No private gun sales! Poppycock!!

[xd2005]

Everyone who says it's not required is absolutely correct. Our rights, however, are under attack and our actions, under a microscope. There are a large percentage of Americans who stupidly think that we no longer need the 2nd Amendment. If one of us sells to someone without checking and that person uses the firearm to commit a crime, it's a black eye on personal sales and a one-way ticket to new laws.

It's like ethical behavior while hunting. There are many things that aren't against the rules that would make hunting look bad to the over 96% of people who don't hunt. You can be indignant and refuse to do the things which will help us maintain a positive public profile, or you can choose not to and risk losing the support of the general public. I choose to be careful when selling a firearm to another. Do what you want.

In a sense this isn't all that different than what we are fighting the gov't  to keep them from doing though.

It's actually the opposite of what the government is trying to do. It's taking on personal responsibility and preventing problems instead of ignoring it and waiting for the dictator to tell us what to do.

[pianoman9701]

Everyone who says it's not required is absolutely correct. Our rights, however, are under attack and our actions, under a microscope. There are a large percentage of Americans who stupidly think that we no longer need the 2nd Amendment. If one of us sells to someone without checking and that person uses the firearm to commit a crime, it's a black eye on personal sales and a one-way ticket to new laws.

It's like ethical behavior while hunting. There are many things that aren't against the rules that would make hunting look bad to the over 96% of people who don't hunt. You can be indignant and refuse to do the things which will help us maintain a positive public profile, or you can choose not to and risk losing the support of the general public. I choose to be careful when selling a firearm to another. Do what you want.

In a sense this isn't all that different than what we are fighting the gov't  to keep them from doing though.

It's actually the opposite of what the government is trying to do. It's taking on personal responsibility and preventing problems instead of ignoring it and waiting for the dictator to tell us what to do.

But your doing an impromptu background check before selling any firearm. Which is exactly what the gov't wants. All gun purchases to be checked prior to sale. Unless I totally mis understood you.

Yes, you totally misunderstand me. I'm saying that if we take personal responsibility which nets positive results, then the general public will support us in keeping our rights when the dictator wants to take personal then away and force us to do his bidding. It's an enormous difference. Voluntary responsibility v. Losing our rights.

[turkeyfeather]

Everyone who says it's not required is absolutely correct. Our rights, however, are under attack and our actions, under a microscope. There are a large percentage of Americans who stupidly think that we no longer need the 2nd Amendment. If one of us sells to someone without checking and that person uses the firearm to commit a crime, it's a black eye on personal sales and a one-way ticket to new laws.

It's like ethical behavior while hunting. There are many things that aren't against the rules that would make hunting look bad to the over 96% of people who don't hunt. You can be indignant and refuse to do the things which will help us maintain a positive public profile, or you can choose not to and risk losing the support of the general public. I choose to be careful when selling a firearm to another. Do what you want.

In a sense this isn't all that different than what we are fighting the gov't  to keep them from doing though.

It's actually the opposite of what the government is trying to do. It's taking on personal responsibility and preventing problems instead of ignoring it and waiting for the dictator to tell us what to do.

But your doing an impromptu background check before selling any firearm. Which is exactly what the gov't wants. All gun purchases to be checked prior to sale. Unless I totally mis understood you.

Yes, you totally misunderstand me. I'm saying that if we take personal responsibility which nets positive results, then the general public will support us in keeping our rights when the dictator wants to take personal then away and force us to do his bidding. It's an enormous difference. Voluntary responsibility v. Losing our rights.

Ok, but this is the statement I am referring to. It appears you are advocating that we be diligent and "check out" anyone we make a private sale to. Is that what you meant? Cause if so that is EXACTLY what the gov't wants.

[xd2005]

Personally (and I had a thread explaining this as well), I support a change in the law to make it a felony to sell to someone ineligible to possess (I did have exceptions for CPL holders).

If you don't care and want to sell to whoever walks up, that is perfectly fine and your right. But I also believe there is some responsibility on our part when selling firearms, not to simply turn a blind eye with a wink, wink, nod, nod and never try to find out if the person is eligible or not, thus staying ignorant. Because of this, I don't believe ignorance should be an excuse and therefore put the onus on the seller to ensure they can possess, or be willing to live with the consequences.

The reasons we end up with the laws that we have is a lack of responsibility on the part of citizens, resulting in the government trying to instill values and responsibility.

Right/wrong and legal/illegal are completely different things. Personally, while it is legal to sell to anyone you want as long as you remain ignorant and turn a blind eye, I don't believe that is the responsible (right) thing to do. I know my thoughts are not popular on here...so be it.

[Bigshooter]

If you think a felon that wants to buy a gun is going to tell the truth then you are the one that is ignorant.

[CP]

I know my thoughts are not popular on here...so be it.

No they are not. 

[bobcat]

My thought is that if a person is so dangerous that he cannot be trusted with a gun, then they never should have set him free in the first place.

It shouldn't be up to me to determine that.

Keep these people in jail if they can't be trusted to be roaming the streets!   

[pianoman9701]

Everyone who says it's not required is absolutely correct. Our rights, however, are under attack and our actions, under a microscope. There are a large percentage of Americans who stupidly think that we no longer need the 2nd Amendment. If one of us sells to someone without checking and that person uses the firearm to commit a crime, it's a black eye on personal sales and a one-way ticket to new laws.

It's like ethical behavior while hunting. There are many things that aren't against the rules that would make hunting look bad to the over 96% of people who don't hunt. You can be indignant and refuse to do the things which will help us maintain a positive public profile, or you can choose not to and risk losing the support of the general public. I choose to be careful when selling a firearm to another. Do what you want.

In a sense this isn't all that different than what we are fighting the gov't  to keep them from doing though.

