Free State Project Forum

Archive => Which State? => Topic started by: Stumpy on July 15, 2003, 10:19:43 am

Title: Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Stumpy on July 15, 2003, 10:19:43 am
The new Wyoming law to send fingerprints with all concealed weapon’s permits to the FBI for a national background check.


Wyoming H.B. No. 0308  Concealed firearms permits-amendment.
Sponsored by: Representative(s) Luthi
AN ACT relating to weapons; providing for the submission of fingerprints to the federal bureau of  investigation as part of a background check for issuance of a concealed firearms permit; and providing for an effective date.


Wyoming Enrolled Act # 105 http://legisweb.state.wy.us/2003/Bills/HB0308.pdf   :o


Wyoming enacted this abomination into law http://legisweb.state.wy.us/2003/HBIndex.htm scroll down to #308
SIGNED INTO LAW: 03/06/03  EFFECTIVE DATE:  03/06/03


I understand that Idaho and North Dakota have similar statutes.



New Hampshire’s law is better  ;D

NH HB 766, recently passed into law, clarified existing state law:

II. No photograph or fingerprint shall be required or used as a basis
to grant, deny, or renew a license to carry for a resident or
nonresident, unless requested by the applicant.
Title: Re:Wyoming and great news about guns
Post by: freedomroad on July 15, 2003, 12:07:13 pm
This is bad news.  We could change this the first year we moved to WY, ND, or ID, though so it is not that big a deal.  It is a good thing that you do not need a permit to carry a gun in Wyoming.

Some interesting notes though.  I talked with the head of the WYOMING STATE SHOOTING ASSOCIATION.  He said he is in favor of the FSP and thinks Wyoming is a perfect place for it.  He even told me about Boston Tea Party's new book which is about the FSP picking Wyoming and then gaining power in Wyoming.  He said that he helped Boston Tea Party with the book and that it will be out in September.

I am going to meet with him on July 22nd.  He is also a former Libertarian candidate for town Mayor and state Senate.  This looks very promising.  

As we know, estimates show that 88% of Wyoming households own guns (the highest in the nation) and Wyoming is know to have the best (or just about there) hunting and hunting laws in the nation.  As long as we work as activists in Wyoming, we should be able to give it more gun freedom than even Alaska.  This should not be hard since Wyoming is already in the top 5 in the nation as far as gun freedoms.  
Title: Wyoming’s New Draconian Gun Law
Post by: Stumpy on July 15, 2003, 12:28:06 pm
This is bad news.  

Yes, bad news.

If WY is chosen, concealed-weapons carriers will have their choice of either:
a) being fingerprinted and those fingerprints being sent to the FBI where those fingerprints will likely be added to a national database
b) ignoring the law and risking imprisonment

Neither seems to be a good option.

Yes, we can get this law reversed, but that is one more fight and political capital that could better be spent on another issue.

I have had WY at #2 in my vote sequence, but this development may move it back. :o
Title: Re:Wyoming’s New Draconian Gun Law
Post by: freedomroad on July 15, 2003, 12:33:18 pm

I have had WY at #2 in my vote sequence, but this development may move it back. :o


All of the research shows Wyoming to have near the best gun laws in the nation, certainly in the top 5.  However, gun freedom not must be the most immportant issue to you because Alaska has some of the best gun freedom in the nation (higher than NH for sure) but you rank it only about DE.
Title: Re:Wyoming’s New Draconian Gun Law
Post by: Stumpy on July 15, 2003, 12:44:15 pm
Quote
All of the research shows Wyoming to have near the best gun laws in the nation, certainly in the top 5.  

I wonder if “all of the research” includes the recently discovered fact that  if you want to legally carry a weapon concealed in Wyoming, Wyoming will fingerprint you and send your prints to the FBI?

I’ll bet it does not. ;)
Title: Re:Wyoming’s New Draconian Gun Law
Post by: Zack Bass on July 15, 2003, 01:20:52 pm

If WY is chosen, concealed-weapons carriers will have their choice of either:
a) being fingerprinted and those fingerprints being sent to the FBI where those fingerprints will likely be added to a national database
b) ignoring the law and risking imprisonment
Yes, we can get this law reversed, but that is one more fight and political capital that could better be spent on another issue.


No problem.  Just move to the Free County (our 30-square-mile ranch in Niobrara County), and no one in the world can hassle you.  The Feds have no Law requiring a Carry Permit, and the State can't touch you without the Sheriff, and the Sheriff won't bother you, since we will own him.

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Tony on July 15, 2003, 01:21:47 pm
Just carry openly until we get it changed.  ;)

A lot of states require fingerprints.  I know for sure that WA does.  Other shall-issue states requiring fingerprints (according to packing.org) include: AZ, AR, CO, CT, FL, GA, ID, IN, LA, MI, MS, and many more (I stopped looking after MS).  Changing WY to a AK/VT style carry law would be fairly easy.  This would allow us to gain support in the community and let the residents know that we can actually get something done.

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: JonM on July 15, 2003, 01:28:58 pm
Just carry openly until we get it changed.  ;)

A lot of states require fingerprints.  I know for sure that WA does.  Other shall-issue states requiring fingerprints (according to packing.org) include: AZ, AR, CO, CT, FL, GA, ID, IN, LA, MI, MS, and many more (I stopped looking after MS).  Changing WY to a AK/VT style carry law would be fairly easy.  This would allow us to gain support in the community and let the residents know that we can actually get something done.



I do believe GA requires a fingerprints for a drivers license now, as well as a couple of other very unfree states.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Kelton Baker on July 15, 2003, 01:51:59 pm
How to get around the finger-print law in Idaho, if we should move there, (and until we get this law changed) :

According to packing.org and my reading of 18-3302  (http://www3.state.id.us/cgi-bin/newidst?sctid=180330002.K) of the Idaho code...

1. Idaho accepts permits from all states except Vermont ( ;) ) Bring your permit with you.  It is good in Idaho until it expires or until your issuing state requires you to surrender it for moving.

2. Use open- carry when within the confines of cities, mining and railroad camps, etc.  Feel free to use concealed carry without a permit when outside of city limits and defined locations (when you go hiking in the foothills, on roads and rural areas between towns, etc.).  Idaho only requires permit when in defined areas.

3. Become an elected official 18-3302;12$(e) gives this special perk to elected officials: "The requirement to secure a license to carry a concealed weapon under
this section shall not apply to ... Any publicly elected Idaho official" !!  (politicians like to grant themselves rights they deny others, don't they?)

4. Be a retired police officer with at least ten years of service.

5. You do not need a permit to carry a loaded handgun in a car as long as it is in the open.

6. (several other narrowly-defined exceptions).
107
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Stumpy on July 15, 2003, 01:58:13 pm
 I understand the reluctance of WY advocates to cede a point, but no amount of spinning will change the fact; if you want to legally carry a weapon concealed in WY,

WYOMING WILL TAKE YOUR FINGERPRINTS AND GIVE THEM TO THE FBI.

New Hampshire does not boast a gun culture, yet New Hampshire does the checking locally, with no federal involvment. ;D

This is yet another reason why I’ll choose New Hampshire.  ;)
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zack Bass on July 15, 2003, 02:03:25 pm
... if you want to legally carry a weapon concealed in WY,

WYOMING WILL TAKE YOUR FINGERPRINTS AND GIVE THEM TO THE FBI.


It doesn't sound like that big a deal.  I don't really understand why people care so much about carrying concealed, as long as they can carry.
In Florida, you can't carry a handgun unconcealed, even if you have a Concealed Carry Permit!!!  Go figure.

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: freedomroad on July 15, 2003, 02:03:29 pm
I understand the reluctance of WY advocates to cede a point, but no amount of spinning will change the fact; if you want to legally carry a weapon concealed in WY,

WYOMING WILL TAKE YOUR FINGERPRINTS AND GIVE THEM TO THE FBI.

New Hampshire does not boast a gun culture, yet New Hampshire does the checking done locally, with no federal involvment. ;D

This is yet another reason why I’ll choose New Hampshire.  ;)


They do that in many states.  They do that in my state of TN, for example.  However, the law does not need to apply to FSP members that move to Wyoming.  All they have to do is get a permit from a state that does not do this.  You can live in one state and carry a permit from another state for as long as you want as long as both states except each other's permits.  

However, I agree, this law should be changed and it will be changed ASAP.  Many gun laws from all of the states need to be changed, and with our help, they will be changed.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Stumpy on July 15, 2003, 02:11:21 pm
It doesn't sound like that big a deal.  

Wyoming is assisting the FBI as it builds a national database.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: cbisquit on July 15, 2003, 03:29:51 pm
I'm not really a big fan of being in FBI databases, but how much would this really change Wyoming's gun value on the spreadsheet?
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: freedomroad on July 15, 2003, 03:52:35 pm
I'm not really a big fan of being in FBI databases, but how much would this really change Wyoming's gun value on the spreadsheet?

Since this is fast become the normal for all states the keep fingerprints and the fact that Wyoming fingerprints is already figured into the spreadsheet, this would not change the ranking at all.  
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Karl on July 15, 2003, 03:58:47 pm
Since this is fast become the normal for all states the keep fingerprints ... this would not change the ranking at all.

George W. Bush couldn't have said it better!

This is not the case in New Hampshire, where they just passed a law that states otherwise.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Kelton Baker on July 15, 2003, 04:14:39 pm

Yes, we can get this law reversed, but that is one more fight and political capital that could better be spent on another issue.

I have had WY at #2 in my vote sequence, but this development may move it back. :o


Each and every state presents problems that some find near unacceptable.

For example, I found New Hampshire's laws about homeschooling absolutely disgusting.  If we move to NH, I will be working to end all of those regulations for sure, and rallying home-school families about to change the law.

Now, I could look at that as a bad expenditure of political capital, and something I wouldn't even have to worry about if we moved to Alaska or Idaho.  On the other hand, if it is a popular measure and we successfully get it repealed, it will be a rallying point to advance libertarian ideals; just the same other in other areas.

What I am concerned about are bad laws that are also highly popular.
197
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Penfist on July 15, 2003, 04:29:58 pm
If we move to New Hampshire, I'll be campaigning against zoning laws, and you can count on my support with home schooling with minimal or no government interference.


Yes, we can get this law reversed, but that is one more fight and political capital that could better be spent on another issue.

I have had WY at #2 in my vote sequence, but this development may move it back. :o


Each and every state presents problems that some find near unacceptable.

For example, I found New Hampshire's laws about homeschooling absolutely disgusting.  If we move to NH, I will be working to end all of those regulations for sure, and rallying home-school families about to change the law.

Now, I could look at that as a bad expenditure of political capital, and something I wouldn't even have to worry about if we moved to Alaska or Idaho.  On the other hand, if it is a popular measure and we successfully get it repealed, it will be a rallying point to advance libertarian ideals; just the same other in other areas.

What I am concerned about are bad laws that are also highly popular.
197
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: jgmaynard on July 15, 2003, 05:22:36 pm
Palindrome and Exitus:

If our organization chooses New Hampshire, we will welcome you with open arms and would be delighted for you to help in the fight for greater liberty in P&Z laws and home schooling options.

It seems like every NH election is really just about taxes, and that's where we put most of our energies - it's one of the reasons we don't have a general sales or income tax - :D With additional resources and volunteers, we can make great strides in those two areas as well.

We would love to have both of you working with us. :)

JM
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: MajesticLeo on July 16, 2003, 07:22:03 am
Since I have been in the FBI's database since 1964 (when I enlisted in the Army) and the CIA database since 1969 (when I applied for a position with them, which I didn't get), this is no big deal to me.  They always know where to find me if they want me.  

BTW, most states that issue CCW permits require you to turn them in if you move to a state that has its own permit, regardless of whether you get one in the new state or not.  Such "non-resident" permits, like Florida and Texas have for instance, are only issued to residents of states without a permit of their own and revoked when you move to a state having a permit system.  So the idea of getting a Florida permit, for example, and using it after you move to Wyoming is not workable.

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Kelton Baker on July 16, 2003, 08:11:12 am
Since I have been in the FBI's database since 1964 (when I enlisted in the Army) and the CIA database since 1969 (when I applied for a position with them, which I didn't get), this is no big deal to me.  They always know where to find me if they want me.  

BTW, most states that issue CCW permits require you to turn them in if you move to a state that has its own permit, regardless of whether you get one in the new state or not.  Such "non-resident" permits, like Florida and Texas have for instance, are only issued to residents of states without a permit of their own and revoked when you move to a state having a permit system.  So the idea of getting a Florida permit, for example, and using it after you move to Wyoming is not workable.


Yes, it is likely evey one of us in the FSP is in some FBI database, just some of us they don't have our prints yet, for whatever that is worth.  If your state requires fingerprints for a drivers license, and you already gave them, like in California, too late.

You make a good point that this is not a good work-around, to continue to use your state's permit when moving to a fingerprint state, like Wyoming, but also not impossible.  According to current laws, you may also choose to delay becoming a resident in some states:

HOW SOON YOU MUST OBTAIN DRIVERS LICENSE AFTER MOVING (and price)

Alaska, 90 days, pay $20
Delaware, 60 days, pay $12.50
Idaho, 90 days, pay $24.50
Montana, 120 days, pay $32 (lasts eight years)
New Hampshire, no formal requirement until after residency is established, unknown? (one unofficial source stated 30 days), pay $32
North Dakota, 60 days, pay $15
South Dakota, 30 days, (law is unclear), pay $8
Vermont, 6 months, pay $20
Wyoming, Must obtain drivers license upon becoming resident, no apparent specification of time limit, must pay $20
Maine, immediately upon becoming resident, $40  

The reason I bring this up is to show that there is also the possibility of a short delay, and the defining moment for officially becoming a new resident seems to be the drivers license.

Some states require you to surrender your permit 30 days after establishing residency in another state, (which would be referenced by the surrender of the D.L.) Tennessee is one, but more importantly, it appears not all require this, on the packing.org website, several individuals stated that they owned permits concurrently in several different states, so it depends, state-by-state.

According to this site (http://www.networkusa.org/fingerprint/page4/fp-04-page4-winners-losers.html), none of our candidate states require fingerprints for drivers licenses.

I live in California and still haven't given my prints because I still haven't become a resident after 2 years.  I do this by following a loophole in the law that allows me to be a resident in another state, though this also means I have to go through several inconveniences several times a year.  There are work-arounds, even in California, it all depends on how willing you are to do so.  I posted earlier that Idaho may have the most work-around options for the CCW permit, if we should go there.

Also remember that several hundred activists are probably going to be moving immediately after the vote,  those laws which other members find most objectionable are going to be targeted first.  Hundreds in state, working for change and thousands out-of-state writing e-mails, phonecalls and faxes concentrated on one single law might even change New Hampshire's objectionable homeschool laws in short order!


307
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Karl on July 16, 2003, 09:20:34 am
Interesting:

The Wyoming legislature voted for this bill UNANIMOUSLY (http://legisweb.state.wy.us/2003/digest/hb0308.htm).  Every single senator and representative in the Wyoming legislature, including the otherwise relatively libertarian Keith Goodenough.

Yet, in NH, the legislature voted to PROHIBIT the taking of fingerprints.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Stumpy on July 16, 2003, 09:50:03 am
Interesting:

The Wyoming legislature voted for this bill UNANIMOUSLY (http://legisweb.state.wy.us/2003/digest/hb0308.htm).  Every single senator and representative in the Wyoming legislature, including the otherwise relatively libertarian Keith Goodenough.

Yet, in NH, the legislature voted to PROHIBIT the taking of fingerprints.

It was unanimous? OUCH!

This leads me to believe the Wyoming legislature will actively fight against the FSP.

I mean: if the Wyoming House and Senate voted unanimously to finger print concealed weapons carriers and to send the fingerprints to the FBI, will they welcome us?

New Hampshire will welcome us and will not force us to give our fingerprints to the FBI. ;D

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: jgmaynard on July 16, 2003, 10:11:58 am
New Hampshire will welcome us and will not force us to give our fingerprints to the FBI. ;D

In fact, NH forbids even the TAKING of fingerprints or pictures for CC (unless requested by the apllicant - probably similar to the tax me more fund ;)), even for the state's OWN use.... Never mind sending them off to our friends in the swamp. :)

JM
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: jgmaynard on July 16, 2003, 10:32:08 am
I have NEVER heard of a "required driver's license". I really don't like driving, and have gone years w/o a license.

I don't need no steenkin' license... :)

Now back to the title of this post....

When we first come into power especially the state house, we are going to need allies. It seems that at least on the gun rights issue, the NH house (which just FORBID such fingerprints by a 5:2 margin) is going to be much friendlier than a senate which voted unanimously (even the supposed "libertarian" senator) to send ALL CC permit applicants fingerprints to the FBI.

JM
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: JasonPSorens on July 16, 2003, 11:01:28 am
Interesting:

The Wyoming legislature voted for this bill UNANIMOUSLY (http://legisweb.state.wy.us/2003/digest/hb0308.htm).  Every single senator and representative in the Wyoming legislature, including the otherwise relatively libertarian Keith Goodenough.

Yet, in NH, the legislature voted to PROHIBIT the taking of fingerprints.

Wow, this makes me wonder whether this was one of those bills that are sneaked through the house by leadership with a misleading title and subject.  In Texas, there was a bill to put fingerprints on the driver's licenses.  It was pushed heavily by leadership simply as a bill to "upgrade the computer databases," a mere formality.  The bill sailed through the state house and through committee in the senate.  Then the ACLU and RLC got wind of it and raised a big stink.  It was voted down by an 80-20% margin in the senate.  It could be that there was no one in WY to raise such a stink, so everyone voted for it without knowing what it was.  What this would indicate is not necessarily that every legislator in WY is a fascist, which would be bizarre & unbelievable for WY as for almost all of the states under consideration, but that there were no pro-liberty activist groups in the state to sniff this thing out.  That in itself is a bad sign, of course, because it means we'd be building a lot of the activism in WY from scratch, but it does make sense out of something that is otherwise totally inexplicable.
Title: Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Stumpy on July 16, 2003, 11:10:32 am
Wow, this makes me wonder whether this was one of those bills that are sneaked through the house by leadership with a misleading title and subject.  

I don’t believe this to be the case. Below are the title and main description. Even the most cursory viewing would indicate that fingerprints would be gathered and sent to the FBI.

Either the Wyoming House AND Senate do not read even the main description of the bills they enact into law, or they unanimously agree to fingerprint their citizens who want to carry weapons concealed and give the fingerprints to the FBI. Of course, there is the possibility that some legislators are lazy and others favor this HORRIBLE law.

H.B. No. 0308  Concealed firearms permits-amendment.
Sponsored by: Representative(s) Luthi
AN ACT relating to weapons; providing for the submission of fingerprints to the federal bureau of
investigation as part of a background check for issuance of a concealed firearms permit; and
providing for an effective date.


 http://legisweb.state.wy.us/2003/titles/hb0308.htm
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zxcv on July 16, 2003, 12:34:01 pm
Jason's theory might hold a little water, except for the fact the bill was short and straightforward. The reason I say this, is that it had the second highest bill number in the House, leading me to believe it was slipped in at the very end.

I have emailed the author, a Republican from Freedom, Wyoming (of all places) to ask him why he wrote it. Perhaps they got some pressure from Homeland Defense bureaucrats? Who knows, but we should be able to find out.

Apparently, if you are caught packing without a permit, it is a misdemeanor in Wyoming. Same as in NH, but in that state a second offence nets you a felony conviction, unlike Wyoming as far as I can tell.

While you NH advocates are making hay about this vote, perhaps you can explain the meaning of this NH law?

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XII/159/159-10.htm
Quote
159:10 Sale Without License. – Any person who, without being licensed as herein provided, sells, advertises or exposes for sale, or has in his possession with intent to sell, pistols or revolvers shall be guilty of a class B felony if a natural person, or guilty of a felony if any other person.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XII/159/159-8.htm
Quote
159:8 License to Sell. – The selectmen of a town and the chief of police of a city may grant licenses, the form of which shall be prescribed by the director of the division of state police, effective for not more than 3 years from date of issue, permitting the licensee to sell at retail pistols and revolvers subject to the following conditions, for breach of any of which the licensee shall be subject to forfeiture:
    I. The business shall be carried on only in the building designated in the license or at any organized sporting show or arms collectors' meeting sponsored by a chartered club or organization.
    II. The license or a copy thereof, certified by the issuing authority, shall be displayed on the premises where it can easily be read.
    III. No pistol, revolver, or other firearm shall be delivered to a purchaser not personally known to the seller or who does not present clear evidence of his identity; nor to a person who has been convicted of a felony.

Does that mean (as I suspect) that if you just advertise a handgun for sale in a newspaper, you are guilty of a felony?
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zack Bass on July 16, 2003, 12:41:01 pm

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XII/159/159-10.htm
Quote
159:10 Sale Without License. – Any person who, without being licensed as herein provided, sells, advertises or exposes for sale, or has in his possession with intent to sell, pistols or revolvers shall be guilty of a class B felony if a natural person, or guilty of a felony if any other person.

Does that mean (as I suspect) that if you just advertise a handgun for sale in a newspaper, you are guilty of a felony?


Holy Chao, NH is worse than Florida!
This is the harshest gun law I've seen anywhere.
Even if you don't advertise... if you just sell a gun to your next-door neighbor, that is proof of your having possessed it with the intent to sell it, at least for a few minutes before the sale was consummated!

NH just dropped a couple of notches.

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Kelton Baker on July 16, 2003, 12:59:54 pm
HOW SOON YOU MUST OBTAIN DRIVERS LICENSE AFTER MOVING (and price)

Alaska, 90 days, pay $20
Delaware, 60 days, pay $12.50
Idaho, 90 days, pay $24.50
Montana, 120 days, pay $32 (lasts eight years)
New Hampshire, no formal requirement until after residency is established, unknown? (one unofficial source stated 30 days), pay $32
North Dakota, 60 days, pay $15
South Dakota, 30 days, (law is unclear), pay $8
Vermont, 6 months, pay $20
Wyoming, Must obtain drivers license upon becoming resident, no apparent specification of time limit, must pay $20
Maine, immediately upon becoming resident, $40  

Not sure where you got these numbers, exitus, but a NH drivers license now costs $50 and lasts 5 years (I just renewed mine in May, so I know).

I got these numbers by going to each and every DMV website online and looking at the numbers, I originally posted this Jan. 12, 2003 on the More and Other Criteria thread... so this makes sense.




Holy Chao, NH is worse than Florida!
This is the harshest gun law I've seen anywhere.

Is it now a free-for all attack on one of my favorite states (but not most favorite) ?

Is the attack- pendulum swinging the other way now?

O.K., I'll join-in... this once...

Boy it sure will be nice when this vote is all over:)


Here's a listing of guns currently for private sale in a major Western newspaper.  Notice the types (an AK-47? a tommy gun?  oh my!)

Classified Search results... (http://www.idahoclassified.com/cv3/idaho/search?searchterm%3Alist=gun&searchterm%3Alist=tommy+gun&subclass%3Alist=All&mainclass=Merchandise&batch_size=50&basket%3Alist=idaho%7CF659D0A852&basket%3Alist=idaho%7CF659D0A861&PrintBasket.x=111&PrintBasket.y=12)
438
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Michelle on July 16, 2003, 01:10:10 pm

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XII/159/159-10.htm
Quote
159:10 Sale Without License. – Any person who, without being licensed as herein provided, sells, advertises or exposes for sale, or has in his possession with intent to sell, pistols or revolvers shall be guilty of a class B felony if a natural person, or guilty of a felony if any other person.

Does that mean (as I suspect) that if you just advertise a handgun for sale in a newspaper, you are guilty of a felony?


Holy Chao, NH is worse than Florida!
This is the harshest gun law I've seen anywhere.
Even if you don't advertise... if you just sell a gun to your next-door neighbor, that is proof of your having possessed it with the intent to sell it, at least for a few minutes before the sale was consummated!

NH just dropped a couple of notches.



Perhaps you folks need to read a little deeper  :-\

Section 159:14
    159:14 Exemption. – None of the provisions of this chapter shall prohibit an individual not licensed under the provisions thereof who is not engaged in the business of selling pistols or revolvers from selling a pistol or revolver to a person licensed under this chapter or to a person personally known to him.
Source. 1967, 220:9, eff. Aug. 21, 1967.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XII/159/159-14.htm
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Michelle on July 16, 2003, 01:28:52 pm
Holy Chao, NH is worse than Florida!
This is the harshest gun law I've seen anywhere.
Even if you don't advertise... if you just sell a gun to your next-door neighbor, that is proof of your having possessed it with the intent to sell it, at least for a few minutes before the sale was consummated!

NH just dropped a couple of notches.

Wyoming's law (which is the subject of this thread) is really MUCH worse.

Yes! Especially since my post above shows that they are concerned over a non-issue! The NH law they quoted was seriously out of context without reading the full chapter  :-\
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Karl on July 16, 2003, 01:34:44 pm
Here's a listing of guns currently for private sale in a major Western newspaper.  Notice the types (an AK-47? a tommy gun?  oh my!)

Similarly, a classified search from NH's The Union Leader (http://unionleader.abracat.com/c2/buyselltrade/results/printer.xml?&se.control.mh=15&cache=false&se.category.kq=gun%20or%20rifle&se.category.q=:Any&se.category.q=:Any&se.category.q=adper_all&se.category.q=:Any).

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: JonM on July 16, 2003, 01:36:49 pm
Here's a listing of guns currently for private sale in a major Western newspaper.  Notice the types (an AK-47? a tommy gun?  oh my!)

Similarly, a classified search from NH's The Union Leader (http://unionleader.abracat.com/c2/buyselltrade/results/printer.xml?&se.control.mh=15&cache=false&se.category.kq=gun%20or%20rifle&se.category.q=:Any&se.category.q=:Any&se.category.q=adper_all&se.category.q=:Any).



What happens if you shoot a bear with a moose gun?
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zack Bass on July 16, 2003, 01:43:10 pm

  .... The NH law they quoted was seriously out of context without reading the full chapter  :-\


What could possibly change the fact that the quoted part makes it a Felony to sell a handgun to your neighbor or to offer to do so on your Home Page?  I mean, since you're the one who has read that part, please let me know how it does that.

Any State that can have such a Law that says that in one part, and another part that makes it inoperative, is a dangerous place for people like me who want to be able to read the Laws and count on their being enforced to the letter of the Law and no further.

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zack Bass on July 16, 2003, 01:44:53 pm

Similarly, a classified search from NH's The Union Leader (http://unionleader.abracat.com/c2/buyselltrade/results/printer.xml?&se.control.mh=15&cache=false&se.category.kq=gun%20or%20rifle&se.category.q=:Any&se.category.q=:Any&se.category.q=adper_all&se.category.q=:Any).


I want everyone to read that and confirm that no pistols or revolvers are offered for sale, lest the seller be imprisoned for a Felony.

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Sebastian on July 16, 2003, 01:46:20 pm
Yeah, my mind is starting to spin a bit after reading the "You can't sell them... but you can."
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Michelle on July 16, 2003, 01:59:23 pm

  .... The NH law they quoted was seriously out of context without reading the full chapter  :-\


What could possibly change the fact that the quoted part makes it a Felony to sell a handgun to your neighbor or to offer to do so on your Home Page?  I mean, since you're the one who has read that part, please let me know how it does that.

Any State that can have such a Law that says that in one part, and another part that makes it inoperative, is a dangerous place for people like me who want to be able to read the Laws and count on their being enforced to the letter of the Law and no further.



What in the world are you talking about? I quoted the exemption above.

It isn't another "part." All NH pistol and revolver statutes are outlined in chapter 159 (which would likely all fit on a single sheet of paper).
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zack Bass on July 16, 2003, 02:00:14 pm


Any State that can have such a Law that says that in one part, and another part that makes it inoperative, is a dangerous place for people like me who want to be able to read the Laws and count on their being enforced to the letter of the Law and no further.


I suppose you have no problem with being fingerprinted and having the prints sent to the FBI.  ::)


I understand that many people object to this, but it's about five orders of magnitude smaller than being imprisoned for a Felony for offering a gun on a Web Site!!!  There's just no comparison.

I'm not typical, but I am far less concerned with Privacy than with Prison.  And I believe that most people's concern with Privacy is mainly to avoid possibly being convicted of violating some crummy Law they have a moral right to violate.  If the cops weren't allowed to imprison me for Possession, I wouldn't be so touchy about their peeking inside my car.

And as for me, sending my prints and photo to the FBI would be highly redundant.  They already have all that from my Florida Concealed Carry License, and over half a dozen arrests; and my trial, which took up a couple of days on Court TV, pretty well inured me to the prospect of the Feds knowing things about me.

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zack Bass on July 16, 2003, 02:09:04 pm

What in the world are you talking about? I quoted the exemption above.


The first Part says it's a Felony to possess the handgun intending to sell it; or to offer to sell it - to ANYONE!

The Exemption is ANOTHER PART that says you may sell a handgun to someone you know personally, or to a licensed dealer.  But it does not <<NOT>> say that you can offer to sell it to someone you know, only that you can sell it!  The first part, Felony Conviction for Offering, still stands!

In any case, the "Exemption" still does not allow me to sell a handgun to my neighbor (whom I do not know personally), or to advertise it on my Home Page.  Even with the broadest interpretation of this poorly-worded Exemption, this is a far harsher Law than even Florida's or any of the other Free State candidates I have heard of.

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Stumpy on July 16, 2003, 02:12:05 pm
And as for me, sending my prints and photo to the FBI would be highly redundant.

Me too. The feds have had my prints for about 20 years.

My main concerns with Wyoming’s new carry conceal law are:
1) It was passed unanimously. Nobody in Wyoming’s House or Senate had a problem with fingerprinting their citizens and giving the fingerprints to the FBI.
2) It is recent. It cannot be blamed on the old guard. They passed the law just a few months ago.

I'm not typical

Zack, I vote this as the understatement of the year. ;D
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zack Bass on July 16, 2003, 02:17:24 pm

Wyoming's law (which is the subject of this thread) is really MUCH worse.


Oh.  What act would Wyoming's Law put you in prison for?

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: JonM on July 16, 2003, 02:24:23 pm
159:8 License to Sell. – The selectmen of a town and the chief of police of a city may grant licenses, the form of which shall be prescribed by the director of the division of state police, effective for not more than 3 years from date of issue, permitting the licensee to sell at retail pistols and revolvers subject to the following conditions, for breach of any of which the licensee shall be subject to forfeiture:
...

Emphasis mine.  This is a license to OPEN A STORE AND SELL GUNS.

If I own a handgun and wish to sell it to a person who is licensed to sell pistols and revolvers, I can.  If I wish to sell it to my friend Bob, I can.  I cannot sell it to someone I do not know, so that would indeed preclude me from placing it on a website to sell to any psychopath who knew how to surf the web.  If you wish to sell handguns on your website, you will have to get a license.

The entire chapter (159-A) on the purchase of shotguns and rifles was repealed.  So there seems to be no regulation of that, hence the classified ads for the rifles.

I thought this last item from the chapter was nice:

159:25 Voluntarily Surrendered Firearms. – No state agency shall operate a firearms "voluntary surrender and destroy'' program. Firearms which are voluntarily surrendered to a state agency shall be sold at public auction or kept by the state agency for its own use. Proceeds from firearms sold at public auction by the state shall be deposited in the general fund.

Another good one:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XII/159-D/159-D-2.htm (http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XII/159-D/159-D-2.htm)

I particularly like the use of IF rather than When.

159-D:2 Confidentiality. –
    I. If the department of safety conducts criminal background checks under RSA 159-D:1, any records containing information pertaining to a potential buyer or transferee who is not found to be prohibited from receipt or transfer of a firearm by reason of state or federal law, which are created by the department of safety to conduct the criminal background check, shall be confidential and may not be disclosed by the department or any officers or employees to any person or to another agency. The department shall destroy any such records after it communicates the corresponding approval number to the licensee and, in any event, such records shall be destroyed within one day after the day of the receipt of the licensee's request.
    II. The department shall retain records containing any information pertaining to a potential buyer or transferee who is prohibited from receipt or transfer of a firearm for 3 years.
    III. Notwithstanding the provisions of this section, the department may maintain only a log of dates of requests for criminal background checks and unique approval numbers corresponding to such dates for an indefinite period.
    IV. Nothing in this section shall be construed to allow the department to maintain records containing the names of licensees who receive unique approval numbers or to maintain records of firearm transactions, including the names or other identification of licensees and potential buyers or transferees, including persons not otherwise prohibited by law from the receipt or possession of firearms.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Rearden on July 16, 2003, 02:24:41 pm

What in the world are you talking about? I quoted the exemption above.


The first Part says it's a Felony to possess the handgun intending to sell it; or to offer to sell it - to ANYONE!

The Exemption is ANOTHER PART that says you may sell a handgun to someone you know personally, or to a licensed dealer.  But it does not <<NOT>> say that you can offer to sell it to someone you know, only that you can sell it!  The first part, Felony Conviction for Offering, still stands!

In any case, the "Exemption" still does not allow me to sell a handgun to my neighbor (whom I do not know personally), or to advertise it on my Home Page.  Even with the broadest interpretation of this poorly-worded Exemption, this is a far harsher Law than even Florida's or any of the other Free State candidates I have heard of.



Zack, this is just like the infamous "Concord Blue Law Battle of 2003," in which you refused to acknowledge that the good people of Concord had repealed their archaic blue laws.

Read this very carefully:

Section 159:14
    159:14 Exemption. &#8211; None of the provisions of this chapter shall prohibit an individual not licensed under the provisions thereof who is not engaged in the business of selling pistols or revolvers from selling a pistol or revolver to a person licensed under this chapter or to a person personally known to him.
Source. 1967, 220:9, eff. Aug. 21, 1967.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XII/159/159-14.htm

Note how it says: "...under this chapter..."  This means that you may indeed sell a pistol or revolver to your neighbor, or anyone else that you know.  The point of this entire chapter is to make it illegal for licensed gun dealers to sell firearms to known felons.  That's it.  This doesn't affect regular folks at all.

Is it a bad law?  Sure it is.  But it's nowhere near as bad as you make it out to be, and it's nowhere near as bad as THE STATE OF WYOMING SENDING YOUR FINGERPRINTS TO THE FBI IF YOU WANT A CCW.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Stumpy on July 16, 2003, 02:28:26 pm
Wyoming's law (which is the subject of this thread) is really MUCH worse.
Oh.  What act would Wyoming's Law put you in prison for?


Michelle proved that the statute zxcv quoted didn’t apply to individuals.


We will assume that we are law-abiding citizens.


Which is worse:

In New Hampshire, someone selling a pistol much verify the identity of the person buying the gun.

In Wyoming, if you want to legally carry a weapon concealed, Wyoming will take your fingerprints and submit them to the FBI

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Karl on July 16, 2003, 02:42:26 pm
Section 159:14
    159:14 Exemption. &#8211; None of the provisions of this chapter shall prohibit an individual not licensed under the provisions thereof who is not engaged in the business of selling pistols or revolvers from selling a pistol or revolver to a person licensed under this chapter or to a person personally known to him.
Source. 1967, 220:9, eff. Aug. 21, 1967.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XII/159/159-14.htm

I think the confusion here is on exactly what the word "license" refers to.  Does it refer to a license to sell or a license to carry?
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: JonM on July 16, 2003, 02:47:23 pm
Section 159:14
    159:14 Exemption. &#8211; None of the provisions of this chapter shall prohibit an individual not licensed under the provisions thereof who is not engaged in the business of selling pistols or revolvers from selling a pistol or revolver to a person licensed under this chapter or to a person personally known to him.
Source. 1967, 220:9, eff. Aug. 21, 1967.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XII/159/159-14.htm

I think the confusion here is on exactly what the word "license" refers to.  Does it refer to a license to sell or a license to carry?

That's a good question, this chapter covers both the license to sell and the license to carry.  It might be worth someone calling up a police dept to ask if this means you can sell a handgun to someone you don't know, so long as they have a license to carry.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zack Bass on July 16, 2003, 02:58:02 pm

Michelle proved that the statute zxcv quoted didn’t apply to individuals.


Did not.

Quote

In New Hampshire, someone selling a pistol much verify the identity of the person buying the gun.


Or else go to prison for a Felony.

Quote

In Wyoming, if you want to legally carry a weapon concealed, Wyoming will take your fingerprints and submit them to the FBI


No contest.  I'd rather have someone send my prints somewhere than go to prison, or be Threatened with Prison if I consider doing something so innocuous as offer to sell my own gun on my own Home Page.
If I want to sell my own gun on my own Home Page in NH, without going to prison, I must try to obtain a License.  Do they take my prints when I do that?

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zack Bass on July 16, 2003, 03:09:30 pm


The first Part says it's a Felony to possess the handgun intending to sell it; or to offer to sell it - to ANYONE!

The Exemption is ANOTHER PART that says you may sell a handgun to someone you know personally, or to a licensed dealer.  But it does not <<NOT>> say that you can offer to sell it to someone you know, only that you can sell it!  The first part, Felony Conviction for Offering, still stands!

In any case, the "Exemption" still does not allow me to sell a handgun to my neighbor (whom I do not know personally), or to advertise it on my Home Page.  Even with the broadest interpretation of this poorly-worded Exemption, this is a far harsher Law than even Florida's or any of the other Free State candidates I have heard of.


Section 159:14
    159:14 Exemption. &#8211; None of the provisions of this chapter shall prohibit an individual not licensed under the provisions thereof who is not engaged in the business of selling pistols or revolvers from selling a pistol or revolver to a person licensed under this chapter or to a person personally known to him.
Source. 1967, 220:9, eff. Aug. 21, 1967.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XII/159/159-14.htm

Note how it says: "...under this chapter..."  This means that you may indeed sell a pistol or revolver to your neighbor, or anyone else that you know.


Of course.  The Exemption allows you to do that.  The Exemption deals with SELLING.
But the originally quoted part deals with OFFERING FOR SALE AND ADVERTISING.  The Exemption does not allow you to advertise your own gun for sale on your own Home Page.  Under the first part, you will go to prison for a Felony if you do that; and the exemption will not save you, since it does not anywhere say that there is any way you can ADVERTISE your gun for sale.  The fact that you sold it, or did not sell it, has nothing to do with the fact that the first part states clearly that you are guilty of a Felony when you ADVERTISE or OFFER in any other way to sell your gun.

Quote

  The point of this entire chapter is to make it illegal for licensed gun dealers to sell firearms to known felons.  That's it.


I was not aware that New Hampshire legislators were so stupid that they are unable to say it is illegal for licensed gun dealers to sell firearms to known felons when that is what they really mean.  They did not end up saying that, whatever their intention.

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Stumpy on July 16, 2003, 03:17:01 pm
Michelle proved that the statute zxcv quoted didn’t apply to individuals.
Did not.

Did too! Oh wait, let’s not be childish.

The gist of the New Hampshire law is: you must verify to whom you are selling a pistol.

The Wyoming law mandates fingerprinting concealed gun-carriers and delivering those fingerprints to the FBI.

The Wyoming law is ominous. They are cooperating with the fed/gov in amassing your personal info into a massive national database.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: JonM on July 16, 2003, 03:22:01 pm

Of course.  The Exemption allows you to do that.  The Exemption deals with SELLING.
But the originally quoted part deals with OFFERING FOR SALE AND ADVERTISING.  The Exemption does not allow you to advertise your own gun for sale on your own Home Page.  Under the first part, you will go to prison for a Felony if you do that; and the exemption will not save you, since it does not anywhere say that there is any way you can ADVERTISE your gun for sale.  The fact that you sold it, or did not sell it, has nothing to do with the fact that the first part states clearly that you are guilty of a Felony when you ADVERTISE or OFFER in any other way to sell your gun.

Quote

  The point of this entire chapter is to make it illegal for licensed gun dealers to sell firearms to known felons.  That's it.


I was not aware that New Hampshire legislators were so stupid that they are unable to say it is illegal for licensed gun dealers to sell firearms to known felons when that is what they really mean.  They did not end up saying that, whatever their intention.



http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/indexes/159.html (http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/indexes/159.html)

The entire chapter.  Read it.  Sections 3, 3a, 7 and 21 deal with selling to and possession by felons.

You can sell your handgun at a garage sale, flea market, or gun show, as pointed out by the anti-gun people when speaking of New Hampshire.  

Do you intend to sell your handgun on a web page?  Are you doing this now in Florida?  If you sold it via a web page, would you ship it to the buyer sight unseen?  What if the buyer lived out of state?

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zack Bass on July 16, 2003, 03:22:02 pm

Michelle proved that the statute zxcv quoted didn’t apply to individuals.
Did not.

Did too!


Did not.

Are saying that Michelle proved that the Statute does not make it a Felony for an Individual to sell a handgun to another Individual he does not know?
Are saying that Michelle proved that the Statute does not make it a Felony for an Individual to advertise his handgun for sale on his Home Page?

Is that what you are saying so snottily?

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Karl on July 16, 2003, 03:26:07 pm
I believe Zack is correct.  Either the purchaser or the seller must be a licensed dealer, or they must personally know one another.  Here it is from the Hollis, NH police department (see point 5):

http://www.hollis.nh.us/police/gunlaws.htm

But to reiterate Doug's points earlier -- 159:10 was last ammended in 1973, which certainly qualifies as the "old guard."  Without a doubt, NH's gun laws have improved considerablly in the last year.  Perhaps we can expect that trend to continue.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zack Bass on July 16, 2003, 03:27:43 pm

You can sell your handgun at a garage sale, flea market, or gun show, as pointed out by the anti-gun people when speaking of New Hampshire.  
Do you intend to sell your handgun on a web page?  Are you doing this now in Florida?  If you sold it via a web page, would you ship it to the buyer sight unseen?


You know darn well that I pointed out the important difference between selling and advertising.  We have no disagreement about what you may sell, do we?  So why keep bringing it up?
The point is, you may not advertise in NH.  I said nothing about selling a gun on my Home Page, only advertising it.  NH will convict me of a Felony for doing that, and imprison me.

If you want to advertise in NH, you must get a FEDERAl FIREARMS LICENSE.
http://BATF.com
And guess what, they send your prints to the FBI.     Duh.

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zack Bass on July 16, 2003, 03:32:10 pm
Either the purchaser or the seller must be a licensed dealer


And the only one who may advertise is the potential seller who is a licensed dealer.
And in order to be a Licensed Dealer, you must get a Federal license.  Which involves the BATF taking your prints.
So not only does NH imprison you for a Felony if you try to put your handgun on your Home Page, the only way to avoid prison is to have your fingerprints taken by the Feds ahead of time.
Compare to Wyoming.

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Stumpy on July 16, 2003, 03:34:04 pm
This is simply redirection to divert attention from Wyoming’s horrendous law, approved unanimously a few months ago by Wyoming’s House and Senate.

This law mandates the fingerprinting of concealed weapons carriers and Wyoming gives the fingerprints to the FBI.



If you hear a yelp when you throw a rock down a dark alley, you know you hit something.


Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Rearden on July 16, 2003, 03:38:57 pm


That's a good question, this chapter covers both the license to sell and the license to carry.  It might be worth someone calling up a police dept to ask if this means you can sell a handgun to someone you don't know, so long as they have a license to carry.

Judging from the following section, I think that 159:14 applies only to gun dealers.

159:8 License to Sell. – The selectmen of a town and the chief of police of a city may grant licenses, the form of which shall be prescribed by the director of the division of state police, effective for not more than 3 years from date of issue, permitting the licensee to sell at retail pistols and revolvers subject to the following conditions, for breach of any of which the licensee shall be subject to forfeiture:
    I. The business shall be carried on only in the building designated in the license or at any organized sporting show or arms collectors' meeting sponsored by a chartered club or organization.
    II. The license or a copy thereof, certified by the issuing authority, shall be displayed on the premises where it can easily be read.
    III. No pistol, revolver, or other firearm shall be delivered to a purchaser not personally known to the seller or who does not present clear evidence of his identity; nor to a person who has been convicted of a felony.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Michelle on July 16, 2003, 03:43:14 pm
I just called the NH state police (603-679-3333) who told me there are absolutely no NH laws or regulations to indicate that an individual may not advertise in the classifieds or in any other manner to sell a handgun in a private sale.

Sorry, Zack, but I think you need to find another way to divert attention from the original topic of this thread.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Tony Stelik on July 16, 2003, 03:49:42 pm
III. No pistol, revolver, or other firearm shall be delivered to a
purchaser not personally known to the seller or who does not present clear
evidence of his identity; nor to a person who has been convicted of a
felony.


It mean you have to check identity of the buyer. Do not sell to felon. Once you check identity it is personaly known person:)
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: tehlurk on July 16, 2003, 03:49:47 pm
meanwhile this debate keeps bumping the thread to the top

are you sure Zack isn't an agent for the other side?
Go NH!
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Rearden on July 16, 2003, 03:51:41 pm
From our friends in at the Brady Campaign to End Freedom:

http://www.nhceasefire.org/education/faqa.html

A private seller is someone who is not a licensed dealer, and who therefore is not subject to the basic requirements of the federal gun law. Private sellers do not have to run background checks on buyers, report the theft of guns, or assist with gun-tracing requests. Their only obligation under federal law is not to provide handguns to people aged under 18. Around 40% of all handgun transactions involve these non-licensed dealers. To regulate these transactions, some states have passed laws requiring background checks by all gun sales. (New Hampshire has not regulated these dealers)

....

If a criminal tries to buy a new firearm in a gun store, s/he will have to go through a background check that would notify the gun store that the person is a criminal. This would prevent the criminal from getting a firearm. However, that same criminal can go to a gun show in NH and go to an unlicensed dealer and buy a gun without a background check. Also, a criminal could buy a gun in a flea market, garage sale or through a newspaper ad without going through a background check.



So, Zack, this all reinforces the fact that you are making a big deal out of nothing.    You can advertise your firearm on your home page, or in the paper, or with a big sign on the front of your house.  

Back to the real point of this thread:

For you to get a CCW in WY you have to turn over your fingerprints to the FBI.  Big Ouch.  Bad.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: JonM on July 16, 2003, 04:19:07 pm
I just called the NH state police (603-679-3333) who told me there are absolutely no NH laws or regulations to indicate that an individual may not advertise in the classifieds or in any other manner to sell a handgun in a private sale.

Sorry, Zack, but I think you need to find another way to divert attention from the original topic of this thread.

Well really, it would probably be better to call the state Attorney General and ask about title XII, Chapter 159, section 10.  Sadly, they're only open till 5 so this must wait until tomorrow.

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: pghpat26 on July 16, 2003, 04:23:38 pm
[For you to get a CCW in WY you have to turn over your fingerprints to the FBI.  Big Ouch.  Bad.
Quote

First time I heard of this. If this is true, WY would go down several spots. Very big mark against.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: EMOR on July 16, 2003, 04:28:03 pm
Well in Wyoming you don't have to conceal it at all right? That would be better IMO.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Stumpy on July 16, 2003, 04:36:19 pm
[For you to get a CCW in WY you have to turn over your fingerprints to the FBI.  Big Ouch.  Bad.
Quote

First time I heard of this. If this is true, WY would go down several spots. Very big mark against.

Check it out.

To view the law, go to http://legisweb.state.wy.us/2003/enroll/hb0308.pdf

The part about submitting fingerprints to the FBI is highlighted in red.




Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zxcv on July 16, 2003, 04:59:57 pm
Quote
Note how it says: "...under this chapter..."  This means that you may indeed sell a pistol or revolver to your neighbor, or anyone else that you know.  The point of this entire chapter is to make it illegal for licensed gun dealers to sell firearms to known felons.  That's it.  This doesn't affect regular folks at all.

Come on, Keith, are we now assuming anyone other than people you know, are felons?  ::)  That's an assumption I'd expect to hear from the gun-grabbing crowd.

This law makes it a felony to sell to over 99% of the people in New Hampshire (presumably you don't know more than 1% of the population, which would be 12750 people). If you offer your gun on a web site, you are a FELON in New Hampshire. If you hang a 3x5 card on the bulletin board offering your antique cap and ball revolver for sale, you are a FELON. Hell, if you just think about selling to someone you don't know, you are a FELON. (Of course, that would be a little hard to prove...  ;) )

On the other hand, what does this Wyoming background check mean? Folks, if you haven't ended up on some federal database somewhere by the time you reach 30, then you haven't lived a life. Anyway, do you think the FBI won't have access to the fact you carry, if they want to know? They just have to ask the state police, who will tell all.

Quote
Michelle proved that the statute zxcv quoted didn’t apply to individuals.

Bosh!

Zack, your distinction between selling and advertising is not needed. All that matters is if you offer it to someone you don't know.

Quote
I just called the NH state police (603-679-3333) who told me there are absolutely no NH laws or regulations to indicate that an individual may not advertise in the classifieds or in any other manner to sell a handgun in a private sale.

Well, Michelle, did you cite the law to them?

I don't know what else we can do than cite the laws now on the books of New Hampshire. If you want to say, "black is white", then you may do so. But the lurkers who read this thread can simply read the language of the law and decide for themselves. It is not complicated.

Even if it is now generally being interpreted as that anyone you sell it to is someone you know personally (provided they show you a driver's license or some other phoney ID  ;) ), that will not protect you if you get hauled into the court of some gun-hating judge, of whom there are many.

Quote
This is simply redirection to divert attention from Wyoming’s horrendous law, approved unanimously a few months ago by Wyoming’s House and Senate.

Doug, what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. You started this latest F.U.D.* campaign, now you're complaining when it comes back on you? Gee, that's tough.

Here's the reality, folks. Every state has its warts. Stuff like this will be easily fixed if we go to the state in question, except for those states that do not have much of a gun culture (e.g. Delaware). About the only reasonable use for information like the laws we've just dug up in NH and WY, is as one of the many indicators of freedom culture in the state. Beyond that, it's small potatoes.

* F.U.D.: spreading Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. Marketing tactic used by the salesmen of one company to tear down the products of their competitors. Usually baseless claims or minor problems easily fixed or even already fixed.

<late breaking flash>
I got my response back from the author of the bill (pretty quickly too), which explains a lot:
Quote
thanks for the email.  I sponsored the bill at the request of the Attorney General's Office.  Several years ago Wyoming passed a law allowing concealed weapons permits.  As I recall the process, the permits are obtained through the Sheriff's office and when you applied  the Sheriff's office finger printed you and then sent the prints on to the Department of Criminal Investigations.  If I remember correctly one finger print card was retained by DCI and the other sent to the FBI for a criminal back ground check.  Last year the FBI determined that the Wyoming concealed weapon law did not authorize them to conduct such checks and they notified Wyoming that they were going to cease doing the checks. (oddly enough, this is an opposite position the FBI took approximately five years ago).  Thus without specific authority in Wyoming law for the FBI to do the checks, it was possible that Wyoming permits would no longer be recognized by other states through reciprocity.  Thus the attorney general's office recommended that the law be changed to reflect the practice that has been occurring since the passage of the concealed weapon permit law.  So while I am not wild about the FBI having our finger print cards, this had been the practice and I felt it was important to keep the integrity of our current permits.  I hope this answers your concern and again, thank you for taking the time to contact me.
Randall


So as you can see, this is truly much ado about nothing; just straightening out an administrative detail, and preserving reciprocity with other states. We will just need to do what AK did, add another non-licensed carry provision on top of it.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: JonM on July 16, 2003, 05:18:44 pm
This law makes it a felony to sell to over 99% of the people in New Hampshire (presumably you don't know more than 1% of the population, which would be 12750 people). If you offer your gun on a web site, you are a FELON in New Hampshire. If you hang a 3x5 card on the bulletin board offering your antique cap and ball revolver for sale, you are a FELON. Hell, if you just think about selling to someone you don't know, you are a FELON. (Of course, that would be a little hard to prove...  ;) )


Not quite.  You can sell your cap and ball revolver to anyone who collects guns or old things. <G>

159:1 Definition. – Pistol or revolver, as used herein, means any firearm with barrel less than 16 inches in length. It does not include antique pistols, gun canes, or revolvers. An antique pistol, gun cane, or revolver, for the purposes of this chapter, means any pistol, gun cane, or revolver utilizing an early type of ignition, including, but not limited to, flintlocks, wheel locks, matchlocks, percussions and pin-fire, but no pistol, gun cane, or revolver which utilizes readily available center fire or rim-fire cartridges which are in common, current use shall be deemed to be an antique pistol, gun cane, or revolver. Nothing in this section shall prevent antique pistols, gun canes, or revolvers from being owned or transferred by museums, antique or arms collectors, or licensed gun dealers at auctions, gun shows, or private premises provided such ownership or transfer does not conflict with federal statutes.

I will call the Attorney General of NH tomorrow and ask about this chapter, and statistics on how many people have been prosecuted for advertising gun sales over say, the last 30 years.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Rearden on July 16, 2003, 06:01:02 pm


Come on, Keith, are we now assuming anyone other than people you know, are felons?  ::)  That's an assumption I'd expect to hear from the gun-grabbing crowd.

This law makes it a felony to sell to over 99% of the people in New Hampshire (presumably you don't know more than 1% of the population, which would be 12750 people). If you offer your gun on a web site, you are a FELON in New Hampshire. If you hang a 3x5 card on the bulletin board offering your antique cap and ball revolver for sale, you are a FELON. Hell, if you just think about selling to someone you don't know, you are a FELON. (Of course, that would be a little hard to prove...  ;) )

Paul, you obviously do not understand the law.  Everything you wrote is untrue.  Please change it or remove your post, as it couldn't be more inaccurate.

159:8 does not apply to private sales.  It only applies to licensed gun sellers.  You can sell your weapon on a bulletin board, or on a web site, or at a gun show, or at a yard sale, and you will not be considered a felon!.

From : http://www.firearmslawcenter.org/content/newhampshire.asp#SecondaryPrivateSales

Private firearms transfers (i.e., transfers by non-firearms dealers) are not subject to a background check requirement in New Hampshire (although federal and state purchaser prohibitions still apply; see New Hampshire Background Checks section).

N.H. Rev. Stat. § 159:7 states that “[n]o person shall sell, deliver, or otherwise transfer a pistol, revolver or any other firearm, to a person who has been convicted, in any jurisdiction, of a felony.  Whoever violates the                   provisions of this section shall be guilty of a class B felony.” 

New Hampshire does not license firearms dealers, but it authorizes towns and cities to do so regarding the retail sale of handguns.  N.H. Rev. Stat. § 159:8 reads:

The selectmen of a town and the chief of police of a city may grant licenses, the form of which shall be prescribed by the director of the division of state police, effective for not more than 3 years from date of issue, permitting the licensee to sell at retail pistols and revolvers subject to the following conditions, for breach of any of which the licensee shall be subject to forfeiture:

I.  The business shall be carried on only in the building designated in the license or at any organized sporting show or arms collectors' meeting sponsored by a chartered club or organization.
 

II.  The license or a copy thereof, certified by the issuing authority, shall be displayed on the premises where it can easily be read.


III.  No pistol, revolver, or other firearm shall be delivered to a purchaser not personally known to the seller or who does not present clear evidence of his identity; nor to a person who has been convicted of a felony.

Section 159:8-a states that no person holding such a license shall sell a handgun to a nonresident unless:

The nonresident has authority under the laws of their state of residence to purchase a handgun; or

The director of the division of state police, “for good cause shown,” has issued a permit for the purchase of a handgun to the nonresident.

So, to recap:

1.) The NH law does not apply, in the least, in any way, to private party sales.  No effect whatsoever.  It only applies to (some) gun dealers.

2.) It isn't even a statewide law!  It only gives towns the ability to license gun dealers.  

3.) You can sell your weapons to anybody you wish without being called a felon.  Even on a 3 x 5 card.

Unless you really believe that these people are felons the police are just too busy (with the nation's lowest crime rate!) to chase down:

Sporting Goods - MOOSE GUN: RAM STAINLESS 300 ultra mag, $550; Ram 700 muzzle loader 50 cal. $225; Ruger, mini 14 ranch, 223, $375; Ram 7400 30-06 carbine, $395; Ram 22 Viper $125. 603-448-4130


Location: NH Date: 7/16/2003
Source: Union Leader

Sporting Goods - MOSSBERG 500A pump action shot gun, 12 gauge, $250. 424-8358


Location: NH Date: 7/13/2003
Source: Union Leader

Back to the real point of this thread, which some people obviously would do anything to avoid:

So the sponsor of the WY bill justified it by saying that WY has been sending people's fingerprints to the FBI for quite some time?  That's his reasoning?  Or is it that he wants to allow other states to dictate WY's policies, and he was afraid they wouldn't accept WY's CCW if they didn't play ball with the FBI?  

NH has made it quite clear, with its refusal to enact a seatbelt law or require fingerprints, that it is a soveriegn state and will not allow other states or the feds to dictate state law.  The NH Constitution even contains the assertion that it is a sovereign state, now and forever, while the WY Constitution promises eternal allegiance to the federal government.

You can blow this off if you want to, but I want to carry concealed in the free state, and I don't know if the FBI has my prints yet, and I don't like the idea of having to choose between carrying and maintaining a degree of obscurity.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Stumpy on July 16, 2003, 06:30:15 pm
So as you can see, this is truly much ado about nothing; just straightening out an administrative detail

If you think this is much ado about nothing, then we will have to agree to disagree.

The Wyoming House voted unanimously to force citizens who want to carry a concealed weapon to submit fingerprints, which are forwarded to the FBI. Nobody voted against this.

The Wyoming Senate voted unanimously to force citizens who want to carry a concealed weapon to submit fingerprints, which are forwarded to the FBI. Nobody voted against this

This was done a little over 4 months ago.


Should we believe these legislators would work with us or against us? ???
   

The evidence is clear that many New Hampshire legislators will work with us. New Hampshire seems to be a better choice for the FSP. ;)


Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: MajesticLeo on July 16, 2003, 07:40:32 pm
I still don't see why this is such a big deal.  I certainly don't have any objection to the FBI having my fingerprints (they have several copies by now anyway) and it is certainly preferable for them to have to do a background check for a CCW than to be required to beg the local sheriff for permission to buy a handgun (and you must state explicitly what handgun you wish to buy complete with serial number here in Missouri).

I would rather have reciprocity with other states than not.  Why you people think the FBI doesn't know who you are or can't find out if you have CCW or drive a Ford or whatever anytime they want is a complete mystery to me.  

Of course this doesn't apply to anyone who has been a hermet for the past 30 years, never had a driver's license, birth certificate, social security number, never did military service, never had a traffic ticket, never had a credit card, never opened a bank account or bought a house, or has never used a computer on line.  ::)
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: JonM on July 16, 2003, 07:54:46 pm
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=rationalization (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=rationalization)
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Sebastian on July 16, 2003, 08:24:51 pm
Quote
just straightening out an administrative detail, and preserving reciprocity with other states
I'm sorry, but I would've greatly prefered a different course of action. The Wyoming legislature should've jumped on the opportunity to change things for the better after the FBI informed them about the situation. I understand their argument, but doubt that they couldn't have preserved that reciprocity with other states in other ways.

Or was this just a temporary solution, while they search for a better one?
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Stumpy on July 16, 2003, 10:10:19 pm
Quote
thanks for the email.  I sponsored the bill at the request of the Attorney General's Office.  Several years ago Wyoming passed a law allowing concealed weapons permits.  As I recall the process, the permits are obtained through the Sheriff's office and when you applied  the Sheriff's office finger printed you and then sent the prints on to the Department of Criminal Investigations.  If I remember correctly one finger print card was retained by DCI and the other sent to the FBI for a criminal back ground check.  Last year the FBI determined that the Wyoming concealed weapon law did not authorize them to conduct such checks and they notified Wyoming that they were going to cease doing the checks. (oddly enough, this is an opposite position the FBI took approximately five years ago).  Thus without specific authority in Wyoming law for the FBI to do the checks, it was possible that Wyoming permits would no longer be recognized by other states through reciprocity.  Thus the attorney general's office recommended that the law be changed to reflect the practice that has been occurring since the passage of the concealed weapon permit law.  So while I am not wild about the FBI having our finger print cards, this had been the practice and I felt it was important to keep the integrity of our current permits.  I hope this answers your concern and again, thank you for taking the time to contact me.
Randall

I know it’s speculation, but what would have happened in the New Hampshire Legislature?

Would New Hampshire have cooperated with the FBI?

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Robert H. on July 16, 2003, 10:15:58 pm
This heinous law is proof that Wyoming does not have a "citizen legislature" by any stretch of the imagination.  :(

The New Hampshire legislature has never enacted anything you've disagreed with?  What about their recent attempt to defeat Benson's "kitchen table" budget while crying about "harming" people?  What about the effort of NH Senate Republicans to conduct meetings in secret?  What about NH's homeschooling laws?

The concept of a citizen legislature goes beyond individual acts of legislation.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zxcv on July 16, 2003, 10:47:12 pm
Quote
159:8 does not apply to private sales.  It only applies to licensed gun sellers.  You can sell your weapon on a bulletin board, or on a web site, or at a gun show, or at a yard sale, and you will not be considered a felon!.

Keith, I don't have a problem with 159.8. I have a problem with 159.10! I only posted 159.8 because 159.10 mentioned licenses, and 159.8 is the section that deals with licensing. It's clear 159.8 is for dealers. I am not concerned with them. I'm concerned about the poor schmuck who puts an ad for a S&W model 10 in the local newsletter.

Most of your post was arguing a point, about 159.8, that I hadn't made, so I won't respond to it.

Quote
Sporting Goods - MOOSE GUN: RAM STAINLESS 300 ultra mag, $550; Ram 700 muzzle loader 50 cal. $225; Ruger, mini 14 ranch, 223, $375; Ram 7400 30-06 carbine, $395; Ram 22 Viper $125. 603-448-4130
These are all long guns. 159.10 makes a felon out of private individuals who advertise pistols and revolvers.

Quote
So the sponsor of the WY bill justified it by saying that WY has been sending people's fingerprints to the FBI for quite some time?  That's his reasoning?  Or is it that he wants to allow other states to dictate WY's policies, and he was afraid they wouldn't accept WY's CCW if they didn't play ball with the FBI?

Well, characterize it the way you want to, but it's clear the point of the bill was to continue things the way they were from the beginning (that's why the vote was unanimous - the bill was just a clarification of existing practice). Wyoming, like almost every other state with a CCW, does an FBI background check on applicants. If you are damning Wyoming for that, you are damning almost every other CCW state.

Is the current NH CCW law the way it was from the beginning? Or did it change recently? I believe most states require that background check to provide reciprocity. Is NH now going to lose reciprocity with other states that require this?

Quote
You can blow this off if you want to, but I want to carry concealed in the free state, and I don't know if the FBI has my prints yet, and I don't like the idea of having to choose between carrying and maintaining a degree of obscurity.

Well, you're not obscure to the state cops!  That's only the case in Alaska and Vermont.

Quote
The Wyoming Senate voted unanimously to force citizens who want to carry a concealed weapon to submit fingerprints, which are forwarded to the FBI. Nobody voted against this

This was done a little over 4 months ago.

Well, Doug, they voted unanimously to keep doing what the state had been doing since the time they started their CCW law. And the way almost all other CCW states do it as well. But I agree, putting it the way you have, sounds more exciting.   :D
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Michelle on July 16, 2003, 11:03:54 pm
Many of the debates that we have on these boards are somewhat entertaining and humorous, but I mean this in all seriousness:

The Wyoming House and Senate voted UNANIMOUSLY to help build the FBI database by requiring and sending fingerprints for any person who wants to carry a concealed weapon. The fact that they have been doing it all along makes it even worse. If such a disgusting law had been recently passed in New Hampshire, no matter how much I would like NH to win, I would have to realize that the success of the FSP is much more important and I would have to seriously rethink my support for the state.

Why? Because the politicians who voted such a law in are the politicians that we will be up against and they are clearly no friend of the FSP! I can't help but think that there is a serious likelihood that they would be unanimous in their efforts to ensure we would never even gain a foothold in Wyoming.

I find the fact that there are FSP members willing to rationalize it and brush this off shocking.

Again, compare this to the bill that was passed in New Hampshire (clarifying what was already implicit in the law) just a few weeks ago:

HB 766

II. No photograph or fingerprint shall be required or used as a basis
to grant, deny, or renew a license to carry for a resident or
nonresident, unless requested by the applicant.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zack Bass on July 16, 2003, 11:25:01 pm

If you offer your gun on a web site, you are a FELON in New Hampshire.


That is absolutely clear.  There is no question about it.
Why then do we get this Crap from Michelle and the NH State Police:

"I just called the NH state police (603-679-3333) who told me there are absolutely no NH laws or regulations to indicate that an individual may not advertise in the classifieds or in any other manner to sell a handgun in a private sale."

This is scary, the State Police tell you you may do this, then they can nevertheless convict you of a Felony and thrust you into prison.  NH is the strangest damn place.  They write these Laws in the most peculiar way, and then they lie about the one part that is crystal clear.

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Karl on July 16, 2003, 11:27:56 pm
An observation:

Rep. Luthi (author of the WY/HB 0308) justifies the bill by stating:

"Thus without specific authority in Wyoming law for the FBI to do the checks, it was possible that Wyoming permits would no longer be recognized by other states through reciprocity.  Thus the attorney general's office recommended that the law be changed to reflect the practice that has been occurring since the passage of the concealed weapon permit law.  So while I am not wild about the FBI having our finger print cards, this had been the practice and I felt it was important to keep the integrity of our current permits."

If reciprocity was the main concern, why didn't they solve the problem like New Hampshire did in HB 766 by making fingerprints voluntary?:

II. No photograph or fingerprint shall be required or used as a basis
to grant, deny, or renew a license to carry for a resident or
nonresident, unless requested by the applicant.


Could it be that they just didn't think of that solution?  If the bill was rushed at the end of the session, as has been suggested, I suppose that's possible, since it apparently didn't change the status quo.

Perhaps Rep. Luthi should be made aware of this solution.  Zxcv, maybe you can ask him?  I'd be curious to find out what he thinks.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zack Bass on July 16, 2003, 11:29:01 pm
Quote
159:10 Sale Without License. – Any person who, without being licensed as herein provided, sells, advertises or exposes for sale, or has in his possession with intent to sell, pistols or revolvers shall be guilty of a class B felony if a natural person, or guilty of a felony if any other person.


Can't get any clearer than that.
And there is no Exemption to this prohibition against ADVERTISING.

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Rearden on July 16, 2003, 11:40:29 pm

And there is no Exemption to this prohibition against ADVERTISING.



Just wait until we get the word from the A.G.  

I think the exemption applies, but we'll get it from the horse's mouth.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zxcv on July 17, 2003, 12:10:16 am
I found this via www.packing.org. It is part of the Montana DOJ website:
http://www.doj.state.mt.us/enforcement/concealedweapons.asp

Quote
Non-Residents
Montana recognizes concealed weapons permits from some other states. Non-residents must meet the following criteria to carry a concealed weapon in Montana:

The state that issued their permit must require a criminal records background check before issuing a permit.
The permit must be in the holder's possession.
The permit holder must have photo identification.
The Attorney General's Office has determined that concealed weapons permits from the following states are recognized under Montana law:

Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky Louisiana
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Nevada
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wyoming

People who hold permits from the following states may not carry concealed weapons in Montana because their state laws do not expressly require background checks of permit applicants: Alabama, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, New Hampshire and Rhode Island.

The following states do not issue concealed weapons permits: Illinois, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, Wisconsin, Vermont and the District of Columbia.

It's clear, Michelle, that what you have characterized as "disgusting", "horrible", etc. on Wyoming's CCW methods are in fact well within the norm (see that lengthy list of states in the quote).

It's also clear that NH residents pay for not having a background check, in terms of reciprocity.

What's even more clear, is that flaws in both NH's and WY's firearms laws can be cleaned up if FSP goes to one or the other of those states, so this whole friggin' thread is irrelevant.

Quote
If such a disgusting law had been recently passed in New Hampshire, no matter how much I would like NH to win, I would have to realize that the success of the FSP is much more important and I would have to seriously rethink my support for the state.

Oh, please.  ::)
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: shere on July 17, 2003, 12:16:58 am
Bravo Zxcv.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Rearden on July 17, 2003, 12:33:09 am
If my choices are:

1.) Having to submit my fingerprints to the FBI in order to obtain a CCW, or

2.) Not being able to carry concealed in a neighboring state that has given into statism,

I'll take the second option, hands down.  NH has done that, whereas most states have not.

Paul, your excuse for WY seems to be that most states have given in to the FBI as well.  As true as that may be, that doesn't excuse the fact that the legislature caved in on this one.  

Does WY always allow other states to dictate policy regarding basic freedoms of citizens?  

Geez, Maryland doesn't recognize WY's permit.  Maybe WY should ask Maryland what it would take to do that, and pass whatever laws the Maryland A.G. says will do the trick.  

I'm sorry to see that MT does not hold the right to carry in as high regard as do the people of NH.  I mean, MT has basically said that they will not accept NH's permits because NH (gasp) allows the gun trade to go by comparatively unregulated.  

Admit it.  WY screwed up, and NH is much better on gun freedoms than both WY and MT.  Be objective, and look at the facts and admit it.  
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: rhull on July 17, 2003, 12:34:23 am
Quote
159:10 Sale Without License. – Any person who, without being licensed as herein provided, sells, advertises or exposes for sale, or has in his possession with intent to sell, pistols or revolvers shall be guilty of a class B felony if a natural person, or guilty of a felony if any other person.


Can't get any clearer than that.
And there is no Exemption to this prohibition against ADVERTISING.




Actually its a prohibition against advertising without a license *if* you are in the business of selling guns.

159:10 Sale Without License. – Any person who, without being licensed as herein provided, sells, advertises or exposes for sale, or has in his possession with intent to sell, pistols or revolvers shall be guilty of a class B felony if a natural person, or guilty of a felony if any other person.

"herein provided" is the key phrase. Somewhere a license is provided for, section 159:8.

159:8 License to Sell. – The selectmen of a town and the chief of police of a city may grant licenses, the form of which shall be prescribed by the director of the division of state police, effective for not more than 3 years from date of issue, permitting the licensee to sell at retail pistols and revolvers subject to the following conditions, for breach of any of which the licensee shall be subject to forfeiture:
    I. The business shall be carried on only in the building designated in the license or at any organized sporting show or arms collectors' meeting sponsored by a chartered club or organization.
    II. The license or a copy thereof, certified by the issuing authority, shall be displayed on the premises where it can easily be read.
    III. No pistol, revolver, or other firearm shall be delivered to a purchaser not personally known to the seller or who does not present clear evidence of his identity; nor to a person who has been convicted of a felony.

The key phrase here is: "sell at retail ". Which is someone engaged in the business of selling pistols and revolvers, not casual private sales.

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zack Bass on July 17, 2003, 12:57:18 am

Just wait until we get the word from the A.G.  
I think the exemption applies, but we'll get it from the horse's mouth.


So, just as in the Concord "Lord's Day" Law, one who can read the Law for himself is at a disadvantage in New Hampshire.  They write the Law one way and then interpret it any way they please.

The Exemption clearly states that it applies only to selling a pistol/revolver.  We have to wait for the horse's mouth to find out how it will be applied, but we know already that that is the way the legislators wrote it.  There is no question about that.  Plain English.

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zack Bass on July 17, 2003, 01:04:20 am

Actually its a prohibition against advertising without a license *if* you are in the business of selling guns.
  ....
permitting the licensee to sell at retail pistols and revolvers
  ....

The key phrase here is: "sell at retail ". Which is someone engaged in the business of selling pistols and revolvers, not casual private sales.


Clearly the License applies to selling at retail.  And equally clearly the ADVERTISING mentioned in the first part applies to any Individual WITHOUT A LICENSE who advertises such a gun, just as the requirement to know the person you sell it to applies to Individuals.

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Mr. Osiris on July 17, 2003, 01:44:13 am
This is bad news.  We could change this the first year we moved to WY, ND, or ID, though so it is not that big a deal.
Repealing New Hampshire's offending law should be easier than Wyoming's. After all when we first arrive many members of the uber-majority that passed the Wyoming law may still be in power and will have to be contended with.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: rhull on July 17, 2003, 03:14:48 am

Actually its a prohibition against advertising without a license *if* you are in the business of selling guns.
  ....
permitting the licensee to sell at retail pistols and revolvers
  ....

The key phrase here is: "sell at retail ". Which is someone engaged in the business of selling pistols and revolvers, not casual private sales.


Clearly the License applies to selling at retail.  And equally clearly the ADVERTISING mentioned in the first part applies to any Individual WITHOUT A LICENSE who advertises such a gun, just as the requirement to know the person you sell it to applies to Individuals.



Yes, provided that individual is required to have a license.

159:8 & 159:10 do not require an individual or a business to obtain a license. 159:8 gives the municipality the authority to require licenses within their jurisdiction: "The selectmen of a town and the chief of police of a city may grant licenses"

If the municipality doesn't require one, then one is not needed, since there is no state issued license. The only way someone could be in violation of 159:10 is if somone is selling or advertising guns at retail within a municipality that requires a license and that someone doesn't have a license.

This does not apply to private casual sales.

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Stumpy on July 17, 2003, 06:40:21 am
I found this via www.packing.org. It is part of the Montana DOJ website:
http://www.doj.state.mt.us/enforcement/concealedweapons.asp

Quote
Non-Residents
Montana recognizes concealed weapons permits from some other states. Non-residents must meet the following criteria to carry a concealed weapon in Montana:

The state that issued their permit must require a criminal records background check before issuing a permit.
The permit must be in the holder's possession.
The permit holder must have photo identification.
The Attorney General's Office has determined that concealed weapons permits from the following states are recognized under Montana law:

Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky Louisiana
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Nevada
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wyoming

People who hold permits from the following states may not carry concealed weapons in Montana because their state laws do not expressly require background checks of permit applicants: Alabama, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, New Hampshire and Rhode Island.



The following states do not issue concealed weapons permits: Illinois, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, Wisconsin, Vermont and the District of Columbia.

It's clear, Michelle, that what you have characterized as "disgusting", "horrible", etc. on Wyoming's CCW methods are in fact well within the norm (see that lengthy list of states in the quote).

It's also clear that NH residents pay for not having a background check, in terms of reciprocity.

I notice Vermont isn’t listed as having reciprocity with Montana. Until Alaska recently changed its law (your list is probably outdated because it contains Alaska), Vermont had THE best concealed-carry law. No need for a permit, just carry concealed if you like. Problem is, there is no reciprocity.

So, the better a state’s concealed-carry law is, the more limits it has on reciprocity. Which is better; more freedom and less reciprocity or more reciprocity if it means you have to be fingerprinted and those fingerprints are submitted to the FBI?

I live in one of the states listed as not having reciprocity with Montana. When we get a CCW permit, we fill out a single form, a deputy sheriff does a cursory check, then issues the permit. That’s it. I’ll take that system (the same system as New Hampshire) with limits on reciprocity, over my state collecting my fingerprints and sending them to the FBI.

Wyoming’s law requiring its CCW permit holders to be fingerprinted and requiring that those fingerprints be submitted to the FBI is bad enough. Far worse is the fact that both Wyoming’s House and Senate approved it just a few months ago UNANIMOUSLY.

Will these ‘stalwart defenders of freedom” in the Wyoming Legislature work with the Free State Project or will they close ranks and block our every move.

I believe the latter.

I’ll vote for New Hampshire where we will not be fingerprinted and our fingerprints will not be sent to the FBI. We’ve been expressly welcomed (the Governor, Legislators and others) and New Hampshire has my vote. ;)


Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Michelle on July 17, 2003, 07:18:21 am
It's also clear that NH residents pay for not having a background check, in terms of reciprocity.

So be it. I'd choose to retain my privacy and liberty through NH's method any day.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: JasonPSorens on July 17, 2003, 07:40:14 am
I notice Vermont isn?t listed as having reciprocity with Montana. Until Alaska recently changed its law (your list is probably outdated because it contains Alaska), Vermont had THE best concealed-carry law. No need for a permit, just carry concealed if you like. Problem is, there is no reciprocity.

So, the better a state?s concealed-carry law is, the more limits it has on reciprocity.

Well, actually, what's so neat about AK is that they have a program for getting a CCW license if you want one that has reciprocity with other states.  So it's up to the option of the individual.

Quote
Which is better; more freedom and less reciprocity or more reciprocity if it means you have to be fingerprinted and those fingerprints are submitted to the FBI?

I can't answer that one.  But clearly the best of all worlds would be to give people a choice, as AK has done.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Karl on July 17, 2003, 09:29:42 am
I repeat:

If reciprocity was the main concern, why didn't they solve the problem like New Hampshire did in HB 766 by making fingerprints voluntary?

The Montana web site reads:

"People who hold permits from the following states may not carry concealed weapons in Montana because their state laws do not expressly require background checks of permit applicants: Alabama, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, New Hampshire and Rhode Island."

The key word is "may."  Will they recognize NH permits if fingerprints were submitted VOLUNTARILY by the New Hampshire applicant?  I suspect so.

NH residents get reciprocity AND privacy.  WY residents get only reciprocity.

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Karl on July 17, 2003, 09:33:00 am
Quote
Which is better; more freedom and less reciprocity or more reciprocity if it means you have to be fingerprinted and those fingerprints are submitted to the FBI?

I can't answer that one.  But clearly the best of all worlds would be to give people a choice, as AK has done.

I believe NH gives a choice as well, per HB 766:

II. No photograph or fingerprint shall be required or used as a basis
to grant, deny, or renew a license to carry for a resident or
nonresident, unless requested by the applicant.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Sebastian on July 17, 2003, 09:39:51 am
Quote
Well, actually, what's so neat about AK is that they have a program for getting a CCW license if you want one that has reciprocity with other states.  So it's up to the option of the individual.
Why didn't Wyoming choose for such a program? Seems like they missed a golden opportunity here.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Stumpy on July 17, 2003, 02:11:37 pm
Quote
Well, actually, what's so neat about AK is that they have a program for getting a CCW license if you want one that has reciprocity with other states.  So it's up to the option of the individual.
Why didn't Wyoming choose for such a program? Seems like they missed a golden opportunity here.

Yes they did. Rather than adopt the New Hampshire model of protecting the freedom of its citizens, Wyoming’s Hose and Senate both voted unanimously to cooperate with the federal government in mandating that CCW permit holders be fingerprinted and requiring that those fingerprints be submitted to the FBI

Shame on you Wyoming.

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Sebastian on July 17, 2003, 02:27:53 pm
Quote
Shame on you Wyoming.
Well, not if this is only a temporary solution. Are there any plans in the works to set up a system more like Alaska's? Or are legislators satisfied with the current system?
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Stumpy on July 17, 2003, 03:24:28 pm
Quote
Shame on you Wyoming.
Well, not if this is only a temporary solution. Are there any plans in the works to set up a system more like Alaska's? Or are legislators satisfied with the current system?

There are no pending bills to make Wyoming’s CCW law like Alaska’s or as good as New Hampshire’s CCW law.

New Hampshire wins again. ;)
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zxcv on July 17, 2003, 04:17:33 pm
Thanks, rhull, for posting exactly the laws I did to prove NH has a big problem. For those of you who have problems with the english language, I'll break it down for you.

159:10 Sale Without License. – Any person
Any means any. All people in the state of NH qualify...
who, without being licensed
here we've narrowed it down to people who (pay attention Keith) don't sell guns for a living - that is, still over 99% of NH's population...
as herein provided,
that's section 159:8, which sets out requirements for folks in the gun-selling business. BTW it looks like the selectmen all on their own can decide whether or not they want a gun shop in their town, another big hit against NH...
sells,
we all know what "sells" means, right, gang?
advertises or exposes for sale,
still not too murky - still with us, everybody?
or has in his possession with intent to sell,
if you've got it and you plan to sell it (wow, the NH cops must be powerful if they can divine that)
pistols or revolvers
that means, a mere two handguns, is all they need to put you away. Perhaps the legal world even includes one revolver when they mention "revolvers", I wouldn't be surprised. Not long guns, Keith. Notice there is nothing here about anyone being in the gun-selling business without a license.
shall be guilty of a class B felony
yes, you're a big-time criminal. The rest of it I will dispense with since we are not arguing about it.

Except for a few challenged individuals, I believe most readers here can figure out this verbiage.

Stumpy, that list is still current, because Alaska did it the right way - they left the old procedure in place for folks who travel and need the reciprocity (which would satisfy Montana), while internally going Vermont carry. I can't imagine how to do it any better than that.

Quote
Which is better; more freedom and less reciprocity or more reciprocity if it means you have to be fingerprinted and those fingerprints are submitted to the FBI?

False dilemma, tsk tsk. As Alaska showed, you can have both.

Quote
The key word is "may."  Will they recognize NH permits if fingerprints were submitted VOLUNTARILY by the New Hampshire applicant?  I suspect so.

NH residents get reciprocity AND privacy.  WY residents get only reciprocity.
Oh, Karl, the key words are "may not". Are you having trouble with the English language too?  ::)

NH residents have no privacy. The state cops know about them. And all the FBI has to do is ask them.

Vermont and Alaska residents have privacy, and they are the only ones.

BTW, it's not the fingerprinting per se that gives reciprocity, it is the background check. There is no provision in NH law for that so you have no reciprocity.

Quote
Will these ‘stalwart defenders of freedom” in the Wyoming Legislature work with the Free State Project or will they close ranks and block our every move.

I believe the latter.

God, you guys are so full of it. You sound like the editor of your ordinary big-city propaganda rag - er, I mean newspaper. So much huff and bluster and righteous indignation.

Never mind actually trying to get the real answer. For those who have some genuine curiosity, here's what the author of that bill said when I asked him (and he got back to me within a day, too).

Quote
thanks for the additional information.  I think the chances for a "Vermont carry" bill are good and I would be glad to work with you on that possibility.  I agree the list is too long, Representative Hinckley (Cheyenne) looked at the possibility of making renewals easier and others have looked at the shortening the list.  That is where the AGs office
usually has a different opinion and with a new Governor and new AG we thought we'd give it some time and see if they would review the list and process and possibly make some recommendations.

I must admit I thought your first email was unusual in that usually questions about legislation come hot and heavy after the session, but I was glad to answer even though I had no idea if you were representing a group or just a curious individual.  Let me know what happens in Oregon.  You would be more than welcome in Wyoming.  Randall

This was what I sent to him:

Quote
> Dear Rep. Luthi,
>
> I am going to come clean with you.
>
> I am a researcher for the Free State Project (www.freestateproject.org).
As you are probably aware, FSP is looking at Wyoming, a
> state that is a front-runner at this point. The vote should take place
next month.
>
> The reason the question came up, is New Hampshire advocates are slamming
Wyoming for this bill, making it look like a big
> accomodation with the feds. Your post cleared that up for me. As I
understand it, most CCW states have CCW applicants go through an
> FBI background check, so Wyoming is not unusual in this respect.
>
> Some other questions have come up. Alaska recently added a "Vermont carry"
option on top of their current process, so that
> internally non-felons may carry, but if an Alaskan desires reciprocity in
other states he may go through the older process with the
> background check. Now, we are wondering how possible it would be to pass a
 similar law in Wyoming. If you have any thoughts on that,
> I'd like to hear them.
>
> We are also wondering about the rather lengthy list of places carry is not
permitted. Of course some make sense (correctional
> facilities and courthouses), but churches? As a permit holder in Oregon
this list seems onerous and it doesn't make a lot of sense.
> What do you think the chances would be to shorten it substantially?
>
> I recently took a drive around Wyoming and found it a very beautiful
state, and I liked the people I met. I am getting tired of the
> big government push here in Oregon, and the high taxes (getting higher
even in the face of our highest-in-the-nation unemployment).
>
> If you have any questions about FSP, let me know. Please don't judge us by
the hot and heavy scrapping you might see on the forums;
> things are pretty hot now just before the state selection vote.
>
> Regards,
> Paul Bonneau

Did you notice my apology for some folks' puerile behavior? Too bad I have to do that...

I would enjoy working with this legislator (far more than with some people here). He actually sounds reasonable. How nice. How refreshing.

Guys, you took your shot at Wyoming, and you failed. No sane person is going to believe that the legislature of the state with the highest percentage of gun owners in the nation, unanimously got that gun control religion and sold out to the feds (also more mistrusted than about in any state). Your overreaching is incredible. Jason, I hope you save these posts, because in 20 years we will all look at them and get a big laugh over how ridiculous things are getting here.

Not only that, your attack prompted me to look up that awful NH law that is far worse (I wouldn't have had any reason to look that up without your ridiculous slander of Wyoming). So you come out of this with a big black eye for New Hampshire.

And, the guy who wrote this bill to simply preserve the existing situation is eager and willing to do a Vermont carry with us.

If you guys have any sense at all, you will resist the temptation to get the last word in (you've already dug yourself a hole deep enough) and just let this silly thread die a natural death.

Hmmm, do New Hampshire advocates have any sense? We shall see...   ;D
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Stumpy on July 17, 2003, 04:34:08 pm
“No sane person is going to believe that the legislature of the state with the highest percentage of gun owners in the nation, unanimously got that gun control religion and sold out to the feds (also more mistrusted than about in any state).”

Only if that sane person can read.

See for yourself the law requiring; if you want to legally carry a weapon concealed in Wyoming, Wyoming will fingerprint you and send your prints to the FBI?: http://legisweb.state.wy.us/2003/enroll/hb0308.pdf

And that it was enacted into law: http://legisweb.state.wy.us/2003/HBIndex.htm  scroll down to HB0308. See that it was enacted into law March of this year.


“And, the guy who wrote this bill to simply preserve the existing situation is eager and willing to do a Vermont carry with us.”

He wrote a law whereby the state of WY fingerprints its CCW citizens, and gives the fingerprints to the FBI. Real nice guy.

Yeh, and the Patriot Act is for our protection.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Michelle on July 17, 2003, 04:41:08 pm
Thanks, rhull, for posting exactly the laws I did to prove NH has a big problem. For those of you who have problems with the english language, I'll break it down for you.

159:10 Sale Without License. &#8211; Any person
Any means any. All people in the state of NH qualify...
who, without being licensed
here we've narrowed it down to people who (pay attention Keith) don't sell guns for a living - that is, still over 99% of NH's population...
as herein provided,
that's section 159:8, which sets out requirements for folks in the gun-selling business. BTW it looks like the selectmen all on their own can decide whether or not they want a gun shop in their town, another big hit against NH...
sells,
we all know what "sells" means, right, gang?
advertises or exposes for sale,
still not too murky - still with us, everybody?
or has in his possession with intent to sell,
if you've got it and you plan to sell it (wow, the NH cops must be powerful if they can divine that)
pistols or revolvers
that means, a mere two handguns, is all they need to put you away. Perhaps the legal world even includes one revolver when they mention "revolvers", I wouldn't be surprised. Not long guns, Keith. Notice there is nothing here about anyone being in the gun-selling business without a license.
shall be guilty of a class B felony
yes, you're a big-time criminal. The rest of it I will dispense with since we are not arguing about it.

Except for a few challenged individuals, I believe most readers here can figure out this verbiage.


Paul - you conveniently left out the exemption.

Section 159:14
    159:14 Exemption. 8211; None of the provisions of this chapter shall prohibit an individual not licensed under the provisions thereof who is not engaged in the business of selling pistols or revolvers from selling a pistol or revolver to a person licensed under this chapter or to a person personally known to him. Source. 1967, 220:9, eff. Aug. 21, 1967.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/XII/159/159-14.htm
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: JonM on July 17, 2003, 04:44:49 pm

NH residents have no privacy. The state cops know about them. And all the FBI has to do is ask them.

How?  The records are destroyed after the background check, the state is not permitted to keep records if the check passed, only if it failed.

As I posted before:

159-D:2 Confidentiality. –
    I. If the department of safety conducts criminal background checks under RSA 159-D:1, any records containing information pertaining to a potential buyer or transferee who is not found to be prohibited from receipt or transfer of a firearm by reason of state or federal law, which are created by the department of safety to conduct the criminal background check, shall be confidential and may not be disclosed by the department or any officers or employees to any person or to another agency. The department shall destroy any such records after it communicates the corresponding approval number to the licensee and, in any event, such records shall be destroyed within one day after the day of the receipt of the licensee's request.


Quote
Never mind actually trying to get the real answer.

Indeed.  I placed a call in to an investigator in the criminal division of the Attorney General's office.  Still waiting to hear back.  According to the law library no case for 159:10 has made it to the state Supreme Court, for whatever that's worth.

When I hear back from the AG, I will post it here.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zxcv on July 17, 2003, 05:02:11 pm
Quote
Paul - you conveniently left out the exemption.

Section 159:14
    159:14 Exemption. 8211; None of the provisions of this chapter shall prohibit an individual not licensed under the provisions thereof who is not engaged in the business of selling pistols or revolvers from selling a pistol or revolver to a person licensed under this chapter or to a person personally known to him. Source. 1967, 220:9, eff. Aug. 21, 1967.

And Michelle, you conveniently chose to ignore that this exception has no effect when placing a general circulation ad, which will obviously be viewed by people other than the ones known by him. And it still makes him a felon if he does sell to the 99% of the public he does not know.

Quote
How?  The records are destroyed after the background check, the state is not permitted to keep records if the check passed, only if it failed.

What a trusting soul. No, governments would never imagine keeping information like this, especially after being told they aren't supposed to.  ::)

When someone in government can reasonably expect to spend time in jail for violating these sorts of prohibitions, then I will start to trust them. But people in government don't go to jail, remember? That's the whole problem...

Quote
If you guys have any sense at all, you will resist the temptation to get the last word in (you've already dug yourself a hole deep enough) and just let this silly thread die a natural death.

Hmmm, do New Hampshire advocates have any sense? We shall see...  

Well, we have our answer...    ::)
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: kbarrett on July 17, 2003, 05:12:44 pm
Yep... I agree with all the participants of this debate.

There really is only one solution to this question concerning WY and NH gun laws.


Vote for Alaska.



Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Sebastian on July 17, 2003, 05:18:08 pm
Quote
And, the guy who wrote this bill to simply preserve the existing situation is eager and willing to do a Vermont carry with us.
Preserving existing situation while working on better one is good enough for me.

This is NOT a silly thread. The bill should make us wonder, and the information that it was enacted to preserve the existing situation alone wasn't good enough for me. What I wanted to know was if this act was merely a temporary solution, and if the WY legislation plans to make improvements to it (Vermont carry). My question was answered so I feel like this thread was valuable to me.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: JasonPSorens on July 17, 2003, 05:28:31 pm
I agree that it's not a silly thread and has in fact been oddly productive.  But I'd caution people on both sides from making overbroad statements.  The NH law and the WY law can both be changed, and I think there are constituencies for such changes.  Just take a look at what MSSA has done in Montana, and then think about what MT would be like if MSSA had not been there:

http://www.mtssa.org/greetings.phtml

Then think about the fact that FSP members, all told, will have about 100 times the clout of MSSA in whatever state we choose.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Stumpy on July 17, 2003, 05:40:13 pm
This is the reason I am a Libertarian and not a Republican. The Republicans participate with the democrats in expanding the role of gov’t in our lives. They ALWAYS have an excuse and gov’t keeps expanding.

Wyoming’s Legislature voted to fingerprint its CCW permit holders and submit the fingerprints to the FBI. They voted unanimously to do this. What Wyoming’s Representative offers is an excuse. I don’t buy it.

This is why I am in the FSP and this is why my vote will go to New Hampshire.  ;)
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zxcv on July 17, 2003, 05:49:54 pm
Trust me, Jason, this thread is silly.   :D

And it's silly for precisely the reason you stated - we can fix the gun laws in almost any state we end up with. I stated that myself a couple of times.

Normal people would say, "yes, that's true, let's move on to the next subject..."

But this thread keeps rolling on. Same old wild claims, heavy breathing and "I'm shocked, shocked." It is mindless.

But at least it is also entertaining.   ;D
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: JonM on July 18, 2003, 09:09:40 am
Rolling on.

Got a reply from the A.G.'s office.  He said it is their position that you may advertise it, but you may only sell the handgun to someone known to you personally, or a licensed gun dealer, so I'm not sure what good advertising would be.  I asked if there were any definition of what someone known personally was in the statutes, but apparently there is not.

I didn't feel like badgering him with hypothetical, but it seems to me any half decent lawyer could rip that portion to shreds should the state bring charges against someone.  If I introduce myself to a person, and he introduces himself to me, are we now known to each other?  Etc.

RSA 159:10 is approaching its 30th birthday since it was last modified.  While other people may disagree, I do not think not being able to advertise handguns or sell them to strangers is a gating factor for the selection of any state.  It would seem to me to be an opportunity rather than a burden.  As pointed out in another thread http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?board=5;action=display;threadid=2486 (http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?board=5;action=display;threadid=2486), there are some gun related laws in NH that could stand changing.  Depending on how soon FSP members would like to take on a statewide issue against opposition (I'm guessing www.nhceasefire.org (http://www.nhceasefire.org) might not like the idea), many of these provisions seem ripe for repeal.


Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zxcv on July 18, 2003, 09:31:06 am
I agree, Jon.

Just to pick one nit (and keep this thread rolling on  ;) ) this A.G. may have interpreted the law to mean you can advertise, but that does not mean the next one would. But anyway, we will fix it. And a lot of other things, as I've noted in that thread you mentioned.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: JonM on July 18, 2003, 10:14:20 am
I agree, Jon.

Just to pick one nit (and keep this thread rolling on  ;) ) this A.G. may have interpreted the law to mean you can advertise, but that does not mean the next one would. But anyway, we will fix it. And a lot of other things, as I've noted in that thread you mentioned.
Indeed.  Since this A.G. and likely others would probably hold that you must personally know a person to sell a gun to him or her, unless he or she is a licensed dealer, advertising is silly.  Short of "Dealers, I have guns, please call if interested" it's pointless.

But since in my entire life I have never felt the need to advertise a handgun for sale, or indeed sell a handgun to a person I did not know, I don't have a big problem with this.  So for future bitching about what needs to change in NH, we can use the other thread, and continue to uselessly bash Wyoming's inexplicable cuddling up to the feds in this one. <g>
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Stumpy on July 18, 2003, 10:30:10 am
It is true that either side in the “which state” question can point to disagreeable laws that should be fixed. But this new law, enacted unanimously by Wyoming’s legislature, needs to be noticed.

It presents the question: if Wyoming’s legislature UNANIMOUSLY voted just a few months ago to require CCW permit applicants to be fingerprinted and to submit those fingerprints to the FBI, will Wyoming’s legislature actively oppose the goals of the Free State Project?

I believe they will. In a case like this, Wyoming’s low population may be moot. If they close ranks and oppose us, we will not be able to enact statewide pro-freedom legislation.

I believe New Hampshire’s legislature and governor will welcome the FSP and see us as allies in the cause of freedom.  ;D
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Sebastian on July 18, 2003, 10:43:34 am
Quote
if Wyoming’s legislature UNANIMOUSLY voted just a few months ago to require CCW permit applicants to be fingerprinted and to submit those fingerprints to the FBI
Well, they voted (unanimously) to CONTINUE to require them to be fingerprinted and have those fingerprints submitted to the FBI.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zxcv on July 18, 2003, 11:10:01 am
Have you guys ever considered trying out for a comedy routine? You are great with this deadpan humor. I can't keep on my chair, hee hee.

If you want to take a look at what needs fixing, in both NH firearms laws (although I only hit part of those), and WY firearms laws, go look at this thread:
The WORST NH Gun Law!!! And how we should change it! (http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?board=5;action=display;threadid=2486)

And then go hang your heads in shame. That is, if you have any.  :o

You'll see there, the difference between a state that has a healthy gun culture, and one (NH) that doesn't.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Michelle on July 18, 2003, 11:16:21 am
Have you guys ever considered trying out for a comedy routine? You are great with this deadpan humor. I can't keep on my chair, hee hee.

If you want to take a look at what needs fixing, in both NH firearms laws (although I only hit part of those), and WY firearms laws, go look at this thread:
The WORST NH Gun Law!!! And how we should change it! (http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?board=5;action=display;threadid=2486)

And then go hang your heads in shame. That is, if you have any.  :o

You'll see there, the difference between a state that has a healthy gun culture, and one (NH) that doesn't.

You are amazing, Paul, and not in a good way, but I'm too polite to say much more than that  >:( I have faith that the many people silently watching this thread are more intelligent than you are giving them credit for.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zxcv on July 18, 2003, 11:40:28 am
Oh, don't worry, Michelle. I have faith in the intelligence of the silent readers of this thread - even if my faith in some of those writing it has been shaken. But I hope they all have a sense of humor. We all need that to get through our day.   :D

Quote
"Here (in America) the daily panorama of human existence, of private and communal folly, the unending procession of governmental extortions and chicaneries, of commercial brigandages and throat slittings, of theological buffoneeries, of aesthetic ribaldries, of legal swindles and harlotries, of miscellaneous rogueries, villanies, imbecilities, grotesqueries, and extravagances is so inordinately gross and preposterous, so perfectly brought up to the highest conceivable amperage, so steadily enriched with an almost fabulous daring and originality, that only a person born with a petrified diaphram can fail to laugh himself to sleep every night and wake up with all the eager, unflagging expectation of a Sunday-School superintendent touring the Paris peep-shows."
--HL Mencken

I toast this silliest of all FSP threads!   ;D
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: jgmaynard on July 18, 2003, 12:36:12 pm
I have enough trouble getting through airports as it is.... I don't need the FBI to know I have a CC permit too.... ;)

JM
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zxcv on July 18, 2003, 01:32:15 pm
In a slightly more serious vein, I have a college textbook, "Argumentation and Debating" by William Foster, written in 1908 and revised in 1917. Reading this book makes me understand how intellectually crippled we have become after a century and a half of government schooling (it hadn't got too bad by 1917 yet - does any school teach debate any more?)

A couple of quotes from the preface:

"I have always dated from these conversations [discussions in a debating society] my own inauguration as an original and independent thinker."
-- Autobiography, John Stuart Mill

"...the first step in intellectual training is to impress upon a boy's mind the idea of science, method, order, principle, and system; of rule and exception.... Let him once gain this habit of method, of starting from fixed points, of making his ground good as he goes, of distinguishing what he knows from what he does not know, and I conceive he will be gradually initiated into the largest and truest philosophical views, and will feel nothing but impatience and disgust at the random theories and imposing sophistries and dashing paradoxes, which carry away half formed and superficial intellects."
-- Cardinal Newman

Think about how debates went in the old days. You got a proposition that you had to argue on, one side or another (you didn't know which side before the event). You sat there before an audience and had to make your arguments out of what you had researched before-hand. Your research was done in a library and from newspapers, with notes laboriously written down (no copy machines).

Now we have this wonderful tool, the Internet. We have instant access via search engines to vast amounts of material, which the search engine thoughtfully presents in descending order of relevance. We can craft our arguments for very large, even international, audiences to see; but we don't have to worry about stage fright or other such issues; we can write and re-write our findings to present them in the best light. We can also groom them to weed out any logical fallacies we may have stumbled into (and we can do it fast, unlike the old days, where everything was pencil and paper). It is the perfect forum for real debate; just think of how our ancestors 100 years ago would have used it.

And now look at what we settle for. Repeated dumb assertions, backed up by no research at all. Joseph Goebbels propaganda tactics.

Can you blame me if I turn to humor? What else can be done with this situation?

It will be a fine day when government schools are wiped from the face of this earth, and people can think and reason again.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Stumpy on July 18, 2003, 01:52:52 pm
OK, it came out recently that Wyoming’s Legislature voted unanimously to “ratchet up” gun control in their state. Wyoming’s advocates have tried many tactics to divert attention away from this. They have said:

It’s not really that bad
It’s bad but that’s OK, we’ll change it
This is normal
NH also had bad laws
This discussion is silly
This is just propaganda

I wonder if there are more tactics in the “James Carvell” bag of tricks? ;)

None of these tactics change the fact that as Wyoming is voting to “ratchet up” gun control, New Hampshire is going the other direction in defending gun rights.

Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: jgmaynard on July 18, 2003, 02:56:23 pm
That act, though a step in the right direction, only has to do with "the sale, purchase and delivery of rifles and shotguns across state lines"....

It has nothing to do with in-state sales or ownership.

JM
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Stumpy on July 18, 2003, 03:34:36 pm
Thanks for adding this Joe. I’m truly thankful to find out that Wyoming’s 2003 gun-rights voting record wasn’t all bad.  ;D

After all, WY could win the FSP vote. It would be bad enough going through the whole fingerprints to the FBI ordeal if the news were all bad.

Of course, ALL of the gun-rights issues that have come out of New Hampshire’s Legislature this year have been positive.

New Hampshire seems to be the state most open to the goals of the FSP. ;)


Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zxcv on July 18, 2003, 05:44:04 pm
Quote
OK, it came out recently that Wyoming’s Legislature voted unanimously to “ratchet up” gun control in their state.

Joseph Goebbels created the concept of the big lie. Repeat it over and over again and the audience begins to believe it.

Doug, even your compatriots have given up on this one, admitting it is just a continuation of current policy (while they assert it shouldn't have been done in the first place, a point that is at least debatable). But you are stuck on this one, hoping I guess that at least the dumbest of the observers here will be snookered.

You know, a reasonable researcher might have done it this way: Stumble on this vote. "Hey, this is something I can use to whack Wyoming. And even a unanimous vote, that is really bad. But say, there must be something more to this. Unanimous votes almost never happen. They usually have to be really non-controversial to be unanimous. Maybe I should ask the author of the bill what was going on, it might not be such a big deal after all. I wouldn't want to put something out on the forum and then have to eat crow because I was too lazy to check things out first. And maybe I should look at New Hampshire's laws too, before I post, to make sure there isn't something even worse in there. I wouldn't want to have a Wyoming researcher dig that out on me and make NH look even worse. Hey, I'd better be careful with this..."

But not you, oh, no. You went to ambush Wyoming on this without checking anything out, then got bushwhacked at your own ambush because NH's laws are much worse, and (unlike your apparent thesis where some aliens have taken over the legislature of the most gun-happy state in the union and turned them all into gun prohibitionists), the Wyoming vote was nothing at all. And the guy who wrote the bill wants to get Vermont carry in the state, and welcomes us there to help him do it!

Hell, without counting cc legislation (which tends to be wordy), NH's laws for just pistols and revolvers contain 2863 words, while Wyoming's for all weapons contain only 561! It's a good thing NH's recent legislation on firearms is positive, because it will take a long time for them to catch up to where Wyoming is right now!

If Wyoming is picked, you can just go ahead and carry without getting that background check you're so worried about. If you get caught it is only a misdemeanor - unlike New Hampshire where they hit you with a felony the second time around.

Doug, why do you keep coming back for more?  ::)
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: JonM on July 18, 2003, 05:55:16 pm
And that Wyoming was sending data on its citizens to the FBI without the legal authority to do so (since this bill was meant to fix that) for many years doesn't worry you? <G>

Look it all boils down to no one place is perfect, if it were there would never have been 10 candidate states and we wouldn't be having these fun discussions, we'd all just move there and be happy.

At worst Wyoming codified in law something they have been doing that many pro-liberty people have a problem with.  At best they never really thought about it and can be convinced to adopt a Vermont Carry law.

At worst New Hampshire has some stupid restrictions on how and to whom you can sell handguns.  At best the fact that those laws are all pretty damn old, and the recent actions by the government to increase gun freedom point to the chance that the will be repealed.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Stumpy on July 18, 2003, 06:11:23 pm
Well Paul, if Wyoming’s new gun control law really were such a “non-issue”, your group would have moved on a long time ago. ;)

Since you seem to be squirming like a worm dropped on hot pavement, I believe you see Wyoming’s new gun control law as a bad thing.  
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: thewaka on July 18, 2003, 07:25:55 pm

It presents the question: if Wyoming’s legislature UNANIMOUSLY voted just a few months ago to require CCW permit applicants to be fingerprinted and to submit those fingerprints to the FBI, will Wyoming’s legislature actively oppose the goals of the Free State Project?

Do you think the legislature is static? There are also term limits in WY. And for those who say they will be repealed, see this article http://www.termlimits.org/Press/Press_Releases/20030203.html (http://www.termlimits.org/Press/Press_Releases/20030203.html)
. Dated 2-10-03, "Last week the House Corporations, Elections and Political Subdivisions Committee voted 7-2 against HB 157, a measure designed to repeal term limits." The rest of the article details who voted for and against the repeal as well as a couple of quotes.

Quote
I believe New Hampshire’s legislature and governor will welcome the FSP and see us as allies in the cause of freedom.  ;D

And they'd better, since there are no term limits on the legislature.

So the question isn't who is the legislature now, but who can it be when we get there? It all comes down to the populace. Legislatures are always passing laws the people don't like. Otherwise they wouldn't have repealed the Oregon referendum (or whatever it is called) for term limits. So the culture needs to be reasonable for us to move to now (to me this leaves out DE [gun problem] and ND [homeschooling]) and reasonable belief that the people want enough of the things we want that we can get moving towards freedom, thereby encouraging those outside the state to move in for freedom. So these laws can and will be changed wherever we end up.

Diana
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Sardonicous on July 19, 2003, 06:12:10 pm
Only those speaking in favor of Alaska or Vermont have any business commenting on Wy carry permit law.

seeing this crap comming from NH supporters who within the last week went from "spinning" the facts to "open deception" really disapoints me.

And New Hampshire requires a permit too.

This is nothing more than one group of slaves commenting on the size of another group's chains.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Michelle on July 19, 2003, 06:25:55 pm
Only those speaking in favor of Alaska or Vermont have any business commenting on Wy carry permit law.

seeing this crap comming from NH supporters who within the last week went from "spinning" the facts to "open deception" really disapoints me.

And New Hampshire requires a permit too.

This is nothing more than one group of slaves commenting on the size of another group's chains.

Sardonicous, do you care to elaborate on the supposed "open deception" that you think you see? Nobody ever said NH didn't require a license. The only states that don't are Vermont and Alaska, and they deserve to be commended for that.

Here are the facts:

New Hampshire offers "shall issue" CCW licenses. They just passed a bill that clarified existing state law saying that it was illegal for fingerprints to be required.

Wyoming also offers "shall issue" permits, but they require that all applicants be fingerprinted. These fingerprints (apparently) have been sent to the FBI for a background check for at least several years. Wyoming just unanimously passed a bill making it state law that all fingerprints are sent to the FBI.

That is what this thread is about. I fail to see anything that could be considered deception.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Tony Stelik on July 19, 2003, 08:28:25 pm
Is this discussion about which State is Free or Which State Will be Free?
From the posts it looks like we are campaigning the first. From FSP point of view it is of little importance.
Scary thought is that WY takes finder prints and sends them to FBI. This means close cooperation of WY legislature with federal government and means that state gives up its powers. Not good.
For the purpose of discussion which state will be free we have to consider how easy it is to repeal the stupid laws. In NH it is quite easy. I still do not see if it is so in WY.
WY supporters would do better job for FSP giving all of us information how to repeal law in question instead of ignoring it’s harmful consequences.
Since this is thread about WY law I would appreciate if WY supporters give us the plan of action to tepeal this horrible law.
Title: Re:Wyoming Votes UNANIMOUSLY to Cooperate with FBI in Gun Control
Post by: Zack Bass on July 19, 2003, 11:33:48 pm

Think about how debates went in the old days. You got a proposition that you had to argue on, one side or another (you didn't know which side before the event).


And this is guaranteed to produce mendacity.
This type of "Debate", arguing for a view you do not hold, is exactly what we don't want here.