Those who sell guns to criminals should not be held responsible for crimes committed

I'm from Alabama. We call people from Massachusetts "Yankees". Interesting term you've provided, though. Is that a common term where you're from for people from Massachusetts?

 

Chicken huh? That's what I thought.

 

You infer what was not implied.

 

No, you're chicken.

 

Whatever.

 

Do you think somebody should be held responsible for terrorism (and punished accordingly) if they illegally sold an airplane to someone and that plane later got used in a terrorist attack?

How about a car?

 

How about a bicycle?

 

Exactly, whatever.

 

Several parties can make a conscious deliberate decision. One to end the life, one to knowingly facilitate and conspire to do so. In my view, there ought to be some degree of criminal intent for criminal sanction, but a separate civil standard for negligent conduct that facilitates the commission. If the seller has reason to suspect that the gun is wanted to commit a crime, a criminal prosecution is in order. If the seller behaves in a way that could reasonable foreseen as contributing to a crime ( not doing the required paper work and background check), should be civilly liable. If he did nothing negligent and had no knowledge, there should be no liability at all.

 

Yes

 

The details may be different but it is still gun control. Restrictions are a form of gun control.

While this statement is correct it also indicates supporting gun control.

 

Curious. You ran no background checks on a tranaction?
I can’t comment on all gun shows, but I work at several in the Midwest area each month. Not one will allow guns being sold from booth without a BC as a venue policy. Any doing that would be immediately ejected. The promoters are generally sensitive to any criticism that they would be hosting venues that allow guns to be sold from hosted booths without BCs.

 

Not required at the shows I attend as long as the seller is not a FFL Dealer. Private party no problem. Just like selling it in the local paper. When the promoters are requiring background checks solely to appease the un-gun people then those gun control supporters have already won.

 

It's still not a term that means enough in a debate to ask if someone is in favor of it. Are you in favor of marriage? Does that support of marriage include polygamy, forced arranged marriage or child marriage?

Isn't it more like felon control?

 

What mechanism do the shows you attend have for private sellers to access NICS?

 

For FFL holders, sure, as required by federal law -- but private citizens do not have access to the NICS...?

 

Two, many of the FFLs will run a free BC for you if you have an already filled out form (sellers tend to exhibit comradere and even watch over an adjacent booth if a seller needs a nature calling break), and a couple of shows have tables set up with FFL volunteers providing free BCs for private sellers, even, walk about sellers. Then too, most have code words built into innocuous comm announcements warning of potential thieves, people soliciting buying without BCs, and those soliciting to buy full autos or other regulated items.
Every gun show I have worked at post rules at the entrance, including a requirement to follow all state and federal laws. And, every one employs multiple LEs, some checking to make sure no loaded weapons are brought to the floor, among other things. Every promoter I know wants to avoid anything that gives media the ability to hurl the common leftist myth accusations of impropriety. Then too, I have seen ATF undercover walking the floor.
Profit margins for FFLs are not high enough to encourage jeopardizing a business for a bad sale. As for private walk about private sellers, there are a few (really just a few) at every show but they tend to sell outside the venue... and still, ATFs can be about. To sell a gun privately many FFLs will do so on consignment (still a BC). Frankly, I think private sales are far easier to do by other means.
For me, I didn’t sell my collection over night, but over time and while I had different buyers from different backgrounds, the nature of the guns in my collection drew other collectors, LE, and even two judges. All had no problem offering information prior to meeting I could use to verify IDs and all brought copies of drivers licenses with many also doing the same with CCPs. Out of sixty some transactions, the three I refused to sell to, one had excuses for not complying with my requests for verifiable ID info, and the second hedged at doing the transaction at the police district location I used for meets (more below), and one immediately displayed complete ignorance at gun safety protocol.
I know a lot of LE (many have attended various training/lectures I have conducted) and I usually arrange to do my meets at their location (they have always been happy to assist and provide a room, a couple times preempting a meet by offers to buy first..my first choice for obvious reasons). Arranging to conduct a transaction at an LE or FFL facility is a recommendation I make if feasible (mine is 3 minutes away)... I figure it will weed out any bad guys hoping to flim a buy and protects a seller from other risks)... It weeded one that I am certain of.

 

In Colorado the gun shows tend to set up background check tables, staffed by FFL employees who have access into CBI/NICS. It's a fee, not free service. For private transfers conducted away from a gun show venue, FFLs typically charge the state mandated BGC fee plus a transfer fee for conducting the transfer.

 

If they suspected or had reason to believe that plane would be used in a terrorist attack then yes they should be prosecuted as an accessory to the crime.

Same answer.

 

They don’t in general, something I find objectionable, something blocked by the Dems for obvious reasons. However, as I related, at the gun shows I have worked, most FFLs, as will the one I work for, run a BC for free if the paperwork is provided. I noted at the one I was at a week ago, not only were the promoter’s rules displayed at the entrance, but the sign encouraged any private sellers to have a FFL run a BC for them if needed.
Sen Coburn has submitted bills for opening the NICS to private sells. His bill was opposed predominately by the DEM for silly reasons and by a handful of GOP because they first want the NICS problems resolved.

 

I think a BC fee discourages it from being done. Taxpayers pay for the system...they should have access. I have yet to see a credible reason for denying private seller access.

 

"Those who sell guns to criminals should not be held responsible for crimes committed"

agree, same with those that sell alcohol to people, ect....

if one commits a crime on a drug, it's all them

 

I believe if one doesn't take advantage of a willing FFL to vet a buyer they are leaving themselves open to a world of personal liability and possibility criminal liability as well, furthermore if a buyer refused to meet me at safe location or insisted on a direct seller buyer shipment versus a FFL to FFL shipment transfer it's a no sale.

I will put personal safety and responsibility to keep firearms out of the hands they don't belong in way over some cash in my pocket.

 

agree, if someone uses alcohol or Cigarettes illegally, it's there fault, not the person that sold it to them, buying underage is a crime

 

what Americans should the constitution not apply too, does the same go for free speech and religion or just the right to bear arms

if we weaken the constitutional right to bear arms, we also weaken other constitutional rights

as long as it's a constitutional right we have to treat it as such, if we no longer want too then we need to remove it so its no longer a constitutional right