Private Party Sale of a Handgun

[srad]

Why do many of the folks who have a handgun for sale on this and other IN forums require that a buyer have a carry permit in order to purchase their handgun?

I understand the need and wisdom of c.y.a., but Indiana State law is pretty clear as is the counsel of reputable gun shops like Gander Mtn. and Midwest Gun Exchange. Some shops will gladly take your money for a $40 or $50 transfer fee that's not neccessary, but the guys at Gander and MGE said the same thing when I asked about private sale of a handgun within Indiana, they said a NICS and transfer is needed when an individual buys a gun from a retail gun store, but for a person-to-person sale within the State of Indiana only a Bill of Sale is needed. The Bill of Sale is the seller's proof that possession of the firearm was transferred to the new buyer.

Here is the State of Indiana statute wording regarding the private sale of firearms/handguns:

"Private firearms transfers (i.e., transfers by non-firearms dealers) are not subject to a background check requirement in Indiana. Indiana Code Annotated § 35-47-2-8 specifically notes that the handgun sales regulations under Chapter 35-47-2 (i.e., the prohibited purchaser provisions) apply equally to an occasional sale, trade, or transfer between individual persons and to retail transactions between dealers and individual persons.

Pursuant to section 35-47-2-7(a), a person may not sell, give, or in any other manner transfer the ownership or possession of a handgun or assault weapon to any person under age 18, except an individual acting within a parent-minor child or guardian-minor protected person relationship, or any other individual who is also acting in compliance with section 35-47-10 (provisions relating to children and firearms).

Indiana prohibits any person from selling, giving, or in any manner transferring the ownership or possession of a handgun to another individual the transferor has reasonable cause to believe:

Has been convicted of a felony;

Is a drug abuser;

Is an alcohol abuser; or

Is mentally incompetent."


I understand that desire to c.y.a. as a seller and the need for due diligence; but the law requires that the purchaser must be over 18 and that the seller have no reasonable cause to believe that the purchaser is a felon, drug abuser, alcohol abuser, or mentally incompetent. The purchaser does not have to provide proof of a current carry permit.

Why are many of the sellers imposing more than the law requires when it comes to a FTF transaction?

 

[pudly]

You've pretty much covered it. It is partially cya, partially just looking to make sure that the purchaser has some evidence to say they aren't a criminal/insane/etc. (Not proof, but just evidence). There have been plenty of discussions on this board on this topic. People are voluntarily taking this extra step. They generally are quite well informed on the legal requirements.

 

[chasekerion4]

Peace of mind. They don't have to, they choose to so they feel better about selling a gun on "the street".

It's a good idea for those who have a strong conscience and don't want to contribute to a criminal getting a gun from the street; namely from YOU.

 

[thompal]

Peace of mind. They don't have to, they choose to so they feel better about selling a gun on "the street".

I kind of understand the reasoning, but it still irritates me. For one thing, I've seen a couple of RIFLES for sale here where the seller required the buyer have a LTCH. I think that is unreasonable.

Let us not get so scared of government regulation that we become more restrictive than the anti-gunners.

 

[joslar15]

I kind of understand the reasoning, but it still irritates me. For one thing, I've seen a couple of RIFLES for sale here where the seller required the buyer have a LTCH. I think that is unreasonable.

Let us not get so scared of government regulation that we become more restrictive than the anti-gunners.

Not to be a smartass, but the easy solution is get your LTCH, then you're covered with the private sellers protecting themselves.

 

[Chefcook]

I kind of understand the reasoning, but it still irritates me. For one thing, I've seen a couple of RIFLES for sale here where the seller required the buyer have a LTCH. I think that is unreasonable.

Let us not get so scared of government regulation that we become more restrictive than the anti-gunners.

If a guy wants what you don't wish to show him then just don't bother doing business with him very simple..

 

[chasekerion4]

I kind of understand the reasoning, but it still irritates me. For one thing, I've seen a couple of RIFLES for sale here where the seller required the buyer have a LTCH. I think that is unreasonable.

Let us not get so scared of government regulation that we become more restrictive than the anti-gunners.

That's just it, I don't think it's regulation that has anything to do with it.

I think people just want to feel safe that if they read the paper and the same model they used to own was used in a murder, they won't feel uneasy that the gun might have come from you by selling it to some 'Joe Schmoe' on the street.

Not out of fear of the government or anything like that - just for their conscience.

I don't necessarily like filling out the 4473 form, but I like that other people have to fill it out also! I'm not sure I'd like it if just anyone could walk into a dealer and buy a gun....

 

[ggglobert9]

Since when could you buy a handgun at 18...you can carry but not purchase a handgun or ammo you still have to be 21?

 

[Chefcook]

That's just it, I don't think it's regulation that has anything to do with it.

I think people just want to feel safe that if they read the paper and the same model they used to own was used in a murder, they won't feel uneasy that the gun might have come from you by selling it to some 'Joe Schmoe' on the street.

Not out of fear of the government or anything like that - just for their conscience.

I don't necessarily like filling out the 4473 form, but I like that other people have to fill it out also! I'm not sure I'd like it if just anyone could walk into a dealer and buy a gun....

