I don't think anybody in this thread was arguing otherwisetreadlightly wrote:Gee, this seems so simple and so common. If you posses stolen property, whether you know it or not, you don't have rights of ownership.
Search found 2 matches
Return to “Fed to seize guns from people who failed background checks”
- Fri Dec 15, 2017 11:09 am
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: Fed to seize guns from people who failed background checks
- Replies: 31
- Views: 8524
Re: Fed to seize guns from people who failed background checks
- Mon Dec 11, 2017 3:19 pm
- Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
- Topic: Fed to seize guns from people who failed background checks
- Replies: 31
- Views: 8524
Re: Fed to seize guns from people who failed background checks
I agree. Most of you know I ran an FFL biz for many years (and I'm grateful for mrvmax for his sage advice when I first started it!). In those seven or so years, I had two firearms that were in delay mode, then went "Denied" AFTER the waiting period expired and I transferred the gun to the buyer.mrvmax wrote: I do not see this as a gun grab but normal business as usual.
In one case, I was able to reach the guy that day and he sheepishly brought it back. Although he didn't admit it, it seemed from the look on his face that he was hoping he'd be able to slide by.
The second one was a little more difficult. He kept ignoring my calls and I was going to just let the ATF handle it (FFLs are in NO WAY required to retrieve a firearm once its transferred, BTW). I finally decided to leave a voice mail for the guy and let him know the plain truth -- the ATF was likely to come up to him in the most embarrassing circumstance, probably at work, and question him about the firearm . He brought the firearm in a couple days later.
In both cases, I paid for their firearms at a HIGHLY discounted rate, because they couldn't transfer them back to the seller. They lost money but avoided having their toy confiscated (both were lowers that I ultimately decided to keep). I don't feel the least bit guilty about it -- it seems pretty clear that both KNEW they had a shady past and were hoping they could feign ignorance.
This kind of thing is why I think there should be a pretty rapid response to people buying guns when they are in denial state, and extremely severe punishments for hiring a straw purchaser. On the other hand, I think people deserve to know their status before they attempt to purchase. Right now, there's no effective way to run a NICS on yourself without actually purchasing a firearm. Catch 22. Kind of the same problem with dealers -- we (usually) have no effective way to determine if a used gun was stolen before buying or transferring it.