3 ms·
Which is kind of silly to add flags for suspicious purchases. Any firearms transfer at a store with an FFL if he is suspicious of the transaction should not se
by elmerfud 4y ago
Which is kind of silly to add flags for suspicious purchases. Any firearms transfer at a store with an FFL if he is suspicious of the transaction should not sell it or do the transfer. There are already laws on the books to prosecute FFL transfers when you should have known or reasonably known the person you were transferring it to wasn't eligible to have the gun.
The federal government is banned by law from compiling a firearms owner's database. This is just a back door to do that. Very likely will accomplish zero reduction in crime or straw purchases. Because when you're buying a gun to commit a crime or for someone else it's generally a few hundred dollars because it's the cheapest gun you can get easy to pay in cash with.
This is an owner's database for expensive guns that are not used in crimes. Because those guns are more difficult to pay in cash with for example the last two guns I purchased were $10,000 and $17,000. Clearly these are the weapons that are used in committing crimes.
- rolph 4y agoim speculating, there is a class of person that has no legal reason, to be prohibited, but asks things like "will this defeat a bulletproof vest ?". i think this is where the head space is with putting flags on.
- LinuxBender 4y agoAFAIK there are only a handful states where black/silver tip ammo is not legal to sell and/or requires a special permit. [1][2] Most can still sell green tips. The definition appears to have evolved over time to include brass/hard-cast for some calibers/states. [3] AP are supposed to be law enforcement only. The ATF exempt some AP intended for specific sporting or industrial purposes. I've never personally found a need to buy it. [1] - https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/ammunition-limits-by-state https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/ammunition-... [2] - https://giffords.org/lawcenter/gun-laws/policy-areas/hardware-ammunition/ammunition-regulation/ https://giffords.org/lawcenter/gun-laws/policy-areas/hardwar... [3] - https://rocketffl.com/ap-ammo-are-armor-piercing-bullets-legal/ https://rocketffl.com/ap-ammo-are-armor-piercing-bullets-leg...
- rolph 4y agoreally big game like alaskan bull moose or grizzly bear have thick dense, bone, and very large muscle mass. I would consider AP to be closer to wise than overkill, id have to check the book for regulations im not sure if it would be allowed on a legal hunt.
- LinuxBender 4y agoAlaska does not prohibit armor-piercing ammunition, although the federal prohibition on certain kinds of armor-piercing ammunition applies [1] - https://giffords.org/lawcenter/state-laws/ammunition-regulation-in-alaska/ https://giffords.org/lawcenter/state-laws/ammunition-regulat...
- rolph 4y agoi just read through the hunting regulations for alaska this season, and there seem to be some changes. there used to be a lower limit [.30] to centerfire rifle calibre. it seems that has been removed, and you cant use rimfire [.22] calibres except in special hunt of caribou crossing a river. it seems [.223] would be a legal calibre for large game this year but id go larger. [edit] i just went a little further on: http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=hunting.firearms http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=hunting.firearms the concern is that a well placed shot as in staying in an 8" group at 200 yards is good enough to take large game. a big bore rifle of such recoil that you cant place a shot is more likely to end in a wounded animal chase, than an accurate smaller bore of lower recoil that you can manage.