In July, New Mexico will require background checks on all gun sales

If the federal government won’t do it, the states will…

Good news.



From the link:

“Twenty-five officials in the state’s 33 counties adopted “Second Amendment Sanctuary” declarations this week, The Santa Fe New Mexican reported.

The declarations say the counties effectively will refuse to enforce the law.”

Not to mention that one cannot enforce a law requiring a background check for something that one does not know exists. Just more “feel good - we have to do something” legislation.

1 Like

How exactly would the sheriffs be involved in enforcing this law?

Sorry, what does this mean?

Nice gun hugger logic shown by those counties. Don’t enforce the laws and then claim laws don’t work. Brilliant.

How indeed. As I said, the government cannot enforce a law on something they do not know exists.

If they don’t know you own a gun, they cannot know if you sold it.

They are going to have real trouble enforcing this law as no one knows who owns what. So, I could sell a gun I have owned since the 60’s to someone and they have no way of knowing that I sold it and who I sold it to. This is just more feel good junk that will not do a thing about gun deaths.
And there are a lot of sheriffs in New Mexico 29 out of 33 that have said they will not enforce the law. Also 26 of 33 counties have passed resolutions to say they will not be enforcing the new gun laws.
The gun owners in New Mexico are already at work trying to get this declared against the constitution which it is.
The GOP in New Mexico is already at work to over turn the bill. They have contacted the secretary of state about adding an approve disapprove the bill to the 2020 ballot. As soon as they have a petition signed by 25% of the registered voters in New Mexico the bill will be suspended and added to the ballot.
And sheriff’s in New Mexico have a law suit ready to file as soon as the law goes into effect.
Also I think the red flag part of the law will be the first thing to end up in the SC. Along with all the other red flag laws from other states. You can not deprive someone of a constitutional right without a hearing. It will either be that or the laws raising the age to purchase a gun.
Also in the New Mexico constitution article II section 6 it says:
No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms.
Nice gun grabber logic pass laws that only effect law abiding citizens and think that it is going to stop law breakers. And than pass more useless laws because the first laws didn’t work. Maybe it’s time to do something about the real problem and not law abiding citizens.

That’s not what I said. I said if they don’t know that you own a gun, they won’t know if you sell it. In other words, the law is unenforceable on its face, therefore, it would be a waste of time for LEOs to try.

What is unconstitutional about requiring registration of firearms? Not what you fear will happen because of it - the government coming to take your guns. How does registration of your firearm infringe on your right to own it?

Yes, the effectiveness of this law will certainly depend in large part on the willingness of gun owners to voluntarily comply with it. At least, the law-abiding ones we’re always hearing about.

My state enacted UBC on 12/1/14. Here’s how I deal with it:
For a firearm I own that I bought before 12/1/14, I don’t require a background check; I only use my due diligence that I’m not selling to someone I suspect is ineligible.
For firearms I bought after 12/1/14 via FFL I require we go through and FFL and background check.
Why? Because if the gun I sold is used in a crime (or otherwise being checked out by LE) I know LE can trace the gun to the original FFL and thus to me. I don’t want to be convicted of violating the law.
So UBC’s won’t have much effect on existing guns at the beginning of the law’s enactment, but over time it should.
As to whether UBC’s have any overall effect on crime, that’s a discussion for another day.

At some point, when the law becomes too onerous, too invasive, too ridiculous … the law abiding become criminals. The saying that “if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns” is not just a clever motto, it is a truism.

“I lost it in a boating accident.” :sunglasses:

Of course the local prosecutors or state attorneys can prosecute after the fact… For instance, sell a firearm without the background check and it’s used in a crime… state charges coming your way…

Not if they don’t know you ever owned it.

LOL… good luck getting it declared unconstitutional… As I pointed out to @samm, the sheriffs don’t have to be involved with enforcement at all… state and county prosecutors indict, not sheriff’s…

Are you suggesting having someone testify, under oath, that they purchased the firearm without a background check would not meet the standard to convict?