Posted: 6/25/2026 5:56:19 AM EDT
|
Universal background checks are now back in play again as of 1 July. For some reason the judge who shot down the UBC has now decided that because of a upcoming law change, he removed his permanent injunction against UBCs. So, get your private sales and trades done, ASAP. If it weren't for the inherent beauty of the landscape in VA, this state would just suck ass. |
Abracadabra, Holmes.
|
The judge didn't just change his mind to dissolve the injunction. The injunction was based on his finding that the UBC law discriminated against 18-20 year olds, because there was no way for them to get a background check to purchase a handgun. It had been perfectly legal for an 18-20 year old to purchase from a private seller. He did not reach the question of whether UBCs as a whole are unconstitutional, he decided the suit on what he determined was the easiest and narrowest grounds. Effectively, he punted on the issue of the general Constitutionality of UBCs. A more thorough analysis can be found here: https://www.concealedcarry.com/court-decisions/virginia-judge-rules-universal-background-check-law-unconstitutional/ For those who don't want to read the whole article, a key excerpt: "The decision doesn’t hold that any requirement for background checks on private transfers is automatically unconstitutional. Rather, it says that Virginia’s particular version of universal background checks cannot stand because of how it interacts with other state and federal laws—specifically, the laws governing young adults and handgun purchases. In plain language: if a state wants to impose a universal background check regime, it can’t do it in a way that leaves an entire class of lawful adults with a right they’re not allowed to exercise in the real world." The GA then amended Virginia law to prohibit 18-20 year olds from purchasing handguns at all, thus negating the issue that the judge ruled on. Since the basis for his decision has been removed, the injunction was dissolved. I don't like it, I miss the days of buying and selling guns in a parking lot, but this GA is out to screw law abiding gun owners every way possible, and UBCs are part of the holy grail of gun control (along with mag limits and the AWB, so the commies definitely hit their trifecta). Basically boiled down to they lost because they were screwing over young adults, so to fix it, they screwed them over even more. |
|
I was talking about this late last year about how it would be reinstated a few times on this forum. The way it got repealed was because the way the law was written was that you couldn't just take out the 18-20 years old part. Other states were successfully making their own UBC laws and the only reason Virginia got undone was because they messed up the language. Now they fixed it and got it "right" by first making it illegal for 18-20 year olds to buy things and on top of that fixing up the verbiage on the UBC law so it's now law proof from anyone challenging it at all. Another proof why assuming SCOTUS or SCOVA would nullify the AWB because usually it comes down to certain language and all they need to do is fix the language and the law is valid again. It has been shown repeatedly in other states like NY with their NYSafe bill that nearly went to SCOTUS and would have been overturned but all they did was went back and fixed the language and blammo no more case and the law stands. |
|
Resurrecting the thread a bit... How is the UBC thing working in practical terms? What dealers are actually doing this correctly? Most of the dealers I've spoken to in the Richmond surrounding area either don't want to mess with this or are charging fees in excess of the legal amount ($17 max). 18.2-302:5 "The designated dealer shall collect and disseminate the fees prescribed in 18.2-308.2:2 as required by that section. The dealer may charge and retain an additional fee not to exceed $15 for obtaining a criminal history record information check on behalf of a seller." 18.2-302:2:J "All licensed firearms dealers shall collect a fee of $2 for every transaction..." Max fee is 2+15 for $17 and not the $40 or $60 or $70 I've been quoted |
Don't let the join date fool you... here since '97
Joined:
May 2014
Posts:
7352
EE: 100% (24)
VA, USA
|
Originally Posted By blwngazkit: Resurrecting the thread a bit... How is the UBC thing working in practical terms? What dealers are actually doing this correctly? Most of the dealers I've spoken to in the Richmond surrounding area either don't want to mess with this or are charging fees in excess of the legal amount ($17 max). 18.2-302:5 "The designated dealer shall collect and disseminate the fees prescribed in 18.2-308.2:2 as required by that section. The dealer may charge and retain an additional fee not to exceed $15 for obtaining a criminal history record information check on behalf of a seller." 18.2-302:2:J "All licensed firearms dealers shall collect a fee of $2 for every transaction..." Max fee is 2+15 for $17 and not the $40 or $60 or $70 I've been quoted |
www.HansohnBrothers.com
|
Originally Posted By HansohnBrothers: We charge $2 for the background check (a bit less than the law maximum) and $23 for the paperwork. $5 extra for each additional firearm on the 4473. To be clear, the law only dictates what we can charge for the background check, nothing else. Originally Posted By HansohnBrothers: We charge $2 for the background check (a bit less than the law maximum) and $23 for the paperwork. $5 extra for each additional firearm on the 4473. To be clear, the law only dictates what we can charge for the background check, nothing else. You're collecting the $2 State fee as required by the law The designated dealer shall collect and disseminate the fees prescribed in 18.2-308.2:2 as required by that section. Yet then immediately disregarding it? The dealer may charge and retain an additional fee not to exceed $15 for obtaining a criminal history record information check on behalf of a seller. Why the Fed 4473 for a State Check? Edited a bit since I re-read and was coming off as an ass... |
Don't let the join date fool you... here since '97
Joined:
May 2014
Posts:
7355
EE: 100% (24)
VA, USA
|
Originally Posted By blwngazkit: You're collecting the $2 State fee as required by the law Yet then immediately disregarding it? Why the Fed 4473 for a State Check? Edited a bit since I re-read and was coming off as an ass... |
www.HansohnBrothers.com
|
Originally Posted By HansohnBrothers: We have to do a 4473 for every firearm transaction per federal law. Is this simply erring on the side of caution since there's virtually zero guidance for this poorly written turd? |
Don't let the join date fool you... here since '97
Joined:
May 2014
Posts:
7356
EE: 100% (24)
VA, USA
|
Originally Posted By blwngazkit: Are you entering the firearm into your books, you'd have to for a 4473 to show the acquisition and disposition? You aren't the transferor or seller but merely the dealer processing the State mandated Background Check through the VSP. Is this simply erring on the side of caution since there's virtually zero guidance for this poorly written turd? |
www.HansohnBrothers.com
