Tom7227 Posted February 9, 2013 Share Posted February 9, 2013 I am wondering what people think about H.F. 237 http://wdoc.house.leg.state.mn.us/leg/LS88/HF0237.0.pdf I think the main idea is to require that private sales of pistols and assault rifles have to go through an FFL. In watching the hearings I heard a number of people claim that this was an attempt to get gun registration enacted. I guess I don't see how it is any more a gun registration effort than what happens when you buy a gun directly from an FFL. You do the paperwork and that stays with the licensee. He runs a NICS and what happens happens but they don't keep a record. In fact I don't know that they even know what you're buying.What do you folks think?Thanks for your time.Tom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey lee Posted February 9, 2013 Share Posted February 9, 2013 If the private sales go through a FFL dealer, what then will the added cost be as they are not going to do the paperwork for nothing.Maybe I do not have to much of an issue with this but what is it going to help? It will not stop any crooks from getting what they want and will only make it harder or a bit more expensive for the honest Joe.I would vote no on this as it is not going to stop a darn thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hookjunior Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 I know a local ffl dealer here charges $25 for a transfer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lichen fox Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 This bill has no place in MN state law...it is clearly, a "step" towards registration and limitations of individual rights...It even tells a licensed FFL dealer, how much they can charge for each transfer. I do not believe the State has the right to set a regulation such as this and others included in this bill on a Federal regulated, and licensed firearms dealer or any individual. It also has some wording in the first paragraph that would not allow any one "under 18" from possesing a firearm unless they are in the direct company of an adult. So, in effect, it now moves the age a person may hunt without the direct supervision of an adult from 14 to 18. Am I reading that correct? Subdivision 1. Ineligible persons. The following persons shall not be entitled to possess a pistol or semiautomatic military-style assault weapon or, except for clause (1),any other firearm: (1) a person under the age of 18 years, except that a person under 18 may carry or possess a pistol or semiautomatic military-style assault weapon or other lawful firearm (i)in the actual presence or under the direct supervision of the person's parent or guardian, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Dewjabber Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 NOPE! I don't like the idea. Where do THEY draw the line. I give my kid a gun. Trade a gun with a friend or family member. Here my gun shop charges $40 per transfer. If my buddy dies and leaves me his guns, then what? He does not have much for family. So it cost me $1200 for me to get something he wants me to have! Or if I want to trade even up for a gun another buddy has in which we already went though this when we bought the guns the first time, to pay to trade and go through it again is just wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott K Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 Dont forget, I am sure there is a way they can get some taxes from the sale as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simple1 Posted February 10, 2013 Share Posted February 10, 2013 Here is what makes no sense. The only people who will abide by these laws are people who are law abiding citizens as I'm sure everyone on this forum is. The last time I checked it is illegal to have or sell certain drugs, and yet we have not exactly won the "war on drugs". Does anyone believe that a drug dealer in Chicago could not get a pound of cocaine anytime they want? Guns will be no different. Yet there is a TOTAL ban on these drugs and yet they enter our country with ease. The so called assault weapons ban should not even be discussed as they are a sliver of the issue of gun violence. The largest issue is with illegal hand guns in inner cities, period.All these laws only create hoops for good people who want to follow the current laws. Waste of time... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bureaucrat Posted February 12, 2013 Share Posted February 12, 2013 It'll be wildly successful in hindering gun commerce between law abiding citizens. Won't do $h1t to stop nut jobs from killing innocent people. What's missing here is the understanding that any decent person will not willfully sell a weapon to someone whom they think is a danger or crooked person. Most law abiding people only sell weapons to people they know and trust like siblings, parents, children, friends, co-workers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now ↓↓↓ or ask your question and then register. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.