Obama Expected to Close Gun Show Loophole by Executive Order

[jdege]

The point is, whether a law is passed by congress making private sales illegal, or it is unconstitutionally declared illegal by executive order, most people won't do it anymore if they could end up in legal trouble for it.

For the most part, it doesn't even matter if it is enforceable or not. Where would someone find guns to buy for private sale if this happens? That market would pretty much dry up.

Except for all of the previously unregistered guns. How many guns do you own that have been registered in your name?

How many new gunners will have off-paper guns, twenty years down the road?

[goett047]

The point is, whether a law is passed by congress making private sales illegal, or it is unconstitutionally declared illegal by executive order, most people won't do it anymore if they could end up in legal trouble for it.

For the most part, it doesn't even matter if it is enforceable or not. Where would someone find guns to buy for private sale if this happens? That market would pretty much dry up.

Except for all of the previously unregistered guns. How many guns do you own that have been registered in your name?

I'm not really sure what you want to argue about here. If this goes through, will you be listing your unregistered guns for sale on places like MNGuntalk, like people are able to do pretty freely now? Will you be likely to participate in a transaction as either buyer or seller, with someone you do not know without following the new rules, if there is the possibility of ending up in jail for it? Do you expect there to be more people buying and selling these unregistered guns openly, or fewer? If someone did want to buy or sell an unregistered firearm, do you think it would be easier or harder than it is now?

I'm arguing that enforcement is unfeasible and that an all out registry would absolutely be ruled unconstitutional. Executive action alone would have no teeth. It won't work. He needs Congressional support and he would never get that for a registry. Congress still holds the purse strings and without money he really can't make a substantive change.

[Erud]

Unfortunately, the EO itself would be teeth enough for most gun owners. Just at answer the questions I asked and you should be able to see what I mean.

[Randygmn]

The requirement used to be that one must have an FFL license if they derive their primary source of income from selling firearms. Now, it looks like there will be a numerical threshold of 25 guns per year. Also, there will be limitations to guns sold in boxes with new packaging. I see what they are doing and it's terribly misguided and wholly unenforceable outside of sting operations. This entire scheme is set up to prevent the handful of douchebags that are moving hundreds of pistols, all at one time, privately, to those that would probably never pass a check, on the outskirts of places like Chicago. It would've been easier to just bust them. Anyway, as has been stated before, this is just an intermediate ruse, AND THEY KNOW IT. At some undetermined time in the future they'll whine about how close they are to being able to prevent bad guys from getting guns but the one component missing to regulate everything is registration.

This, along with the newly proposed AWB has gotten me more determined. Feelings about gun ownership has changed drastically just in the last 10-15 years nationwide. IMO, folks won't abide another AWB, since the recent sunsetting of 2004. Neither will they abide Katrina like confiscation, which only happened very recently. We should be forming state wide militias, in every state and start preparing to protect our rights, by any means necessary. No, I'm not kidding.

[xd ED]

Unfortunately, the EO itself would be teeth enough for most gun owners. Just at answer the questions I asked and you should be able to see what I mean.

This is the thing.

As things appear to be heading, a reasonable, typically law abiding person is not going to risk going to jail, and financial ruin to obtain/ dispose of a firearm as opposed to paying the FFL fee and all the potential paperwork that might then ensue.

They'll create the EO, bust a few select people as an example of effective crime control...
Yeah it might prove unconstitutional, but by the time your case gets to the SCOTUS, you will be a forgotten and broken footnote of history.

(What's the guy's name who remains in jail for the 'Benghazi' video?)

For those whose lifestyle would take a dramatic upswing by being imprisoned. it really won't have an effect, should the inevitable selective enforcement of the 'law' happen upon them.

So you have much the same result of most gun control laws- control/ restrict the general populace, with little to no effect on crime or violence.

[Holland&Holland]

Unfortunately, the EO itself would be teeth enough for most gun owners. Just at answer the questions I asked and you should be able to see what I mean.

This assumes that GOGCRA, the NRA, and their ilk do nothing. If that is the case, then we are lost

[Erud]

Unfortunately, the EO itself would be teeth enough for most gun owners. Just at answer the questions I asked and you should be able to see what I mean.

This assumes that GOGCRA, the NRA, and their ilk do nothing. If that is the case, then we are lost

They may sue, but as mentioned above, that sort of thing takes years. What happens in the meantime?

[2in2out]

The tide is turning in our favor, in spite of their backroom strategies and huge sources of funding (for propaganda and lobbyists).

I agree with you, Erud - it COULD be a very bad thing, if the President can actually do what some think he's going to do. However, I also agree with goett047 - without Congressional funding and a law to go with it, he's not going to have much weight to throw around.

One other thing to consider: EO's are only temporary if a future President deems them so. Any executive action can be undone as easily as it is done, if the Republicans can get their act together and field an electable Presidential candidate. This makes legal action effective, because it stalls the EO in court, even if they eventually decide against us.

There are a lot of ways to fight such a thing, and the President knows that. That's why he's spending so much energy meeting with lawyers.

We need to fight it, yes. But, the Obama Administration is acting out of desperation. We have the high ground, let's keep it.

Oh, and one final thought - GOCRA, GOPAC and the GO Caucus are US, not "them". "They" wouldn't fight this. "WE" WOULD.

[Lumpy]

Unfortunately, the EO itself would be teeth enough for most gun owners. Just at answer the questions I asked and you should be able to see what I mean.

This assumes that GOGCRA, the NRA, and their ilk do nothing. If that is the case, then we are lost

They may sue, but as mentioned above, that sort of thing takes years. What happens in the meantime?

Almost certainly there would be a filing to block enforcement of the EO while the lawsuits go through the courts.

[Kelor]

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of ... d-make-our

Executive order was just posted on Whitehouse.Gov

[Bearcatrp]

Looks vague about online sales. Does this mean we as individuals cannot post a gun for sale in the firearms for sale forum without running a back ground check? I like what Cruz says about this. He will undo what the president does. Going to get real stupid real quick. As usual, making a law that is questionable, or specifically how to do it. I would say if that AR you have been itching to buy is available, better go buy it.

[xd ED]

Looks vague about online sales. Does this mean we as individuals cannot post a gun for sale in the firearms for sale forum without running a back ground check? I like what Cruz says about this. He will undo what the president does. Going to get real stupid real quick. As usual, making a law that is questionable, or specifically how to do it. I would say if that AR you have been itching to buy is available, better go buy it.

The first thing that jumped out to me was the lack of definition in qualifying some as a dealer; no doubt intentional:

Quantity and frequency of sales are relevant indicators. There is no specific threshold number of firearms purchased or sold that triggers the licensure requirement. But it is important to note that even a few transactions, when combined with other evidence, can be sufficient to establish that a person is “engaged in the business.” For example, courts have upheld convictions for dealing without a license when as few as two firearms were sold or when only one or two transactions took place, when other factors also were present.

[Snakeman721]

So.........with this EO from the boy king, as I understand it, you need an FFL if you sell an undetermined amount of guns (but more than one) because you will be considered "in the business" of selling guns. Strange....in the Clinton era, they were busy dismantling and taking away FFLs from "small time home business" types that didn't have a storefront. So now we've come 360. F***ing Dems can't figure their head from their arse!

[fine ape]

F***ing Dems can't figure their head from their arse!

Aren't they interchangeable?

Broke out the SPOOKY language on the NFA items....the most heavily regulated items.....with names and addresses engraved in to the receivers. Clearly LEGALLY OBTAINED AND PROSESS NFA items are perfect for evil doing.

When did a CLEO signature be come a background check? Don't you still have to do federal paperwork when buying,selling SBR, SBS, full auto's?

[TTS]

ATF has updates on their FB page:

https://www.facebook.com/HQATF/

Looks like not much has changed. If I am reading correctly Trusts now need prints, photos and BG checks on all "responsible parties" but CLEO sign off is eliminated for all NFA items. Only CLEO notification required.

This means they may have made it easier than ever to get NFA items.

The rules for dealer don't look much different...

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.