TexasCHLforum.com

Nevada’s Dramatic Expansion Of Background Checks Creating Confusion

On Nov. 8, Nevada voters voted to dramatically expand background checks to cover every private gun sale. The measure, passed by the narrowest of margins, was backed by $19 million in out-of-state money from Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown For Gun Safety, but the majority of local law enforcement opposed it. Now, confused gun store owners are demonstrating why.

Questions about the new law abound, i.e., what happens when a private sale background check, conducted by a gun store, is denied? State law requires the gun be booked into the gun store’s inventory; the new state law seems to allow the gun to be returned to the owner, but federal law requires another background check to do so.

“We still haven’t received any guidance from anybody,” said David Famiglietti, owner of New Frontier Armory. Speaking to the Las Vegas Review-Journal, Famiglietti said, “There’s a bunch of people in charge on the government level, but no one is taking charge.”

https://www.americas1stfreedom.org/arti ... confusion/

Nevermind the obvious confusion created by the first question I have about this....

How would anybody know a private transfer occurred if it weren't reported?

OOPS! There's that logic thing again, silly me.

Oh wait, I get it. Confirmation of compliance with private sale BG checks necessitates registration.

Once again proving that "Common Sense Gun Control" is about Control and not about Guns.

And some would say I need a tinfoil hat...

Law of unintended consequences? I really think not! Liberals and anti-gun people do not think beyond the end of their nose and really do not care how much they make life difficult on anyone else. Remember that their end game is total elimination of private firearms ownership and anything they can do to make our life harder or more confusing goes along with their end game.

I would guess that there will be very few bill of sales filled out in Nevada from here on out.