Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 45

Thread: Reeves disappoints: SB 377 Firearm transfers to dealers; penalty.

  1. #1
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Reeves disappoints: SB 377 Firearm transfers to dealers; penalty.

    From the VCDL Legislative website, I just found this most disappointing bill from Bryce Reeves:

    SB 377 Firearm transfers to dealers; penalty.


    Firearm transfers to dealers; penalty. Requires firearm dealers to go through a process administered by the Department of State Police to determine whether a firearm that is being transferred to the dealer by a person other than a dealer, importer, or manufacturer can be lawfully transferred. The bill has an effective date of January 1, 2015.

    Here's the VCDL analysis:

    This bill creates an unfunded requirement that dealers have the state police run a stolen check on all guns that are being sold, transferred, or traded to the dealer by a person who is not a dealer. This would be largely a waste of time, effort, and money, as the vast majority of guns that are sold, transferred, or traded to dealers are not stolen. It could also delay the transaction by over a day if the state police are slow in responding. Giving the dealer an option to have a suspicious gun checked for stolen would be completely acceptable. Forcing the dealer to do the stolen check on all such guns is simply not reasonable.

    Here is Bryce Reeves' Facebook page... he needs to know this bill is not acceptable:

    https://www.facebook.com/brycereeves

    TFred

  2. #2
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Took a look at the bill... this really is a dumb idea.

    B. Any person, not a dealer, selling, transferring, or trading a firearm to a dealer shall present a valid photo identification issued by a state or federal governmental agency and shall consent in writing, on a form to be provided by the Department, to have the dealer obtain a verification check to determine if the firearm has been reported to a law-enforcement agency as lost or stolen. Such form shall include only the written consent; the name, address, birth date, gender, race, and verifiable government identification number on the photo identification presented by the person selling, transferring, or trading the firearm; and, the serial number, caliber, make, and ,if available, model of the firearm.

    Clearly a Fourth Amendment violation, since "selling a gun to a dealer" cannot be probable cause to run a stolen records search on a firearm.

    If this passes, look for the supply of used guns in Virginia to diminish, why would anyone want to submit to such a search?

    TFred

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,182
    Email sent to Senator Reeves.

    Here is his email address if anyone else wants it: senatorreeves@brycereeves.com

  4. #4
    Regular Member wrearick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Virginia Beach, Va.
    Posts
    635
    Begins to create a paper trail. "We know back in 2012 you purchased 3 firearms. we also know that you transferred/sold only two of them so where is the third gun buddy"

    Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    It is already illegal to possess or to sell stolen property. Bet there are more private sales (which this is all about) of stolen cars, lawnmowers, circular saws, or dogs than there are of stolen guns. But do the folks on Craigslist who are sellling stolen property have to go to the car dealership or hardware store to get a stolen property check before they can sell their stuff?

    What liability will the FFL have regarding the accuracy of the stolen-gun check? What records will they be required, and how long will they be required to retain them? How much will they be allowed to charge for this "service"?

    Will there be a "user fee" that goes to the state? If so, how much? And what guarantee will there be that the money goes to support this activity as opposed to being siphoned off to something else? (Gee, why did I ask that?)

    What personal identifying information will the prospective seller and/opr buyer be required to provide when they go to have the stolen-gun check made?

    Why aren't FFLs being required to check to see if the guns they are selling are stolen?

    Does anybody really expect that someone selling a stolen gun might get off on all other possible charges but be convicted for skipping this stolen-gun check?

    Does anybody really expect that criminals will stop and decide not to sell a stolen gun because they now have to submit to a stolen-gun check?

    And the granddaddy of all questions - how much will my taxes go up because of this? And if there is no tax money to support this, what other State Police service(s) will be reduced in order to comply with this mandate?

    OK, I'll stop now.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  6. #6
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,628
    Quote Originally Posted by wrearick View Post
    Begins to create a paper trail. "We know back in 2012 you purchased 3 firearms. we also know that you transferred/sold only two of them so where is the third gun buddy"

    Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
    Exactly - it is back door registration.

    The process would require that the gun first be transfered to the FFL, who would then do the verification check. If the transaction to potential purchaser is not completed then FFL would have to do another check to return the gun to you.....AND keep the record for 20 years.

    Most (all?) FFLs are going to refuse to get involved = stops legal private transfers.
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 01-09-2014 at 07:58 AM. Reason: fixed
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  7. #7
    Campaign Veteran roscoe13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Catlett, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,134
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    Most (all?) FFLs are going to refuse to get involved = stops legal private transfers.
    How do you figure this will affect private transfers? There's no requirement for private transfers to go through the stolen gun check. Did you mean this for the SB287 thread?

    Roscoe
    Last edited by roscoe13; 01-09-2014 at 09:00 AM.
    "The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." - George Washington

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran T Dubya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Va, ,
    Posts
    892
    My first reaction was "welcome to the department of redundancy department", but being the healthy skeptic I am I understand that government is only efficient at trampling individual rights, its most definitely a sort of quasi-registration. Good catch.
    "These are the shock troops (opencarry.org) of the gun lobby. And, they are not going away."
    Ceasefire NJ Director Brian Miller, NJ.com, August 20, 2009

  9. #9
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,628
    Quote Originally Posted by roscoe13 View Post
    How do you figure this will affect private transfers? There's no requirement for private transfers to go through the stolen gun check. Did you mean this for the SB287 thread?

    Roscoe
    Those bills are joined at the hip and yes SB337 would require such a check/determination.

    SB287 requires that transfers go through a FFL.

    This one requires "the dealer obtain a verification check ...."

    No FFL, no check for stolen = no legal transfer.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran roscoe13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Catlett, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,134
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    Those bills are joined at the hip and yes SB337 would require such a check/determination.

    SB287 requires that transfers go through a FFL.

    This one requires "the dealer obtain a verification check ...."

    No FFL, no check for stolen = no legal transfer.
    Only if BOTH bills become law. This bill, on it's own, will have no affect on PRIVATE sales/transfers.

    We need a full-court press to kill both of these bills ASAP.

    Roscoe
    "The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." - George Washington

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,182
    Quote Originally Posted by T Dubya View Post
    ...efficient at trampling individual rights...
    Irony....


  12. #12
    Regular Member B. Reddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Orange County, Virginia
    Posts
    110

    Vote "NO" on SB 377 Firearm transfers to dealers

    Email opposing SB 377 sent to my Senator, (Reeves). district17@senate.virginia.gov

    For those of you in Orange Co, Louisa, Culpeper, Albemarle, Spotsy, & Fredericksburg, the 17th, after re-districting, went from solid red to flaming purple in 2013. http://www.vpap.org/elections/district/64


    The bill is now before the Senate Courts of Justice.

    If any of your senators below are listed, please let them know how you feel about SB 377.

    Shucks, why be shy? Email the WHOLE committee!

    http://www2.vcdl.org/cgi-bin/wspd_cg...REF=cjocs&PRE=


    Membership: Norment (Chairman), Saslaw, Marsh, Howell, Lucas, Edwards, Puller, Obenshain, McDougle, McEachin, Stuart, Vogel, Stanley, Reeves, Garrett


    Grab a cup of coffee and look at VCDL's page of other legislators that need some emailin'.

    http://www2.vcdl.org/webapps/vcdl/2014leg.html

  13. #13
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by B. Reddy View Post
    Email opposing SB 377 sent to my Senator, (Reeves). district17@senate.virginia.gov
    You do realize that your senator, (Reeves) is the one who submitted this bill, right?

    I can't imagine a patron voting "no" on his own bill... but we need to explain to him why it's so bad that he should WITHDRAW it... that keeps it from even coming up for a vote.

    TFred

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,171

    Can anyone say

    1984?


    Any questions? (NSA is watching.)

  15. #15
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,628
    Quote Originally Posted by va_tazdad View Post
    1984?


    Any questions? (NSA is watching.)
    1984 is now 30 years past - we've come a long way baby! Pssst, look over your shoulder.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  16. #16
    Regular Member B. Reddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Orange County, Virginia
    Posts
    110

    Yep- asked him to withdraw it.

    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    You do realize that your senator, (Reeves) is the one who submitted this bill, right?

    I can't imagine a patron voting "no" on his own bill... but we need to explain to him why it's so bad that he should WITHDRAW it... that keeps it from even coming up for a vote.

    TFred
    Sure, I asked him to withdraw it. Here is his reply:

    " Please withdraw SB SB 377 Firearm transfers to dealers; penalty‏

    Bryce Reeves

    To:

    XXXX, this is a good gun bill brought to me by some local reputable gun dealers. Currently ATF is now doing 100% inspections of all paperwork transactions. Because of this, they have found multiple guns that were listed as stolen. So the dealers are out money because ATF seizes the property.

    The dealers have no way to check the status of a firearm if you are consigning, , or selling your gun to them to check to make sure a person is not selling them a "bad" gun.

    This bill allows them to run a serial number to do just that.

    I hope this helps. As a former COP, Army Ranger, conceal carry, hunter, and gun enthusiast, I don't want more restrictions. But I would like my property back given the chance if it were stolen."

  17. #17
    Regular Member 2a4all's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Newport News, VA, ,
    Posts
    1,586
    Quote Originally Posted by B. Reddy View Post
    Sure, I asked him to withdraw it. Here is his reply:

    " Please withdraw SB SB 377 Firearm transfers to dealers; penalty‏

    Bryce Reeves

    To:

    XXXX, this is a good gun bill brought to me by some local reputable gun dealers. Currently ATF is now doing 100% inspections of all paperwork transactions. Because of this, they have found multiple guns that were listed as stolen. So the dealers are out money because ATF seizes the property.

    The dealers have no way to check the status of a firearm if you are consigning, , or selling your gun to them to check to make sure a person is not selling them a "bad" gun.

    This bill allows them to run a serial number to do just that.

    I hope this helps. As a former COP, Army Ranger, conceal carry, hunter, and gun enthusiast, I don't want more restrictions. But I would like my property back given the chance if it were stolen."
    So where would a dealer check the serial number to learn this? Is there a list somewhere of "guns reported stolen"? If the list includes the lawful owner, then wala! We have a gun registry!
    A law-abiding citizen should be able to carry his personal protection firearm anywhere that an armed criminal might go.

    Member VCDL, NRA

  18. #18
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    Quote Originally Posted by B. Reddy View Post
    Sure, I asked him to withdraw it. Here is his reply:

    " Please withdraw SB SB 377 Firearm transfers to dealers; penalty‏

    Bryce Reeves

    To:

    XXXX, this is a good gun bill brought to me by some local reputable gun dealers. Currently ATF is now doing 100% inspections of all paperwork transactions. Because of this, they have found multiple guns that were listed as stolen. So the dealers are out money because ATF seizes the property.

    The dealers have no way to check the status of a firearm if you are consigning, , or selling your gun to them to check to make sure a person is not selling them a "bad" gun.

    This bill allows them to run a serial number to do just that.

    I hope this helps. As a former COP, Army Ranger, conceal carry, hunter, and gun enthusiast, I don't want more restrictions. But I would like my property back given the chance if it were stolen."
    It disappoints me greatly to have to say this, but Reeves is not telling the truth. This bill requires a S/N check. That is entirely different than "allows."

    If a dealer is allowed to run a check, I have no problem with that. The dealer can set a policy, and the customer can weigh that policy and decide whether or not to sell their gun to the dealer. Requiring a S/N check is a different monster altogether.

    We got rid of Edd Houck for a reason. This is most disappointing from Reeves.

    TFred

  19. #19
    Regular Member Maverick9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Mid-atlantic
    Posts
    1,507
    Look at Reeves' FB profile pic close up.

    What is that expression? It shows teeth, but it's not a smile. Kind of like his proposed bill.

  20. #20
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    Might not be a bad bill if they could exempt guns transferred by CHP holders.

    I'll put that on the wish list....right below allowing Sunday Hunting by persons with CHP's

  21. #21
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    Huh???

    Quote Originally Posted by peter nap View Post
    Might not be a bad bill if they could exempt guns transferred by CHP holders.

    I'll put that on the wish list....right below allowing Sunday Hunting by persons with CHP's

    P4P for Sunday hunting on Sunday???? Really????
    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

  22. #22
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    Quote Originally Posted by 1245A Defender View Post
    P4P for Sunday hunting on Sunday???? Really????
    Oh yeah...it's the latest fad!

  23. #23
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,628
    Quote Originally Posted by peter nap View Post
    Oh yeah...it's the latest fad!
    Which one?

    http://www.allacronyms.com/FAD

    Think maybe - "failure assessment diagram"
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 01-12-2014 at 12:30 PM. Reason: Added
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,182
    Reeves: "...this is a good gun bill brought to me by some local reputable gun dealers."
    Quote Originally Posted by TFred View Post
    This bill requires a S/N check. That is entirely different than "allows."
    Follow da money. I'd bet the 'reputable dealers' who brought this bill to Reeves are counting on charging a new fee each time they do a SN check. So basically they use Reeves to get a law passed that gives them a 'required' pathway to make more money on what should be an otherwise simple transaction.

  25. #25
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705
    So this bill was made marginally acceptable by changing the original "required" to "optional."

    Then our puppet-governor got his hands on it. Hope VCDL sends out an alert on this soon.

    Virginia: Governor Returns NRA-Opposed Amendment on Firearm Records Legislation

    Governor McAuliffe’s action to SB 377 has deep anti-gun implications. While SB 377 as passed and sent to the Governor requires the gun dealer to destroy the consent form for a firearm determined not to be lost or stolen, the Governor’s amendment would mandate that those consent forms would be kept by the dealer for at least 90 days with no requirement to destroy them ever. Such an amendment would create a backdoor registration of those seeking to sell, trade or transfer their lawfully owned firearms to a gun dealer.

    Reeves really was duped on this one, and he still doesn't have a clue about it.

    TFred

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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