# Gun Purchasing Question by state....



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

What type of measures for purchasing a firearm are in your states?

Here in MN if you want a normal rifle (not AR style) and shot gun. You go to a gun store and fill out the paper work, they call it in, and you either walk home with it or you don't. If you want a pistol or AR style rifle you need to get what is called an acquisition permit or Conceal Carry Permit. This is done by the towns police chief or Sheriff if you live out of the city. It takes about a week to get but it is a back ground check they do before they issue a permit. It is good for a year where Conceal is good I think for 5 years. Then you can go to a store show this permit, fill out the paper work, they do the call and you either walk out with the gun or not. I think this could have stopped what just happened. Because what I have read it was just the one time check by the gun store and that was it.

Just curious if other states have these measures. Now this is something I would be totally behind. Again it would stop a shooter from getting a shot gun or a traditional hunting rifle. It wont keep guns out of law abiding peoples hands. It is just another step taken to get an AR or pistol. If you don't have anything to hide it isn't an issue.

What do others think?


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

I mean think about it. It would be another safety check for people to catch any mental illness or some other flag. It is also a measure to make a gun store owner who might not be doing things by the books more accountable. Because it would have a sheriff or police chief paper work to either back up a good background check or not.

BTW... the permits are FREE in MN. You just need to fill out the paper work. Also if a sheriff/police chief sits on them.... Also I have heard that they become valid after something like 14 days. So it will keep police honest and not sitting on things. they have to process them. So a couple of fail safes in there so it cant be politically bias.


----------



## north1 (Nov 9, 2010)

I don't know how things have changed as of late in North Dakota but when I received my class A conceal carry in 2011 this was the procedure:

1. Had to take a class with a local law enforcement and FBI agent as instructors.
2. Took a written test.
3. Performed a firearm proficiency test requiring a certain number of shots in varying positions.
4. Finger printed and photographed a paid license fee.
5. Had local sheriff sign paperwork.
6. Paperwork sent to FBI and reviewed.
7. Received conceal carry permit in mail.
8. Couple of years later requirements changed so I had to do it ALL over again. Including fee.


----------



## Sasha and Abby (May 11, 2004)

here in SC. you just show up with money and they run your background check... same as gunshows... you can still buy from private individuals and this will never be able to made illegal - unenforceable.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

North....

In ND can you just go to a store and purchase a hand gun or AR style of long gun with just the normal NiX check or do you have to go thru more leg work to obtain these guns?

Sasha....

I agree that they will never be able to stop the sales from individual to individual. But this kid in Florida just walked into a store and bought the stuff. Then with what you are hearing that has come out with the cops, feds, school, etc all been called on him and his mental state should have been caught some how or some where. Like if one more step needed to be taken. Because in MN the "acquisition permit" thing is supposed to be a more in depth check than the NIX.

Like i mentioned before if you want to purchase a shot gun or standard/traditional hunting rifle you don't need this permit. But to purchase a hand gun or AR style of long rifle you need this permit.

Others thoughts on this type of system pros/cons???


----------



## Habitat Hugger (Jan 19, 2005)

Nothing like that in ND or AZ, Chuck. Just the phone call background check, and you go home with the gun. But that's if you have the concealed carry permit. Without it I dunno, as I've had the CWP for close to 40 years.
A wait for a better more inclusive background check might be a PITA for some of us, depending on the situation, as would a system of background checks for private backyard sales or private gun show sales, but not the end of the world. Assuming it might weed out more people who shouldn't own guns, though I'm not convinced that trying to predict some kind of future shooting thing can be done with certainty or accurately. Two other problems -who pays for the extra background work and paperwork involved? Who decides who should or should not have access to a gun? Pretty subjective decision for some clerk in the local law enforcement office, though after the fact hindsight is always 20-10 or better.


