North Dakota Firearms Sanctuary State Bill

Status
Not open for further replies.
The dealer has a Federal Firearms License meaning that the dealer still must comply with the regulations of the BATFE and Federal Government.

Background checks are done directly between the Dealer and Feds via telephone thus no State Government Agencies or resources are used.

However I would love to see other Midwest States (South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas) adopt similar laws.
 
This is exactly what we need! I copied the article and plan to send it to a Republican Senator in our State House that I know will get this done for North Carolina. I urge other THR's to do the same in their state!!
 
The dealer has a Federal Firearms License meaning that the dealer still must comply with the regulations of the BATFE and Federal Government.
This reminded me of something I was wondering about the other day. Is it legal for FFL dealers to do private sales?
 
what would that mean in practice as regards application of background checks on firearms purchases?
Well, if a person were, say, a resident of Washington, which has a State UBC, a Dakota law is not likely to have much effect.

A person would need to reside in ND to be able (generally) purchase a firearm in ND. ND State alw would apply to that purchase as well as Federal rules. If a person had a second residence in WA, that might allow non-UBC purchases. Just not non-NICS purchases. However living in two States is complicated, particularly so when enough to qualify as "resident" to the standard used in 18 USC 922.
 
Is it legal for FFL dealers to do private sales?
It might be.
Can a car dealer sell a car privately? Real Estate broker sell land privately.
Maybe.
But, given that one is in business to perform such sales, it would (probably) want all sorts of additional work and documentation to show it as a non-business transaction.

As a tl;dr answer: No.
 
This reminded me of something I was wondering about the other day. Is it legal for FFL dealers to do private sales?

Yes he can. A dealer can own personal firearms, but must keep them separate from firearms that are part of his/her business. If I recall, BATFE will get a bit upset if you don't hold that firearm for something like six months before doing a private sale, but the question is really why would you do a private sale since you aren't required to charge a transfer fee, by doing the background check you know your buyer is not a prohibited person, and BATFE won't give you any static.
 
Yes he can. A dealer can own personal firearms, but must keep them separate from firearms that are part of his/her business.
Obviously. The question is really more about a situation where someone sold a gun to a person who happens to be a dealer. Is that dealer required to sell that as a dealer or can they sell it like the rest of us?

If I recall, BATFE will get a bit upset if you don't hold that firearm for something like six months before doing a private sale,
I understand not wanting to upset the BATFE since they can cause problems for people just like any other corrupt government organization. My question was about the law though, not keeping the ATF happy.

but the question is really why would you do a private sale since you aren't required to charge a transfer fee, by doing the background check you know your buyer is not a prohibited person, and BATFE won't give you any static.
Depends on what you believe. The current system is blatantly unconstitutional, so IMO the question is, why would anyone contribute to that system any more than absolutely necessary to stay out of jail?
 
Bearcreek,
"Obviously. The question is really more about a situation where someone sold a gun to a person who happens to be a dealer. Is that dealer required to sell that as a dealer or can they sell it like the rest of us?"

As a dealer, I can buy a gun for either myself or my inventory and I can sell it either way. BATF only knows about the firearms that are run through my bound book. As long as I'm not engaged in the business, by their definition, by buying and selling without running them through my books, it's not a problem.

As far as the laws and regulations being unconstitutional, until they are found to be unconstitutional, I plan on following them. I have NO intention of shelling out a small fortune for a lawyer and even less intention of putting myself in a position of spending time in the grey bar hotel.
 
....My question is: given that NICS is federal law, what would that mean in practice as regards application of background checks on firearms purchases?
It won't mean anything.

These sorts of laws are basically merely decorative or symbolic. They don't really do much of anything.

It's well established that a State may decide not to enforce federal law or assist with the furtherance of federal policy (Printz v. U.S., 521 U.S. 898, 117 S.Ct. 2365, 138 L.Ed.2d 914 (1997)), but a State may not nullify federal law. Federal agents may still enforce federal law without a State's help.
 
It won't mean anything.

These sorts of laws are basically merely decorative or symbolic. They don't really do much of anything.

Well that is not exactly accurate statement.

In regards to background checks when buying a gun from a FFL that is true which is what I say in Post #2.

However, the Feds rely heavily on use of State and Local Governments manpower, resources and money.

For example consider housing a prisoner charged with a federal crime being held in the County Jail. The County is suppling everything necessary to house the inmate...physical facility, detention staff, medical care, food, clothing, etc. In exchange of course the Feds pay the County a fee.

However jails especially in large urban areas are often overcrowded meaning violent offenders are released on bond simply because there is not enough bed space. As a citizen it is reasonable to ask who poses the most danger to me...someone who committed a violent crime such as robbery with a gun or a illegal alien who only crime was non-violently climbing over a border fence and immediately surrendering to the Border Patrol. Denying the Feds use of local jail space has a huge impact on their policies.

I see this as part of the movement of the States reasserting their 10th Amendment Rights and as pushback against unfunded Federal mandates that put the cost on the States.

Of course other States such as California are tired of waiting on the Feds to disarm it's citizens and are passing much more restrictive laws that do not require use of Federal law enforcement.
 
Last edited:
As far as the laws and regulations being unconstitutional, until they are found to be unconstitutional, I plan on following them.
Everybody is entitled to their opinion of course. Most of us follow unconstitutional laws too, simply because it's easier than fines or prison. Everybody has a line though. Eventually it'll be crossed. Anyway, I was asking about the law as it stands now. I'd love to see documentation of some sort about what you've said, if you have some. I understand that their may not be any, since I'm basically asking about the absence of a law.
 
Everybody is entitled to their opinion of course. Most of us follow unconstitutional laws too, simply because it's easier than fines or prison. Everybody has a line though. Eventually it'll be crossed. Anyway, I was asking about the law as it stands now. I'd love to see documentation of some sort about what you've said, if you have some. I understand that their may not be any, since I'm basically asking about the absence of a law.

I've never seen a law that prohibits me, as a dealer, from acquiring firearms off my license. Generally, in law, that which is not prohibited is allowed.

Read this for yourself and tell me if you find anything that prohibit me from acquiring a firearm the same as any private party; Title 18 section 922 .
 
Last edited:
This might be the ideal test case.

Briefly two Kansas men, Shane Cox and Jeremy Kettler, were convicted of violating Federal law by making and marketing unregistered firearms and suppressor even though they were made entirely in the State and never crossed State lines.

In fact their light sentence makes me wonder if the Judge believes their argument has merit. Cox, 45, was given two years of supervised probation, and Kettler, 28, got one year of supervised probation.

As it will take several years for the case to make it to the Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg poor health may give President Trump the opportunity to nominate another Conservative to the bench before they decide whether to hear the case.


https://bearingarms.com/tom-k/2018/...empting-guns-federal-regulations-doesnt-work/

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/6/2-kansas-men-spared-prison-in-prosecution-over-sta/
 
Last edited:
Obviously. The question is really more about a situation where someone sold a gun to a person who happens to be a dealer. Is that dealer required to sell that as a dealer or can they sell it like the rest of us?

Would depend on whether he bought it as a non-dealer for his own collection or for his resale business.
 
This is just red meat political theatre. And dangerous. If you will recall, the Kansas State legislature passed a somewhat similar law and Brownback signed it. Acting in good faith based on Kansas law, a chap made a suppressor in Kansas and sold it to a chap in Kansas without a federal tax stamp. AFAIK, at least the chap who bought it is still in jail for having violated federal.law (NFA). That nitwit, Brownback, and the GOP leadership of the Kansas legislature should be doing nothing but trying to get that fellow out of jail. They set him up; they put him in jail.

I don't want state and municipal legislatures violating federal law to set up.sanctuaries for illegal aliens, so I don't want dipstick legislators violating federal law and setting up innocent people acting in good faith for jail time.
 
Last edited:
As it will take several years for the case to make it to the Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg poor health may give President Trump the opportunity to nominate another Conservative to the bench before they decide whether to hear the case.
I wouldn't hold your breath. His record so far certainly doesn't inspire confidence. Have you seen his nominee for AG?
 
Would depend on whether he bought it as a non-dealer for his own collection or for his resale business.
That's what I'm asking though. How is that determined? If a dude walks into a gun store and sells the dealer his old rifle, what steps, if any, determine which of those things the dealer bought it for? Or is it just based on what he claims was going through his mind when he bought the weapon?
 
If he logs it into his book because it was a retail buy/sale. Personally, if someone actually walks into your store, then you are in the business side of things.
If you, as a dealer, stumble across a gun at a flea market or garage sale or from a buddy, that, (IMO only) could be construed as a personal deal (unless he bought it for inventory)
 
Please show me what Amendment in the Bill of Rights protects setting up sanctuaries for illegal aliens.

Do you have a reading disability or are you learning challenged? I don't want to respond in the manner you otherwise deserve it either is the case. Please advise.
 
I wouldn't hold your breath. His record so far certainly doesn't inspire confidence. Have you seen his nominee for AG?

Heller is far from the pro-gun decision is made out to be.

Chief Justice Roberts especially is not to be trusted. The NFA is a Tax Law. Roberts wrote the decision declaring the Affordable Care Act as constitutional because it is also a Tax Law. We will never have a sure majority in the Court.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top