Under ‘Recent changes’: ‘5/27/2014 – Virginia and Washington now honor Kansas permits.’
Here’s a question that just popped into my head: Washington treats black powder guns the same as modern firearms, but other states do not and you can get them through the mail or over the counter. Would it be legal for me to call up Dixie Gun Works and order another Uberti and have it shipped to a friend in Mississippi, and then go pick it up from him? Or just pop over to Idaho and buy one?
Ah, I had just looked at the West Coast states and it was California and Oregon that do not recognize any permits. Sorry about that.
As for your question, I don’t know. Federal law allows you to buy one in Idaho if they will sell it to you, which isn’t always the case. Having it shipped to a friend smacks strongly of a straw purchase so I would advise against that. And I don’t know what Washington’s laws are, so I can’t comment on that.
In any case, it’s easier to pay the $25-50 transfer fee to a FFL than it is to maybe run afoul of the BATFE.
It wouldn’t be a straw person. I’d ship it to myself at that address.
But it’s academic anyway. I want to get rid of most of my collection. It’s just such a daunting task…
Drive down to Seedro Wooley. Go to Kesselring’s Gun Shop. Ask for Jim. He’ll handle everything. If it’s interesting he’ll buy it for himself. If it’s something I want, he’ll bring it down when he comes to visit later this year.
See? wasn’t that simple?
But their Facebook page looks like they’re still open. I tried their number and I got a message saying ‘The number you are calling is temporarily unavailable.’
EDIT: If they’re still open, I might see if they’ll buy the AR-180 I bought there; and maybe my Shiloh Sharps No. 3 Sporting Rifle. If they offer a good price, I might see if they’ll take the rest of my stuff. But I don’t want to pay too much for the convenience.
.
Based on discussion with the poster, since the post presents relevant information, I have downgraded this Warning to a Note. However, in the future, please present your information in a less inflammatory fashion.
I commend the rest of the posters in this thread for keeping it mostly factual. Gun threads have an unfortunate tendency to run off the rails if given the chance.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
The same could be said for cars, fatty foods, or hospitals. Then again, there is no “right to life” to begin with. I think you may have been thinking of a line in the Declaration of Independence, which holds no legal authority.
For the OP I’d like to embolden the caution about there being 50+ (territories, you know) different set of laws. People watch TV and think the gun laws being talked about on Law & Order are true throughout the country.
You wouldn’t believe how many people in my state think it’s illegal to carry a gun into a tavern, church, or bank. It isn’t. But in some states it is. Be careful about knowing such intricacies before getting into arguements or debates.
Moderator Note
See my post #31. I’ve already asked people not to hijack this thread with side debates.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
It’s heartening that people on the run are gonna utterly forgo personal protection based on a bit more added to their sentence if they get caught. If they plan to get caught.
As the OP, I echo this sentiment. Lots of good useful information here. I usually refrain from entering any discussion about guns because they do tend to become so inflammatory so quickly. I don’t necessarily plan to start any debates, but I’d like to reserve the right to jump in with actual facts when I see people being either willfully ignorant or woefully misguided.
So it seems that (except for gun shows) one needs a background check to acquire guns. Usually missing from those coffee-shop or CNN discussions, is how the perpetrator of a heinous crime managed to acquire their guns in the first place and whether the current background checks did/would have prevented this.
The guy in Sandy Hook for example, IIRC took his mother’s guns.
The fellow who just shot the two TV workers - did he pass a background check? Did he acquire those guns legally? Was a background check of any use, or would he have had to lie on his application?
What’s the status of background checks versus the question “who do you live with”? Do these checks actually determine if giving someone a gun means that someone who should not get a gun, now gets one? (I.e. “are you the live-in girlfriend of a convicted felon”?)
I think the Canadian background checks are a lot more intensive, and issues like being recently fired or in the middle of a divorce are likely to get your application denied, as well as having psychiatric issues. How careful are US background checks?
There is nothing special about gun shows. They are just a central place to meet/get ripped off. The law is the same at them vs. buying from someone on Craigslist/Facebook (FWIW, a local FB group I look at seems to do a pretty good job at policing sketchy posts and banning if necessary).
In a lot of cases, no, passing a background check was not an issue.
The SC church guy (Roof) passed a background check, but because his arrest was improperly reported he passed. It was for drug possession, not really a predictor of violence, although it would’ve at least temporarily invalidated him had the information been properly passed on.
Well, if you lie on the application, then they have no way of knowing! But it can lead to future consequences, much like the WTF questions asked by customs and immigration.
Here is the standard form that you fill out (paper or electronic). It doesn’t ask about cohabiting or spouses except WRT domestic violence. Living with a felon can affect your rights but I’m not 100% sure whether any proscription is federal or state/local.
This isn’t true. Except for purchases from a licensed dealer, then a background check isn’t required except in states where it is.
It was pretty widely reported that the shooter purchased the firearms through a dealer and passed the required background checks. Here is a USA Today article that states it.
No - who you live with is not part of the questions asked during the background check. Here is a court case where the indictment of a person for abetting the possession of a firearm by a felon was dismissed where the defendant lived with a felon and owned an SKS rifle herself.
My understanding was that this was a wobbler. Roof was arrested, but because the information wasn’t loaded into the correct system and/or the correct jurisdiction wasn’t looked at, it wasn’t detected. The wobbler was that whathe was arrested for was a misdemeanor - not a disqualifying arrest so even if the proper jurisdiction was contacted he still would have passed. Now, it was a drug arrest, so the drug question 11e could have triggered it, but merely being arrested on the drug charge doesn’t necessarily mean that he would fail question 11e.