----------



## north1 (Nov 9, 2010)

I am not sure of the process without conceal carry either. I never purchased a handgun until I received my conceal carry(had a Ruger 44 magnum and .22 handed down to me from my father and grandfather beforehand). Previous to that I had only purchased hunting rifles and shotguns and they were always pump, lever or bolt action.
They will probably pass more laws that will not be followed. The Florida shooter was suspended for taking knives to school. That is a felony and if prosecuted would have precluded him from purchasing firearms. But more laws will make people feel all warm and fuzzy. Until they fail to follow them and it happens again. Criminals don't follow laws anyway, obviously, so it is a bandaid over a decapatation wound. Eventually people will realize all the rights they have given away but it will be too late when the gestapo is leading away to the gas chamber.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

The mental condition of a person is subjective. Don't forget Nancy Pelosi said anyone who wants a gun is psychotic. I agree those that are a few fries short of a happy meal shouldn't have a gun, but there is a big danger every time liberals get their fingers in that decision. To me being liberal is psychotic soooooo. :rollin:


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

In ND any firearm, handgun, shotgun, rifle, or AR can be purchased at a gun store without a concealed carry permit. The store will run a NICS check and the time it takes is determined by how long that check takes. The store can take up to three days to do that, but every store I know of does the check immediately, so in most cases 15 minutes to an hour and you are out the door. In theory, the concealed carry permit allows the store to skip running the NICS, but most run it anyway. That way they can be doubly sure that you are ok to purchase, and the longer they keep you in the store, the more chance there is of you finding more stuff to buy. :laugh:


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

Plainsman said:


> The mental condition of a person is subjective. Don't forget Nancy Pelosi said anyone who wants a gun is psychotic. I agree those that are a few fries short of a happy meal shouldn't have a gun, but there is a big danger every time liberals get their fingers in that decision. To me being liberal is psychotic soooooo. :rollin:


I wonder how Nancy would react to my argument that anyone who wants to be a politician is psychotic ? Admit it ...you'd have to be a little crazy..... Nancy has shown she is power hungry.. what is more psychotic than that ? ..... LOL

The reality is you could have a month waiting period / background check and it will make little or no difference. The check is only as good as the current information, And nobody in the system is going to spend more than an hr or two doing the background check no matter how much time they have to do it. That's just a reality. FWIW if the instant background check is approved and an issue is discovered a day or two later they can still go after the buyer and take the gun.

The problem with waiting periods is if I go across the state and find a deal on a gun I like then I would have to make arrangements to have it shipped to a FFL to my side of the state adding extra cost and time.

ND did have a 3 day waiting period for a time. I bought a gun on layaway went and paid it off, then was forced to wait 3 days (which was described as a cooling off period) to pick it up. In that case the purpose of the waiting period was moot. I had already waited 3 months to pick up the gun. I'm not sure waiting periods have ANY effect. And there really is no way to know. Just because a shooter buys a gun the day before a shooting it doesn't mean he just decided to do it. He could have been planning it for weeks and timed his buy to when he needed the gun. Just because you are crazy it doesn't mean you can plan. If you are dealing with an undocumented psychotic its likely if he cant get a gun the day he needs it he will just do the deed when the gun is available.

I'm not even convinced most psychologists are any more sane than their patients. Takes one to know one comes to mind.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

So far no other state has what I am talking about goes on in MN... So far. It is just a permit to purchase, not a CWP. So it is another little step to take. Which could deter people.... again COULD. Like someone mentioned.... you cant predict these things.

It is the local law enforcement doing a check. So when the police were called on this individual they would have known and probably denied said permit.... etc.

I agree with you HH where will the funding come for this. I don't know. Like I mentioned the local law enforcement can have up to 2 weeks to issue this permit in MN. I know there is down time in which they can get this done. The only time it would be swamped for them is if the feds did this on a national level. The first month/year would be chaotic and then funding would be an issue.

I also agree that it would be a PITA and it is to remember when my permit is up. This is why I want to get a CWP... they last for something like 5 year and do the same thing.

North1 also makes a great point. The knifes on school grounds is a felony... :bop:

There are checks in place so these people don't get firearms... It is just a matter if people follow them. :bop:


----------



## Habitat Hugger (Jan 19, 2005)

The three day "cooling off" period is mean to try deter impulsive crimes of passion, or impulsive suicidal things. I doubt anyone can say it DOES or DOESNT work! Obviously as Huntin says, it'll never work EVERY TIME but it does it SOMETIMES work? I haven't any idea! Remember, the Federal Govt (and my NRA that I've supported since 1978) has made sure nothing can be done to research anything about gun violence? In my field, no once could make logical intelligent decisions about causation and treatment without at least some degree of data to support it! Like medical marijuana, there is almost no accurate data on guns and violence, thanks to Federal legislation. 
Yes, it can be a PITA to have to ship a good dela through a FFL with the nusciance and extra shipping, and costs and waiting and all that (don't I know it?) .....but it might be something we all have to increasingly work with. And many other things I predict coming -better securing of home guns, locking cabinets, keep them out of kids fingers, etc.
Extra and more extensive checks like Chuck suggested, may become the norm. Effective or not, I haven't any idea.


