R&R to House of Delegates: "We Will Not Comply!"

fabsroman · Mar 20, 2019

Malleovic said:
I'm curious about this actually. Does the FFL have to take the firearm into their inventory to do a NICS check for a private sale?

An FFL does not "have" to take a firearm into inventory for anybody. An FFL does not have to take my GunBroker purchase in PA into inventory and do a Form 4473 and NICS check for me. I contact my FFL, who has reassured me many times that I do not have to contact him anymore before having a gun sent to him, and ask him if he will do a GunBroker transfer for me. He says he will, I tell the seller to send my new Ruger to my FFL, and then I go in and pay my FFL for the service. There is no law out there stating that an FFL "must" accommodate anybody on a transfer. I could walk into my FFL, ask him to see a firearm, ask to buy it, and he could refuse to sell it to me.

The key here, is that there is no law whatsoever that says it is illegal for a FFL to do a NICS check on a private sale. In fact, there is a brochure put out by the ATF setting forth how FFL's can make the community safer by doing a NICS check for sellers that want to have a NICS check done on buyers. Somewhat surprised that all the people on here that require an ID, do their own "due diligence" via case search, want a bill of sale, etc. before they sell a gun, are not for NICS checks on buyers.

Now, an FFL decides to do a transfer for people based upon what people are willing to pay for the transfer/service and whether he likes them. I could be willing to pay $100 for a transfer, but the FFL could say "no thanks" because I am wearing Nike while watching the NFL on my phone and carrying a Benchmade knife.

swinokur · Mar 21, 2019

Why did the NV AG say that the NV NICS check on private sales was unenforceable?

He reportedly said an FFL cannot run a NICS check on a firearm not in their inventory aka privately owned.

willtill · Mar 21, 2019

swinokur said:
Why did the NV AG say that the NV NICS check on private sales was unenforceable?

He reportedly said an FFL cannot run a NICS check on a firearm not in their inventory aka privately owned.

Possibly that means that you can't "force" a FFL holder to perform one on private sales? It's currently a voluntary action that they (the FFL) can choose to perform for a private sale?

.

pcfixer · Mar 21, 2019

willtill said:
Possibly that means that you can't "force" a FFL holder to perform one on private sales? It's currently a voluntary action that they (the FFL) can choose to perform for a private sale?

.

Question is. How will MSP, sheriff or police really enforce private face to face sale of long gun or shotgun? They don't know and don't tell then by goodness is not enforceable.

swinokur · Mar 21, 2019

How is the voluntary nature of the Federal law going to be reconciled with the mandatory nature of the MD statute ?

Seems to be poorly conceived without researching the Federal law first.

You can’t compel a license holder to do something that the entity issuing the license says is voluntary

A poorly written and ill conceived bill in MD?

How unusual.

Rack&Roll · Mar 21, 2019

This will go the way of Clippinger’s “No Fly List, No Buy List” lame bill?

Engine4 · Mar 21, 2019

pcfixer said:
Question is. How will MSP, sheriff or police really enforce private face to face sale of long gun or shotgun?

YEP! As long as you can be certain the one you're selling the firearm to isn't a tattletale or undercover officer, then Do Not Comply!

Derek · Mar 21, 2019

Engine4 said:
YEP! As long as you can be certain the one you're selling the firearm to isn't a tattletale or undercover officer, then Do Not Comply!

Snitches get stitches! :lol:

Just another unenforceable, feel-good law without some sort of registration.

Rack&Roll · Mar 21, 2019

Time to ramp up our “We Will Not Comply” movement and embarrass MD DemocRats by taking it in front of the White House where the National Media that is camped out there will see us.

I will put up a new thread this morning calling for everyone to wear their WWNC shirts or Patriot Picket blue shirts and converge on the White House front plaza (Lafayette Park) this Saturday at 10am and go til noon.

Dads, bring your kids, too! Help publicize “We Will Not Comply” to the rest of the 2A Nation!

I will bring stacks of all of our signs:

TO HELL WITH MD DEMOCRAT TYRANNY
WE WILL NOT COMPLY
MORE PATRIOTS THAN YOU HAVE HANDCUFFS

plus a stack of our classic PP demonstration signs too.

I can tell you from a lot of experience being in front of the White House that interacting with the many tourists there is an awesome experience, with lots of picture-taking by tourists, National press & bloggers, and DC passers by.

That can spread our WWNC effort BIG TIME on social media and could get us good pickups on media websites.

The weather will get GREAT: the sun will be out with temps in the mid 50s.

Parking: on meters or cheaper weekend rates at garages marked “Public parking” just a block or two from the White House.

Tourists from “free America” often ask to hold our signs to pose for pictures with us, which makes this one of my favorite places to picket!

fabsroman · Mar 21, 2019

pcfixer said:
Question is. How will MSP, sheriff or police really enforce private face to face sale of long gun or shotgun? They don't know and don't tell then by goodness is not enforceable.

