What do you think about this woman in the Columbine area?

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Aries

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Feb 1, 2019
Messages
5,549
Reaction score
8,121
Location
Sapulpa
I had a guy from Missouri offer to by my rifle at the gun show, I told him I didn't think I could sell it to him. He thought he could buy rifles, but my understanding is he could from a dealer, but from an individual the transfer would have to go through an FFL.
 

Ethan N

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
487
Reaction score
313
Location
OKC Area
I had a guy from Missouri offer to by my rifle at the gun show, I told him I didn't think I could sell it to him. He thought he could buy rifles, but my understanding is he could from a dealer, but from an individual the transfer would have to go through an FFL.
The transfer would not only have to go through an FFL, but an FFL in his home state. The ATF has published a document to explain lawful private transfers. From that document:
An unlicensed individual is prohibited from directly transferring a firearm to a person residing in another State.

Regardless of the purpose of the transfer (e.g. gift, trade, loan, sale, ownership, etc.), this restriction applies to all types of firearms.
 

n423

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
8,588
Reaction score
2,710
Location
Norman/Eufaula
I just don't understand why there isn't more places where people can get help for their loved ones with mental problems. Sad deal all round.

We tried to get mental health for my SIL years ago. Spent a lot of time trying to help her or get her help. As long as she didn't hurt herself or somebody else, it was very frustrating. She would take her meds, feel better, then stop taking them.
 

Aries

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Feb 1, 2019
Messages
5,549
Reaction score
8,121
Location
Sapulpa
The transfer would not only have to go through an FFL, but an FFL in his home state. The ATF has published a document to explain lawful private transfers. From that document:
Wouldn't that be the same result as saying he can't buy a long gun out of state of residence? He could walk into a dealer in OK and buy one though, right? (but not a handgun)
 

okierider

Sharpshooter
Staff Member
Supporting Member
Special Hen Moderator Moderator Supporter
Joined
Dec 26, 2016
Messages
8,707
Reaction score
12,837
Location
OKC
That's not what I'm talking about at ALL. I'm talking about people with real mental illness. I've posted on here before about trying to get someone remanded to custody for the safety of the public - and themselves. Only to have them repeatedly released and eventually ending up killed by police.

Those are the people I'M talking about - clear cut cases of severe mental illness. We don't even have the fecking balls in this country to deal with THOSE people.

I understand what you mean , but , you are still putting too much faith in bureaucracy!! On too many levels .gov run programs are abused and mishandled and turned into a huge mistakes that started out as a good idea. You say "mostly unbiased" and there in lies the problem, everyone has their biases and "most" are incapable of making decisions based on law and facts and let their feelings guide the decision making process.
You cannot take human nature out of the equation. Who decides what constitutes severe mental issues and how do you keep people from abusing the process.
Look at the checks and balances that the FBI works under and by all accounts FISA was abused to spy on a Presidential candidate.
I know one has nothing to do with the other , it is that type of abuse of power that I fear cannot be removed from the equation.
 

tRidiot

Perpetually dissatisfied
Special Hen
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
19,521
Reaction score
12,712
Location
Bartlesville
I understand what you mean , but , you are still putting too much faith in bureaucracy!! On too many levels .gov run programs are abused and mishandled and turned into a huge mistakes that started out as a good idea. You say "mostly unbiased" and there in lies the problem, everyone has their biases and "most" are incapable of making decisions based on law and facts and let their feelings guide the decision making process.
You cannot take human nature out of the equation. Who decides what constitutes severe mental issues and how do you keep people from abusing the process.
Look at the checks and balances that the FBI works under and by all accounts FISA was abused to spy on a Presidential candidate.
I know one has nothing to do with the other , it is that type of abuse of power that I fear cannot be removed from the equation.

What I'm talking about is several levels of both civilian and governmental checks, along with input from the community - friends, family members, etc.

What alternative would you suggest? I mean, we allow "government employees" to arrest, investigate, prosecute, judge, sentence and EXECUTE people. Are we going to throw that system out?
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom