TexasCHLforum.com

baldeagle wrote:

Moby wrote:I don't think I have a problem requiering background chIecks between private individuals. Know one on this forum that didn't require I show my CHL would know if I'm a felon or not. And we can't really use the confines of this forum as a scale to measure against. How many private buyers do not request to see a CHL, are not a member of this forum, or in any other way know the buyer? Adding $50 to the purchase of a firearm or using the FBI and paying $12 and waiting for them to get to it is a safeguard I do not see as overly intrusive. The selling of firearms needs to be kept out of the hands of gang bangers, felons, etc. I'm not for more restrictions on the purchasing of firearms. But with this addition it is not any more intrusive for me.

But it is more intrusive. And it won't do a single thing to prevent gang bangers and felons from getting guns. Even if it were possible to completely prevent sales between private parties, gang bangers and felons were either steal them or illegally purchase them. Forcing private gun owners to use background checks before sales won't change anything.

We'll have to agree to disagree sir. I think any sale of any firearm should have the same background check I currently have to have.
If I have to do it, I see no issue with it. It may not stop all gang bangers etc. but I have to do it. Anyone that is responsibl on these forums whould ask about my CHL to ensure their not selling to a felon. I just don't see a logical argument against it. I'm not for Obama's universal national database. But what we have right now would be just fine for all gun slaes in my opinion.

I don't think I have a problem requiering background chIecks between private individuals. Know one on this forum that didn't require I show my CHL would know if I'm a felon or not. And we can't really use the confines of this forum as a scale to measure against. How many private buyers do not request to see a CHL, are not a member of this forum, or in any other way know the buyer? Adding $50 to the purchase of a firearm or using the FBI and paying $12 and waiting for them to get to it is a safeguard I do not see as overly intrusive. The selling of firearms needs to be kept out of the hands of gang bangers, felons, etc. I'm not for more restrictions on the purchasing of firearms. But with this addition it is not any more intrusive for me.

quote="baldeagle"]

steveincowtown wrote:Could you provide an explanation as to why the geographical location of a background check on the private sale of anything makes it any more or less reasonable?

Forcing them to insert an FFL into the transaction increases the cost of the transaction and inconveniences the parties while having zero impact on preventing sales to felons.


Sure.

At a gun show a private seller is selling to any party that is interested without any previous interaction other than the buyer's questions regarding the weapon at the time of the sale, just the same as any other gun dealer at the show. The equipment to do a background check, if needed, is readily available and can be used easily.

In a private two party transaction, the seller normally would either know the buyer personally or would use their personal judgment regarding the person's trustworthiness. For example, guns are sold on this forum a lot, and many of the sellers and buyers "know" each other through their interactions on this forum. Many also will only sell to someone who holds a CHL. Forcing them to insert an FFL into the transaction increases the cost of the transaction and inconveniences the parties while having zero impact on preventing sales to felons, because those sellers and buyers will simply ignore the law.[/quote]