Another new "rule" incoming? No more private sales without a ffl involved?

[d.kaufman]

I think we can all agree that at the very least we need a psychic reading done before selling a gun to someone.

Im thinking its amazing how many fudds are on INGO

 

[Creedmoor]

I think we can all agree that at the very least we need a psychic reading done before selling a gun to someone.

My brother used to use Miss Cleo,

 

[Ark]

You do know that the friend that gave him that rifle plead out? And how much do you think their lawyer fees racked up to.

Friend who bought rifle for Kyle Rittenhouse gets plea deal

A judge dropped felony charges against Dominick Black that were linked to the purchase of an AR-15-style rifle.

abcnews.go.com

Black agreed to plead no contest to a non-criminal county ordinance citation of contributing to the delinquency of a minor stemming from his purchase of the semiautomatic weapon.

That took like 15 seconds to debunk. They basically wrote him a non-criminal ticket because it was impossible to prosecute as a straw purchase, and Rittenhouse was not a prohibited person.

 

[Creedmoor]

Friend who bought rifle for Kyle Rittenhouse gets plea deal

A judge dropped felony charges against Dominick Black that were linked to the purchase of an AR-15-style rifle.

abcnews.go.com

That took like 15 seconds to debunk. They basically wrote him a non-criminal ticket because it was impossible to prosecute as a straw purchase, and Rittenhouse was not a prohibited person.

The article made me laugh with MCRD Parris and MCRD San Diego are chocked full of 17 yr olds with machine guns.

"I do believe it is a serious offense to purchase a firearm for someone who is not legally able to do so. Our office will continue to vigorously prosecute those offenders," prosecutor Thomas Binger said during Monday's hearing. "And it is still our office's position that 17-year-olds should not go armed with firearms."

 

[11infantryb]

You say "ticket" the legal system says "misdemeanor" but hey what do they know, am I right?

 

[Creedmoor]

View attachment 291358

Im thinking its amazing how many fudds are on INGO

 

[Expat]

View attachment 291358

Im thinking its amazing how many fudds are on INGO

If I don’t have one, then no one needs one of those.

 

[Expat]

Liberty can be scary, thankfully we have gubmint to protect us from it.

 

[d.kaufman]

If I don’t have one, then no one needs one of those.

Yup. To many with that mindset. It's extremely unfortunate

 

[Route 45]

You say "ticket" the legal system says "misdemeanor" but hey what do they know, am I right?

"Black agreed to plead no contest to a non-criminal county ordinance citation of contributing to the delinquency of a minor stemming from his purchase of the semiautomatic weapon."

What exactly do you not understand about "non-criminal?" Where are you getting "misdemeanor" from?

 

[Creedmoor]

"Black agreed to plead no contest to a non-criminal county ordinance citation of contributing to the delinquency of a minor stemming from his purchase of the semiautomatic weapon."

What exactly do you not understand about "non-criminal?" Where are you getting "misdemeanor" from?

Que up that Millennial Video...

 

[KLB]

You say "ticket" the legal system says "misdemeanor" but hey what do they know, am I right?

Apparently not much

https://www.lawyers.com/ask-a-lawyer/criminal/what-is-the-difference-between-a-citation-and-a-misdemeanor-1574427.html

A citation is a ticket. A misdemeanor is a crime

It was less impactful than a speeding ticket.

 

[Cameramonkey]

That's why ill usually type up a stupid simple bill of sale. It is just "I _____ sell this gun (Make, Model, SN) to _______". I sign they sign then I'm covered. If they lie, if they use it in a crime, ext i have proof i sold it and who i sold it to. If you're legally now allowed to own a firearm you're well aware of that fact, and I promise you they're still buying guns left right and center. I protect myself and after that its in gods hands.

Just understand without being at least notarized, that piece of paper is worth less than TP because its too rough to wipe your butt with. For example, so you have a piece of paper with my name on it. And my supposed signature. Who cares? "I've never seen that paper in my life officer." Congrats. Its still my word against yours.

You are welcome to have your own silly requirements for a sale. Just make sure if you are going to sell here that you make your requirement known up front. You're going to **** off most folks here if you spring that on them at the time of the transaction.

 

[Route 45]

Que up that Millennial Video...

Geez. Who raised these idiots?

 

[Cameramonkey]

You do know that the friend that gave him that rifle plead out? And how much do you think their lawyer fees racked up to.

You obviously dont understand the scope of those charges. The charge was a straw purchase.

