NC PPP law?

[BigWaylon]

If so I’ll ask his wife if she mine’s.

I couldn’t care less about them or their opinion’s!

Theirs no one on this forum that pays my bill’s or feeds me!

So some can trash talk me if you make’s you feel better! I’ve heard it all my life and it doesn’t bother me!

Just show’s just how ignorant some people can be!

That’s the reason I handle my firearm’s deal’s in the way I do.

Everyone is is entitled to their own opinion about thing’s!

I have thick skin and always have.

It’s just word’s until they act on them!

Some thing’s he didn’t say anything about.

Ok…so I gave you credit for the couldn’t care less remark the first time. Then you did it again, well done.

But since you said you had thick skin, we need to have a serious talk about misuse of apostrophes now. All those are just from the previous page. 😝🤓

 

[captcave]

Some people get the caps lock stuck on, sometimes it's the ' key that sticks

 

[MacEntyre]

BigW, squeezing a stone for water... will there yet be Drama?

 

[Kassar]

Many, if not most folks here prefer not to have their personally identifying information floating around with people who are otherwise strangers to them, due to reasonable and prudent privacy concerns.

Probably more folks than you realize. But as you say, it is your choice to make. Just be sure you state that clearly in any “for sale” ad you post, because if you don’t tell your buyer till after a deal is already struck, and it sours the deal for the buyer (and you) it will be viewed very dimly here.

Since 99% of my handguns have been bought through FFL's, there is already a federally digital footprint by serial number of the gun I am selling. I understand that people don't want a gun traced back to them, but custodial chain is difficult to hide nowadays, particularly when the perp, himself, can tell LEO where he got the gun just to cut a better deal for himself. I have been a lawyer for more than 40 years. To say that I don't trust prosecutors to do the right thing is an understatement. DA's love to hang accessory charges on anyone connected to the gun when there is a homicide. So do civil liability attorneys. I am going to protect myself every way I can in a sale to a stranger.

 

[fieldgrade]

Since 99% of my handguns have been bought through FFL's, there is already a federally digital footprint by serial number of the gun I am selling. I understand that people don't want a gun traced back to them, but custodial chain is difficult to hide nowadays, particularly when the perp, himself, can tell LEO where he got the gun just to cut a better deal for himself. I have been a lawyer for more than 40 years. To say that I don't trust prosecutors to do the right thing is an understatement. DA's love to hang accessory charges on anyone connected to the gun when there is a homicide. So do civil liability attorneys. I am going to protect myself every way I can in a sale to a stranger.

My point was that many here are probably less concerned about a gun being traced back to them than they are of some stranger having a copy of their NCDL, CHP, PPP, or other personal identifying info.

 

[captcave]

Since 99% of my handguns have been bought through FFL's, there is already a federally digital footprint by serial number of the gun I am selling. I understand that people don't want a gun traced back to them, but custodial chain is difficult to hide nowadays, particularly when the perp, himself, can tell LEO where he got the gun just to cut a better deal for himself. I have been a lawyer for more than 40 years. To say that I don't trust prosecutors to do the right thing is an understatement. DA's love to hang accessory charges on anyone connected to the gun when there is a homicide. So do civil liability attorneys. I am going to protect myself every way I can in a sale to a stranger.

 

[GymB]

I am going to protect myself every way I can in a sale to a stranger.

Me too.
How does a bill of sale or keeping a PPP accomplish this?

DA's love to hang accessory charges on anyone connected to the gun when there is a homicide. So do civil liability attorneys.

I’ll accept that this is true, at least for the sake of argument, and I agree that I’d like to minimize my risk. Frankly if the risk is great I’ll just cut up any guns that I don’t like on the bandsaw, their value is insignificant vs the cost of litigation much less incarceration.
But rather than cutting up my guns, it seems like you’re saying that if I have a piece of paper that says I sold it that I’ll be immune from prosecution? Is that right!

 

[fieldgrade]

I don’t know if this has been mentioned in this thread or not. At 9 pages, and with some new members heavily invested in the topic it bears mentioning.
Again, if necessary.

