I was surprised to find waiting periods were a State thing. I'm from the great state of Missouri where the only thing that stops me from buying a handgun on my lunch break is my wife's cold stare of disappointment that I would waste money like that. However when I lived in Florida, I bought a pistol on the internet and it was delivered to an FFL in the area. It took the gun a week to arrive which I expected, but it was incredibly stupid that I then had to wait an additional three days to buy the gun from the FFL. I get what they're trying to do, to prevent crimes of passion, but come on! I ordered it on the internet. That three days figure originally mentioned is the length of time that the FBI has before an FFL can legally sell someone a gun without a fully complete background check. So if you buy a pistol and the run the check, but the FBI doesn't give a yes or no, you don't have to continue to wait forever. They can sell you the pistol after three days.
You know, I wonder if that policy is in place so that the FBI and ATF can't keep people's status in limbo through lack of action. Bureaucratic systems are the absolute pros when it comes to stall tactics. So if you buy a pistol and the run the check, but the FBI doesn't give a yes or no, you don't have to continue to wait forever. They can sell you the pistol after three days.
That's exactly what it is. Which is why a lot of small gun shops don't resist selling to an incomplete background check, but Wal-Mart will resist it. Wal-Mart isn't making a statement by selling guns, but pursuing profits. The gun shop does not exist simply to sell firearms, but to make a statement of support for firearms. They host safety classes, concealed carry classes, etc., and they participate in lobbying groups where Wal-Mart wouldn't. That's why for me changing the background check period to 30 days like in California is a mistake. It's an undue burden on the buyer and is a cost at his or her expense which simply keeps the state from improving their response time to requests.
I think if this was 50-100 years ago, a 30 day period would seem somewhat reasonable. However, in this day and age, with the speed of communication and the amount of readily accessible information the government has, 30 days might as well be a year.That's why for me changing the background check period to 30 days like in California is a mistake. It's an undue burden on the buyer and is a cost at his or her expense which simply keeps the state from improving their response time to requests.