Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

NodeBB

  1. Home
  2. Legal & Legislative
  3. USPS Proposes Mailing Handguns Rule

USPS Proposes Mailing Handguns Rule

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Legal & Legislative
handbooklegislative
1 Posts 1 Posters 31 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • A Offline
    A Offline
    admin
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    The postal service hasn't been allowed to move handguns since Calvin Coolidge was president. That's about to change if a new USPS proposed rule goes through — and the details are worth reading carefully before you form an opinion.

    "The proposed rule allows unlicensed individuals to mail handguns, rifles, or shotguns to themselves or another person in another state for 'lawful activities.' No FFL required. No background check on the recipient. No log entry."

    That phrase "or another person" is carrying a lot of freight. Every transfer I've run through an FFL — whether it was a private sale, an online purchase, or an estate transfer — had a 4473 at the end of it. That paper trail exists for a reason, and this rule sidesteps it completely.

    "131 (3.2%) involved the U.S. mail — under the existing, more restrictive system"

    So we already have mail-based gun trafficking under rules that are supposed to prevent it. Loosening those rules and then pointing to a low percentage isn't the reassurance they think it is — it's a baseline that's about to get tested.

    The comment period is open right now. If you think this is a good idea, go say so. If you think it's going to make life harder for law-abiding owners when the inevitable misuse gets plastered across the news cycle, go say that instead. Either way, that's the actual lever available right now — not arguing about it after the rule is final.

    For those of us who do private transfers, ship guns to gunsmiths, or move firearms between states for hunts or matches — has your experience with the current FFL-based transfer system been workable, or is there a legitimate inconvenience here that a smarter rule could actually solve?


    Read the full article in The Handbook → | By Steve Duskett

    1 Reply Last reply
    0

    Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.

    Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.

    With your input, this post could be even better 💗

    Register Login
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes


    • Login

    • Don't have an account? Register

    • Login or register to search.
    Powered by NodeBB Contributors
    • First post
      Last post
    0
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • World
    • Users
    • Groups