Printable View
I understand the law changes after the 1st that background checks will be required for sales; two questions:
1) does having a CCW circumvent this since one has already been done? In other words, is a background check at a FFL is required on every single purchase?
2) will background checks be required for trades as well? Even trades? Also +/- cash trades?
1) no
2) yes
I thought it's
1 yes
2 yes
.?
The bills to accept CCW instead of background checks never passed, so it's meaningless as far as CBI is concerned.
Yes, a background check is required for every single purchase. A purchase may be 5 guns at once (1 background check) or 1 in the morning, another one in the afternoon (2 separate background checks). It can even be one single check for 3 guns from 3 different sellers, assuming you all show up at the same time to the FFL (and assuming the FFL will cooperate with that).
CBI will charge the FFL $10 each time the check is run. That's separate from whatever your FFL will charge you for the service (law says $10 max, for whatever that's worth). Assume your price for a (legal) FTF transfer goes up at least $20 on Monday.
One other fun fact...
If the buyer fails the background check, the FFL is now supposed to run a check on the seller before turning the guns back over to them. Oh yeah, at least another $10 to CBI for that too.
See update regarding this part - pg6.
To back up what Brian just posted cocerning question #1-Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr_Fwd
http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite.../1251622199756
Why is it I see very few background checks being done for private arms.That just killed any private person from taking anything to a gun show. Not passing the check is one thing but then running another check on the owner as well.....Quote:
If the buyer fails the background check, the FFL is now supposed to run a check on the seller before turning the guns back over to them. Oh yeah, at least another $10 to CBI for that too.
Number 1 is actually two different questions so it would look like this
1) no/yes
2) yes
Would that only apply IF the FFL takes possession of the firearm?Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian
I wasn't aware that the FFL needs to take possession. So this scenario is what I see. I meet the buyer at FFL. We ask the FFL do to a bg check on the buyer. At no point to I ever intend to hand over the firearm to the FFL. Buyer passes, I walk out to the parking lot and hand over the firearm. FFL makes his fee, but never needs to add the firearm to their logbook.
Now, I know there's so much confusion about everything, so I may be wrong. Is anyone clear about any of these crappy laws?
That's what I thought.Quote:
Originally Posted by spleify
Ahh indeed it is, I was addressing the CCW question.Quote:
Originally Posted by spleify
Chad, the FFL can't run the background check without adding the firearm to their log books. I asked the exact same question as you.
I guess as the seller, you better make sure you can pass a BG check before you try to sell, this is such horse sh$t! So let's say this turns into a frequent occurrence, I wonder what happens to all these firearms that don't have homes?Quote:
Originally Posted by Irving
Problem with that, is that you can't just get a background check to test and make sure you can pass.
On display with the other used / trade in guns.Quote:
Originally Posted by hurley842002
Better yet, since someone who failed a BCG is attempting a sale to someone else who failed a BCG, they have obviously shown that they are irresponsible people and should have their guns confiscated by the ATF...it's for the children, you know.Quote:
Originally Posted by jim
ETA: Scary thought. What if the requirements for passing a BCG get ridiculously stringent, or say a person is BOLO'd for a closer look. If you are a person who has never failed a check (and never would under normal circumstances), you could walk into an FFL and suddenly find that you are unable to legally own guns...and now your name has popped up on CBI's new hardware, paid for with every $10 fee.
Just saying.
I asked one of the folks at Green Mountain Guns about how they we will handle the sales between people, and he said that they are not going to handle those transactions because 10 dollars does not cover expense to the business. I wonder how many other dealers are going to do the same.
Sadly, we will not be facilitating person-to-person transfers for this very reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by battle_sight_zero
Great point, what if most gun dealers refuse to do private sale BGC? Will they need to keep the transaction 'on file' like any other sale per law? Sounds like a hassle to me and not worth the time for a shop owner. Thoughts?Quote:
Originally Posted by battle_sight_zero
Sounds like just what the Dems wanted, no more private party sales period...Quote:
Originally Posted by flogger
Yes, all BATF rules will need to be followed including entering the firearms into the bound book and then transferred to the new owner & also maintaining the 4473 records.Quote:
Originally Posted by flogger
I absolutely agree!!Quote:
Originally Posted by hurley842002
FIFYQuote:
Originally Posted by hurley842002
Nice job dumbasses...make us all criminals for selling personal property.
Since Sportsman's isn't going to sell any remaining firearms that have standard magazine capacities that are non-Colorado compliant after tomorrow, will they have to run BGCs to return them to their distributors? This is assuming they don't load them out tomorrow night.