 

[Expat]

Que…

 

[chipbennett]

"How can you know if you dont ask" is exactly the question I could hear a prosecuter ask you. I can tell some of you have never thought through that statement. But not asking and not knowing are two different things. I hope you folks at least check DLs before you do private sales.

You have no legal requirement to ask. Now, whether you have a moral obligation to do so might be another matter - and one left up to you and to your own conscience. But from the State's (i.e. the prosecutor's) perspective, there is nothing requiring you to ask, seek, or in any way ascertain anything about the person to whom you transfer a firearm.

 

[chipbennett]

Like they laughed Kyle Rittenhouse's lawyer out of the courtroom and the guy that gave him a gun? You sound naive. You and others say you will not comply and can say "shall not infringe" all you want but you clearly don't know how the left is employing their tactics and you are feeding into it.

That's... a bit of a stretch in the context of this discussion. Kyle Rittenhouse was not a prohibited person. The only question before the court in Rittenhouse's trial was whether he could lawfully possess the rifle in question. That answer was unequivocally "yes", which is why the judge threw out the "minor in possession" charge.

As for Black: he accepted a plea deal under the same statute. He could have fought it, and likely would have prevailed (because it was 100% lawful for Rittenhouse to possess the rifle in question; therefore, Black could not have transferred it to Rittenhouse unlawfully under that statute); however, as is often the case, the process is the punishment. It was easier for him to take the plea deal.

 

[Jaybird1980]

You do know that the friend that gave him that rifle plead out? And how much do you think their lawyer fees racked up to.

That was not even a gun sale, and he got a ticket for it.
Then Binger the "Tough on Guns" prosecutor brags that he will continue to be tough on gun crimes. Sure thing Binger keep handing out those tickets that is sure to get them straightened out.

I wonder if Binger and Mears is related.

You should spend sometime actually educating yourself and take Guy Relford's essentials of Indiana gun law class.

 

[chipbennett]

You do know that the friend that gave him that rifle plead out? And how much do you think their lawyer fees racked up to.

He took a plea deal on a clause of the very same statute that the judge found Rittenhouse not to be in violation of (which is why he tossed the related charge).

Here's the statute in question:

948.60  Possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18.
(1)  In this section, “dangerous weapon" means any firearm, loaded or unloaded; any electric weapon, as defined in s. 941.295 (1c) (a); metallic knuckles or knuckles of any substance which could be put to the same use with the same or similar effect as metallic knuckles; a nunchaku or any similar weapon consisting of 2 sticks of wood, plastic or metal connected at one end by a length of rope, chain, wire or leather; a cestus or similar material weighted with metal or other substance and worn on the hand; a shuriken or any similar pointed star-like object intended to injure a person when thrown; or a manrikigusari or similar length of chain having weighted ends.
(2) 
(a) Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.
(b) Except as provided in par. (c), any person who intentionally sells, loans or gives a dangerous weapon to a person under 18 years of age is guilty of a Class I felony.
(c) Whoever violates par. (b) is guilty of a Class H felony if the person under 18 years of age under par. (b) discharges the firearm and the discharge causes death to himself, herself or another.
(d) A person under 17 years of age who has violated this subsection is subject to the provisions of ch. 938 unless jurisdiction is waived under s. 938.18 or the person is subject to the jurisdiction of a court of criminal jurisdiction under s. 938.183.
(3) 
(a) This section does not apply to a person under 18 years of age who possesses or is armed with a dangerous weapon when the dangerous weapon is being used in target practice under the supervision of an adult or in a course of instruction in the traditional and proper use of the dangerous weapon under the supervision of an adult. This section does not apply to an adult who transfers a dangerous weapon to a person under 18 years of age for use only in target practice under the adult's supervision or in a course of instruction in the traditional and proper use of the dangerous weapon under the adult's supervision.
(b) This section does not apply to a person under 18 years of age who is a member of the armed forces or national guard and who possesses or is armed with a dangerous weapon in the line of duty. This section does not apply to an adult who is a member of the armed forces or national guard and who transfers a dangerous weapon to a person under 18 years of age in the line of duty.
(c) This section applies only to a person under 18 years of age who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the person is in violation of s. 941.28 or is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and 29.593. This section applies only to an adult who transfers a firearm to a person under 18 years of age if the person under 18 years of age is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and 29.593 or to an adult who is in violation of s. 941.28.

Rittenhouse complied with Paragraph (C), by possessing a rifle that was not a short-barreled rifle. Therefore, Black could not have unlawfully transferred a "dangerous weapon" to a minor, as defined in the statute.