick to your story that you had no idea. See it happen with white collar criminals a lot who have good defense attorneys to advise them to answer, “I don’t remember/I don’t know,” to pretty much any question asked of them.
Apart from that why are people going out of state? Is it hard to find a gun seller in some states? A cursory search showed me numerous online gun classified ads in every state and gun shows seem very common (at least one a month if not more…sometimes a little less) in the sample of states I looked at.
Seems trivial to buy a gun in a state you live in unless you are looking for a very specific gun (which I doubt most criminals meaning to use it for crime would be fussy about).
Sure, but the original question was about SELLING a gun. Not buying one.
Here is the original question from k9bfriender: “Yes, but if you sell a gun to someone that you do not know is from out of state, have you broken a law?”