Thursday, May 9, 2013

Delaware Governor Signs in Background Check Law - Tyranny Expected

From the Trenches

Most private gun transfers in Delaware will soon be subject to the same background check rules currently applied to sales by licensed dealers, according a measure signed into law today by Gov. Jack Markell.

The signing comes on a day when several other pieces of a Democrat-sponsored package of gun control bills are facing committee action in the General Assembly.  
The background check law is the first piece of the package, introduced earlier this year, to win passage.

Effective July 1, private gun sellers will be required to obtain federal background checks on buyers, except in cases where a firearm is being transferred to a close family member, a law enforcement officer or the holder of a valid concealed-carry permit.

The background checks will be performed on behalf of private sellers by federally licensed firearms dealers, who may charge a fee for the service.

“Today we are closing the private-sale loophole once and for all,” Markell said. “No longer will we have two different markets for the sale of firearms, a regulated market for dealers and an unregulated market for everybody else.”

Now what the hell was so difficult about that?  What in the world is the pro-gun objection to this little bit of tyranny? How exactly does it violate the spirit of the 2nd Amendment?

Please leave a comment.


  1. The main level on which this offends me is being a stupid and worthless measure.

    Here, we have a law that requires people to go, find an FFL, pay him to make a phone call, get the background check done, and then they can transfer the gun legally.

    Unless they're selling to a cop or a person with a carry permit, who they can just transfer the gun to with no check.

    Why does this offend me rather than elate me? Because the people who would already obey the law and not sell to prohibited persons are the ones who are going to obey this and wind up with the added expense of the background check fees. Meanwhile, those wishing to dodge the system can still sell guns and say: hey, I sold it to a cop.

    And so we have a new level of bureaucracy, new fees for gun owners, and a totally ineffectual statute.

    Celebrate on, Mikey; your side just passed ANOTHER law that is worth about as much as tits on a boar-hog.

  2. Tennessean gave a good answer. Of course, how many times have all of us said the same and more, Mikeb? Come on. By now, even you should understand what our objections really are--not the ones that you make up in your head, I mean, but our real objections.

  3. It most certainly DOES NOT subject private sellers to the same rules as licensed dealers. All it does is make it illegal to sell your gun. Only the dealers can request a NICS check, so only the dealers can perform the transaction. Private sellers are not under the same rules.

    1. What are you talking about. Private sellers have to pay a few bucks to an FFL to perform the background check for them. Am I missing something?

    2. If private sellers were under the same rules, they would be able to run the checks themselves, not have to pay some service fee to someone else.

      Is that REALLY that hard to understand, Mike?

      And as for the few bucks--the fees in Tennessee, if you buy a gun online, having it shipped to an FFL who runs your check (which is what's legally required unless the seller is in your state), run about $20-30 in addition to the cost of the background check. This may not seem like much, but little fees here and there like that add up in people's budgets. They REALLY add up if an FFL gets that money, with no outlay of cash on their part, for every private sale in their area. Why should the FFL's be given that free profit?

    3. Mikeb, we've suggested a system whereby anyone could access a database of convicted felons and so forth, but no, you insist on something that leaves control in the hands of others. Again, you yearn for control. This isn't about safety.

    4. Contrary to what Greg says, I'm not opposed to opening up the NICS, but it seems simpler and easier to require that private sellers simply go to the local FFL guy. What I don't understand is what's the big fucking deal. I honestly don't see all that much difference.

    5. So we have to add economics to the list of things that you know nothing about, Mikeb? If all legal gun sales have to pass through an FFL, can't you see how said dealers would be motivated to tack on larger fees? Or perhaps you do realize that and want it to happen. After all, in your view, making gun ownership more expensive is a good thing. But then, only the one percent and their minions will be legally armed. I don't know how you can support that, given your political ideology.

    6. It is as big a deal as the punishments you put on it. You guts want to throw good people in jail for selling legally owned goods on their own and not give people the tools to do it on their own. So your making it a pretty big deal. I'm glad you are willing to do it our way (but it is pretty clear which way you lean). Your comrades in gun control make it a deal breaker. Ask them why.

      And what do you mean by "easier"? Easier for whom? The legislators?

    7. The only time Mikeb supports something that would benefit licensed dealers of guns is when that proposal would make life more difficult for good gun owners.

    8. "Life" would be so much more difficult if you had to visit the local FFL guy rather than doing the background check yourself, is that right, Greg?

      I say again, TS, what the hell's the difference? You seem to think it's some kind of conspiracy against you poor gun owners. Why would it be? What's the point?

  4. MikeB: "Am I missing something?"

    Yep, the part where you go to prison if you sell it yourself, even if they buying party is perfectly legal. Not the same rules- not at all.