First, a quote from the Giffords Law Center To Prevent Gun Violence: "Though more than 90% of the American public supports background checks for all gun sales, a dangerous and deadly loophole in federal gun laws still exempts unlicensed sellers from having to perform any background check whatsoever before selling a firearm. More." (BS in my opinion but opinions are like butts, everyone has one) And this: "See site." <NOTE: Quotes above edited by moderator benenglish to comply with site copyright policy.> Jeff Knox, noted 2A activist, wrote in a 2006 Op Ed on "Ammoland" pretty much predicting this turn of events in his piece on how to defend personal sales and how to defend against using the non-existent "Gun Show Loop Hole". "Title 18, Section 922 of the U.S. Code, the 1968 Gun Control Act, covers sales and transfer of guns. The law forbids transfers between residents of different states except through an FFL in the buyer's state. Of course it is also illegal for a federally “prohibited person” – a felon, fugitive, someone dishonorably discharged from the service, etc. – to purchase a firearm from anyone, FFL dealer or not. If the seller has any indication that the prospective buyer is a “prohibited person,” selling the gun is a crime. It is also illegal for anyone to purchase a firearm on behalf of someone else – even if that someone else could legally purchase it himself – and a seller can again be held criminally responsible if they had any indication that such a “straw” transaction was taking place. But not all sellers are that prudent. A foolish few think they are “safe” if they take a “don't ask, don't tell” approach, avoiding any question of the buyers’ legal status and studiously not noticing if the buyer says something that might indicate ineligibility. They delude themselves." I've read many posts in this forum basically stating that if you keep your head in the sand, you can't be held criminally responsible. Or that if the buyer looks okay and has cash, take it and run. Or the time honored a BOS is bullsh*t and won't help your in criminal court. All could be true. But, no one ever mentions that the civil court doesn't have the exacting standards of a criminal court. A law school professor I once had said to sue everyone remotely connected to an incident and let the trier-of-fact (judge) decide who stays in the suit. Ask Remington, now the owner of Bushmaster, how that civil lawsuit is going on the Sandy Hook school shooting. It's costing them a lot of money to fight what should not be their involvement in the suit, but the court is letting it go forward. I wonder if Remington will settle out of court eventually to save money? Think you'll have the resources to fight any civil suit against you if you sell the handgun used by some dirtbag to kill some kids? I can't and will perform "due diligence" if I ever sell another firearm on this forum. That includes using a BOS developed by a pro-2A lawyer to cover all the bases of me meeting the US Code and proving, at least I hope, to a civil jury that I did due diligence. Who knows, you may never be sued. And you may never be audited by the IRS. But then I've been audited three times, two because they made a mistake and once because I gave to much cash to charity for what I earned. I'm going to try and keep the stats as they are.