Monday, December 28, 2015

"What's Next on Gun Control: Obama and the Loophole."

The next shoe to drop on gun control may come by mid-January, when President Barack Obama is expected to issue an executive order requiring everyone "in the business" of selling firearms to perform background checks.
An ironic twist is that many of the attendees at SHOT each year are federally licensed bricks-and-mortar gun dealers who sometimes concede privately that they have no real problem with all gun sellers being forced to do background checks. These full-time retailers resent competition from casual unlicensed sellers at gun shows.
But the National Rifle Association's orthodoxy—that any additional gun control is merely a first step toward bans and confiscation—holds sway in the firearms world, making outward expressions of support among gun sellers for Obama's proposal unlikely. While the enormous gathering in Las Vegas isn't technically an NRA event, the group's strong anti-Obama stance will almost certainly be evident there, and a fresh proposal to stiffen regulation may have the effect of pouring gasoline on a fire already burning hot.
There will probably be calls to challenge Obama's authority to broaden the background check mandate without congressional involvement. Lawsuits and objections from pro-gun Republicans on Capitol Hill will likely follow, as has happened with other efforts by the administration to use executive authority in the environmental arena.
See also: I've got 12 months left to squeeze every ounce of change I can while I'm still in office. And that's what I intend to do.'


Anonymous said...

As the son of a former FFL holder I find three things rarely mentioned outright fascinating due to their omission by anyone on the anti-gun side:

1. ATF has resolutely refused to define "engaged in the business" outside of the following:

The term “dealer” is defined at 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(11)(A) to include any
person engaged in the business of selling firearms at wholesale or retail.
The term “engaged in the business” as applied to a dealer in firearms
means a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms
as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms. A dealer can be “engaged in the business” without taking title to the firearms that are sold. However, the term does not include a person who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms.

Clear as mud, yes? How would you like to try jeopardizing your liberty and civil rights based upon that definition?

2. So-called "unlicensed dealers" CANNOT conduct a NCIS background check even if they wanted to because the "dealer's" FFL number is required to access the system. So rather than evil unscrupulous manipulators of the "gun show loophole" they are in fact excluded from participating in the system even if they wanted to.

3. Many of the "unlicensed dealers" used to be licensed, my father included. But during the Clinton administration they were forced to give up their license because ATF said there were too many to administer given their then budget limitations. So if you were a low volume "dealer", ATF requested that you give up your FFL. They also jacked up the price to renew an FFL. Those who didn't do so voluntarily found that local zoning authorities were informed that they were running a business from their homes which were probably not zoned for business operations. Imagine if the FAA said they wanted the number of airliners or airlines in the world limited due to their budget constraints.

Not Me said...

I notice that the Obama rarely sticks his head up out of his hole except in Hollywood, NYC, Hawaii, or Martha's Vineyard. Smart.

Moe Death said...

If the Kenyan Kommie squeezes a bit too hard, we may be forced to do some squeezing of our own.

Hope you had a great Christmas, Mike, and we're praying for you.

If you wake up with a bag of Chiky-Stix, it means Domino's prayers are getting through okay...

Stay safe and well.
Bill and Domino

Miles said...

ATF before Slick Willy, even had booths set up at gunshows promoting Dealer FFLs for everyone.

Slick Willy went on a FFL rampage and ATF forced about 2/3ds of the FFLS (mostly of what the leiberals would like to call "kitchen table") dealers to give them up.

Now Obummer may want to reverse gears.

One prosecutorial tactic ATF has used is the vagueness of the definition of 'being in the business' to effect plea bargains and convictions.

If "O" actually makes ATF regulate that making a specific number of gun sales mandates a FFL, ATF Will Have A Cow.

And with that regulated minimum, we'll see just how effective enforcement can not be. And, also the number of people who will document that they've sold exactly one gun less than that minimum.

Otto Didact said...

OK, now I'm puzzled. I tought FFAs were already required to conduct IBCs on all sales. What's the deal here? Besides, who's gonna know who sold what to who absent documentation? Who's gonna know - aside from the two parties to the deal?

Anonymous said...

I haven't seen anyone talk about this....but feel free to poke holes in my theory.

Closing the "Gun Show" Loophole IS Registration.....

If you cannot dispose of your property as you wish without a NICS or similar background check....then the 4473 form traces the firearm back to YOU...and you alone (until you sell it with a background check to someone else).

If a new "law" requires that all transfers be subjected to a background check (thereby eliminating person to person sales without such paperwork), then effectively after the date the law goes into effect, any firearms sold (new or used) will already be registered via the 4473 form. All that would have to change is for ATF (as one bureaucratic entity example) to have access to the 4473s...which they've already been caught twice illegally obtaining and caching.

If TPTB come looking for a firearm purchased after the date the law goes into effect and you don't have it....and haven't reported it stolen (or sold it with a background check which means they wouldn't be coming to you in the first place)....your only "excuse" will be that it's been lost or destroyed.

Somehow, I don't think they'll accept either of those excuses.

"Closing the gun show loophole" nothing more than backdoor registration of all newly purchased firearms (and subsequently sold used firearms) and is a huge violation of property rights.

Anonymous said...

According to my understanding, " in the business" of selling firearms is 50 or more a year. Is that correct?

Anonymous said...

"Loophole" is code for private two party contract.
This is not about guns. It is about total economic control, and thus total control of all people via economics.

tjbbpgobIII said...

I just don't he will be able to achieve his goals at all.