Until about 1964 that's exactly how it was. Do you think that we are safer now with all the restrictive laws we have???

 

[thompal]

Not to be a smartass, but the easy solution is get your LTCH, then you're covered with the private sellers protecting themselves.

An easier solution is to not buy guns. (grin)

After a certain point, it's a matter of principle. It's irritating enough to have the government require that I ask permission to exercise a right, having others ask whether I've asked permission or not is a bit beyond the pale.

Having a private citizen ask to see my permit to carry means they are taking on law enforcement duties, and are enforcing laws which don't exist. Besides, if I only wanted to have a handgun in my home for self defense, I wouldn't need a permit to begin with.

 

[CarmelHP]

Since when could you buy a handgun at 18...you can carry but not purchase a handgun or ammo you still have to be 21?

18 year olds can not buy from an FFL holder, but can buy from a private seller.

 

[chasekerion4]

Until about 1964 that's exactly how it was. Do you think that we are safer now with all the restrictive laws we have???

I absolutely think we're worse off now, but for different reasons.. without going all into detail, I'll just say this:

There were no Columbine's back then, no mass mall shootings, etc.

There are millions more people in the country now. The parenting since 1964 has gotten worse and worse decade by decade and a big chunk of the young generation now, well, pretty much sucks...

No respect, no discipline.. On and on..

The comparisons between now and 1964 are comical in every facet of society.

That's not a knock on you, but with all the crazy people in this world, some things we should use a little common sense. And I personally don't see anything wrong with requiring a LTCH. Nowadays everybody wants a gun; so if you don't qualify under the seller's terms, he'll find someone to sell it to; or he doesn't need to sell it that bad. If he wants to see a LTCH to sell it to make him feel better, more power to him!

So, in short, I kinda agree with this particular practice.

 

[Lucas156]

With everybody being so sue-happy these days can you really blame them for asking to see an LTCH? At the minimum I would suggest a bill of sale. As for an LTCH even being a requirement by the law, it is unconstitutional-bottom line.

 

[versuchstier147]

A year or so ago I was at the 1500 with one of my shot guns and someone asked what I wanted for it and I told them it wasn't for sale. A few minutes later someone else asked and I sold it to them without asking for ID or anything. You just need to use your best judgment. One looked like a drug addict, the other looked like a deer hunter.

I know that has nothing to do with handguns but, whatever. Same basic thing. If someone on the street wants to see your LTCH, it's a lot easier than the paperwork and backround check a real dealer puts you through. Which I don't mean to sound like I'm complaining about. It's a good system and only takes about ten minutes. Man, I'm glad I don't live in Louisville, anymore.

 

[glocker1911]

Must be a wonderful skill to be able to look at someone and know wether they are a drug user or deer hunter.

 

[marv]

The LTCH also proves or at least suggests that the buyer is a Hoosier. Very important.

 

[BE Mike]

It is the seller's right to stipulate a LTCH. It is a reasonable requirement. If someone doesn't want to show their Indiana LTCH to me, they will not be the buyer of my gun. If that gun ends up being used in a crime, I can point to my reasonable efforts in attempting to sell the firearm to a person who is eligible to buy firearms in the state and has had a criminal background check. I'm no lawyer, but I would think that would present a strong defense in a civil or criminal proceeding against me, if things were to go south.

 

[pig957]

"There were no Columbine's back then, no mass mall shootings, etc."


This is not exactly true! In 1964, Austin, Texas, a man armed with a rifle stood on the clock tower of the university and killed serveral people until two police officers were able to take him out. The big difference between then and now is that alot of concerned citizens were able to keep the gunman's head down by providing cover fire from thier own weapsons. I am writing from memory so if someone else could fill in the facts that I cann't bring to mind that would certainly help.

 

[samrothstein01]

With everybody being so sue-happy these days can you really blame them for asking to see an LTCH? At the minimum I would suggest a bill of sale. As for an LTCH even being a requirement by the law, it is unconstitutional-bottom line.

I am all for being conscious, conciencious, and careful. Whatever the seller is comfortable with, that is what the buyer must comply with.

That being said, and understanding that I am by no means a lawyer, and this is just my opinion, so take it for what it's worth....

I don't believe a bill of sale is worth any more than the paper it's written on. They can very easily be created, made up, forged, etc., and so I don't think they can be considered valid with any certainty.

Again, just my opinion....

 

[srad]

In my specific case, my LTCH application is in process (submitted a little over two weeks ago) and I just purchased a XD9sc from Midwest Gun about two weeks ago... and had to obviously pass a NICS background check.

And I haven't been convicted of a felony or become mentally incompetent in the last two weeks, as far as I can tell :-)

I offered to provide a copy of my application and copy of my XD9 sales receipt along with a proper Bill of Sale with affixed copy of IN Drivers License (proof of residency & age). Guess I'm somewhat stuck until the LTCH comes back from the ISP, unless I go through another $40 NICS check again for a private purchase.

Totally understand the seller's reasons and to be honest I'd probably do the same thing if in his shoes since there are more than enough buyers out there these days.