They will enforce it just like they try to enforce the laws against illicit drugs. Somebody here offers a gun for sale in the classifieds, law enforcement has an account on here, an undercover LEO contacts the seller, the undercover LEO tells the seller that he does not want to go through with the FFL check and pay the additional fee, and who knows, maybe the LEO is willing to offer a little extra for the sale.

Trust me when I say that it has already happened on this board. I know of a circumstance where somebody was actually set up through this board and busted by undercover agents. There are plenty of straight and narrow on this board that would not hesitate to report that somebody "Is not complying" and there are plenty on this board that are looking for "loopholes" in many different aspects of life. We have the entire gambit here, and law enforcement is watching.

fabsroman · Mar 21, 2019

swinokur said:
Why did the NV AG say that the NV NICS check on private sales was unenforceable?

He reportedly said an FFL cannot run a NICS check on a firearm not in their inventory aka privately owned.

Yes, the big question is usually "Why?"

Why did the NV AG say that the law is unenforceable?

Is it unenforceable because it is unconstitutional?

Is it unenforceable because there is a federal law against an FFL doing a voluntary NICS check on a private sale (there isn't, but who knows, maybe the NV AG is also misinformed because it suits his agenda)?

Is it unenforceable because it is poorly written by the Nevada legislature?

Is it unenforceable because it will take too much law enforcement man power to enforce it?

I don't really know the answer as to the "Why?" question as it pertains to Nevada because I haven't really looked into.

Maybe the better question is, "Exactly why would the Maryland law, as currently written, be unenforceable?"

pcfixer · Mar 21, 2019

Rack&Roll said:
Time to ramp up our “We Will Not Comply” movement and embarrass MD DemocRats by taking it in front of the White House where the National Media that is camped out there will see us.

I will put up a new thread this morning calling for everyone to wear their WWNC shirts or Patriot Picket blue shirts and converge on the White House front plaza (Lafayette Park) this Saturday at 10am and go til noon.

Dads, bring your kids, too! Help publicize “We Will Not Comply” to the rest of the 2A Nation!

I will bring stacks of all of our signs:

TO HELL WITH MD DEMOCRAT TYRANNY
WE WILL NOT COMPLY
MORE PATRIOTS THAN YOU HAVE HANDCUFFS

plus a stack of our classic PP demonstration signs too.

I can tell you from a lot of experience being in front of the White House that interacting with the many tourists there is an awesome experience, with lots of picture-taking by tourists, National press & bloggers, and DC passers by.

That can spread our WWNC effort BIG TIME on social media and could get us good pickups on media websites.

The weather will get GREAT: the sun will be out with temps in the mid 50s.

Parking: on meters or cheaper weekend rates at garages marked “Public parking” just a block or two from the White House.

Tourists from “free America” often ask to hold our signs to pose for pictures with us, which makes this one of my favorite places to picket!

I concur Jeff. PP and WWNC great job.

fabsroman · Mar 21, 2019

swinokur said:
How is the voluntary nature of the Federal law going to be reconciled with the mandatory nature of the MD statute ?

Seems to be poorly conceived without researching the Federal law first.

You can’t compel a license holder to do something that the entity issuing the license says is voluntary

A poorly written and ill conceived bill in MD?

How unusual.

The license holder is not being compelled to do anything. The seller of the firearm is being compelled to do something, and that is to find a license holder that is willing, for a fee, to do a NICS check on the buyer.

Then again, just because federal law makes it voluntary for the license holder to do the check, Maryland law could make it mandatory for a Maryland gun dealer to do the check. I believe Maryland gun dealers are also licensed by the State of Maryland. How is it that Maryland made it mandatory for dealers to do a Form 77R and for buyers to go through a 17 database MSP background check for a regulated firearm? If the mandatory NICS check on face to face sales is illegal, then I would think that the Form 77R on regulated firearm sales is also illegal because there is absolutely no federal law whatsoever that requires a Form 77R.

The issue stands just a slightly better chance of winning in court than the Rapid Fire Trigger Device litigation. Just slightly better than slim and none.

I think a better argument might be, what proof will the seller get from the license holder that the buyer passed the NICS check? How can I make sure that if I sell a gun, I have some sort of evidence that the buyer passed the NICS check, because I sure as hell do not want to be going to prison after selling a gun to some maniac that uses it in a crime? Am I going to get a copy of the Form 4473 with all the buyer's private information on it? I know I wouldn't want to give my Form 4473 to any of you, except my specific gun dealer, and heck, I don't even think my dealer gives me a copy of the Form 4473, just the Form 77R. So, how will a seller get some sort of receipt to show that he/she complied with this law?

Engine4 · Mar 21, 2019

fabsroman said:
They will enforce it just like they try to enforce the laws against illicit drugs. Somebody here offers a gun for sale in the classifieds, law enforcement has an account on here, an undercover LEO contacts the seller, the undercover LEO tells the seller that he does not want to go through with the FFL check and pay the additional fee, and who knows, maybe the LEO is willing to offer a little extra for the sale.

Hence the reason for my "fight club" thread. We'll either be forced to submit, forcibly rounded up, forced to vacate maryland, or forced to go dark.

