Delaware Concealed Carry Forum
State News & Gun News => Delaware News => Topic started by: JOET on July 26, 2013, 01:08:05 AM
-
SECOND AMENDMENT ACTION ALERT NETWORK
BEAU BIDEN'S LATEST SCHEME TO INTERFERE WITH YOUR RIGHT TO SELF DEFENSE
It's summertime. The General Assembly is in recess, the State Fair is under way and we should be safe from the depredations of Delaware's elitist anti-gun crowd, right?
WRONG!
With hundreds of legitimate concealed carry permit applications clogging their desks, the Attorney General's office is working late into the night to concoct new and innovative ways to "mess with" concealed carry license holders and to make it more difficult for you as a law-abiding citizen to defend yourself and your loved ones from the criminals they refuse to prosecute for violent gun crimes. Apparently refusing to properly process current applications and renewals isn't good enough for Beau Biden and his elitist anti-gun cronies.
Here's their latest scheme: They want to require that every permit holder "qualify" with their carry piece every year. What's more they want you to declare which piece you are going to carry and to license you for just that one piece. (That's what cops do - they must think you're a cop).
And there's more - we don't know the whole plan right now, but you can rest assured that Attorney General Biden and his anti-gun henchmen are planning more and better ways to inflict as much financial pain, inconvenience and regulatory agony upon you, Delaware's law abiding gun owners, as possible.
CALL TO ACTION
-
I'd like to believe it's not true...
but, as I said to David Keene, "I'm the id10t who's been telling people 'Relax: Obama's not coming after our guns.'"
-
Here's what I received from Bridgeville R&P - includes contact info
BRIDGEVILLE RIFLE & PISTOL CLUB, LTD.
SECOND AMENDMENT ACTION ALERT NETWORK
BEAU BIDEN'S LATEST SCHEME TO INTERFERE WITH YOUR RIGHT TO SELF DEFENSE
It's summertime. The General Assembly is in recess, the State Fair is under way and we should be safe from the depredations of Delaware's elitist anti-gun crowd, right?
WRONG!
With hundreds of legitimate concealed carry permit applications clogging their desks, the Attorney General's office is working late into the night to concoct new and innovative ways to "mess with" concealed carry license holders and to make it more difficult for you as a law-abiding citizen to defend yourself and your loved ones from the criminals they refuse to prosecute for violent gun crimes.
Apparently refusing to properly process current applications and renewals isn't good enough for Beau Biden and his elitist anti-gun cronies.
Here's their latest scheme: They want to require that every permit holder "qualify" with their carry piece every year. What's more they want you to declare which piece you are going to carry and to license you for just that one piece. (That's what cops do - they must think you're a cop).
And there's more - we don't know the whole plan right now, but you can rest assured that Attorney General Biden and his anti-gun henchmen are planning more and better ways to inflict as much financial pain, inconvenience and regulatory agony upon you, Delaware's law abiding gun owners, as possible.
CALL TO ACTION
Call Attorney General Biden today and
Tell him to leave Delaware's concealed carry permit system alone.
Tell him it works just fine the way it is (or it would, if he did his job).
Tell him that if he wants to help make Delaware a safer place to live he should support "Shall Issue "legislation.
And tell him to clear the log jam of applications that is stacked up in his office so the Courts can do their jobs.
Tell him to prosecute the real criminals and to stop persecuting law-abiding gun owners.
Attorney General Biden can be reached by calling his Wilmington office at 302-577-8400.
Or, feel free to call his office in Sussex at 302-856-5353 or his office in Kent at 302-739-7641.
Beau Biden's email address is Attorney.General@state.de.us. If you can't get Beau, just leave a message.
And remember - be polite......
-
Someone needs to verify this information. So far, I can't find anything to confirm it.
If true, I suspect that this is retaliation for the strong opposition to HB-88.
Does anyone know if it is within Biden's power to make such changes?
If it is, what is the best course of action to fight him?
As it stands, his record on fighting crime is abysmal. I suspect that much will be made of
his failure come election time.
-
The entire process of obtaining and using a carry permit is spelled out clearly in the Delaware Code (as we all know - Title 11, Chapter 5, Subchapter VII, 1441-1461). Because all this in in the code, it would seem that it would require a new law or revision to existing law to implement Biden's changes. That can only be done by the Delaware Legislature and cannot be ordered by AG Biden, I believe. I'm not sure if this is correct but it seems to be.
-
Clogging up the CCDW permit works is within the power of the AG but what isn't (as MarkB pointed out) is annual qual and the sidearm limitation which is required for retired LEOs to carry CCW in Delaware. They want to make us dance to the same tune but they need to change the law. IANAL
http://attorneygeneral.delaware.gov/consumers/protection/lawenforcement/LEOSA030408.pdf
STATE OF DELAWARE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Law Enforcement Officers’ Safety Act of 2003 Advisory HR 218
18 U.S.C. § 926
Retired Law Enforcement Officer:
6. During the most recent 12 month period, has met, at the expense of the individual, the State of Delaware standards for training and qualification for active law enforcement officers to carry firearms, as established by the Council on Police Training (“COPT”).
And in their application, they must certify that:
I understand that I must meet the State of Delaware’s standards for training and qualification for retired law enforcement officers to carry the firearm of the type and caliber and serial number listed on the State of Delaware Retired Police Officer Concealed Weapons Qualification Notification form.
-
IF this is true, then what happens when your gun needs repair? "are you serious?". no gun for weeks, because you can change up?
Really.
-
http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20130726/NEWS/307260043/Concealed-weapon-permit-changes-floated
-
Saw it in the News Urinal this morning, made my coffee boil in the cup. My guess is that this is coming from Markell, with the more than willing help from Beau. Kind of like..." hey Beau, let's see what we can do to registar the guns of carry permit people, and screw up the system." They should drop the requirement on the retired cops, instead of putting it on us.
What the heck is Markell running for, Pres??? He is getting his name/pic posted almost as much as Obama.
-
All just talk so far, but you know that is the first step...It would take a change to Chapter 11 (by the house and senate) to do what they are talking about. None of it is good. They will try to use this and trade for some other thing. Just watch...
-
Well, if they want to make our requirements like LEOSA, lets have the SAME coverage (ALL 50 states).
Other than that, place it where there's little sunshine.
-
Here is my response to the News Journal article, this morning:
http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20130726/NEWS/307260043/Concealed-weapon-permit-changes-floated
It's increasingly clear that the current administration is continuing to entertain proposals that infringe on the right to keep and bear arms. There has not been some rash of incidents of concealed carry permit holders inappropriately using their weapons. National statistics show that CCW holders are actually doing a BETTER job of making choices to deploy a weapon and are less likely to injure bystanders than actual law enforcement officers.
This is just another "common sense" proposal by the anti-gun crowd - a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. Unlike a drivers license, the right to keep and bear arms is a constitutional right, although Delaware is among a minority of states that consider CCW as a "privilege" - we are a "may issue" state, while most are "shall issue" states for qualified applicants.
Requiring proficiency testing or linking the permit to specific firearms are simply methods to add cost to the process, seek alternative "registration" of firearms and erect barriers to concealed carry. There is strong evidence that increased numbers of CCW licenses correlates to lower crime rates. Why would we want to add restrictions and conditions, when there is no evidence of inappropriate use? Certainly not in contrast with the benefits to the community.
-
Looks like we will be busy again when the new legislative session starts.
Thank them all for the heads up. Now we have plenty of time to develop
an action plan.
Does anyone know how many (few) arrests have been made in Wilmington for
illegal gun possession?
-
MAKE SURE YOU NOTIFY YOUR STATE SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES.
-
For groundgrid: Does anyone know how many (few) arrests have been made in Wilmington for
illegal gun possession?
According to state statistical analysis director in 2011 there were 1199 arrests made for possession of a firearm by a person prohibited. Of those arrests only 204 convictions occurred and 8 more convictions as an included lesser offense.
When nearly 1000 people in one year arrested for possession of a firearm by a person prohibited throughout the state walk free on that charge the AG's office should look to address problems in its own back yard before they seek to fix a problem that does not exist. I have failed to find the common sense in passing new laws to keep firearms out of peoples hands who are not permitted to own firearms but when authorities make an arrest on that very charge the state fails to convict them.
-
Doing so would cost the state money. Passing laws that only inconvenience law abiding citizens does not produce a tax burden while still enabling the politicians to say that they did something to help reduce crime.
Headline come the next election: "Biden strengthens sate gun laws, makes streets safer"
Should read: Crime rises steadily under Biden's leadership, consistently fails to convict violent and repeat offenders.
-
MAKE SURE YOU NOTIFY YOUR STATE SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES.
This is the bottom line folks. This forum has a good listing of contacts.
-
I've heard back from my Senator and Representative. Both are good 2nd Amendment Republicans.
Senator Lopez said @ 9:05 PM today:
"Thanks, Mark! We are aware and the AG knows it!"
Representative Smyk said @ 7:13 AM today:
"Thanks Mark!
This administration just won't stop.
Thanks for this tip."
That's two fighting for us!
-
For groundgrid: Does anyone know how many (few) arrests have been made in Wilmington for
illegal gun possession?
According to state statistical analysis director in 2011 there were 1199 arrests made for possession of a firearm by a person prohibited. Of those arrests only 204 convictions occurred and 8 more convictions as an included lesser offense.
When nearly 1000 people in one year arrested for possession of a firearm by a person prohibited throughout the state walk free on that charge the AG's office should look to address problems in its own back yard before they seek to fix a problem that does not exist. I have failed to find the common sense in passing new laws to keep firearms out of peoples hands who are not permitted to own firearms but when authorities make an arrest on that very charge the state fails to convict them.
Thats about 1 out of every 5 cases walks. What are they hoping to accomplish? Marshal Law? If anything, these people need to be locked up. It looks a lot to me like they are letting these people walk to "show how easily they can get a gun." Fix your own house first indeed.
-
I'd like to believe it's not true...
but, as I said to David Keene, "I'm the id10t who's been telling people 'Relax: Obama's not coming after our guns.'"
Better to learn later than never man.
I had been saying it from day one.
The main thing is that we all know this now. I don't think guns should be a political issue. We have stuff like tax rates to fight about
-
IF this is true, then what happens when your gun needs repair? "are you serious?". no gun for weeks, because you can change up?
Really.
Not just that, but there are those of us who carry different guns depending on what we are wearing. Also I am fine with an 8 round 1911 typically, but I go into many areas of Killmington I have a 17 round Glock with me.
Also if you have a self defense shoot the first thing they do is take your gun, even if its 100% justified. What are you supposed to carry then.
-
For groundgrid: Does anyone know how many (few) arrests have been made in Wilmington for
illegal gun possession?
According to state statistical analysis director in 2011 there were 1199 arrests made for possession of a firearm by a person prohibited. Of those arrests only 204 convictions occurred and 8 more convictions as an included lesser offense.
When nearly 1000 people in one year arrested for possession of a firearm by a person prohibited throughout the state walk free on that charge the AG's office should look to address problems in its own back yard before they seek to fix a problem that does not exist. I have failed to find the common sense in passing new laws to keep firearms out of peoples hands who are not permitted to own firearms but when authorities make an arrest on that very charge the state fails to convict them.
I think info that would help our cause much more is if there is a way to find out about any problems with guns like murders and so forth that were commited by legal permit holders and so forth. I doubt its many. The argument is then made that they are focusing on the wrong people.
-
Doing so would cost the state money. Passing laws that only inconvenience law abiding citizens does not produce a tax burden while still enabling the politicians to say that they did something to help reduce crime.
Headline come the next election: "Biden strengthens sate gun laws, makes streets safer"
Should read: Crime rises steadily under Biden's leadership, consistently fails to convict violent and repeat offenders.
Maybe biden is just trying to make more victims for the thugs in killmington. I am sure more gun people dont vote for biden and his kind while they bus them from killington to vote. They really need to look at who is committing the crimes and focus on them and leave us alone.
I am so sick if this pandering
-
I notice he floated this turd out there through an underling, according to the News-Journal. Either he is testing the waters, or he doesn't want his name taped to another legislative failure.
So, as the token libtard on this site, I wrote him as one liberal to another:
From: [oldgraygeek's real name & Email]
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2013 5:28 PM
To: 'Attorney.General@state.de.us'
Subject: RE: Attorney General Messing with CCDW permits!!!
Dear Attorney General Biden,
When I read the Email from the DSSA (header below), I thought it had to be right-wing hooey.
After all, I reasoned, you’re an intelligent, effective public servant, focused on protecting Delawareans and taking effective action to prosecute & prevent crime.
Surely, your office would not waste time trying to pass restrictions on concealed carry… needless regulations that would not prevent a single crime.
Then, I saw the News Journal article, and I see I might be wrong.
I ask you: Other than to damage Democratic prospects in the upcoming elections (which I realize is not a consideration for you), what possible benefit could Delaware realize from such regulations?
Heck, you’ve already checked permit holders’ backgrounds (including mine and my wife’s) sixteen ways from Sunday, at initial issuance and renewal of our carry permits.
Between the two of us, we’ve been carrying for twelve years. Nobody has been placed at risk, not even you when we met at the Acme in Bear.
Other than to make it much more expensive and difficult to exercise the “Right to Keep and Bear Arms,” there is no sensible motivation for the rules proposed… surely that can’t be the motivation!
So, I urge you to forget about this idea. There is nothing to gain – no crimes to prevent, not even the slightest increase in public safety – by further restricting concealed carry in Delaware.
Please, hang it up. As a dedicated liberal and a reliable Democratic voter for over three decades, I urge you not to prove the right wing to be right about this.
Thank you,
[oldgraygeek's real name, address & phone]
From: Delaware State Sportsmen's Association [mailto:info@delsports.net]
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2013 9:00 PM
To: [oldgraygeek's real Email]
Subject: Attorney General Messing with CCDW permits!!!
-
OGG...I have to commend you for your very well written and to the point letter to the AG..their only agenda is to disarm the public. I can not wait for you to post his response....way to go....thumbs up for you!!!!
-
OGG...I have to commend you for your very well written and to the point letter to the AG..their only agenda is to disarm the public. I can not wait for you to post his response....way to go....thumbs up for you!!!!
Great letter
-
OGG...I have to commend you for your very well written and to the point letter to the AG..their only agenda is to disarm the public. I can not wait for you to post his response....way to go....thumbs up for you!!!!
Great letter
As usual. Well done.
-
OGG...I have to commend you for your very well written and to the point letter to the AG..their only agenda is to disarm the public. I can not wait for you to post his response....way to go....thumbs up for you!!!!
I agree, well said. I only hope he gives you the respect of a personal reply.
-
Personal reply??? I can't even get a boiler plate, canned reply from politicians any more. The only reply I have had in recent years was from Debbie Hudson, who seemed symathetic to our cause. But I still write often!!! They seem to give a lot to write about.
-
Another unfortunate side effect, were this proposal to be implemented, is that the number of states with which we enjoy reciprocity would
likely decrease, since we would no longer have "similar training requirements". We are to lose Virginia reciprocity at year's end because they
simplified their process to include an online test(?).
Regards!
-
I don't know how many CCP holders we actually have in Delaware, but in attempting to think through the logistics of how this would work..... such as; when/where/how would we qualify? What proof would be required that we shot and passed the qualification? Would the shooting session have to be conducted in the presence of some gun-hating LEO or an NRA certified instructor? And I would assume at some very brutal expense? This looks like a nightmare just from a practical standpoint, let alone the individual liberty aspect. I would imagine the goal here would be to make this as difficult, time-consuming and expensive as possible with the end goal of getting people that are thinking about getting a CCP to give up and walk away and those of us that already have one to consider giving it up. I hate to say this a I am a native of Delaware, and it sickens me to even write this... but this state is fast becoming a Dictatorship of the Socialist/Progressives and is destined to implode like many of the other states in the Northeast.
We must get these sick, self-serving, evil people out of state and federal government and never let them return. If we don't do this and soon... Putin's Russia will start looking like an attractive alternative.
-
I have no doubt the goal of this is so most people either won't renew or get one.
This is as dangerous as anything that *********** Markell tried to pull during the year legislative session.
-
As a native Delawarean, I am appalled by the actions of a few politicians to attempt to control the masses. I can't leave the region, yet, but for the first time in my life, I am considering moving to PA. Not Delaware or Chester Counties, but much farther up- Berks, Lehigh, Bucks counties. I know it is not perfect in PA, but at least there are enough working and industrious people there that maybe there is hope for a future. Delaware is trying to be Maryland and New Jersey and it is disgusting. The problem is we are now outnumbered here and the possibility of voting these sick and controlling politicians out of office becomes smaller and smaller each year. On to PA now, and ultimately to Texas later.
-
Unfortunately, the libs have a solid lock on Delaware politics due to the upper county and the freebie loving voters. This has become a one party system, and only massive efforts in NCC will change that. We can't convert the freebie lovers, but if we can get Repubs and conservatives to at least show up at the polls, we have a chance. They stay away in numbers that allow THEM to win consistantly.
Unless I am the only one noticing, Markell is running, full boar, for something and it is not Gov. But he is generating supporters for his ideas and we are not. We have to get moving. I am not an organizer, but some of you are, let's get moving or move, your choice.
-
People of the state have forgotten their history. Delaware has more in common with many conservative states than liberal ones.
I wonder if Jersey transplants were much of the change in politics in the state. Seems Maryland had the same problem.
I never thought I would see the day that I would head North to PA before South to Maryland, but I could see moving up there. I would love to stay in my native state, but sadly it is almost to the point of scorched earth.
-
Changes in the current political climate can be made. We have a good example in HB 88 which passed the House with a vote or 40 to 1 and was defeated in the Senate. This occurred even when the NRA/DSSA stated that they would not oppose the bill. A few pro gun people in the state continued the fight against overwhelming odds and were successful when many just took it for granted, me included, that the bill would pass. We should take HB 88 as an example of what can be done to make changes here in Delaware.
During this past legislative session I realized that the NRA, DSSA or Delaware GOP will not truly fight for our 2nd amendment rights. It will be the individual gun owner who is willing to fight for our rights working with many other like minded individuals who will be able make the changes to the current political environment that we seek to change. I look forward to working with all of you to make the necessary changes that we all want to make for Delaware.
Great letter to the AG.
-
Capnball, according to the referenced article, 8,770 permit holders in DE.
-
"Active" permit holders.
-
Capnball, according to the referenced article, 8,770 permit holders in DE.
Do you feel this is a valid number? I wonder if the state has this posted somewhere on their web site.
-
IMO, we need to form the "DE CDW Permit Holders Association"
$10.00 yearly dues from 5000 members = a $50,000 contribution to the correct candidates.
In this state this would make us a very sizable campaign donor as well as a large enough
voting block to be taken seriously.
-
IMO, we need to form the "DE CDW Permit Holders Association"
$10.00 yearly dues from 5000 members = a $50,000 contribution to the correct candidates.
In this state this would make us a very sizable campaign donor as well as a large enough
voting block to be taken seriously.
That could be an idea, Make it one dimension focused though like you said just about our second amendment rights.
-
IMO, we need to form the "DE CDW Permit Holders Association"
$10.00 yearly dues from 5000 members = a $50,000 contribution to the correct candidates.
In this state this would make us a very sizable campaign donor as well as a large enough
voting block to be taken seriously.
yup, but most people talk the talk but don't walk the walk I hope I am wrong.. it would be hard to find the 5,000 names ,maybe a few of us put up enuff for a couple of adds for a new assoc. I will walk the walk
-
IMO, we need to form the "DE CDW Permit Holders Association"
$10.00 yearly dues from 5000 members = a $50,000 contribution to the correct candidates.
In this state this would make us a very sizable campaign donor as well as a large enough
voting block to be taken seriously.
Seriously needs its own thread so as to not get lost in this one. Possibly even a new section for discussions later.
-
IMO, we need to form the "DE CDW Permit Holders Association"
$10.00 yearly dues from 5000 members = a $50,000 contribution to the correct candidates.
In this state this would make us a very sizable campaign donor as well as a large enough
voting block to be taken seriously.
I would gladly support.
-
I suggest supporting the NRA and other local groups instead. As OGG has mentioned before, we mainly fly under the radar, and don't need the additional attention. And to Anjdrifter I say, it SHOULD be hard to find the names of all the permit holders in DE. Maybe that was your point.
-
I suggest supporting the NRA and other local groups instead. As OGG has mentioned before, we mainly fly under the radar, and don't need the additional attention. And to Anjdrifter I say, it SHOULD be hard to find the names of all the permit holders in DE. Maybe that was your point.
yup it was the point. . It should separate from this forum. I have supported the NRA and other groups including the reb. party but that hasn't really been all that fruitful. I don't know if this type of thing would fly but sure is worth discussing.
-
I vote for a new thread focusing on a group but the name should not specifically mention concealed carry. We need the support of open carry people, and it should be 2nd amendment focused and not directly focused on CCDW and many have mentioned, it is best that we stay under the radar.
-
I know first state firearms freedom association was supposed to do that, but never seemed to get off the ground.
-
I vote for a new thread focusing on a group but the name should not specifically mention concealed carry. We need the support of open carry people, and it should be 2nd amendment focused and not directly focused on CCDW and many have mentioned, it is best that we stay under the radar.
I was going to ask about the open carry and don't forget the retired leo s there are a lot more of them, a lot more then you think ,from this state and the tri state area .also agree about the concealed part... name doesn't matter the cause does .
-
Ill agree about open carry being involved as well. The reality is gun people have too many enemies to fight amongst ourselves.
-
I'm in, too. The focus is coordinating committed 2nd Amendment advocates. Dues and contributions to pol's are secondary to communication.
-
New thread has been started with an outline of what I have in mind.
-
I just got a new DSSA ACTION ALERT today, warning that some dealers are charging more than the maximun fee of $30.00 to do a FFL background check and transfer of guns. The DSSA wants to know about ANYONE that is over chaging for this. The maximum of $30.00 is set by Markell's HB35.
I'm thinking PROSECUTION of the guilty.
-
I just got a new DSSA ACTION ALERT today, warning that some dealers are charging more than the maximun fee of $30.00 to do a FFL background check and transfer of guns. The DSSA wants to know about ANYONE that is over chaging for this. The maximum of $30.00 is set by Markell's HB35.
I'm thinking PROSECUTION of the guilty.
I would say get the word out to let people know so they wont go to the shop, but after what miller's pulled his shop still seems busy everytime we go by it.
-
I just got a new DSSA ACTION ALERT today, warning that some dealers are charging more than the maximun fee of $30.00 to do a FFL background check and transfer of guns. The DSSA wants to know about ANYONE that is over chaging for this. The maximum of $30.00 is set by Markell's HB35.
I'm thinking PROSECUTION of the guilty.
Is the $30 fee for the background check, the transfer or both?
My thought is since ATF Form 4473 allows up to 5 firearms to be listed for the 1 background check the transfer should only be $30.00 for up to 5 firearms.
The reason I ask is before the new law some FFLs would charge by the background check allowing up to 5 firearms while others charged per firearm. I haven't purchased much this year however I've been known to order more then one firearm at a time online. I got hit with a 125.00 fee last year from a new FFL I decided to use as they charged me $25.00 per firearm. Needless to say they didn't see any of my business again involving more then 1 firearm. There are at least 2 home based FFLs and 1 LGS in my area who charged only for the background check, not per firearm.
So another question.. does the current new law have any type of loop hole allowing the dealer/FFL to charge 30.00 for each firearm even though its still only 1 background check?
-
Dovers Shooter Choice's home page list the FFL Transferfee as $35.00 for members and $50.00 for non-members, plus $10.00 for each extra gun check.
According to what I've read, this is against the law, per HB 35. Membership in a shooting range has nothing to do with it.
What say you?
-
Would have been legal prior to HB35
Now isn't. Can't see how they could possibly interpret the law otherwise.
Other question is, are they obligated to do it?
If an FFL decides that it's not worth the trouble can they refuse to do a transfer?
-
Read this: http://delcode.delaware.gov/title24/c009/index.shtml
§ 904A. Criminal history checks for sales between unlicensed persons.
(5) Any dealer who is asked to facilitate the transfer of a firearm pursuant to the terms of this section, may charge a reasonable fee for said service, said fee not to exceed $30 per criminal history check performed pursuant to this procedure. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no fee may be charged for the return of a firearm to its owner in the event that the proposed transaction may not be immediately and legally completed as the result, or lack thereof, of a criminal history background check hereunder.
(6) Failure or refusal on the part of the dealer to facilitate the transfer of a firearm pursuant to the procedures set forth herein shall be adequate cause to suspend the license of said dealer for a period not to exceed 30 days per occurrence.
-
"not to exceed $30 per criminal history check performed"
To me this means that multiple guns on one background check would only be $30.00.
My FFL has always charged per gun, guess he can't do that anymore.
If we are required to abide by the law, so should everyone involved.
Every law ever written is subject to the Law of Unintended Consequences.
Wonder what else is going to come up with HB35
-
Dont want to split hairs but... The section I quoted (and you are reading from) is 904A
transfers between UNLICENSED PERSONS.
Find in the Delaware law where it sets the fees a FFL may charge for a transfer
(from his/her inventory to the purchaser).
-
My eyes hurt!
I've looked at the DE online code and the supporting laws at the bottom of the sections and, ai may be wrong, but the only place I find a fee for the background check is in section 1448B - "Criminal history record checks for sales of firearms -- Unlicensed persons" and that is limited to $30 per check. There is no mention or restriction of fees for the background check in section 1448A - "Criminal history record checks for sales of firearms". Fees are either not mentioned or someplace else I did not see.
http://delcode.delaware.gov/
The review is always a good review.
-
As far as dealers refusing to do a transfer, I see what the law says, but I know x-ring has said they will NOT EVEN DO A TRANSFER FROM BUD's or places like that.
IF I am reading this the right way, not only did that law infringe on our rights, but it also gun put gun shops out of business as bud's prices are always a bit lower than x-ring even if they pay the $30 fee
-
I do see it says between person's so I guess that is how they get out of it