The three day rule

[arakboss]

The three day rule releases are clearly an option (not required) for FFLs. I have bought over a dozen firearms since the election and not a single one was purchased from or transferred in a shop that wasn't doing three day rule releases. It is an FFLs choice to do three day rule releases just as it is my choice not to do business with them.

 

[Yarome]

Personally, I think the scurrying around at the last hour trying to buy a firearm is pretty comical. It's not as if the writing hasn't been on the wall for months. Kind of a dilema of a purchasers own making.

Even so, I don't think it's unreasonable for purchasers to expect more FFL's to be honoring the 3day and are rightly peeved a bit. I mean... that safeguard is in place for a reason and a perfectly valid extenuating and short term reason did present itself... so. Go figure!

 

[Camelfilter]

If the 3 day release option changed from "may" to "must", I wonder if the BGC "system" would magically get fixed?

 

[PORSCHE928S4]

 

[slimmer13]

Personally, I understand why FFL's almost exclusively don't.

Must be a regional thing. In E WA, they almost exclusively do.

 

[jackrv]

To my way of thinking, a compromise is where each side gives up something to achieve a deal.

How is what going on with us a compromise? Only one side, us, is giving anything up.

Jack

 

[slimmer13]

Must be a regional thing. In E WA, they almost exclusively do.

I should add IME. I'm sure most FFLs around here exercise their right to not release at times if the circumstances warrant it.

 

[bcp]

A compromise where each side gives up something is still a loss for our side.

It isn't really a compromise when all you are doing is negotiating the size of your loss.

Better compromise is for each side to gain something.



Bruce

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Compromise on freedom of religion? Compromise on freedom of speech?

I think people would be rightly outraged at that! These are rights, not things to be negotiated and diminished bit by bit.

 

[nammac]

What many just do not want to get their head around is the 3 day does NOT mean the FFL is in the clear. Let one of those guns they let walk end up in some "big deal" and the FFL will now have to hire VERY expensive lawyers as the AG can spend all the money they want. Its a huge risk just like here is WA when some will let a gun go after the 10 day wait. Many will not let it go for the same reason. It's easy for people who have nothing on the line to to tell those who stand to lose everything they should just take the risk.

But is it a liability to follow federal firearms regulations? How many FFL's, who have released on the "3 day rule" and later the recipient turns up denied, end up in litigation?

That's an honest question, it's not like we hear about these cases. What's the ATF's stats on this I wonder….

 

[Member 5605]

Should be called a 'Three Day Option'

 

[solv3nt]

Personally, I think the scurrying around at the last hour trying to buy a firearm is pretty comical.

I resemble that remark....

 

[Yarome]

I resemble that remark....

Well... you're from Roseburg. It's not your fault so I didn't want to name names.

 

[solv3nt]

Well... you're from Roseburg. It's not your fault so I didn't want to name names.

I had a list minute idea that I should get a smaller caliber rifle for the kids to hunt with in the future rather than handing them an '06.

 

[nwslopoke]

It's another prime example of our legislators unduly negotiating away our rights. The mistaken belief that we are somehow required to find some "compromise" between what the gun grabbers want and what are our protected rights... not to be infringed or "negotiated" away just to give the opposition some kind of "win".

It never should have happened but it shouldn't come as any suprise that they are now trying to take away that... in their eyes... temporary concession they made just to get the legislation passed.

You would think our side would learn from history, but we repeat the same mistake over and over and continue to move the line in the sand of our own free will.

They are fully aware it's an infringment. They couldn't care less... if we continue to let them get away with it... that's on us.

Maybe if they wrote it down or made it a law or something, we wouldn't have to revisit it all the time.

 

[Yarome]

I had a list minute idea that I should get a smaller caliber rifle for the kids to hunt with in the future rather than handing them an '06.

THAT'S valid!!

 

[solv3nt]

THAT'S valid!!

I'm hoping for another instant. Should be in today.

 

[Yarome]

I'm hoping for another instant. Should be in today.

Splendid!! Worst case you still have until March 7th at the least.

Good luck today! Quicker is always better than later.

 

[Danall]

But is it a liability to follow federal firearms regulations? How many FFL's, who have released on the "3 day rule" and later the recipient turns up denied, end up in litigation?

That's an honest question, it's not like we hear about these cases. What's the ATF's stats on this I wonder….

interesting with all the hue and cry about litigation there has been no response to this honest question.
Perhaps the anti-gunners are behind this "sky is gonna fall" if we legally release guns in 3/5/10 day scenario?

 

[solv3nt]

Splendid!! Worst case you still have until March 7th at the least.

Good luck today! Quicker is always better than later.

My FFL recently switched to allow the three day rule. Here's hoping Judge Raschio doesn't let the state get away with the ban on the 3-day government accountability law.