140
Children killed in mass shooting at kids' birthday party in California (news.sky.com)
submitted 8 months ago by [M] to c/news@lemmings.world
61 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

You must be confusing a CCW (Concealed Carry of a Weapon) permit with an FFL (Federal Firearms License).

A CCW is obtainable by almost anyone who is over 21 and not a convicted felon, and allows you carry a concealed weapon, such as a handgun or a knife with a blade longer than 3 inches.

An FFL is obtainable by business-owners who pass extensive background checks with the ATF and allows them to legally sell firearms to other people.

A CCW can be obtained over a weekend or two. An FFL takes months of paperwork, interviews, background checks, and filing fees.

If you don't believe me, please go try and obtain an FFL. I'd be very interested to learn how far you get.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    I think they might be referring to a lower-tier FFL.

    CCW doesn’t award you legal suppressors and large capacity magazines in CA.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    Correct. To my knowledge, there is no legal way to possess a suppressor or high capacity magazine in California, under their current laws. In (almost) all other states, high capacity magazines are not regulated, and suppressors can be legally obtained with a $200 tax stamp and NFA form.

    I'm not from California, so I'm not as familiar with their laws, but I find the idea of an easy loophole to suppressor ownership very difficult to believe.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago (1 child)

    I never said it was "easy". It's not. As the other guy pointed out, it's a months long, expensive, and personally invasive process to obtain a FFL. That being said, certain individuals are highly motivated to go through the process anyways. My original point was that the entire process becomes streamlined so long as you don't mind presenting yourself as a conservative. I've heard of people being turned down for a years old social media post, but somehow the redhats don't run into the same issues.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 8 months ago (1 child)

    My original point was that the entire process becomes streamlined so long as you don’t mind presenting yourself as a conservative.

    Well I'm glad you clarified then. For a minute there, I thought your original point was that an FFL was an easy loophole to legal machine gun and suppressor ownership in California. Since the ATF regulates FFLs, how does one "present themself as a conservative" during a presumably remote, paper-driven process?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 8 months ago

    I'm well aware of the difference. FFLs aren't just for actual business owners. Plenty of private collectors run a "business" of reselling firearms specifically in order to make obtaining a FFL a lot easier. It also is possible to show that you are qualified for one with previous military or law enforcement service, as a firearms instructor, or simply with enough determination and charm around your local police academy.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent