Here's a reason to ask to see an LTCF.....

[phillyd2]

You might want to Google "Oliver Wendell Holmes' bad man theory of the law". It deals with amoral folks who are only concerned about the legal penalty for their misdeeds, and not with whether what they've done was right or wrong, or helped to get someone killed.

Are you saying no legal jeopardy, that its just morally wrong?

[Kabloosh]

People that get carry permits or a LTCF in PA are generall 5 to 8 times less likely to commit a crime anyways. So if you don't want to drag the guy out to a FFL dealer and make him get a background check then asking for one is going to be the best option you have in making sure the guy is trust worthy.
That or you can just not care.

[anthony_s]

so what's wrong with this scenario:

I've got a guy who wants to buy my "whatever." I invite him to a computer. He logs on to the PA Criminal Background check system on-line. He enters his data and pays the $10. The computer does its thing and what emerges is a document certifying (or not) "no know criminal history" within the limits of the data base that the PA system has access to. Buyer prints out a copy, I make a copy, I take his money for the "whatever" and we're good to go (or not) as the case may be.

[Kabloosh]

Keeping a record of his criminal background? What do you need it for if it just says there is nothing? Keeping a copy of the receipt of the background check would be fine just to prove it happened for whatever reason.

[GunLawyer001]

Are you saying no legal jeopardy, that its just morally wrong?

No, I'm saying "You might want to Google 'Oliver Wendell Holmes bad man theory of the law'. It deals with amoral folks who are only concerned about the legal penalty for their misdeeds, and not with whether what they've done was right or wrong, or helped to get someone killed."

[wew3]

If you want to compromise on background checks I'm willing but it has to be something simple like I can call pics myself, give them the purchasers drivers license number and get a yes or no. No other information recorded, no fees, etc.

Wasn't this done in the 90's? I seem to recall that for a relatively short time, in order to do a private transfer, the seller had to call a 900 number and give some information about the buyer and get an approval number.

I did a not so thorough search and all I could find was this article (excerpt shown):

###################################

Panel Proposes New Gun Measure

Fumo said he would try to get Senate Republicans to attach the legislation to another bill next week. The gun-control legislation, if enacted, would be called the Pennsylvania Uniform Firearms Act of 1994 and would:

* Prohibit the buying of firearms by those who have committed certain

violent and nonviolent crimes ranging from arson to stalking.

* Create a statewide instant background-check system funded through a $5 per gun sale surcharge and dealer-licensing fees.

* Require background checks - made available through a 900 number telephone call to the state - for private firearm transactions, except in cases where the transfer is to a spouse or from parent to child.

* Impose felony punishments on persons who illegally sell firearms.

* Provide grants to public schools for violence-prevention and firearm- safety programs

http://articles.philly.com/1994-11-1...eapon-violence

###############################

I'm pretty sure that this was enacted with the bill. Maybe someone remembers more about it.

Bill

[phillyd2]

No, I'm saying "You might want to Google 'Oliver Wendell Holmes bad man theory of the law'. It deals with amoral folks who are only concerned about the legal penalty for their misdeeds, and not with whether what they've done was right or wrong, or helped to get someone killed."

Haha. I think I would rather take morality lessons on the use car lot. Not sure why you are refusing to answer such direct questions but it is what it is folks.

[GunLawyer001]

Haha. I think I would rather take morality lessons on the use car lot. Not sure why you are refusing to answer such direct questions but it is what it is folks.

I've said many times that anything preceded by any variation of "So YOU'RE saying..." is going to be a strawman, 99 times out of 100.

To answer your implied question, your legal jeopardy will depend on what you knew or should have know (what the jury will believe you knew), the nature of the buyer's subsequent crimes, and whether your indifference to what he plans to do with the gun rises to the level of criminally culpable.

There is no answer that applies to every situation, any more than a good car mechanic can tell you "what a clicking sound always means".

To address the morality issue, if you don't think it's important, that's a good thing to know about you. Now go do that Google search, and everybody can see why I posted that suggestion in response to your post.

[phillyd2]

Well, since I've never been professionally trained to twist words and my feelings of morality lessons from certain sources are clear enough, how about another direct question: has anybody in PA ever been charged as a result of a FTF sale based on the example given?

[yukon375]

who would of thunk it? a lawyer wanting to create more criminals to defend instead of dealing with the loony who did the killing. blame the gun, blame the person who sold the gun, why not blame the maker of the gun too while your at it? but wait! the gun dident do the killing, the bullet did! lets blame the bullet, and the person who sold the bullet, and so on, and so on....