It's actually the opposite of what the government is trying to do. It's taking on personal responsibility and preventing problems instead of ignoring it and waiting for the dictator to tell us what to do.

But your doing an impromptu background check before selling any firearm. Which is exactly what the gov't wants. All gun purchases to be checked prior to sale. Unless I totally mis understood you.

Yes, you totally misunderstand me. I'm saying that if we take personal responsibility which nets positive results, then the general public will support us in keeping our rights when the dictator wants to take personal then away and force us to do his bidding. It's an enormous difference. Voluntary responsibility v. Losing our rights.

Ok, but this is the statement I am referring to. It appears you are advocating that we be diligent and "check out" anyone we make a private sale to. Is that what you meant? Cause if so that is EXACTLY what the gov't wants.

I'm done. You know exactly what I said and meant. Time to go camping/scouting. Bye all.

[turkeyfeather]

Everyone who says it's not required is absolutely correct. Our rights, however, are under attack and our actions, under a microscope. There are a large percentage of Americans who stupidly think that we no longer need the 2nd Amendment. If one of us sells to someone without checking and that person uses the firearm to commit a crime, it's a black eye on personal sales and a one-way ticket to new laws.

It's like ethical behavior while hunting. There are many things that aren't against the rules that would make hunting look bad to the over 96% of people who don't hunt. You can be indignant and refuse to do the things which will help us maintain a positive public profile, or you can choose not to and risk losing the support of the general public. I choose to be careful when selling a firearm to another. Do what you want.

In a sense this isn't all that different than what we are fighting the gov't  to keep them from doing though.

It's actually the opposite of what the government is trying to do. It's taking on personal responsibility and preventing problems instead of ignoring it and waiting for the dictator to tell us what to do.

But your doing an impromptu background check before selling any firearm. Which is exactly what the gov't wants. All gun purchases to be checked prior to sale. Unless I totally mis understood you.

Yes, you totally misunderstand me. I'm saying that if we take personal responsibility which nets positive results, then the general public will support us in keeping our rights when the dictator wants to take personal then away and force us to do his bidding. It's an enormous difference. Voluntary responsibility v. Losing our rights.

Ok, but this is the statement I am referring to. It appears you are advocating that we be diligent and "check out" anyone we make a private sale to. Is that what you meant? Cause if so that is EXACTLY what the gov't wants.

I'm done. You know exactly what I said and meant. Time to go camping/scouting. Bye all.

If I did I wouldn't be asking. Don't get your undies in a bunch. Just asking you to clarify and or back up what you said. 

[csaaphill]

Having a yard sale at my moms house and I was going to try and sell an SKS that have. All was well and good then my Brother-in-law who is a cop tells my mom she cant sell it. "What if you sell it to a convicted felon?" he asked her. Well sir, this is America and last I checked the private sales of firearms are completely legal! This is not Communist Russia! I cant believe this crap. What if you sell a car to a guy with 9 DUI's? we can what-if forever. The point is it's legal and there is no reason that she cant sell my gun. I do not believe in mandatory registration!

ya just sell it don't worry. If i could afford it i'd buy it.
glad people stand up to over regulative states.

[CAMPMEAT]

Sell it, then report it stolen...........

[csaaphill]

Sell it, then report it stolen...........

[bearpaw]

Selling a gun is no different than selling a car, knife, or baseball bat. 

I agree with the thought that if a person can't be trusted with a gun why is he trusted to roam freely among us using cars, knives, and baseball bats which can all be just as lethal. 

I think some of you are playing right into the hands of the liberals who want more controls on all the activities of others. 

[Elkaholic daWg]

Selling a gun is no different than selling a car, knife, or baseball bat. 

I agree with the thought that if a person can't be trusted with a gun why is he trusted to roam freely among us using cars, knives, and baseball bats which can all be just as lethal. 

I think some of you are playing right into the hands of the liberals who want more controls on all the activities of others. 

 And this is not the only issue where we do it!!

[lokidog]

Everyone who says it's not required is absolutely correct. Our rights, however, are under attack and our actions, under a microscope. There are a large percentage of Americans who stupidly think that we no longer need the 2nd Amendment. If one of us sells to someone without checking and that person uses the firearm to commit a crime, it's a black eye on personal sales and a one-way ticket to new laws.

It's like ethical behavior while hunting. There are many things that aren't against the rules that would make hunting look bad to the over 96% of people who don't hunt. You can be indignant and refuse to do the things which will help us maintain a positive public profile, or you can choose not to and risk losing the support of the general public. I choose to be careful when selling a firearm to another. Do what you want.

In a sense this isn't all that different than what we are fighting the gov't  to keep them from doing though.

It's actually the opposite of what the government is trying to do. It's taking on personal responsibility and preventing problems instead of ignoring it and waiting for the dictator to tell us what to do.

But your doing an impromptu background check before selling any firearm. Which is exactly what the gov't wants. All gun purchases to be checked prior to sale. Unless I totally mis understood you.

Yes, you totally misunderstand me. I'm saying that if we take personal responsibility which nets positive results, then the general public will support us in keeping our rights when the dictator wants to take personal then away and force us to do his bidding. It's an enormous difference. Voluntary responsibility v. Losing our rights.

Ok, but this is the statement I am referring to. It appears you are advocating that we be diligent and "check out" anyone we make a private sale to. Is that what you meant? Cause if so that is EXACTLY what the gov't wants.

I'm done. You know exactly what I said and meant. Time to go camping/scouting. Bye all.

If I did I wouldn't be asking. Don't get your undies in a bunch. Just asking you to clarify and or back up what you said. 

I agree with Piano, the big difference is that the private seller is not RECORDING and KEEPING a list of who is buying what to be used against the buyer at a later date.