speaking of more gun laws

[DanG 1]

You and I have had this discussion before. I'll reiterate my points once, since you apparently didn't remember them

1. Yes, in cases that are purely he said/she said the law is unenforceable. Some cases are like that. However, there will be cases that include other evidence besides the word of the accused criminal. There will be receipts, cashed checks, third-party witnesses, etc. Of course, if the cops have already decided they will not enforce the law, then they won't look for that evidence.

2. What incentives are there not to sell to a shady character? Do you think people are prevented from selling to a shady character out of their love of mankind and sense of civic duty? If so, why would they hesitate going through a FFL?

3. I'm not anti-gun. I'm an Army combat veteran. I'm anti-criminals-and-mentally-insane-people-with-guns. The NRA absolutist stance is ridiculous.

- Dan G

[Hooknswoop 19]

1- I do not believe that law enforcement in Colorado have simply chosen not to enforce this law. I don’t keep receipts for firearms, a canceled check wouldn’t have the serial number of the firearm on it, and a 3rd party witness is not enough proof.

2- Yes, civic duty. I think most responsible private sales go through a FFL if the person isn’t well known to the seller. Why pay the extra money, time and paper trail?

3- Agreed.

Derek V

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

DanG

You and I have had this discussion before. I'll reiterate my points once, since you apparently didn't remember them

1. Yes, in cases that are purely he said/she said the law is unenforceable. Some cases are like that. However, there will be cases that include other evidence besides the word of the accused criminal. There will be receipts, cashed checks, third-party witnesses, etc. Of course, if the cops have already decided they will not enforce the law, then they won't look for that evidence.

2. What incentives are there not to sell to a shady character? Do you think people are prevented from selling to a shady character out of their love of mankind and sense of civic duty? If so, why would they hesitate going through a FFL?

3. I'm not anti-gun. I'm an Army combat veteran. I'm anti-criminals-and-mentally-insane-people-with-guns. The NRA absolutist stance is ridiculous.

1 - I don't agree. Unless there is pretty solid proof that the sale happened after the law went into effect, it can't be proved. That might include a gunsmith receipt with a serial number on it, or maybe a pawn shop receipt, again with a serial number. But if both the buyer and seller are aware that this 'non-FFL', 'non-background-check' sale is not legal, then it's pretty unlikely that proof will exist. Hypothetically speaking, if I were in Colorado (I'm not) and wanted to sell a gun "Off the Books" (I don't), I certainly wouldn't give the buyer a correctly dated receipt. I wouldn't accept a check. And I would make sure that no other proof (gunsmith, pics, vindictive ex, ect) existed. While it would be harder for a buyer to ensure that the seller had no proof of possession after the law went into effect, I'd still be sure that I had no such proof (receipts, cancelled checks, ect) that the sale took place when it actually did.

2 - Actually, yes. A lot of gun owners do not want to see their guns in the wrong hands. Some of it is not 'out of love of mankind', it's purely self interest. They don't want the cops knocking on their door asking why a gun that they had bought new had been used in a crime. They don't want a 'bad guy with a gun' to know who they are and where they live (and that they have more guns).
They don't want to go through a FFL because they don't want the paperwork with their name on it. Or they don't want to pay the cost. Or simply don't want the hassle. Selling it to a buddy from the range is a lot simpler and faster.

3 - The absolutist stance is a result of the anti-gun crowd back in the 80s & 90s. When they would compromise, the antis would simply come back and ask for more. They soon realized that the antis didn't want compromise, they wanted abolition. So they quit compromising.
I agree that it's pretty ridiculous, but I understand it. I went through a similar situation with the range I'm part of. We had a 'gun hater' who bought the house across the road (a long, long time after the range was established). She lived there for over a decade before she decided she was going to shut the range down. We tried to compromise, and offered a variety of concessions. All those did was encourage her to push harder for more restrictions. So we got a good lawyer and took a 'no more' stance. We won. The range is still there.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[Bob_Church 7]

How hard is it to remove identification numbers from a gun?

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

Bob_Church

How hard is it to remove identification numbers from a gun?

Virtually impossible.

Even if the numbers are filed or ground off, the act of punching them into the surface of the metal 'pushes down' the metal below them. So even if they are 'removed', there are ways of 'bringing out' the numbers from the deformed metal below.

One is Acid etching.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[Hooknswoop 19]

The serial number on a glock lower receiver is a stamped piece of metal that is inserted into the plastic. It could removed without leaving a trace. Then an aftermarket slide and barrel and then there is no more serial number.

Seems like a lot of expense and legal liability when you could simply do it legally. Google 80% lower.

Derek V

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

Hooknswoop

The serial number on a glock lower receiver is a stamped piece of metal that is inserted into the plastic. It could removed without leaving a trace. Then an aftermarket slide and barrel and then there is no more serial number.

Seems like a lot of expense and legal liability when you could simply do it legally. Google 80% lower.

Derek V

I thought the Glock plate was a lot bigger than what is visible. My understanding is that removing it will destroy the lower.

I could be wrong on that, though.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo