Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: "New Law" to allow WI to buy long guns over state lines??

  1. #1
    Regular Member anmut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Stevens Point WI, ,
    Posts
    879

    "New Law" to allow WI to buy long guns over state lines??

    http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/...out-state-guns

    Basically they are saying that this new law would drop the restriction on long guns being sold over state lines to WI residents. But... if I want to buy a gun, hand gun or long gun or NFA item, I can have it shipped to a dealer across state lines as it sits right now.

    Of course, this is the GB Gazette - possibly one of the most anti "news" papers on the planet. Can someone better explain what this law actually changes?

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member protias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    SE, WI
    Posts
    7,318
    Before, you couldn't purchase a long gun from a state that does not border WI.
    No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. Thomas Jefferson (1776)

    If you go into a store, with a gun, and rob it, you have forfeited your right to not get shot - Joe Deters, Hamilton County (Cincinnati) Prosecutor

    I ask sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few politicians. - George Mason (father of the Bill of Rights and The Virginia Declaration of Rights)

  3. #3
    Regular Member anmut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Stevens Point WI, ,
    Posts
    879
    Quote Originally Posted by protias View Post
    Before, you couldn't purchase a long gun from a state that does not border WI.
    REALLY? I did not know that... so even if it's shipped from FFL to FFL, a WY to WI long gun can not be purchased? What is the law with hanguns transferred into WI from FFL to FFL? If I saw a really sharp 1911 in Alabama I couldn't buy it on gunbroker.com because they can't ship it to a WI dealer?

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    Quote Originally Posted by anmut View Post
    REALLY? I did not know that... so even if it's shipped from FFL to FFL, a WY to WI long gun can not be purchased? What is the law with hanguns transferred into WI from FFL to FFL? If I saw a really sharp 1911 in Alabama I couldn't buy it on gunbroker.com because they can't ship it to a WI dealer?
    No, what it means is that you could not go to AL and buy it over the counter with your WI residency. Sending it to the FFL is what you have to do instead. But with a handgun, that is the federal law anyway. This current news item is a local (state) restriction on rifle sales, again on over-the-counter purchases.

    NV was similar recently where our dealers could only sell [rifles] to neighboring state residents. Now they dropped the law and so only federal law applies which allows long gun sales to any state resident (as long as it doesn't violate the buyer's state's law).
    Last edited by MAC702; 09-16-2013 at 10:29 PM.
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    As usual, they got it wrong.


    Originally, the Federal Gun Control Act of 1968 banned interstate sales of firearms but contained an exception for long gun transactions occurring between federally licensed dealers (FFLs) and residents of contiguous states. Such sales could occur only if “the purchaser’s State of residence permitted such sale or delivery by law.”
    So states had to enact laws that allowed the purchases in contiguous states.
    Here is WI's:
    175.30 Purchase of firearms in contiguous states permitted. It is lawful for a resident of this state or a corporation or other business entity maintaining a place of business in this state to purchase or otherwise obtain a rifle or shotgun in a state contiguous to this state if the transfer complies with federal law and the laws of both states.
    In 1986 the FOPA, however, removed both the contiguous states limitation and the requirement that the purchaser’s state of residence specifically authorize the purchase. Now, interstate sales of rifles and shotguns can occur between FFLs and residents of any state, as long as “the sale, delivery, and receipt fully comply with the legal conditions of sale in both such States.”

    Some states have just within the last few years have been repealing these laws because they make nothing illegal, are outdated, and just confuse a lot of folks.
    Last edited by notalawyer; 09-16-2013 at 10:35 PM. Reason: typo

  6. #6
    Regular Member anmut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Stevens Point WI, ,
    Posts
    879
    Quote Originally Posted by MAC702 View Post
    No, what it means is that you could not go to AL and buy it over the counter with your WI residency. Sending it to the FFL is what you have to do instead. But with a handgun, that is the federal law anyway. This current news item is a local (state) restriction on rifle sales, again on over-the-counter purchases.

    NV was similar recently where our dealers could only sell [rifles] to neighboring state residents. Now they dropped the law and so only federal law applies which allows long gun sales to any state resident (as long as it doesn't violate the buyer's state's law).
    Awesome - thank you for the clarification. So if I visit a state, find a gun I want to buy from an FFL, and as long as that state's law allows it, now WI will allow me to buy from them and bring home the long gun. As it sits right now, I could not do that from a non-neighboring state - it would have to be transferred to an FFL, correct?

  7. #7
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    Quote Originally Posted by notalawyer View Post
    ...In 1986 the FOPA, however, removed both the contiguous states limitation and the requirement that the purchaser’s state of residence specifically authorize the purchase. Now, interstate sales of rifles and shotguns can occur between FFLs and residents of any state, as long as “the sale, delivery, and receipt fully comply with the legal conditions of sale in both such States.”...
    Thanks! I knew what happened, just didn't know why the change was necessary, but now that (state part) makes sense, because the federal part didn't but they had to keep up with it (eventually).
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran MAC702's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    6,520
    Quote Originally Posted by anmut View Post
    Awesome - thank you for the clarification. So if I visit a state, find a gun I want to buy from an FFL, and as long as that state's law allows it, now WI will allow me to buy from them and bring home the long gun. As it sits right now, I could not do that from a non-neighboring state - it would have to be transferred to an FFL, correct?
    Right. But sometimes you will find a store policy that doesn't allow it...
    "It's not important how many people I've killed. What's important is how I get along with the people who are still alive" - Jimmy the Tulip

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,509
    Quote Originally Posted by notalawyer View Post
    As usual, they got it wrong.


    Originally, the Federal Gun Control Act of 1968 banned interstate sales of firearms but contained an exception for long gun transactions occurring between federally licensed dealers (FFLs) and residents of contiguous states. Such sales could occur only if “the purchaser’s State of residence permitted such sale or delivery by law.”
    So states had to enact laws that allowed the purchases in contiguous states.
    Here is WI's:


    In 1986 the FOPA, however, removed both the contiguous states limitation and the requirement that the purchaser’s state of residence specifically authorize the purchase. Now, interstate sales of rifles and shotguns can occur between FFLs and residents of any state, as long as “the sale, delivery, and receipt fully comply with the legal conditions of sale in both such States.”

    Some states have just within the last few years have been repealing these laws because they make nothing illegal, are outdated, and just confuse a lot of folks.
    Exactly. And after 1986, non-contiguous state sales were going along just fine, until ATF decided they couldn't any more.

    Texas had the same law. It didn't ban anything, merely said that Texas residents could purchase rifles or shotguns in contiguous states. ATF decided that was a limitation, and said Texas residents could only buy long guns in Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and New Mexico. So, Texas simply repealed that law, and all is well.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Interceptor_Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,839
    Quote Originally Posted by KBCraig View Post
    Exactly. And after 1986, non-contiguous state sales were going along just fine, until ATF decided they couldn't any more.

    Texas had the same law. It didn't ban anything, merely said that Texas residents could purchase rifles or shotguns in contiguous states. ATF decided that was a limitation, and said Texas residents could only buy long guns in Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and New Mexico. So, Texas simply repealed that law, and all is well.
    Wisconsin is the same way. There is no overt prohibition, simply the statement that we may purchase from contiguous States.
    175.30  Purchase of firearms in contiguous states permitted. It is lawful for a resident of this state or a corporation or other business entity maintaining a place of business in this state to purchase or otherwise obtain a rifle or shotgun in a state contiguous to this state if the transfer complies with federal law and the laws of both states.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by KBCraig View Post
    Exactly. And after 1986, non-contiguous state sales were going along just fine, until ATF decided they couldn't any more.

    Texas had the same law. It didn't ban anything, merely said that Texas residents could purchase rifles or shotguns in contiguous states. ATF decided that was a limitation, and said Texas residents could only buy long guns in Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and New Mexico. So, Texas simply repealed that law, and all is well.
    They never said anything of the kind. The exact opprosite actually.

    They explained it it in a couple industry newsletters over the years.
    Here is one such:

    December 2002:

    “CONTIGUOUS STATE”
    The phrase “contiguous state” no longer has meaning under the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA), as amended. Nevertheless, it continues to confuse many long-time firearms dealers, especially when residents of other States visit their gun shops. For those who may not be familiar with this phrase, it appeared in the GCA prior to 1986. The “contiguous state” exception allowed FFLs to sell long guns to residents of contiguous states if the purchaser’s State of residence permitted such sale by law and the sale complied with the legal conditions of sale in both States. A State was “contiguous” to another State if it was adjacent to (bordering) that State. For example, Georgia and Alabama are in fact both contiguous to Florida, and the GCA formally recognized this and similar relationships. In 1986, certain amendments to the GCA rendered the phrase “contiguous state” obsolete and without meaning for firearms dealers. Since 1986, licensed firearms dealers have been allowed to sell a long gun over-the-counter to an unlicensed resident of any State, provided (1) the purchaser is not otherwise prohibited from receiving or possessing a firearm under the GCA, and (2) the sale, delivery, and receipt fully comply with the legal conditions of sale in the buyer’s and seller’s States.
    People still do not understand.
    Last edited by notalawyer; 09-18-2013 at 05:59 PM.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,509
    Quote Originally Posted by notalawyer View Post
    They never said anything of the kind. The exact opprosite actually.

    They explained it it in a couple industry newsletters over the years.
    Here is one such:
    Yes, one such that supports exactly what I said: non-contiguous sales were fine, until ATF decided they weren't.

    Texas didn't change their law out of the blue. It was because ATF gave notice that Texas residents could not longer purchase out of state from non-contiguous states. That happened after the 2002 newsletter you quoted; if memory serves, it was 2006/2007.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by KBCraig View Post
    Yes, one such that supports exactly what I said: non-contiguous sales were fine, until ATF decided they weren't.

    Texas didn't change their law out of the blue. It was because ATF gave notice that Texas residents could not longer purchase out of state from non-contiguous states. That happened after the 2002 newsletter you quoted; if memory serves, it was 2006/2007.
    until ATF decided they weren't
    Sorry, but you are mistaken. They have never said anything of the kind!

    As shown in the ATF newsletter I quoted, folks could purchase long-guns out of state, unless, and only if, the state had a law that prohibited it. Texas did not. Their law like the vast majority of such laws complied with the authorization language required by the '68 GCA. They never got around to repealing it (like most states) because it was simply an outdated meaningless law.

    Old version:
    A resident of this state may if not otherwise precluded by law, purchase firearms, ammunition, reloading components, or firearm accessories in contiguous states. This authorization is enacted in conformance with Section 922(b)(3)(A), Public Law 90-618, 90th Congress.
    New version:
    A resident of this state may, if not otherwise precluded by law, purchase firearms, ammunition, reloading components, or firearm accessories in another state. This authorization is enacted in conformance with 18 U.S.C. Section 922(b)(3)(A).
    Still a meaningless law, they should have just repealed it. There is no need to authorize folks to do anything. Not to mention 18 U.S.C. Section 922(b)(3)(A) no longer exists! (But then again, I've never accused any state legislature of really understanding anything that they vote on!)

    BTW, Texas Penal Code 46.07 was amended in 2009.
    Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 280, Sec. 1, eff. May 30, 2009.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,509
    Quote Originally Posted by notalawyer View Post
    Sorry, but you are mistaken. They have never said anything of the kind!
    Oh, really? You know every word the ATF has ever said, and you can prove they never said Texas residents could no longer purchase from non-contigous states?


    BTW, Texas Penal Code 46.07 was amended in 2009.
    Yes, which aligns exactly with my memory that the problem surfaced about 2006-07. The Texas legislature only meets in odd-numbered years, so 2009 was the first effective chance to change the law.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by KBCraig View Post
    Oh, really? You know every word the ATF has ever said, and you can prove they never said Texas residents could no longer purchase from non-contigous states?
    {SNIP}
    Well, I have researched their published documents and have found no such statements. I have found published information that says the exact opposite though.....

    Have you found any published statements that support your assertion? IF so, please share them with us. Otherwise you are just wasting electrons.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,509
    Here's a clue for you: a great deal of what the ATF does, and what FFLs are scared of losing their licenses over, is never officially published.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,509
    notalawyer, I have to apologize: it was the FBI, not ATF, that was the source of the problem. NICS was denying purchases to Texas residents shopping in non-contiguous states. (That's outside the scope of NICS, but it was still happening.)

    Here is one of the threads where it came up in Texas, prompting the change to the state statute.

    http://www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=92&t=20275

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by KBCraig View Post
    notalawyer, I have to apologize: it was the FBI, not ATF, that was the source of the problem. NICS was denying purchases to Texas residents shopping in non-contiguous states. (That's outside the scope of NICS, but it was still happening.)

    Here is one of the threads where it came up in Texas, prompting the change to the state statute.

    http://www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=92&t=20275
    A few complaints? I still call BS!
    More than likely it was FFLs rejecting the sale because they did not understand it (like Buds Guns retail outlet refusing a long gun sale to folks from Florida) and blaming it on NICS because they were afraid to look stupid.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,509
    Quote Originally Posted by notalawyer View Post
    A few complaints? I still call BS!
    Then why don't you go over there and call it? The fellow who posted that report was the president of TSRA at the time. It's so hard to get good gun laws passed in Texas that they don't waste their time on frivolous stuff. If it wasn't a real issue, they wouldn't have spent political capital getting it changed.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by KBCraig View Post
    Then why don't you go over there and call it? The fellow who posted that report was the president of TSRA at the time. It's so hard to get good gun laws passed in Texas that they don't waste their time on frivolous stuff. If it wasn't a real issue, they wouldn't have spent political capital getting it changed.
    Wow you really are wound up tight over this aren't you?

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,509
    Quote Originally Posted by notalawyer View Post
    Wow you really are wound up tight over this aren't you?
    No, I'm a bit peeved that I took the time to look up the correct information, apologize for having cited the wrong source of the problem, and you still said it was B.S., in the face of a direct cite to the source.

    So, I'm done with you. Carry on.

  22. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by KBCraig View Post
    Here's a clue for you: a great deal of what the ATF does, and what FFLs are scared of losing their licenses over, is never officially published.
    I had the ATF come into my neighborhood, after the brady bill was passed, and about 1/2 my neighborhood houses had 1 ffl living there. They tried to scare all the ffl's from giving up their licenses or "possibly face 20 yrs in prison". They offered no reason...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •