Posted on 09/17/2013 6:28:43 PM PDT by chessplayer
That'll do too!
Both a shotgun and a rifle require the same background check and wait for approval or a ten day waiting period. He couldn’t have bought a shotgun if he couldn’t have bought a rifle.
OK so the 870 Remington shotgun is the MSM’s AR-15 Shotgun. You can’t even try to be this stupid!!!
It’s those dang assault shotguns!
Interstate sales/transfers of any firearm between private parties need to go to a dealer in the recipients state.
Intrastate sales/transfers of any firearm between private parties may be done just like selling a car, motorcycle, etc., UNLESS state/local law requires otherwise. In many jurisdictions, handgun transfers require a permit on the part of the recipient which may or may not require the use of an FFL to receive and transfer the firearm. It just depends on the state/local laws and jurisdiction.
An FFL may sell/transfer a “long gun” firearm to an out of state resident as long as their state law allows it. Normally, this is the case with bordering states but not always. The purchaser completes the ATF Form 4473, background check, etc., and any other legal requirements imposed by their residence state. Sale/transfer of a handgun MUST occur through an FFL in the recipient’s state whereby they would complete the 4473 and any other requirements and only after that, be given possession of the handgun.
Long gun v. handgun drives where and how the transfer can or must occur. Hope this is helpful.
I agree that preventing him from buying the assault rifle did not prevent Obama’s son from going on this killing spree.
However, we cannot put every wackjob in America under close surveillance. Just not possible.
I believe the answer is to let the people under the 2A arm themselves and be able to protect themselves wherever they are. These “gun free zones” are nothing more than “free kill zones”.
A wackjob hell bent on taking any modern day firearm and a couple pockets of magazines or bags of shotshells is free to wreak havoc for several minutes until someone shows up to give him a dirt nap or for him to stop his own mayhem. The people MUST be allowed to protect themselves.
There is no such thing as a “gun free zone” to me. It does not exist. If there is one of those whacky machines that I have to go through.....I do not go there....end of story.
I will not be disarmed.
The law enforcement angle is just saying they hate that shotgun because it is black. I doubt it was a Wingmaster with fine wood and rich blueing. It was BLACK!
Oh - you are so wrong- !!
if he needed an assault rifle- he just needed to
get ahold of Mark Kelly (Gabrielle Giffords husband)
he would gladly purchase and hand over the weapon.
he admitted that when HE PURCHASED an AR15 for himself!
Then said he was going to give it tooo... who knows?
Just another lib breaking the LAW- admitting it!-
and nothing happens! sarc
“The gunman then perched himself above an atrium where he fired down on people who had been eating breakfast, officials said, adding that he used shotgun shells that had roughly a dozen large ball-bearing-like shots in them, increasing their lethal nature.”
Gotta ban buckshot.
Thanks.
I didn’t realize that private party sales had to go through a buyer’s home state FFL. I thought that private party sales were exempt from an NICS check no matter what states the buyer and seller were located in. I did know that certain states however impose other restrictions.
So it sounds like private party sales that cross state lines are actually more restrictive than long gun sales from a dealer in another state in certain instances. In certain states a long gun can be purchased over the counter by a non-resident (after an NICS check) whereas a private party (long or short gun) sale would have to be transferred through an FFL in the buyer’s home state.
Once you start dealing with addtl state by state restrictions the whole thing gets crazy complex.
Had he had a felony conviction for going on a looney-tunes shooting spree near Seattle, he wouldn’t have been able to buy anything!
Oh no!
So, let’s see if I have this right ...
There IS a Virginia specific assault weapons law that does place restrictions on the purchase of assault weapons.
Assault weapons under the law are defined by aesthetic criteria that are easily circumvented by an informed buyer willing to make separate purchases of items like a folding stock, flash suppressor and large capacity magazine.
Regardless of whether he could have bought the AR-15 or not, and despite having played with it, there’s no actual verified evidence that the gunman tried to purchase it.
Is that it? Am I missing anything?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.