gun show loophole???

[Librarian]

Most states (if not all) require that a person confirm that the buyer is a resident of the state where the private party sale is occuring. There is no 'gunshow loophole', but apparently a lot of CA residents believe there is because there's no shortage of them trying to buy a gun via PPT here in AZ without disclosing that they are an out-of-state resident

The Feds seem to expect a private seller to check, but don't absolutely require it; don't know how they could enforce that if they wanted to make it mandatory. FFLs, of course, are required via the 4473 process.

We try to educate the ones who come here and ask. Regrettably, that doesn't include a lot of people.

[ke6guj]

Wisconsin has legal PPT without an FFL. I bought 2 rifles from a relative by going to his house and getting them.
.

I'm assuming you were both Wisconsin residents at that time. Otherwise, if you were a CA resident, then getting those rifles while in Wisconsin was a violation of federal law.

[CmpsdNoMore]

I'm assuming you were both Wisconsin residents at that time. Otherwise, if you were a CA resident, then getting those rifles while in Wisconsin was a violation of federal law.

Yes, I moved to California last August and purchased the firearms a few months before I moved. My relative is a Wisconsin resident.
My bad.

[kingjoey]

The Feds seem to expect a private seller to check, but don't absolutely require it; don't know how they could enforce that if they wanted to make it mandatory. FFLs, of course, are required via the 4473 process.

We try to educate the ones who come here and ask. Regrettably, that doesn't include a lot of people.

As I said in my post, most states require it either directly or indirectly. Here in AZ the state law requires that the buyer likewise be a state resident. If you sold to a prohibited possessor or out-of-state buyer it could be prosecuted as "misconduct involving weapons" IIRC.