Rack&Roll · Mar 21, 2019

Engine4 said:
Hence the reason for my "fight club" thread. We'll either be forced to submit, forcibly rounded up, forced to vacate maryland, or forced to go dark.

One of the biggest threats to Long Gun owners is not knowing about the transaction & transfer traps the MD DemocRats are trying to set.

One goal of “”We Will Not Comply” is to get traction in the media to get the attention of EVERY LONG GUN OWNER in MD with our controversial stance to convey the traps and threats eminating from the legislature.

I am confident our WWNC is a public service in that regard.

We are also serious about saying that 400 years of ultra -low crime with Long Gun ownership in MD demonstrates we DON’T NEED the expensive and intrusive, time-wasting Long Gun Government Controls.

Sell or gift your long gun property in the future to folks you have the trust are not government agents, and carry on with life!

swinokur · Mar 21, 2019

By law, NICS queries must be deleted within 24 hours. The only proof it was done would be if the FFL gives you the NTN. But even then if the query is deleted as per the law, the NTN points at nothing of any value other than the date and time of the query and perhaps the requesting FFL. No PII is allowed to be retained. Now if the BB has the info that’s a different story.

fabsroman · Mar 21, 2019

swinokur said:
By law, NICS queries must be deleted within 24 hours. The only proof it was done would be if the FFL gives you the NTN. But even then if the query is deleted as per the law, the NTN points at nothing of any value other than the date and time of the query and perhaps the requesting FFL. No PII is allowed to be retained. Now if the BB has the info that’s a different story.

Yep, and that is why I would prefer a NICS check in lieu of a Form 77R on each and every single gun purchase in Maryland. If the Form 77R is Constitutional and enforceable, why couldn't Maryland institute it on all firearms purchases, and not just regulated firearms? Maryland did away with the FTF sale of regulated firearms decades ago via the Form 77R. ON a Form 77R, does MSP do a NICS check, does the FFL do a NICS check, or is there just no NICS check whatsoever? So, if that is enforceable, then how would getting rid of the FTF on non-regulated guns not be enforceable?

I guess the big question is how can we get something for the seller that shows a NICS check was actually done on the firearm before its sale? Maybe some sort of document that the FFL signs with the make, model, and serial number on it and the FFL attesting to running a NICS check for the sale of the gun. Maybe a form on the MSP website that sellers can download, fill out, and just have the FFL sign off on?

If this law gets passed, there needs to be something in place to protect the seller when MSP comes tracing a gun that was used in a crime.

jefflac02 · Mar 21, 2019

fabsroman said:
Yep, and that is why I would prefer a NICS check in lieu of a Form 77R on each and every single gun purchase in Maryland. If the Form 77R is Constitutional and enforceable, why couldn't Maryland institute it on all firearms purchases, and not just regulated firearms? Maryland did away with the FTF sale of regulated firearms decades ago via the Form 77R. ON a Form 77R, does MSP do a NICS check, does the FFL do a NICS check, or is there just no NICS check whatsoever? So, if that is enforceable, then how would getting rid of the FTF on non-regulated guns not be enforceable?

I guess the big question is how can we get something for the seller that shows a NICS check was actually done on the firearm before its sale? Maybe some sort of document that the FFL signs with the make, model, and serial number on it and the FFL attesting to running a NICS check for the sale of the gun. Maybe a form on the MSP website that sellers can download, fill out, and just have the FFL sign off on?

If this law gets passed, there needs to be something in place to protect the seller when MSP comes tracing a gun that was used in a crime.

I agree with the aspect of liability protection wholeheartedly. If they are forcing this requirement, then isn’t the liability on the state? If someone passes a check then commits the crime. Not sure how the seller nor the dealer could be liable for the actions of someone.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

swinokur · Mar 21, 2019

The only proof will be a NTN and afterwards an entry in the BB.

Can the NICS check be done without an entry in the dealer BB?

I think that is what the NV AG was pointing out.

fabsroman · Mar 21, 2019

Jefflac said:
I agree with the aspect of liability protection wholeheartedly. If they are forcing this requirement, then isn’t the liability on the state? If someone passes a check then commits the crime. Not sure how the seller nor the dealer could be liable for the actions of someone.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am more worried about law enforcement trying to trace the gun from manufacture to ultimate destination, coming to a law abiding Maryland citizen that sold the gun to somebody, and that citizen then not having anything to show that he/she complied with the NICS requirement upon the sale. That is something that needs to be addressed in this bill. The seller needs something to show that he complied. Otherwise, the seller does not have any evidence if he/she is charged with not complying with this law. I am worried about the law abiding seller, getting charged for something because he does not have proof that he/she complied with the law.

R&R to House of Delegates: "We Will Not Comply!"

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Ultimate Member

In a State of Bliss

The Dude Abides

Ultimate Member

In a State of Bliss

R.I.P

Curmudgeon

Si vis pacem, para bellum

R.I.P

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Curmudgeon

R.I.P

In a State of Bliss

Ultimate Member

Active Member

In a State of Bliss

Ultimate Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics