Obama Expected to Close Gun Show Loophole by Executive Order

[xd ED]

Link does not work. Did he sign this order?

No(t Yet)

Obama Expected to Close Gun Show Loophole by Executive Order

By Paul Barrett
Bloomberg News
Tuesday, December 29, 2015
(Published in print: Tuesday, December 29, 2015)

New York — The next shoe to drop on gun control may come by mid-January, when President Obama is expected to issue an executive order requiring everyone “in the business” of selling firearms to perform background checks.

Wait a second, you might be saying. Doesn’t federal law already oblige gun retailers to do computerized criminal checks via the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s data base? Yes and no.

Yes, when it comes to federally licensed dealers. But no, when you’re talking about people who lack federal licenses and sell guns from their personal collections.

An awful lot of firearms are sold in the latter fashion by individuals who aren’t technically gun retailers but who sell weapons at weekend gun shows or from their homes. Forthcoming research by the Harvard School of Public Health estimates that 40 percent of all gun transfers occur without background checks (that’s the so-called gun show loophole)....

http://www.vnews.com/news/nation/world/20259390-95/obama-expected-to-close-gun-show-loophole-by-executive-order

[45Badger]

Can't wait to see the definition of "in the business"

Number of guns sold, swapped, or transferred per year?

Total revenue of guns sold, swapped, or transferred per year?

Total "profit" made doing above? Gross or net? Ebitda?

Before I lost all of my guns in a tragic boating accident on the way to our new home west of the cesspool, I bought, sold, swapped, traded up, traded down and traded out of a number of guns over a 20 year period. Made a little on some, lost a little on others, traded into what I wanted on others. At the end of the day, the gain or "margin" never exceeded 1% of my adjusted gross income. I don't consider myself to have ever been "in the business" of selling firearms.

If there is an EO that defines me as such, can I re-file past tax returns and depreciate my stuff? Or write it all down in 2016?

[45Badger]

In case it was not clear-

Last sentence of above post was me being witty.......

Semi related video posted on local forum-

http://www.mrctv.org/videos/gun-control-song

[jdege]

Most of the people who sell guns at gun shows on anything other than a very occasional basis used to be FFLs, and had their licenses pulled because they weren't in the business.

If the ATF starts requiring them to have licenses, it's going to have to give up on the storefront retirement.

[2in2out]

I see they're still regurgitating the same inaccurate statistic propaganda that 40% of all gun sales are between private parties at gun shows.

[45Badger]

I see they're still regurgitating the same inaccurate statistic propaganda that 40% of all gun sales are between private parties at gun shows.

I think you and the antis are splitting hairs. The so called "gun show loop hole is any private sale".

I don't doubt that 40% of all gun sales/transfers are private. I have not bought a new gun in 20 years. Overwhelming majority of my purchases and sales have been private transfers. Some at gun shows, some at my house, some at somebody else's house, some in the parking lot of Cabela's , Goose Hill, Costco, Walmart, etc.

I'll be trolling a show tomorrow

[bofe954]

The other issue is the definition of "part of a personal collection".

[Squib Joe]

The other issue is the definition of "part of a personal collection".

The Bloomberg plan is to require that a firearm be in your possession for a full year to qualify as being part of your collection

[xd ED]

The other issue is the definition of "part of a personal collection".

The Bloomberg plan is to require that a firearm be in your possession for a full year to qualify as being part of your collection

And how does any party prove/ disprove when it(the firearm in question) came into/ out of one's possession?

[Squib Joe]

The other issue is the definition of "part of a personal collection".

The Bloomberg plan is to require that a firearm be in your possession for a full year to qualify as being part of your collection

And how does any party prove/ disprove when it(the firearm in question) came into/ out of one's possession?

The same way you can prove that a car was in your possession. Register it.. TADAA!

[xd ED]

And how does any party prove/ disprove when it(the firearm in question) came into/ out of one's possession?

The same way you can prove that a car was in your possession. Register it.. TADAA!

DING DING DING

[Bearcatrp]

Must be close to announcing
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pos ... next-week/

[2in2out]

According to that article, Obama has been consulting with lawyers for months about what he can get away with. That makes me wonder just how effective his executive orders could possibly be. In other words, I think he'll make a big commotion without much substance.

On the other hand, they seem hell-bent on doing things in the name of preventing tragedy when in fact they're merely seeking revenge against the Evil NRA for relentlessly opposing gun control. I really think that's the Obama administration's main focus. They can't get anything done, and they need to take it out on someone in order to ease their frustration.

[photogpat]

It won't matter the actual substance of the EO's - or even if they're effective or not...

They'll be marketed as "See!! We CAN get common sense gun 'safety' measures passed!"

Then slowly, and with selective enforcement, they'll gradually foist additional restrictions, definitions, etc...

Just wait until you have to prove when you bought a particular firearm...no longer will it be on the .gov to prove you're guilty, it'll be on you to prove you're innocent.

[jdege]

Just wait until you have to prove when you bought a particular firearm...no longer will it be on the .gov to prove you're guilty, it'll be on you to prove you're innocent.

That's been my fear, in all of this, and that the only acceptable proof would be to hope that F-troop hadn't screwed up their record keeping.