Apparently 594 isn't tracking as many guns as they expected

[luvmystang67]

Haha, how many times have you heard "40% of guns are sold privately without background checks", well turns out its more like 2% that are sold privately.  NOT a shocking number to probably most of us.  I'm sure there are an equal  number that aren't following the law or that are following and only sell the family members, etc, but this is absolutely hilarious to me.  What morons.


In 2014 voters approved a Washington initiative that requires buyers to undergo a background check when they purchase a gun from another private citizen.

Initiative 594 was designed to close the so-called "gun show loophole."

But analysis of federal data by the KING 5 Investigators raises questions about how effective that law has been.

Only 2% of background checks in Washington in 2015 stemmed from "private party" sales of guns, according to data in the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check – or NICS – system.

That number is surprising to researchers Philip Cook of Duke and Jens Ludwig of the University of Chicago, who study gun violence.

They say that their own research – and studies by others – have shown that up to 40% of gun sales nationwide are between private citizens. They're skeptical that the 2% reported to the FBI is an accurate picture of the private gun market in Washington state.

"I suspect…there are a lot of unreported private-market sales going on," Ludwig said in an email to KING 5.

In other words, the data could indicate that many gun sellers and buyers are evading the law.

"Jonathan" – who asked that we not reveal his real name – is one of them.

"People knew there was a threat to our rights," he said of I-594.

Jonathan says he's bought or sold several guns since the law went into effect.

"As far as following the law, roughly 50% of those (sales) I followed the law," Jonathan said.

Jonathan says many gun owners connect via private websites and meet up to buy and sell guns without the background check.

"If you hit me up on Facebook and say 'I'd like to buy your pistol', I can go through your Facebook right then and there and look at the kind of person you are right from your pictures," Jonathan said.

He says he uses his own means to determine if a buyer is a reasonable gun owner and doesn't believe that I-594 in constitutional.

Many others may be following suit.

NICS data shows that 170,876 background checks were conducted in Washington state between April and October of last year. The FBI started collecting the data from Washington in April.

Of all those background checks, only 3,290 of them – less than 2% -- were conducted for private party sales.

The data is entered by federally licensed firearms dealers. I-594 requires private buyers to report to a licensed dealer who conducts the background check – usually for a fee.

Firearms dealer Kelly Bachand, who owns Kelly's Gun Sales in Tukwila, say the low number may also be attributed to firearms dealers incorrectly filling out federal paperwork.

"It's not very obvious or easy to find the information as far as how it should be filled out," said Bachand.

It does not appear that anyone has ever been prosecuted for violating I-594. The Washington Administrative Office of the Courts says it does not have any record of anyone being charged under the law in 2015.

I-594 has stopped some felons from getting guns.

A firearms enthusiast in Snohomish County, who did not want to be identified, told KING 5 that he backed out of a deal when a background check identified the buyer as a felon.

Even so, the Snohomish County man feels I-594 is more of a hindrance on law-abiding citizens instead of criminals.

Even though he follows the law, he says there is much resentment in the gun community.

"I would say the majority of people who are buying and selling guns aren't following the law," the man said.



http://www.king5.com/story/news/2016/01/05/gun-buyers-may-not-be-following-background-check-law/78323388/?csp=nbcnews

[h20hunter]

I'm willing to bet that there are still plenty of person to person sales between responsible adults that are not getting registered.

[BOWHUNTER45]

There is no way they can control that unless someone actually used the gun they bought in a crime and was caught ...How can they ?

[luvmystang67]

There is no way they can control that unless someone actually used the gun they bought in a crime and was caught ...How can they ?

They're only now beginning to realize it... they thought it would be so easy.  It is really cute.

I'm going to propose an initiative that mandates that everyone is nice.  If people are not nice it is a gross misdemeanor.  I assume we'll get a lot of votes.   

[grundy53]

I'm willing to bet that there are still plenty of person to person sales between responsible adults that are not getting registered.

Civil disobedience. Look up the numbers on New York's safe act. Something like over 90% of all guns in New York haven't been registered like they were supposed to be.

