Well, I've been teaching criminal justice for about 12 years and worked in the field before that. I know a lot of people in the field, and I cannot think of any circumstance, other than a once off fluke, where an arresting agency or booking sheriff would not notify a CHL issuing sheriff when someone is arrested for a disqualifying offense. On the other hand, we know that NICS wrongfully denies transfers because of the successful appeal statistics.

Again, we know that refusal to sell firearms to certain people does not prevent them from harming others. We also know that firearms in the hands of private citizens does prevent them from victimization.

So, refusing to honor an eligible CHL for a transfer: (1) cannot create legal liability, (2) won't make the anti people or the media dislike them any more than they already do, (3) will not deter an evil person from doing evil, (4) can result in unlawful denial of constitutional rights thereby exposing that person and his/her family to being victimized, and (5) will result in me and others purchasing our firearms, ammo and gear elsewhere.

You know, I’ve heard this song and dance before. It sounds a lot like:

• “We can’t allow people to carry guns; we will have shoot outs in the street over minor disagreements.”
• “I can’t allow CHL holders in my restaurant because if one of them shoots someone I’ll be sued, no one will eat here again, and I’ll go out of business.”
• “We can’t allow CHL holders into bars because they will get drunk and shoot the place up.”

Of course, none of those things happened.

Now, this “we can’t sell CHL holders guns without the federal government’s approval for each sale because they might be spousal abusers or child molesters” is just the most recent push-back from a legislative victory. Other states have been transferring firearms this way for a long time without issue. Heck, we bought firearms without an instant check from the time they were invented until 1998.

I don’t understand why BFA and OFCC are just sitting back and taking it this time around. They should address this new push-back the same way as before with education efforts and boycotts.

Seems to me that the problem is that an instant check at each purchase v.s. the merchant just accepting a CHL is based on the idea that an instant check is more likely to be valid now, whereas the CHL could have been pulled and nobody noticed.

Given the folks at NICS don't get it right all that often anyway, it seems like the chances are about even. The difference being that the merchant who refuses the CHL is doing a CYA, just in case.

The whole thing is just so much "theater" anyway, like the TSA. The criminals will still get weapons regardless of the of the restrictions, and the crazies will likely do so, too, although sneaking through the cracks will remain just as possible.

Regards,

That's true forOHIO only. If you are in Ohio and they run your license plate, the Ohio officer also gets your driver's license status. If you are in Kentucky, it takes the office there TWO SEPARATE queries to get both of those pieces of info. If they want your CHL status, it's a third query. If they want any warrants you have in Ohio that are not extraditable outside of Ohio, that's another query.

There are separate queries for each state to pull different info. It just so happens that the programmers of LEADS in Ohio and the MDCs we use here run all those queries at once for Ohio info only. If I want someone's Florida CHL status, I have to separately run that through Florida. The ONLY outside state we can get a CHL from just running a driver's license is Tennessee. They tie your CHL DIRECTLY to your driver's license in the BMV database so it comes back driving status and CHL status.




That's assuming the backlash doesn't put them out of business from the financial burden of the lawsuit. The store that sold the firearms in the Aurora movie shooting is well over $250,000 in legal fees on a case they won. Now the plaintiffs are appealing so that could easily double. And insurance may or may not cover it. Some small stores may take the easier way out and close up shop.



I recently read on Facebook that one county says they run all their CHL holders monthly through BCI/III. If they see something pop up, they notify the person and suspend the license.



Not sure where you worked before but Ohio has admitted they have had a problem since the 80s. That's one reason why they currently aren't fixing it. They have no idea how to fix the old and the ORC doesn't really provide them with the sanctions for errors now. Here's an example of how it is messed up....

So you are pulled over for a DUI tonight. You refuse, that means you get an automatic license suspension (ALS.) Those are still mailed to Columbus and take about 7-10 days to process. Until then, you can just drive around and no police officer knows you were suspended or even got a DUI. Now, let's say you have a loaded 9mm in the glovebox. That's an additional charge, an F4. You should be fingerprinted for that so it gets into BCI which can lead to current NICS denial. Guess what....the fingerprint machine is down so they simply process you through and release you from the station because you were cooperative. How does anyone know that F4 exists? They don't and that has been Ohio's problem for decades. The ORC only mandates certain crimes be fingerprinted. And generally those crimes are ones where no matter what, you are going to jail for the night.

That problem happens all the time. We had a guy two months ago tell us he just got convicted for an OVI when we stopped him for OVI. 4 days had been between the two yet besides doing a manual Internet search through another Ohio's county Clerk of Courts. We never knew about it. He simply opened his mouth and that increased his penalty for refusing to blow.



You really think BFA and OFCC want to do boycotts against local businesses? Some of them are the financial support they rely on. We prefer not to piss off our allies when they have the choice that they want to make.



Correct. One is more updated. When your CHL is suspended, there's also no repercussion for failing to turn it in. Simply say you lost it to the Sheriff when they request it and use it to buy a gun later on.

And correct on NICS as well. But the problem there is it's all based on name searches. Don't even get me started on how flawed that is.

