Question About Buying A Long Gun In PA

[internet troll]

If existing laws are adequate, why so much hate (not directed specifically at you) for those who suggest not going beyond that? It smells a whole lot like "I think open carry should be legal, but I don't think you should do it, because if you do it, people will be uncomfortable, and then it will be outlawed."

What I see is a bunch of gun owners independently creating a circumstance that they would vocally oppose if the law mandated the very same thing.

Makes ZERO sense to me.

Makes sense to me. I am an adult and can decide what scenario I am comfortable with selling a gun. I don’t think it’s the governments business to tell me what I am comfortable with.

Take the scenario I posted earlier...... I am totally against the government mandating taking a course before buying a gun. Something a lot of antis want.

But I still advocate for anyone buying a gun to practice and learn as much about the gun as they can. I know I did.

Same with selling a gun. If I am selling a gun, I personally like knowing that I am selling the gun to someone who is not a criminal. Just my personal preference. So unless I know the person a ltcf gives me that comfort level. It’s not full proof but it is something.

If someone else want to have a different set of criteria when they sell a gun..... that’s their right to determine their own comfort level imo.

[Emptymag]

It’s not that a law has been violated. Thing is, if you sell a firearm no questions asked, to a person who uses it to commit a crime, than you can guarantee being questioned by authorities if its traced back to you. And they will attempt to find some wrong-doing to bring charges against you.


Wait... Emptymag, are you supporting Maryland Guy’s argument here? Or are you simply playing devils advocate?

Read what Gun posted - what I quoted and replied to.
Your response to my post has nothing to do with what I posted.

Go ahead - if you agree with him, I'll give you a crack at citing a law that is broken by not asking to see a LTCF.

And yes, at it's core, I do agree with the OP.
I think a lot of responses in this thread do not address his question, and even mire support his thinking that "we" are bending to the whims of the antis.

I also see that a lot of people here would be OK with AR15s being banned - you'll sell a shotgun to someone sight unseen, but not an AR15. If you don't think they should be banned, then maybe you just think that AR15s kill people as opposed to people misusing them?
"Cover your ass" when selling an "assault weapon", but you're a "true patriot, keep the gov outta mah biz" when selling a shotgun.

[Emptymag]

If existing laws are adequate, why so much hate (not directed specifically at you) for those who suggest not going beyond that? It smells a whole lot like "I think open carry should be legal, but I don't think you should do it, because if you do it, people will be uncomfortable, and then it will be outlawed."

What I see is a bunch of gun owners independently creating a circumstance that they would vocally oppose if the law mandated the very same thing.

Makes ZERO sense to me.

Yup.

[GunLawyer001]

If existing laws are adequate, why so much hate (not directed specifically at you) for those who suggest not going beyond that? It smells a whole lot like "I think open carry should be legal, but I don't think you should do it, because if you do it, people will be uncomfortable, and then it will be outlawed."

What I see is a bunch of gun owners independently creating a circumstance that they would vocally oppose if the law mandated the very same thing.

Makes ZERO sense to me.

I oppose mandatory background checks as proposed, because they're all Trojan Horses for universal registration.

I don't have any problem with the concept of private sellers trying not to sell to prohibited persons; it's the people breaking existing laws that create enthusiasm for more laws, which is stupid but reality. I don't even have a problem with free online pass/fail checks that don't collect info on the gun. It's the push to run ALL gun transfers through an FFL's bound book that's the danger.

Universal registration being incorporated into all "common sense" gun bills is revealing, it's the Spam of legislation. It's because the anti's want to ban all guns, eventually, and they learned from the UK that they need to have reliable registration first.

Every seller who hands a gun over to a prohibited person is helping to create the incidents that will be used to destroy our gun rights. You guys aren't the heroes in this story, sorry.

Besides, asking for an LTCF is our right, it's legal, am I free to go or am I being detained?

[Walleye Hunter]

Required by law or not I think we have a responsibility to not sell guns to prohibited persons. If we don’t take that responsibility upon ourselves I would expect laws to be passed in the future that would require it. But I know that what I think and do will have no affect on future legislation. I believe that it’s coming.

[knight0334]

I oppose mandatory background checks as proposed, because they're all Trojan Horses for universal registration.

I don't have any problem with the concept of private sellers trying not to sell to prohibited persons; it's the people breaking existing laws that create enthusiasm for more laws, which is stupid but reality. I don't even have a problem with free online pass/fail checks that don't collect info on the gun. It's the push to run ALL gun transfers through an FFL's bound book that's the danger.

Universal registration being incorporated into all "common sense" gun bills is revealing, it's the Spam of legislation. It's because the anti's want to ban all guns, eventually, and they learned from the UK that they need to have reliable registration first.

Every seller who hands a gun over to a prohibited person is helping to create the incidents that will be used to destroy our gun rights. You guys aren't the heroes in this story, sorry.

Besides, asking for an LTCF is our right, it's legal, am I free to go or am I being detained?

Police ourselves or get policed by the law.

[gnbrotz]

Police ourselves or get policed by the law.

OK, but if the end result is the same, what's the difference?

Seeing many of the opinions here recently, I'm surprised now that I haven't seen sellers requiring proof of completion of a basic safety course before entertaining a sale.

[knight0334]

OK, but if the end result is the same, what's the difference?

Seeing many of the opinions here recently, I'm surprised now that I haven't seen sellers requiring proof of completion of a basic safety course before entertaining a sale.

One is voluntary without punitive measures, the other is forced down your throat with penalty of fines/jail time.

There is no requirement that you have a safety course. But there is a requirement that you not knowingly transfer a firearm to a prohibited person.

[GunLawyer001]

OK, but if the end result is the same, what's the difference?

Seeing many of the opinions here recently, I'm surprised now that I haven't seen sellers requiring proof of completion of a basic safety course before entertaining a sale.

But the end result is NOT the same. If I look at an LTCF before I sell, I'm not creating a registry of all guns, conveniently held in one government computer.

That's not a minor difference, it's the goal of the gun-haters, an essential weapon against us in their long march to UK-style unilateral disarmament.

[DavidH]

Read what Gun posted - what I quoted and replied to.
Your response to my post has nothing to do with what I posted.

Go ahead - if you agree with him, I'll give you a crack at citing a law that is broken by not asking to see a LTCF.

And yes, at it's core, I do agree with the OP.
I think a lot of responses in this thread do not address his question, and even mire support his thinking that "we" are bending to the whims of the antis.

I also see that a lot of people here would be OK with AR15s being banned - you'll sell a shotgun to someone sight unseen, but not an AR15. If you don't think they should be banned, then maybe you just think that AR15s kill people as opposed to people misusing them?
"Cover your ass" when selling an "assault weapon", but you're a "true patriot, keep the gov outta mah biz" when selling a shotgun.

I really have no idea who you are talking to?? You aren’t describing me in any way. Who said anything about thinking it’s the tool vs people doing the killing...or said anything about shotgun vs AR15?? If you wish to sell your firearms to people with nothing more than a hi & bye..Well, that’s your business. I believe that to be careless action.

The other things you said are neither here nor there. It’s almost like you are trying to argue for arguments sake. Understand, you called me out and asked a question. I was simply answering you. What I mean is I’m not trying to be combative. But you are saying things that make no sense.