If you as a seller don’t expressly state ALL your requirements for a deal in your listing of an item for sale, like requiring anything beyond what the law requires (in addition to the other usual terms of a deal like time, place, price, etc.) and you spring that on a buyer at a "face to face" after all the other terms have been agreed upon, I am pretty sure that could or would lead to a negative feedback posted on your account. Changing the terms of a deal that has been struck after the fact is generally not optional.

Some negative feedback ratings are just that, and nothing more.

Some end up looking like this “ fieldgrade “.

Which means that member can’t sign on here anymore.

Banned to heck, as it were.

 

[hp468]

I've enjoyed this thread, just shows who to do business with and who not.

 

[dmarbell]

Since 99% of my handguns have been bought through FFL's, there is already a federally digital footprint by serial number of the gun I am selling.

I might be wrong, but I don't think this is technically correct. An FFL completes the 4473 and also records the transaction in their ledger. The 4473 and ledger stay with the FFL in paper format, except in certain circumstances like multiple purchases of weapons within a time frame, unless and until the FFL goes out of business. Now if the gun could be traced to a seller, say Gunbroker, and the GB record shows shipment to my FFL, then ATF or whoever could trace to my FFL and examine paper copies.

So there is a traceable record that would take some doing to trace, but it's not digital. Nor should it ever become digital if we have our ways.

 

[KB74]

Yeah it sounds like someone has to much time on their hands! Especially wanting to start drama over something so petty. We out of school “ have been many years” and I think it was clear what I said. Starting to think I’m on the “View” forum. Drama, drama, drama, drama, and more drama! What is the point in it? Nothing really better to do? Really what is the deal with the drama? It’s ridiculous wanting to start some drama and if so make it be over something that’s actually gonna matter. Or at least have a significant reason for it! Apostrophes really, you are gonna start drama over that! If I wanted drama I would have stayed with my ex wife. Maybe go make you a Facebook account! There’s plenty of drama and people to argue with on there! Thought this was a place for discussion’s not drama!!! Starting to think otherwise. Not trying to start nothing with anyone. But I guess it is what it is!

Hp468, I have to agree with you on that!

 

[hp468]

I might be wrong, but I don't think this is technically correct. An FFL completes the 4473 and also records the transaction in their ledger. The 4473 and ledger stay with the FFL in paper format, except in certain circumstances like multiple purchases of weapons within a time frame, unless and until the FFL goes out of business. Now if the gun could be traced to a seller, say Gunbroker, and the GB record shows shipment to my FFL, then ATF or whoever could trace to my FFL and examine paper copies.

So there is a traceable record that would take some doing to trace, but it's not digital. Nor should it ever become digital if we have our ways.

Its "easy" for them to trace new guns... Mfg - distributor - dealer - buyer. Used guns, that's a whole different animal, especially if they have been sold privately a few times over the coarse of decades. Even if you purchased from an FFL, ASSuming there is no digital/searchable registry, they would have no starting point to begin the trace.

 

[Pineapple]

Yeah it sounds like someone has to much time on their hands! Especially wanting to start drama over something so petty. We out of school “ have been many years” and I think it was clear what I said. Starting to think I’m on the “View” forum. Drama, drama, drama, drama, and more drama! What is the point in it? Nothing really better to do? Really what is the deal with the drama? It’s ridiculous wanting to start some drama and if so make it be over something that’s actually gonna matter. Or at least have a significant reason for it! Apostrophes really, you are gonna start drama over that! If I wanted drama I would have stayed with my ex wife. Maybe go make you a Facebook account! There’s plenty of drama and people to argue with on there! Thought this was a place for discussion’s not drama!!! Starting to think otherwise. Not trying to start nothing with anyone. But I guess it is what it is!

Hp468, I have to agree with you on that!

Bless your heart sweetie.

 

[hp468]

Bless your heart sweetie.

It's always comical to me when new people tell established members to go somewhere else.

 

[KB74]

I see there’s a bunch of drama queens on here! I guess you can’t help it. It’s ok somebody still love’s you.

 

[hp468]

I see there’s a bunch of drama queens on here! I guess you can’t help it. It’s ok somebody still love’s you.

