In many states there is a path get rights restored which usually requires being crime free for a certain period of time and then petitioning the state for restoring those rights. BTW, the restrictions for felons usually applies to firearms as defined in a State’s criminal code; often it doesn’t apply to black powder or pneumatic guns.Again, query how a Felon can legally purchase and carry a black powder gun for SD, like for instance a 1851 Colt Navy or even an early blackpowder cap lock derringer.
So what you're saying is you would just have to find a way to avoid the background check in order to buy and sell guns?
Either a firearm is procured through legal channels, which a convicted felon cannot do, or it is acquired through illegal channels. Those are the only two options that exist. There is no so-called "loophole" in need of address.
So what you're saying is a felon who can get a gun legally would be the loophole, and that doesn't exist?
Pray tell, exactly how can a felon, a prohibited individual, go about acquiring a firearm in a legal manner, without committing a felony in the process of either the acquisition, or the subsequent possession? Explain how such can possibly occur.
Why do you care about the subsequent possession? If the felon can get a fire arm, isn't that enough for the loophole?
For the fact that possession of a firearm by a prohibited individual is a felony in itself. It is not. The acquisition, regardless of the circumstances surrounding how it occurred, remains a felony offense. If an individual is murdered in cold blood, does such mean that there is a loophole in the prohibition against murder that allowed for such to physically occur? Or does it simply mean that the individual responsible for committing the murder simply did not care about abiding by the law?
Yeah so I just have to prove the minimum. If a person can walk out of the store with a gun legally when they're not supposed to have it, reporting it as themselves, that's enough for a loophole. Why? Because in the time for the background check to come in that's enough time for a crime other than that to occur. If that happens, that would qualify as a loophole. Your scenario would make sense if they could kill a person, and then have a legal excuse to have committed the killing. Not murder because murder has a specific connotation. I think that's what your doing here as well. By saying it's a felony, you're assuming the conclusion already, when a better to frame it is obtaining a gun in the first place.
Except that by their very attempt to purchase a gun they have broken the law. Therefore they did not acquire the gun legally. IE: No loophole.
In any state and with the Fed, a felon in possession of a gun is committing a felony. Why play games by asking 20 questions? Ask the actual question you want to ask or make your point.
If you buy from an FFL (think store) you can’t walk with a gun until your background check clears indicating you aren’t prohibited from buying a gun. There is no loophole. The loophole myth is just that, a myth. Go buy a gun.... see the process. Or, go to a gun show and see if anyone will sell you a gun without a background check. The margins in gun sales aren’t high enough for an FFL to risk a felony charge or loosing their license.
So what you're saying is there is a distinction between de juro and de facto? You can de facto acquire a gun legally by walking it out of the gun shop, but de juro you committed a crime by purchasing it? If that's the case, wouldn't there be a loophole there letting someone de facto do something illegal? Questions are more important than the answers. Always remember that. I've already made my point. There's a loophole.
No FFL will allow you to complete the sale and take possession of a gun until the BC has been completed ...period. No, exceptions. You haven’t made your point. You’ve just illustrated you haven’t a clue. There isn’t a loophole.
And you have just started talking to me. I live in a rough neighborhood and tried to get a handgun for personal protection. I've gone through the process. Not very fun in NY but it is what it is. The SAFE Act is what it is. I've seen it with my own eyes when I tried to make a purchase between my friends. Care to try again?
No loophole for these sales. They are private sales, specifically excluded from BCs by Federal Law, thus no loophole. If the buyer was a felon, the buyer would be violating the law. The one potential questionable seller was the one private seller at a booth if he was selling multiple guns... the ATF has rules for private selling, if selling multiple guns for a profit (a business), in which case the seller is required to obtain an FFL. Any FFL is required to maintain a record of all their transactions (both acquisitions and sales) and the 4473 forms and produce them on demand to the ATF. I frequently work at gun shows, manning booths for a couple client FFLs, and know quite a few sellers...all FFLs. In all the venues I have worked I have yet to see a private seller sell guns from a booth, and the venue Hosts I know are pretty vigilant about the rules requiring an FFL to rent a booth for selling guns. So, like many of those commenting on the 7 Year old CNN Video in YouTube coupled with CNNs reputation, I am inclined to suspect their video has been edited. This is closer to what you would actually find [video][/video] BTW, both the FFLs I work with will perform BCs for any private seller for free and a couple venues have places setup for private sellers to have BCs done for them. Also, in most of the venues I work, there are off duty police working the doors, some working in the booths, and often plain clothes ATF agents walking the isles.
Aww, so what you’re saying is, loophole because they don’t have to get a back ground check if it’s a private deal.
Yeah. I was outbidding a friend on a gun (needed it for shooting foxes). Turns out he was busted a couple of years ago on drug selling and dealing. Love him to death, he needed the gun too so what was I supposed to do?
I don't think you understand what a loophole is. A loophole is when some is able to legally do something that is not normally allowed. Think of it like getting a special permit to hunt an endangered species. Normally not legally allowed but due to a loophole you got a special permit which gives you an exemption and legally allows you to hunt that endangered animal. To put it simply, a loophole allows you to do something legally. No felon can legally buy, own, possess, or even handle a gun. Period. No ifs, ands, buts, or coconuts. IE: no loophole. Can felons get ahold of guns? Yes. Are they legally allowed to? No. Can felons get them via otherwise legal means such as private sellers or gun stores? Yes. If the person selling is not doing thier due diligence. Does that mean it's a loophole? No. Because it is still illegal for them to do anything to acquire a gun. Just because someone can do something it does not mean it's not illegal. If I drive 10 miles per over the speed limit and don't get caught is that a loophole? No. I still did something illegal. If a LEO goes over 10 miles per hour over the speed limit in the course of thier duties is that a loophole? Yes because the law gives them an exemption. Do you understand what a loophole is now?
If he was a felon, he is breaking the law even by borrowing a gun. And, selling to him, if his status was known, was a felony as well.
Yes loopholes exist in laws. And? Right, I understand that. It's an exemption to the rule which skirts the meaning of the rule. If I'm saying the exemption to the rule is something, that's a loophole. The exemption to the rule that you need to have a background check before purchasing a gun, is to have a private deal. It does not matter legality of the situation, you can commit illegal actions by following the law. What matters is the manner in which it is cared out. When I say you can legally buy a gun, you can do that by skirting the rules of when you have to do a background check, or when you are allowed to pick up the gun and carry it out the store. If you buy drugs, that's a crime. They can search you for that. But if you buy drugs and it gets shipped to you via the post office, they can't search the mail without a warrant. That's a loophole because you can skirt the rules of when to do a search.
"Skirting the rules" as you say is not a loophole. Skirting the rules is doing something you know is wrong but getting away with it. Like driving 10 miles an hour over the speed limit but not getting caught. There is a difference between "skirting the rules" and a "loophole". One will get you in trouble. The other is perfectly acceptable. As for private sales...there no law requiring background checks on private sales. That means there is no loophole as loopholes require a law against something in order to give an exemption to.
