Remember: if a law allows something that Democrats don’t like, its a ‘loophole’.
Should be interesting to pick this apart and see exactly what is and isn’t defined as being ‘engaged in the business’. The important takeaway here is that if you believe that a paperless gun transaction is important to your privacy and well-being, yo u may wish to make those purchases sooner rather than later.
The federal government has no authority to regulate intrastate transfers of firearms.
Commander:
What say we put a “looped hole” into a rope, attach that rope to a tree and let Dimocrats explain their “Loophole Theory” to the tree…
Yes – I know – someone would complain about polluting the forest!
Ceejay
It’s already law that anyone selling firearms for profit must have a federal dealers license, and that any licensed dealer selling a firearm (No matter where) must follow the states background check procedure.
There IS no ‘gunshow loophole’. It’s totally fabricated pravda.
So… this is a regulation demanding what is already law be followed.
In other words, clear and utter redundant bullshit for political show.
What you are saying currently only applies to people “engaged in the business” or FFLs. In most states, a private seller can transact a firearm to a private buyer for profit with no federal or state regulations being violated.
This is all about building a federal database on all firearm owning American’s for future confiscation.
It appears that the tack being taken is to redefine what ‘engaged in the business’ means.
A rule is not a law. FJB.
We need a law against people in office and their immediate families from becoming multi millionaires while they are in elected offices. Some might say insider trading with knowledge of of government contracts should be illegal but they do it all the time. Then they want to disarm the public while they walk around with armed security. Please get rid of hypocrites.
Steve:
We can’t do that!
How could politics (as we know it) exist without hypocrrites?
Their gravy train would be over…
Instead of giving other peoples taxes away, they would be in need of the money.
Ceejay
All political office holders should be paid $1.00 per year with no benefits. We used to have people serve us because they loved America and what it is. Now they serve to loot America and it’s people.
I Dig Au,
So only wealthy people could afford to serve in political office? Good to know. Got it.
Government jobs used to be very part-time as most had real jobs that paid the bills. George Washington had to pay his Whitehouse staff from his own pocket because nothing in the Constitution allowed public servants to be paid with public money.
Survivormann99:
When was the last time a “Working Class” person managed to get political office?
Ceejay
No, all people who wish to be “in the business” of politics should be required to give all their assets to the government, including that of their spouses and adult children living with them. Then they should be paid a “living wage” based on the prevailing minimum wage, for the rest of their lives, owning no private property other than their clothes and personal objects needed to live. See “Freehold” by M. Z. Williamson.
Maybe a definition of what ‘engaged in the business’ is would be helpful. If more than 10 firearms a year are transferred to other individuals make them a gun dealer for example. Or does the firearm seller actually own it or is it part of an inventory they keep on hand. Or does a firearm ordered from a gun dealer and not privately owned make it a commodity at all – the seller is just the middle man.
You are right CZ – the law is too ambiguous. Making it difficult for an individual selling their private property to another does not make one a gun dealer any more than selling a car to another make them a car dealer.
jrg:
Perhaps all those “engaged in the business” of politics should have their intelligence (and ideology) measured.
Those not put against a wall can then inform Americans what America needs…
Ceejay
BATFE has consistently refused to define what “engaged in the business” is so far as a number of guns being sold per specified period of time.
They — of course — want to have the ability to arbitrarily define someone as an “unlicensed person engaged in the business” when it suits their ends.
This is however not a legally-sustainable definition. They’re getting slapped down for overreach of this sort in the case of shoulder braces, and likely bump-stocks as well. And there are other Supreme Court decisions that are placing much greater restraints on such overreach by other federal agencies.
So I see no special reason to get too excited about this dog-and-pony show. Obama played the same game regarding the same issue, and his Executive Order ended up being a toothless restating of the existing law.
This is just an increasingly desperate Biden trying to appeal to his gun-banning pals by “doing something!” ahead of the election. Nothing more than “If I rile up the soccer-moms about guns, they may forget about the doubled grocery bills and the surge in crime since I was sworn in.”
Sounds like window dressing. The “loophole” account for 13,600 gun sales per year according to ATF data trying to make it sound like a big problem. There are about 16 million gun purchases in the US each year. Election year “see I tried to do something” stuff that disappears when the White House changes parties.
New rule even defines the selling or discussing selling a single firearm as illegal……it’s unconstitutional but will take years before it’s struck down….and who wants to be the test case????
F#$K e’m all
idahobob:
Why improve their day?
Ceejay
No need for them to enjoy it.
“Anything can be used as a dildo. Once.”
Agreed:
They could start with a Pineapple!
My state (before anyone goes there it used to be gun friendly and my minor children are here) “closed that loophole” some time ago. Thankfully I saw it coming and had made the preparations I deemed important. Of course I’d have liked to do more but such are finite resources and limitless desires.
If a person had bought one gun every other year and a mag per paycheck since the Obama administration they would have several guns and a bunch of mags.
More work for FPC, I see. I like their sentiment – Nuke Us or Fuck Off.
it’s been a long time since I read Orwell’s ‘Animal Farm’ but I am reminded of the pigs in the ruling party constantly changing the rules to suit their own selfish desires.
“Gun Show Loophole” was/is always communist-speak for Private, Person-to-Person Gun sales. Like the term “Unlicensed Dealer”, now also being used in the same way. Interestingly, there is established case law regarding “Dealing” or “Doing Business In” just about anything, in terms of Taxation and Licensing. Selling a Gun or two, once in a while has Never fallen under the conventional Definition of “Doing Business In” or “Dealing” in this regard, and until recently, even the nazis in the ATF have generally recognized that a Case made on the basis of a Claim that someone is an “Unlicensed Dealer in Firearms” was not going to pass muster in Court.
Now, with the Courts fully Corrupted by communists, they will be able to change “Definitions” in lieu of changing Law. You will see more examples of 0300 Murders of Citizens on the basis of being an ‘Unlicensed Dealer’.