Can't be too bad, your still here.

 

[KB74]

No worries!

 

[GoWolfpack]

Only one person here is being dramatic.

 

[noway2]

But rather than cutting up my guns, it seems like you’re saying that if I have a piece of paper that says I sold it that I’ll be immune from prosecution? Is that right!

A piece of paper doesn't prove anything. For that matter, what's to say the seller didn't make up a fake bill of sale after the fact?

 

[Mathieu18]

Y'all are getting a bit twisted... not saying it'll prevent prosecution but record keeping always trumps not. Just because the law doesn't say you have too, doesn't mean there's no potential benefit, that's a false equivalence.

But this is turning into the BOS discussion again.

FWIW, what swayed me on the BOS is exactly your point @noway2, the BOS alone doesn't prove anything, it gives a name and is better than nothing, but could be faked or claim to be faked. Better (BOS or not) would be for me to keep a record saying I sold you X gun for $XXX.XX from CFF. Your user name was noway2 and PDF a copy of the conversation supporting the same as well as my listing. If I get any other supporting info about buyer (phone, address, name, etc.) record that too. Not full proof by any stretch but significantly better position than just "I sold it, sorry no other info."

No one has to do this, it's not remotely required. But saying someone who did vs someone who didn't would be on even footing should something happen with that firearm is naive.

 

[Pineapple]

Y'all are getting a bit twisted... not saying it'll prevent prosecution but record keeping always trumps not. Just because the law doesn't say you have too, doesn't mean there's no potential benefit, that's a false equivalence.

But this is turning into the BOS discussion again.

FWIW, what swayed me on the BOS is exactly your point @noway2, the BOS alone doesn't prove anything, it gives a name and is better than nothing, but could be faked or claim to be faked. Better (BOS or not) would be for me to keep a record saying I sold you X gun for $XXX.XX from CFF. Your user name was noway2 and PDF a copy of the conversation supporting the same as well as my listing. If I get any other supporting info about buyer (phone, address, name, etc.) record that too. Not full proof by any stretch but significantly better position than just "I sold it, sorry no other info."

No one has to do this, it's not remotely required. But saying someone who did vs someone who didn't would be on even footing should something happen with that firearm is naive.

I can understand both sides of wanting and not wanting to do a BOS.

Again what makes me sound off is when people spout "you're breaking the law" not going through an FFL or doing a BOS.

How many times have we heard the Gun Show Loophole needs to be shutdown?

 

[GymB]

A piece of paper doesn't prove anything. For that matter, what's to say the seller didn't make up a fake bill of sale after the fact?

I know what you think, I was asking @Kassar who might bring something new to the conversation.

But saying someone who did vs someone who didn't would be on even footing should something happen with that firearm is naive.

You keep repeating this opinion of yours, it’d be nice of you’d take a shot at supporting with something other than your own rationalization based on ignorance and fear. Wanna try?

 

[captcave]

Y'all are getting a bit twisted... not saying it'll prevent prosecution but record keeping always trumps not. Just because the law doesn't say you have too, doesn't mean there's no potential benefit, that's a false equivalence.

But this is turning into the BOS discussion again.

FWIW, what swayed me on the BOS is exactly your point @noway2, the BOS alone doesn't prove anything, it gives a name and is better than nothing, but could be faked or claim to be faked. Better (BOS or not) would be for me to keep a record saying I sold you X gun for $XXX.XX from CFF. Your user name was noway2 and PDF a copy of the conversation supporting the same as well as my listing. If I get any other supporting info about buyer (phone, address, name, etc.) record that too. Not full proof by any stretch but significantly better position than just "I sold it, sorry no other info."

No one has to do this, it's not remotely required. But saying someone who did vs someone who didn't would be on even footing should something happen with that firearm is naive.

Do you work for the NSA?

 

[Car0linab0y]

I quit reading at the bottom of page 3.

This... this right here is why I don't sell guns. Once I buy them they are mine for life; the only exception was a m48 I traded for a different rife.

Could split hairs and say that still wasn't a sale... but I keep them. I'm not a collector; I'm an accumulator, and I'm just fine with that.