Sent from my E6782 using Tapatalk

[Bob33]

Allen and Bloomberg wasted $10 million on a feel good do nothing constructive campaign.

[bobcat]

If a hunter is selling a gun to another hunter, who ALREADY has guns, what's the point of doing a background check? Come on, it's common sense.

Also, the Lewis County sheriff has stated that they will not be enforcing I-594. So how many people do you think are paying the fee to do background checks on a private sale in Lewis county?

Will the State Patrol enforce the law? I don't know. They didn't at the I-594 protest in Olympia. Lots of people there were blatantly "transferring" firearms and nothing was done.

 

[pianoman9701]

I'm willing to bet that there are still plenty of person to person sales between responsible adults that are not getting registered.

It's certainly nowhere near 40% of gun sales.

[luvmystang67]

I've often thought, every time you get out of a truck and leave your gun with your buddy in the truck to open the gate, isn't that technically a transfer?

I have some liberal friends (I know, not many, some of them just aren't bright enough to know any better and their heart bleeds) who want to shoot and I always use that they're not allowed to shoot my gun in the woods because of 594.  It serves 2 purposes, 1) I dont really want to take them anyway and 2) I want them to know how ridiculous the law they supported is.

[pianoman9701]

I take as many liberals shooting as possible. It gives them a whole new outlook on firearm ownership. I also ask them when we're done if they now feel inclined to go out and murder people. So far, the answer has been unanimous.

[bobcat]

Before 594 passed I was storing a cousin's deer rifle in my safe. He's under 18 and for some reason my aunt didn't want the gun at her house. So, suspecting that she would be voting in favor of 594, I told her if it passes I won't be able to let him have his rifle without going to a gun dealer and doing a background check. She didn't believe me, but didn't like that I said that, so she had another cousin pick up the rifle and he's now storing it in his safe.   

[bigtex]

If a hunter is selling a gun to another hunter, who ALREADY has guns, what's the point of doing a background check? Come on, it's common sense.

There are some felons who have WA rifle hunting licenses and legally cannot possess firearms. WDFW's licensing system does not check criminal records.

So just because someone has a hunting license doesn't mean they can legally possess firearms.

[bobcat]

If a hunter is selling a gun to another hunter, who ALREADY has guns, what's the point of doing a background check? Come on, it's common sense.

There are some felons who have WA rifle hunting licenses and legally cannot possess firearms. WDFW's licensing system does not check criminal records.

So just because someone has a hunting license doesn't mean they can legally possess firearms.

I said if they already have guns. So say I know someone with a safe full of guns, that they hunt with every year. I have an extra bolt action 30/06- why shouldn't I sell it to them without a background check?

[bigtex]

If a hunter is selling a gun to another hunter, who ALREADY has guns, what's the point of doing a background check? Come on, it's common sense.

There are some felons who have WA rifle hunting licenses and legally cannot possess firearms. WDFW's licensing system does not check criminal records.

So just because someone has a hunting license doesn't mean they can legally possess firearms.

I said if they already have guns. So say I know someone with a safe full of guns, that they hunt with every year. I have an extra bolt action 30/06- why shouldn't I sell it to them without a background check?

I know what your saying. Every year WDFW busts felons hunting with guns who have a rifle hunting license, and most have more than 1 gun sitting at home.

I'm not pro-594 but simply assuming that since a guy hunts with a gun and thus must be legally able to possess a gun is flawed.

Now obviously you would (or should) know if your buddy is a felon. But if it's a random guy you meet on craigslist who is looking for a new hunting rifle you never know...

[ipkus]

It's too bad the liberals that keep passing these laws can't see it from a little higher viewpoint;

The more stupid, emotion based laws you pass, the more 'criminals' you create (because people with common sense won't adibe)...which is why they pass more laws...it's just a viscous circle with no end.

If you took every person convicted of first degree murder using a gun and hung them, in public, on television during American Ninja Warrior episodes, I GUARANTEE the murder rate in this country would plummet (ANW ratings would also break records).

Stop punishing 75% of the citizens for what 0.1% does.