DUI and OVI are not disqualifying offenses even if they are felonies, and I was talking about the CHL coming during booking.

I know there is no legal mechanism for notification, but LE agencies absolutely do notify out of professional courtesy. Maybe BFA and OFCC should ask the legislature to require notification upon indictment and/or conviction to an issuing sheriff. Maybe then the legislative change that they worked for for over ten years would actually mean something.

Also, this is always hypothetically discussed because CHL holders, by and large, do not commit crimes and become prohibited persons. Like I said, it is the same song and dance we have heard before.

I was using the OVI and DUI as an example of how the process is slow and flawed. It's worse with criminal offenses and I deal with it every day. I see the issues and try to fix the process, but at my department I'm just one small person. Considering how many departments there are in Ohio, it's a huge problem and it involves the whole process from LE to Courts to AG.

And it looks like there is a fix on the way....

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories ... hecks.html

The original story about how flawed and unreliable the current background checks are can be found here...

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories ... hecks.html

Also, I work closely with Hamilton County and since they have expanded CHL issuing locations to include two and process them pretty fast, they have seen an increase in renewals through them. At the same time, they have also seen a large increase in recommending suspensions. During a meeting with them earlier this year they said they had over 100 CHLs that were applying for renewal last year that they had to deny and contact the issuing county to actually suspend because they had the court record but it was not properly submitted to BCI and a surrounding county issued it. So not all are necessarily law abiding...I wills the majority are, but I've seen people with over 50 criminal convictions have a valid CHL...all because none were disqualifying offenses.

Jedi:

You double-posted. I killed the first one....

Millenia ago (well, about 45 years ago), I helped train a local PD Dispatcher on the operation of the Teletype Model 35, which was the way you talked to LEADS back then.

Just to test, we ran my buddy's SSN. He was another rent-a-cop, clean record, etc. Came back to a guy in Cincy! Double checked.... Same result. My buddy's record was clean. Vetted about as well as anybody could....

Never did hear any more, fortunately.

Regards,

This makes me wonder if the no guns signs that went up back in 2004 would still be there if the business owners would have been financially supporting OFCC. Maybe Bloomberg has been lining the wrong pockets.

Liberty, before I even started the thread, I knew that this change to the law would be problematical. It was just a matter of HOW problematical.

I was talking to a gun store owner today who told me that he was told by BATFE not to accept post 3/23/15 Ohio CHL for firearms transfers because BATFE does not yet have a method for FFL to check the status of individual Ohio CHL's. I don't think the shop owner was making up what he was told. Ohio is still listed on the permanent Brady permit chart, and I cannot find anything on the net about this. Has anyone else heard of this?

I work in one of the stores that Mr. Liberty has been ranting and raving about not accepting his CCL permit as a background check. What he is complaining about is not from the employee behind the counter, but by the business owners themselves. If he is finding this resistance from every larger store that he is encountered it is because the store I work in, and others are all members of FFL Guard. And as for the woman behind the counter, I know her personally. The things you said that she said were not true. She is an NRA pistol instructor and knows better than to say those things. This not a personal attack on anyone Mr. Liberty. It is what stores are doing to protect their FFL licenses. Check out the purpose of FFL guard. http://www.fflguard.com/

I understand the decision not to accept one of BATFE's methods of transferring firearms is made by the owner and not the sales people, but looking me in the eye and insinuating that I am a wife beater is very, very poor customer service. Even if the store reverses its policies, I don't think I could ever go back in there again. And you calling me a liar makes it worse.

And the large stores are not the problem. Gander Mountain priced matches, and they made transfers pursuant to BATFE's requirements under the law by putting my CHL number on the form 4473 and making the transfer without reporting my purchase to the FBI, via its NICS. The form is designed to make transfers using BATFE approved CHL's. Please explain to me how an FFL can lose its license for following BATFE's procedures?

jerichoshooter:

Welcome Aboard!

There's a sticky at http://forums.buckeyefirearms.org/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=10097 that you should have a look at, but it's not mandatory. Might be sleep inducing, or worse....

I've blathered along about the primary topic here. It seems like some dealers are doing CYA. I refuse to worry about - IMHO, either method is just "theater". They are not willing to assume that a CHL handed to them over the sales counter is still good because of something you might have done in the last 24 hours or so.

The other problem is similar to BFA's not accepting firearms advertising on board. While we may win any resultant lawsuits, we have better places to put the money. Smaller dealerships are in the same boat, IMHO.

Regards,

Ready Line Firearms in Newtown (east of Cincinnati) accepts the NICS-compliant CHL for purchase in lieu of running the check itself. Of course you still have to do the form 4473.

Another change made at the same time now allows traveling Ohio residents to make long gun purchases in most other states. (In person through an FFL dealer, without a transfer to Ohio dealer, is what I mean.) Before, we could only do so in contiguous states.

But I wonder how many non-Ohio dealers know that? FFLs get updates on such things via BATFE, which is notoriously slow giving out info.

A road trip this weekend included the Akron gun show on Sunday. I took time to ask several dealers if they accepted the NICS compliant CHL's in lieu of calling in the form 4473. About nine out of ten said yes. Things seem to be getting better.