 

[Mathieu18]

I know what you think, I was asking @Kassar who might bring something new to the conversation.


You keep repeating this opinion of yours, it’d be nice of you’d take a shot at supporting with something other than your own rationalization based on ignorance and fear. Wanna try?

You keep on with the back handed insults of ignorance and fear. It's neither. All of my interactions and experience in life and business, with attorneys, accountants, professionals etc. is that the more and better documentation you have the better off you'll be in a dispute, whatever the venue or cause. Taxes, lawsuits, negotiation, mediation etc. I can't fathom the need to "prove" that, if you're naive enough to believe you would have the same defense/standing with just your word. I didn't want to call anyone out specifically, but you took it to the extreme above saying that @Kassar was suggesting a BOS make you immune from prosecution. Stop with the strawman arguments, no one was saying that. They're saying you stand a better chance at either avoiding prosecution or having a defense if you do have some kind of documentation. If you don't think that true I hope you never come across the issue and I can't help nor do I have any desire too. Aside from all that, if I'm right or even partially accurate then there's nothing but some investigations but having documentation would have prevented it from going further so there would be no public record.

You keep stating nothing is needed and it won't make a difference. Please provide a case where someone had no proof they'd sold a firearm but the police etc. let them go anyway and they had no further interaction. It's be nice if you'd take a shot at supporting with something other than your own rationalization based on naivety. Wanna try?

The odds of any of this rising to that level is minuscule, but so are the odds of having to actively use my CCW for defense. So why even carry a gun. Because sometimes s*** goes sideways. You can prepare for that or stick your head in the sand.

@captcave, no.

 

[GymB]

You keep on with the back handed insults of ignorance and fear. It's neither. All of my interactions and experience in life and business, with attorneys, accountants, professionals etc. is that the more and better documentation you have the better off you'll be in a dispute, whatever the venue or cause. Taxes, lawsuits, negotiation, mediation etc. I can't fathom the need to "prove" that, if you're naive enough to believe you would have the same defense/standing with just your word. I didn't want to call anyone out specifically, but you took it to the extreme above saying that @Kassar was suggesting a BOS make you immune from prosecution. Stop with the strawman arguments, no one was saying that. They're saying you stand a better chance at either avoiding prosecution or having a defense if you do have some kind of documentation. If you don't think that true I hope you never come across the issue and I can't help nor do I have any desire too. Aside from all that, if I'm right or even partially accurate then there's nothing but some investigations but having documentation would have prevented it from going further so there would be no public record.

You keep stating nothing is needed and it won't make a difference. Please provide a case where someone had no proof they'd sold a firearm but the police etc. let them go anyway and they had no further interaction. It's be nice if you'd take a shot at supporting with something other than your own rationalization based on naivety. Wanna try?

The odds of any of this rising to that level is minuscule, but so are the odds of having to actively use my CCW for defense. So why even carry a gun. Because sometimes s*** goes sideways. You can prepare for that or stick your head in the sand.

@captcave, no.

Maybe I’m confused.
Do we agree that NC law does not require that the seller retain the PPP or obtain a BOS? If no, then hard stop, you’re just wrong and nothing more need be said. If we agree on that foundational issue, then we have a basis to discuss your opinion that I think is incorrect and unfounded.
I understand that it is your opinion that doing extra-legal stuff is helpful in some hypothetical situations. I think the hypothetical situations are unrealistically contrived to support a particular conclusion, and even in those contrived situations the extra-legal steps you suggest would be ineffective at reducing risk.
Given that disagreement it seems that the burden of proof should be on you to show that your argument that doing extra stuff actually reduces risk, that’s your argument, right? I’m simply saying that you’re wrong.
Moreover, I’ve provided reasonably well reasoned arguments for my position, and my position is strongly supported by the general belief that most transactions do not involve the process you suggest, by the fact that in spite of the large number of transactions there is no credible evidence that anyone that failed to comply with your recommendations has ever been arrested, charged, or convicted falsely, and by the fact that the legislature has never added such requirements to protect all of us citizens. Conversely your argument in favor of your position is that it just makes sense. Have you got anything else?
I don’t think you do, and that’s fine, but it means that you’re either or both ignorant about the matter and responding to a fear that you can’t demonstrate is real.
I’m not trying to take your baby blanket, you do what makes you feel good, I’m trying to ensure that others don’t take false comfort in a baby blanket built on your suggestions.