----------



## dakotashooter2 (Oct 31, 2003)

The issue I have with having to send it to my ffl across the state is if its a $50 single shot 22. This just doubles the price for a gun that is very unlikely to be used in a crime.


----------



## Habitat Hugger (Jan 19, 2005)

I agree Dakotashooter! A real PITA. I was lucky and had a good friend with an FFL but still a bother to ship and all that!


----------



## Habitat Hugger (Jan 19, 2005)

What gets me about this whole thing is why the crosshairs on AR's other than them being used in some high profile stuff? And looking so mean and military looking. 
I hope no bad guys read this, but were I planning a shoot, I'd choose a couple of pistols with multiple biggest magazines I could find. Much easier to conceal, and could easily carry several hundred rounds all set to go other than changing magazines, like the bad guys used in theater shootings, etc.
I don't want to lose my AR but if the anti gun people think about it, it makes as much or more sense to go after pistols. Ultimately we could all be deer and p dog hunting with single shots, or bolt guns with limited magazine capacities to say 1 or 2 extra rounds!?!? Saying this kind of seriously! When well meaning people get active, the slippery slope argument becomes real! And like it or not, might makes right! IMHO the only way to stop this is to voluntarily get into the "What might work" argument. NRA type stonewalling won't cut it much longer.


----------



## north1 (Nov 9, 2010)

Very true. Seriously a couple of easily modified 12 gauge shotguns with 00 buckshot(barrell shortened and butt replaced with pistol grip). Heck wouldn't take but a couple of hours and for crying out loud would they think twice about committing that felony when they have the evil they are planning to do in their mind?


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

The reason why for the FFL between state lines is to stop people from supposedly going to one state and purchase a gun that has lack laws.

Just in my example of in MN you need that acquisition permit to buy an AR style rifle. In ND it seems you don't. Well I have to have that gun shipped to a MN FFL who will require me to have that permit. So if there is any red flags it might get caught.

If there was a National Acquisition permit or if CCW permits were nationwide instead of state by state. Hopefully you wouldn't need to do the FFL thing when you find deals across state lines.

But again how much more do you want the Fed's involved is the question. :bop:


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

I was watching a program and a "gun expert" came on and said the reason why the AR is getting a bad name is because it is being used in these shootings. he also stated why the AR is being used is in part because the media and people think it is the evil gun. So they copy cat it. He also said that he wont name guns.... but there are guns out there that would inflict more damage and faster damage than an AR. Just like you two just mentioned.

Plus my whole argument about the past "assault weapons" ban is that you can take a ruger 10/22. Which is a great gun for people to teach shooting, to use hunting/trapping, to use for plinking and training, etc. But you can make that ruger 10/22 into an gun that was banned in that legislation. Semi- Automatic, Pistol grip, adjustable/folding/collapsing stock, large capacity mag (over 10 rounds), flash suppressor/barrel shroud. you can make it look "scary". See Picture.

Also the general public needs to realize the difference between Assault Weapon and Assault Rifle. Assault rifles have selective fire option that makes it go from semi auto to full auto. Which are not sold to the general public. Assault weapon is a semi-automatic rifle that has been changed or designed cosmetic changes to fit what I described above.

One thing I will say is look at the gun manufactures out there now. Look how they are making some guns. they are making them to look like weapons used in the video games. Look at savage... the 10/110 or the 110 scout These are bolt action rifles. Look at the Tikka T3x Tac. They are marketing to the "gamer" crowd. IMHO.


----------



## Habitat Hugger (Jan 19, 2005)

You guys are all right! Anything that looks "scary" seems to sell better than the same action looking like what we considered 20 years ago a normal hunting rifle or shotgun. The knee jerk reaction will be to ban anything scary or evil or military looking, which of course won't work, but the slippery slope will have already begun.
Though I hate to say it, and many will disagree, but my AR is kind of a toy! Ammo is cheap, it's loads of fun to shoot at targets, rocks, tin cans, p dogs, and varmints, very accurate, but face it, I could get along just fine huntingwise with any of my boltguns, even single shots, pump shotguns or my O/U's. Yep, some do use them for deer hunting, but being old and conservative I still feel a bit uneasy when I run into someone I don't know carrying an AR! Like Chuck says, a gamer? A guy with less emphasis on safety, a different mindset from most of us hunters? Yes, I know you can't tar em all with the same brush...


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

HH...

I agree with you 100% about hunting and what not. I do just fine with my bolts, pumps, o/u and muzzleloaders..... but you also hit the nail on the head about how the AR styles are sure fun to shoot and also cheap to shoot.

I think most hunters would agree with both of us saying you don't really need them for most hunting situations (other than eradication of hogs, pdogs, or running shots at yotes). But just like you mentioned about the slippery slope.... once one is gone will it turn into places in Europe where guns can only hold 3 shells total??? Then will it change to single shots?? Then only muzzle loaders..... then pooffff... gone. that is what I am afraid of.

We had this conversation last night at my pool league between 3 teams after shooting. Some talked about banning the AR style of guns. The "New manufacturing" of them. So all existing ones can stay. But stop production on them. Then of course I went into my NRA stonewall about you cant take my guns. But then I mentioned what we have been talking about here. Get a national acquire type permit or national CCW type permit which allows people to purchase AR style guns. Most of the liberals at the table kind of agreed that this would be a very good middle ground. Too bad out elected officals cant be like this. HAHA


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

I hunt in Canada every year. Been going for 25 years. Years ago when Canada put in more restrictive gun laws,I took a course in gun safety and a test from a guy who came down from Winnipeg. It allowed me to get what they call a PAL license. Good for 10 years. I just show it at the border and away we go. If you don't have one they charge $25 per gun and wait while they do a background check. Spousal abuse or DWI and they won't let you in.

At the end of 10 years you have to renew it. You have to fill out a form that includes a section on domestic abuse and signed by your significant other. You also have to have a background check done by your local police department. This year I had to have it done by the BCA in St.Paul.

Not a big deal.....you just have to get it done. I can see those things happening here.


----------



## speckline (Dec 13, 2008)

In WI, Last time I purchased a handgun, had to wait the three day period and pass background check only. Bought a rifle off gunbroker and had to go through FFL and background check. Cost was an added $35.00.

Issue I have with the left trying to "close" private sale loopholes is best described with scenario I went through when bill was being debated in congress in 2013 (I think).

My Dad inherited many guns from his Dad and Uncle as he was the only hunter/shooter in the family. My Dad had a lot of guns ranging from expensive to cheap Saturday night specials. He died in 2013 and my brother and I inherited all his guns. At the time, the Obongo administration was pushing hard for all private sales including inheritance to be completed through an FFL. It was projected at the time that the FFL fee would go up as high as $75 *per gun* due to the significantly increased transfer load the could expect. As a result, it would cost my brother and me upwards of $2100.00 to be able to obtain my Dad's guns, several of which were in the family for over 100 years.
Gun control at it's finest! The gov wasn't trying to take away our guns, just make it too expensive to own.


----------



## Habitat Hugger (Jan 19, 2005)

LIke Ken, I got the PALS (possession and acquisition licensing system) from a guy in Winnipeg who came down to the local gun club. I learned a bit from the course as I did/do from every gun class I've ever done, particularly about their gun laws up there parts of which I consider make good safety sense, particularly their laws about securing and locking them up to keep them out or reach of curious kid's fingers and probably stop or slow down suddenly impulsive crimes of passion sometimes, and theft. Nobody ever thinks about the self defense thing up there. Much safer country because of lots of reasons I guess. 
You havent been able to have a have a handgun there since the ?1930's? UNLESS you are a member of a target shooting type club and have a background check and now the PALS class which I was when I lived up there, and had several handguns. My brother teaches the PALS course up there and owns a dozen handguns and lots of long guns. He complains about the rules and regs, but lives with it. I regularly shoot with him when I visit up there, as does he here. 
One law that doesn't make sense to me is that an American can bring up a Mini-14 but NOT an AR that resembles a so called Dratted Assault Rifle! The old mean, scary and evil look again.......Dunno about restrictions on magazine capacity, but I'd bet 10. Similarly, you can bring up a mini14 on a hunting trip from USA but not an AR! Muzzies and cartridge guns manufactured before ?1873? Are exempt from any gun laws, though when I took up my flintlock on a bear hunt the guy had to document it and asked how much powder and how many balls I had! I told him a flask of powder and two balls but said my wife wouldn't want me to show them to him! LOL he laughed, too. Didn't bat an eye filling out all the gun forms at the border, they are used to us honest Yanks bringing up guns. Said they didn't worry about hunters and guns, but want to document serial numbers and such. Can't sell or leave one up there. 
Like an idiot, I spaced out the 10 year renewal for the PALS and it expired. Wonder if anyone knows if or when or where it might be offered again. I can't remember the spousal abuse thing to be signed by my wife, but then I don't beat her up too often - she's tougher than me anyway! LOL. Showed her this and she agreed!


----------



## Habitat Hugger (Jan 19, 2005)

Good point Spekline! I too have many family heirloom guns, and at my age inheritance is a concern! I wouldn't be against an easy inexpensive or gratis transfer with a background check ( nothing to worry about in my family) but your post exemplifies why we MuST keep politics out of it, unless it is too late. Kick out the hard nosed tunnel visioned gun takers like the Boxers, Feinstein, Pelosis, and on the other side, (I'll get blasted for this,) slap around or boot out a Wayne Lapierrs, equally non bendable, tunnel visioned, narrow minded and unreasonable from the gun owners side. I dunno how many times I've heard comments from people here, mostly conservative people, like "I'm a life member of the NzrA, but those Ba-ares dontrepresent me any more,". Twice yesterday alone. Looking forward to what I hear in today's card games and social stuff from conservative gun owners.

Anyway, inheritance. There could also be an exemption for guns designed or manufactured before a certain date......doubt any descendent of mine would shoot up a place with my great grandfathers 50-70 or my grandfathers lever action 32 rim fire, or a single action colt .45! Lots of solutions regarding older guns but aR's and huge capacity automatic pistols I'm not so sure. Even I've started to think about what could happen with MY auto guns 50 - 100 years or a few generations down the line. They are safe in my hands and my kids hands, but further down who knows? I'm not about to light up a torch and cut em up on my deathbed, but the security of future background inheritance checks might be comforting.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Yep the Canada thing is just like some of the "acquisition" thing I am talking about. Local PD does the checks so they know if calls have been made or they should have a pulse on a situation more than the Feds. I watched a clip from Tucker where they had an FBI guy on. That guy stated as much as it hurt him to say but the FBI did its job. Because when the kid mentioned about "becoming a professional school ..." he didn't specify what school. So he hated to say it but it wasn't a direct threat. So they could only do so much. This is following their "guidelines". But now if the local PD would have been informed instead of the FBI... maybe something else could have been done. Since they were called to that residence or on this subject over 30 times!!

I am by no way putting blame on the teachers or anyone like that with this next statement. But it is in our culture now to not "snitch" or not cause waves when we see things that just don't add up. Generations are being taught not to "tattle tail" on someone or something. Just turn a blind eye to things. It is sad but true. Also it is very hard to teachers to do things with out fear for losing jobs, getting reprimanded, etc. I mean think about it... if a teacher brings up some behavioral issue to the school, they do something about it. The parent goes off on the school and sues! Which people seem more and more inclined to do now. Then lets not even forget about the "no child left behind" BS. Where it was beneficial to just push kids along thru the system so the school can get its funding. Again teachers, schools, learning institutions have their hands tied on this stuff. It is very sad.

Again I am not blaming schools, teachers, or anything like that. Because they have a very very hard job when it comes to all of this. Just pointing out flaws in another system out there.

On the gun inheritance.... same issue with me. That is why I don't think it would work. Unless the Fed's put a cap on what people could charge... ie: $25 a gun until you reach $100. But again that also goes against all of my thought on "free trade". So I am torn on that.


----------

