The enforcement would be any potential crime committed by a firearm that doesn't go through a background check will be tied to the person who sold it and will endure some sort of legal responsibility and therefore would not want to take on that risk.
If I recall, when the Patriot Act came into existence and concerns around invasion of privacy were raised it didn’t matter much to Republicans. Only 3 voted against it in 2001. There was a sense that the Patriotic Act was nothing to fear if you’re not a criminal/terrorist/general-evil-doer. Why wouldn’t Republicans support a digital database with the capability to turn a 3 day waiting period into 3 minutes?
Like I said the incentive is not to sell your weapon without a background check to someone and that someone does something illegal and your name is tied to the weapon where you will be held accountable in some form.
The enforcement would be being legally liable when the Individual you sold it to without a background check does something illegal with the firearm and it traces back to you.
I sell my rifle to my friend. I do NOT go through an FFL to complete the transfer (a misdemeanor in New York). My friend is never heard from again as he happily uses the rifle to hunt deer for the rest of his life. When he dies he gives the rifle to his son, who happily hunts deer with it until he dies. And so on, and so on and so on. New York state has NO WAY of enforcing the law governing my sale of my rifle to my friend who never commits a crime with what was previously my rifle. NO WAY OF ENFORCING THE LAW.
That's awesome. I don't trust every human's judgement on who they sell their weapons to including yours. Obviously you would hypothetically I hope be grandfathered in where that rifle you sold would not make you legally liable ad you sold it before any hypothetical universal background check for private sales.
Okay? But if a hypothetical law was in place that made you legally liable for someone doing an illegal act with the firearm you sold without a background check, would you take that risk of selling to someone without a background check especially if you know the person mental health and anger issues? The point is to minimize the amount of times people sell their weapons to privately to people with a history and a tendency for violence. It will never be full proof but it will minimize. If you want to argue about the difficulty of the process, that's fair and I hope there is a process that is fair and affordable that isn't a massive regressive tax on the sale. I too wouldn't want it to be overly cumbersome and costly. That is something that is negotiable if both sides come at it with good faith.
There is no difference between a private sell and a random store shipping it to the FFL. It's the same amount of work for the FFL. Most pawn shops do FFL transfers so there is obviously some money in it. Even in small towns, I can see some random guy wanting to make 10-20 bucks for 5 minutes of work. The reason why it's a pain in NY is because anything in NY is a pain.
well the good news is that this bill is likely going nowhere in the Senate. It applies not just to the sale of firearms between private parties, but also to the loan of firearms between non-family members. that's pretty much the kiss of death right there
Do family members not have possible mental health and anger issues with a history of violence? Last time I checked, when passing down a car to your kid, your kid still needs to obtain a license.
California firearm lending law https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160AB1511
My law would be that if someone illegally provides a gun to someone else (gives, loans, sells) and that gun is ever used in a crime, the original gun owner faces the same charge as the person committing the crime.