 

[DrPhudd]

Maybe I’m confused.
Do we agree that NC law does not require that the seller retain the PPP or obtain a BOS? If no, then hard stop, you’re just wrong and nothing more need be said. If we agree on that foundational issue, then we have a basis to discuss your opinion that I think is incorrect and unfounded.
I understand that it is your opinion that doing extra-legal stuff is helpful in some hypothetical situations. I think the hypothetical situations are unrealistically contrived to support a particular conclusion, and even in those contrived situations the extra-legal steps you suggest would be ineffective at reducing risk.
Given that disagreement it seems that the burden of proof should be on you to show that your argument that doing extra stuff actually reduces risk, that’s your argument, right? I’m simply saying that you’re wrong.
Moreover, I’ve provided reasonably well reasoned arguments for my position, and my position is strongly supported by the general belief that most transactions do not involve the process you suggest, by the fact that in spite of the large number of transactions there is no credible evidence that anyone that failed to comply with your recommendations has ever been arrested, charged, or convicted falsely, and by the fact that the legislature has never added such requirements to protect all of us citizens. Conversely your argument in favor of your position is that it just makes sense. Have you got anything else?
I don’t think you do, and that’s fine, but it means that you’re either or both ignorant about the matter and responding to a fear that you can’t demonstrate is real.
I’m not trying to take your baby blanket, you do what makes you feel good, I’m trying to ensure that others don’t take false comfort in a baby blanket built on your suggestions.

but... you cannot argue that using an additional half a roll of toilet paper after the last bit comes up clean is not good insurance against skid marks

 

[Mathieu18]

You claim to be open to discussion but you argue your position needs no proof since your opinion is well stated and “correct”. Not exactly discussion aside from your insults.

FWIW, we agree that NC Law doesn’t require it. I agree my situation is contrived, but disagree about its usefulness. But then the effort vs risk is pretty unbalanced. I suppose you have far greater risk tolerance than I do, but then the ease of keeping some basic record is a pretty low bar, in my opinion of course. Regardless I’m not sure what high ground was bestowed on you that given a disagreement all the proof lies on me.

The statue doesn’t require you to keep proof. That’s a fact. Also a fact that the lib AG wants you to keep proof (conflating Cooper with Stein). That’s also relevant info for anyone who might be undecided. Especially in this environment when the Libs seem to love to try and make examples of normal folks.

Likewise I don’t think you have anything to support you assertion that any records would be useless. I’m actually quite certain any and everything you might find would support that some documentation is better than none. The law is a minimum requirement, and frankly not much is required to be in writing. That doesn’t equate to being the best practice no matter your feelings.

Regardless this is going no where. I shoulda stayed gone. You can respond, I won’t ignore you and will even consider what you have to say if you have any constructive arguments but no one wants to read our back and forth. I hope none of us has to defend ourselves to the feds or use our guns in defense. Otherwise I hope everyone takes whatever steps they feel necessary to protect themselves.

 

[BigWaylon]

No drama. I had emojis at the end of the post. 😝

 

[noway2]

Do we agree that NC law does not require that the seller retain the PPP or obtain a BOS? If no, then hard stop, you’re just wrong and nothing more need be said. If we agree on that foundational issue, then we have a basis to discuss your opinion that I think is incorrect and unfounded.
I understand that it is your opinion that doing extra-legal stuff is helpful in some hypothetical situations. I think the hypothetical situations are unrealistically contrived to support a particular conclusion, and even in those contrived situations the extra-legal steps you suggest would be ineffective at reducing risk.

Ok, let me first address your comment to me about ‘knowing what I think… but you were asking user X”. This is an open thread, which is a lot like an open letter where the “recipient” isn’t necessarily the intended audience. We are having a general discussion here, and while some statements may serve as a segue it doesn’t mean we’re addressing or “attacking” a person or position. That being said ….

I will throw this out for food for thought. My go to EDC is a gun I bought in the parking lot of Calibers in Greensboro from a member of the CSF (?) predecessor to CSC, whom I only remember a first name. We showed each other our CHP and ID. Exchanged cash and gun. Now, should I today go commit some hypothetical crime with said gun and it’s retrieved at the scene, do you reasonably think it’s going to require more should a trace go back to the seller be more than, “gee, I sold that gun to a member of a (long defunct) website years ago and I’m sorry, I can’t remember his name”?

There is nothing other than the librul dream of firearm tracing him to my hypothetical crime. On top of that, the legal system isn’t designed around you proving your innocence. It’s a dead horse.

 

[Kogarth]

I don’t think you do, and that’s fine, but it means that you’re either or both ignorant about the matter and responding to a fear that you can’t demonstrate is real.
I’m not trying to take your baby blanket, you do what makes you feel good, I’m trying to ensure that others don’t take false comfort in a baby blanket built on your suggestions.

I think I just witnessed a murder.

 

[GymB]

Ok, let me first address your comment to me about ‘knowing what I think… but you were asking user X”. This is an open thread, which is a lot like an open letter where the “recipient” isn’t necessarily the intended audience. We are having a general discussion here, and while some statements may serve as a segue it doesn’t mean we’re addressing or “attacking” a person or position. That being said ….

I will throw this out for food for thought. My go to EDC is a gun I bought in the parking lot of Calibers in Greensboro from a member of the CSF (?) predecessor to CSC, whom I only remember a first name. We showed each other our CHP and ID. Exchanged cash and gun. Now, should I today go commit some hypothetical crime with said gun and it’s retrieved at the scene, do you reasonably think it’s going to require more should a trace go back to the seller be more than, “gee, I sold that gun to a member of a (long defunct) website years ago and I’m sorry, I can’t remember his name”?

There is nothing other than the librul dream of firearm tracing him to my hypothetical crime. On top of that, the legal system isn’t designed around you proving your innocence. It’s a dead horse.

You and I agree on this issue of PPP retention and BOSs, in fact we probably could not be more in agreement. If you’d read even a small percentage of the posts in the thread you could not have avoided knowing this as well as knowing that I fully understand your thoughts on the topic. I am therefore surprised and disappointed that you, a well seasoned veteran of this community in its several forms, jumped in the conversation to answer a question that was primarily rhetorical without knowing anything about the discussion or participants, just dropped in and puked up your thoughts. So intent upon expressing yourself right now that you hadn’t paid the least bit of attention to what anyone else said. Usually it’s the new guys that fail to read the room, you just surprised me.

 

[Bigdave0924]

I don’t worry about what other people do with property I used to own. I had a g29 stolen from me a couple years ago. I held out hope it was misplaced and never reported it stolen because I had a gut feeling it was misplaced and not stolen and also NC law doesn’t even require you to report the gun stolen. I had pretty much forgotten about the gun a year or so later and was sitting in the gun shop where I bought the g29. I remember it was pre Covid me and the employee where the only people in the store it was dead in there. The store phone for the gun shop rings while I’m standing there talking to the employee. The employee looks at caller ID and he sees it’s the ATF and he makes a comment about wondering what they want. He answered the phone and starts flipping through the bound book. He states my gov name, glock 29 serial number xxxxxxxxx. I get the guys attention whiie he’s on the phone and tell him that’s my gun that was stolen. He tells the lady calling about the trace that she wouldn’t ever believe it but the guy that bought the gun is standing right in front of him but the gun was stolen and never reported. I never heard another word about it. I wish I had reported the gun stolen MAYBE I could have gotten it back once they found it but I literally never heard another word about it. That gun had to of shown up somehow for them to call and do the trace. Idk if the gun was found on a felon during traffic stop or if it was used and found as a murder weapon but I didn’t have to prove that I didn’t have anything to do with whatever was going on.

 

[GoWolfpack]

My next door neighbor many years ago was a very dedicated gun guy. He loved guns and cadillacs and loved horse trading in both so he cycled through them pretty rapidly. I can't believe it now but cancer came for him 7 years ago.

His favorite gun store was called D&R Arms, which has the ignominious distinction of being the store in the whole state with the shortest time between sales of guns and their connection to a crime. Their sales were all legal and as far as I know they're still open. I myself chose never to purchase from them for fear of inviting extra scrutiny personally.

He purchased a gun from them, played with it some, decided it wasn't for him and passed it along in a FTF sale, which was blessedly legal at the time. It was later found to be connected to a crime and the boys in blue came knocking.

-Mr. Diggs, you bought the gun at D&R and it was just found at a crime.
-I sold it.
-To whom?
- I don't remember.
-OK then, if you remember let us know.

 

[tws3b2]

I Did the hiring and firing for a large company. Had to check ID's and fill out forms. I would photo copy Picture ID's and keep. I thought I was protecting myself and company. Untill company lawyer said STOP IT. The law does Not require ID copies. DO As The Law Requires. NO more. No less. More can get you in just as much trouble as less. That go's for any dealing with the law.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Id be interested to see if anyone has a case they know of where someone got in trouble as the seller in a private transaction due to improper paperwork passing or whatever. Im sure some have been nailed for knowingly selling to a felon or prohibited person. But not sure I have ever heard of anyone getting in trouble due to not seeing a permit or keeping one.

Not saying it hasnt happened. Just seems kinda like something that would be tacked on as a charge with something else >like< selling knowingly to a prohibited person.

EXACTLY.

The State will not bother charging someone with such a minor, single perceived infraction of an interpretation of the law. This will always be in conjunction with more severe charges.

To do so would invite serious judicial scrutiny on one, single aspect of the written law involving that single charge against an individual and the adjudication becomes MUCH simpler:

- What was the person charged with (which necessarily includes the applicable statute)?

- Did this individual meet all the elements required to be charged with this violation AS WRITTEN IN THE STATUTE?

AG opinon or not, no DA will want to prosecute something like that.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

I look at it like this! Just cover your own a%# and have a someone with a FFL transfer it from you to them! Someone else mentioned in an earlier post about this. If the seller and buyer are to cheap to do it the legal way to cover both of you then keep it! Spend 10 to 15 bucks to keep yourself out of prison, hmmmm sounds like it would be worth it! Otherwise add it to the gun price from the start! Most around my area are about 25 to 35 dollars to do a transfer! That is if you want to be a law abiding citizen! Criminals are not law abiding citizens and that’s why they are called criminals lol! Had an officer tell me a notarized bill of sell is enough to keep you from being responsible for anything done with the firearm from the date and time it was notarized! But to cover yourself still do what you need to do according to the law! Bad when it’s someone else getting you in trouble because of your negligence!

I look at it like this:

Follow the law, as written.

If the law is silent on the matter, then quit filling in the silence with nonsense.

Far too many people approach this with attitudes that invariably lead to comments like "There oughta be a law...".

We need to stop with making our lives ever more restrictive and start telling those we elect into power "You need to have a nice, piping hot cuppa STFU with a side order of there-oughta-be-a-law-that-says-you-should-pass-stupid-laws".


You can't violate laws that don't exist.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Once gain, I challenge anyone to find a case where a seller has been found guilty for not keeping records of a private sale in NC.

Does the Court of Public Opinion count?

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Not bringing any names on here! Just sharing what I know from the person personally. Knew him since I was a kid and so did my family.

The problem with this, while I can respect not wanting to talk about someone you know, is two-fold:

1. You don't give us anything objectively verifiable which has a detailed legal description of the facts of the case, what charges were specifically tried, what charges were specifically convicted on, and the evidence considered in the conviction.

2. Not providing this information makes your claim anecddotal at best. Which leads others to believe how they wish about it, from best to worst.

There is more to a murder charge than just a shotgun one happened to own up until they sold it ten years previously. That hardly meets any of the statutory elements which must be met in order to be charged with such a crime.

 

[MacEntyre]

Only one person here is being dramatic.

No, there are two.