DE Permit to Purchase Update

[Radnor]

 ? 1448B. Background checks for sales of firearms ? Unlicensed persons [Effective until implementation of 84 Del. Laws, c. 259, ? 1].

(a) An unlicensed person may not sell or transfer any firearm to any other unlicensed person without having conducted a background check through a licensed firearms dealer in accordance with ? 1448A of this title and ? 904A of Title 24 to determine whether the sale or transfer would be in violation of federal or state law, and until the licensed firearms dealer has been informed that the sale or transfer of the firearm may ?proceed? by the State Bureau of Identification, through the Firearm Transaction Approval Program under subchapter VI of Chapter 85 of this title or 25 days have elapsed from the date of the request for a background check and a denial has not occurred.

(b) For purposes of this section:

(
(5) ?Transfer? means assigning, pledging, leasing, loaning, giving away, or otherwise disposing of, but does not include any of the following:

a. The loan of a firearm for any lawful purpose, for a period of 14 days or less, by the owner of the firearm to a person known personally to the owner.

b. A temporary transfer for any lawful purpose that occurs while in the continuous presence of the owner of the firearm, if the temporary transfer does not exceed 24 hours in duration.

c. The transfer of a firearm for repair, service, or modification to a licensed gunsmith or other person lawfully engaged in such activities as a regular course of trade or business.

d. A transfer that occurs by operation of law or because of the death of a person for whom the prospective transferor is an executor or administrator of an estate or a trustee of a trust created in a will.

[Just Bill]

How do they proceed with a state department that does not exist??

[slsharp]

boy, this 'permit to purchase' stuff has completely taken my freedom away when it comes to firearms.  complete bunk!

[Just Bill]

Not really.....if you have lots of money and time, you will get that permit...maybe.  I have my doubts that this falls in the "shall not be abridged" category.  But people get what they vote for.  The lower income folks seem to vote dem so they should be happy they are included in this bill.   By the way, go for the ccdw permit first, essentially the same thing with loopholes.

[MarcWinkman]

This is certainly in violation of "shall not be infringed" in the Second Amendment.  Under principles of constitutional interpretation, language is given its meaning as used at the time of the drafting, in the case of the Second Amendment, that means 1791.  The dictionary definition of "infringe" at that time is to hinder or destroy.  A requirement to obtain a permit to purchase which in effect is nothing more than a tax as laid out in this new statute is certainly a hinderance.  Under the Supreme Court's decision in the Minneapolis Star case, it was ruled that a tax on ink was in infringement upon the First Amendment right to free speech and press.  This by analogy is no different.  Happily this is already being challenged in court.  Hopefully by learned counsel who will look to constitutional precedent outside the spectrum of Heller/McDonald/Caetano/Bruen.