Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Obama says he will close "loophole" in background checks with executive action.
I am surprised the states allow the gun shows-- I am totally against them - I have and I think they should not be sold like candy - with balloons and clowns -- its serious business and should NOT be considered less-- and a training class should be mandatory.
18 USC 922 expressly permits the sale of firearms between two private individuals who reside in the same state. An EO cannot overturn that law. An EO cannot create a method where private individuals can execute a background check, NICS is restricted by law to licensed dealers (who are cleared prior to use). State/Local LEA's may use the NCIC but at a cost per query, and the States are under no obligation to perform such a check (see Prinz v. US, also an example of a state who did not enforce BATFE's rules), and they are also under no obligation to bear any costs, and an EO cannot provide funding. I'll also mention that Alaska has a statutory obligation to ignore such a law, and we're not the only state to have such a statute.
Under what law would BATFE enforce a prohibition on private gun sales? FFL's? There is no obligation for FFL's to run background checks unless they're selling a firearm, indeed the current process demands that FFL's would need to place themselves at risk to perform a background (by effectively owning said firearm for a short period between the start of the check and end of check, since that firearm would be required to be considered inventory), or not record the check, in the former there is a risk that the FFL has evidence they possessed stolen goods, in the latter no record means legally "it didn't happen", because how do you validate something happened without a record?.
Under what federal law would states arrest people selling privately?
How could people comply with a law that requires a background check, if no method is provided to perform that check? Laws that demand the performance of specific tasks to comply with the law, but with no mechanism provided to perform those tasks are overturned or ignored at the first test, pretty much every time.
He's not going to stop individuals from selling guns without a background check, he can't do that and he knows it. He's going to issue guidance to ATF regarding 'who' is considered a dealer at a gun show - I haven't seen what he is sending to ATF but from what I have read it's going to involve requiring people who accept credit cards, have business cards and rent a table at the gun show to have a dealer's license.
Well, I have never been to a gun show in California, but I have been to many, in many other states. I have never seen a seller in a gun show that wasn't federally licensed. In other words, the loophole you are referring to is a fairy tale talking point with no basis in reality.
The sellers at California guns shows are licensed in California, but California requires a transfer through a dealer for a personal transfer of a weapon. I lived in Northern Nevada and there were more private sellers than dealers at some shows and they sold guns all day long with 'no questions asked'. The only thing Obama is going to do is have ATF set some standards about 'who' is a dealer, i.e. if you rent a table at a gun show and take credit cards you need to get a dealers license. Doesn't sound too awful to me.
Hey, I've already explained how even this EO has no legal standing in my opinion.
I'm just pointing out that people who are screaming "reasonable restrictions" need to be careful, because there's a good chance that even if they win, they will lose.
The executive order will be to require more scrutiny of people selling at gun shows without a dealers license, i.e. if you rent a table, have business cards and take credit cards then ATF would consider you a dealer. Want to sell a gun privately- no problemo- just do the transaction in the parking lot of the gun show rather than renting a table inside. I don't see any court overturning that one. Reno gun shows are full of people who sell guns full time without a dealers license and word gets around pretty quick regarding which table you can buy a gun at with "no questions asked".
How is a gun anymore, or less dangerous, than the bomb that sits in your kitchen....
Education, that's how. Gun safes lock them up. What about gas stove safes? lock them up.
Some how the kid at an early age understands that the stove is a tool, that can be really dangerous.
I put that same mindset with my own daughter at a very early age, that the stove and the gun were good tools, if you know how to work them safely.
My daughter was cooking on the stove at 5-6 yo, along with shooting better than dad too....
We need stoves they are a part of every day life and a necessity. We don't need guns and they are not tools,if everyone locked them up and was responsible we wouldn't have a few hundred thousand missing weapons
He's not going to stop individuals from selling guns without a background check, he can't do that and he knows it. He's going to issue guidance to ATF regarding 'who' is considered a dealer at a gun show - I haven't seen what he is sending to ATF but from what I have read it's going to involve requiring people who accept credit cards, have business cards and rent a table at the gun show to have a dealer's license.
ROFL.
Then he will have to open up the FFL licensing again for "kitchen table" FFL's which IIRC was abolished during Clintons terms.
Here's the problem back then they were not deemed to be sufficient to be considered in the business of selling firearms (as a means to abolish kitchen table FFL's), there were law cases that were heard that leveraged that point to permit non-renewal of licenses. However if Obama determines they are in the business of, they can then apply for an FFL, and Obama has stated they are in the business of, therefore BATFE must issue a license (right now they're not considered in the business of, so can be denied a license).
So all that will happen is that Kitchen Table FFL's will return. Consider it's $200 for the initial 3 year license maybe $100-$200 one time cost for security and $90 for a renewal every 3 years, and you too can be an FFL. Add on an SOT 3 at $500/year and you can buy dealer sample NFA items that are prohibited to the public (as long as they're considered inventory) and not have to jump through any hoops to get them (not that as a dealer you should do this...).
I don't think that's the intent of the law, but from historical law and rulings, it's the most likely outcome.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