HUGE problem in this scenario. The number one concern about HB1229, and main reason many will never do these.Quote:
Originally Posted by jerrymrc
BTW, a fee is going to be associated to this stuff too. Ya, I know what the law says but no way people are doing this for $10. Won't even cover the labor and time involved. There are ways around the law's wording and it will happen by those that will do these transfers.
FFL to FFL doesn't require this...Quote:
Originally Posted by fj605
I doubt that any distributor is going to accept these firearms back. What I am sure will end up happening is that Sportsman's (and all other large chain stores) will send their "CO-illegal" guns to their stores in other states.Quote:
Originally Posted by fj605
Really, why bother even following this law. There is no registration of firearms thus no way to know who owns what. Screw this law, it is not enforceable unless you are buying form an undercover or get caught in a sting of some sort. If you know the person though, screw it!
Ok, rant off, this just pisses me off!
The $10 fee is for the Background Check through CBI, the FFL dealers can charge a Tranfer fee as they wish. I have had a dealer already do this to me, $10 for the Background check, plus 2X $25 Tranfer fees for 2 items and this was for a receiving FFL.
I am sure they will increase this transfer fee for the hassle of a person to person sale.
If a dealer is receiving a firearm for someone (for example, when a firearm is being shipped from another state), they are allowed to charge whatever they want as a service fee for the transfer but, if they are just facilitating the sale between two people in Colorado, HB 13-1229 is very specific when it says that the dealer can only charge a fee not to exceed $10.Quote:
Originally Posted by SideShow Bob
18-12-112(2)(d) - A LICENSED GUN DEALER MAY CHARGE A FEE FOR SERVICES RENDERED PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION, WHICH FEE SHALL NOT EXCEED TEN DOLLARS.
So, you just know there will be damn few FFL dealers who will agree to screw around with these transfers if $10 is actually the maximum they can charge per 18-12-112(2)(d) for their transfer service. Surely some of our FFL holders will jump on here with a comment or two!Quote:
Originally Posted by cysoto
Before this law goes into effect, dealers have been able to charge a maximum of $10 for BG checks while at a gun show..
Quote:
Originally Posted by cysoto
my bad...........[facepalm]
A couple of the manufacturers are swapping mags. S&W is swapping all mags no longer legal for compliant mags. Someone else was too, but I cant remember who it was. Other manufacturers are doing nothing. Stock that can't be swapped out will be sold to other FFLs out of state. At least that's how the store I work for is doing it.Quote:
Originally Posted by cysoto
A few of the manufacturers have agreed to swap us mags too but the distributors were a "no-go." The only issue is that some of them don't have enough 10 rounders to swap for all the dealers here Colorado so we may need to wait a few weeks/months to get them.Quote:
Originally Posted by SA Friday
Oh joy, another black rifle shortage. This one caused by a lack of 10 round mags. Now if I could only find where I lost mine at. [dig]Quote:
Originally Posted by cysoto
I think the bottom line is there will be no private sales because no FFL will do them. I read where the CBI added 12 people to handle the "rush" of background checks between private parties.
So after 2-3 months of nothing will they go Hmmmmm? and realize that they made a law that has no impact because nobody is using it or can't use it? Or will they think that suddenly there goals are achieved because with no background checks being done for private parties that no guns are being sold.....[Bang]
I know that I will not be buying or selling anything that would be covered by this law, at least until the lawsuit runs its course. I think it fairly likely that the sheriffs will be successful in obtaining a preliminary injunction to prevent implementation on this and the mag ban while the suit is in litigation.
When a fudd finds out that if the buyer does not pass the background check and has to pay $45 to get his shotgun back how many will be willing to sell?Quote:
Originally Posted by KellyTTE
Well some dealers are going to be making some killings on consignments.Quote:
Originally Posted by BlasterBob
What he said ^^^^Quote:
Originally Posted by SideShow Bob
It sounds like, a private sale of a C&R item to a C&R holder OR a non-C&R holder should not require a CBI BGC, per HB1229 aka 18-12-112
So M1 Garands, M1 Carbines, etc. , are still OK to do FTF and without a CBI BGC.Quote:
HB1229 aka 18-12-112
(6)THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION DO NOT APPLY TO
(a)A TRANSFER OF AN ANTIQUE FIREARM, AS DEFINED IN 18U.S. SEC 921(a)(16), AS AMENDED,OR A CURIO OR RELIC,AS DEFINED IN 27 CFR478.11,AS AMENDED
Do you guys read it this way ?
Or not do a transfer, because they have the same item in inventory.Quote:
Originally Posted by KellyTTE