Here Comes the Executive Order on Background Checks

[avboiler11]

There is NOT a requirement that anyone that sells a gun needs a FFL.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...e-order-background-checks-75.html#post6282977

 

[traderdan]

There is NOT a requirement that anyone that sells a gun needs a FFL.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...e-order-background-checks-75.html#post6282977

How many can you sell before you are in business?

 

[avboiler11]

How many can you sell before you are in business?

There is no number today...just like there was no number yesterday.

There are examples in the ATF guide that help understand the ATF's perspective (and also, in my dumb pilot mind, help provide guidance to avoid..."misunderstandings").

I was VERY leery of this at first glance, but the more I look at it, the less concerned I am.

 

[dusty88]

My concern isn't with the FFL issue (after seeing it, it's a yawner)

I am looking for specifically what changes he wants in the way HIPAA laws are handled.

I support attempting to keep firearms from those who have been adjudicated mentally ill, but not based on any other mental health records. Nor do I want the federal government to have any increased access to medical records. (not that I'm naive enough to think they can't get any electronic records they want, but I digress)

Is this process just to make sure they get the names of those adjudicated mentally incompetent?

 

[Huzrjim]

There is no number today...just like there was no number yesterday.

There are examples in the ATF guide that help understand the ATF's perspective (and also, in my dumb pilot mind, help provide guidance to avoid..."misunderstandings").

I was VERY leery of this at first glance, but the more I look at it, the less concerned I am.

But what if President Hillary Rodham Clinton changes the language to "one gun" and drops the profit/principle business/livelihood language. Liberals are never satisfied with what they achieve, that is only a step towards their ultimate goasl. 100% background checks for all sales, a national gun registry, and ultimately, confiscation. Just look at how Commufornia has changed their laws over the last 30 years.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Some of the many threads on this topic:

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...reduce-gun-violence-make-our-communities.html
https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...-regs-executive-orders-executive-actions.html
https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/legislation-2nd-amendment/401937-here-comes.html
https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...-obama-press-conference-executive-action.html
https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...going-stop-future-conservative-president.html

 

[avboiler11]

But what if

Lemme stop you right there.

President Obama could have done all of those hypotheticals you wrote *today*, but he didn't. In fact, he really didn't change much of anything to that end...but it looks like he did to people that don't actually take the time to read the guidance. And guess what? Most of the people so effusive in praise for him or so strongly in opposition to him haven't actually taken the time read the damn guidance, they are reacting to what they saw on 24/7 news or have read on the internet.

In my opinion only, Obama would have gone further than this if he legally could have - but he can't, so he didn't. Going into an election year where Democrats are hoping to keep the White House and win back the Senate, he's not going to do something that could result in a legal rebuke to executive power, a massive voter backlash, and tarnish his legacy...even though he's a lame duck in the last year of his presidency.

No, he's going after low information, high emotion progressives that will see this and revel in his "doing something" when anybody paying attention knows he really didn't do much of anything. And while it might serve to embolden the disarmist cause (like they need a rallying point) it also can serve as a brake to further restrictions - "Obama took these actions and we should really wait to see what their impact will be before taking up any additional gun control measures".

It is yet another Washington "kick the can".

I understand people's concerns...but I don't understand people's FEAR on this issue.

 

[chipbennett]

But what if President Hillary Rodham Clinton changes the language to "one gun" and drops the profit/principle business/livelihood language. Liberals are never satisfied with what they achieve, that is only a step towards their ultimate goasl. 100% background checks for all sales, a national gun registry, and ultimately, confiscation. Just look at how Commufornia has changed their laws over the last 30 years.

Except, neither Obama nor Hillary could do that.

18 U.S. Code § 921 (a)(21)(C) defines “engaged in the business” as:
“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, but such term shall 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”

 

[ArcadiaGP]

One way to look at it:

Obama Vows to Make Gun Industry Investors Rich Before Leaving Office

 

[KG1]

I guess 0bama is mostly restating existing laws to help his legacy? It's a cool trick when you've convinced the masses that a nonexistent loophole exists that must be closed to save the children. Restate current laws and then act like you've just dealt your opponents a crushing blow.

I'll have to ping my brother-in-law and see if he's gushing.

The anti crowd is too stupid to know that they've been duped by their saviour. This crap will not make the difference that they've been told it would.

 

[BogWalker]

Except, neither Obama nor Hillary could do that.

18 U.S. Code § 921 (a)(21)(C) defines “engaged in the business” as:
“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, but such term shall 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”

That's what I don't understand. It says an occasional sale is fine, but Obama says you can be arrested for a single sale. I don't see how you can prove somebody is in the business through a single sale.

Of course they might not be looking for convictions. They might just be looking to make examples to discourage private sales. Legal defense is expensive.

 

[HoughMade]

That's what I don't understand. It says an occasional sale is fine, but Obama says you can be arrested for a single sale. I don't see how you can prove somebody is in the business through a single sale.

Of course they might not be looking for convictions. They might just be looking to make examples to discourage private sales. Legal defense is expensive.

I can see multiple ways of proving intent some realistic, some absurd....some of the absurd have probably happened.

- Seller casually mentions during the transaction: "I just bought this gun and it was such a good deal, I knew I could resell it at a profit."

- Seller buys a ledger to record gun buying and selling, writes "Gun Business" on the outside and records a sale with the bought price, selling price and notes the profit (or loss)

- Seller just tells someone: "I buy and sell guns like a business, but it's so few no one will notice" or "well, I just made my first sale for my new business."

- Seller has receipts printed up that say "Joe's Guns" and gives the buyer a filled out receipt when he sells gun #1.

- Seller posts on website how much he hates the "barriers to entry" put up by the ATF regs, states that he believes they are unconstitutional and won't follow them and elsewhere (on the same site or elsewhere) offers a gun for sale that he has only owned for 3 hours....or skip the political stuff and just offer a gun for sale at a price higher than you bought it for that you have owned for 3 hours.

- Seller attempts to deduct the costs of his "gun hobby" as a business expense, or pays taxes on the net profits as "business income" (I guarantee both have happened).

I could go on and on.

How do you prove intent? You show a jury what you did and said and if they can discern your intent "beyond a reasonable doubt" in their minds, there you go.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I can see multiple ways of proving intent some realistic, some absurd....some of the absurd have probably happened.

So, I see you have a solid grounding in criminal law.

 

[KG1]

Whatever you do don't hand out business cards.

 

[HoughMade]

So, I see you have a solid grounding in criminal law.

Let's just say that I'm a keen observer of the criminal intellect....such as it is.

 

[HoughMade]

Whatever you do don't hand out business cards.

I also guarantee THAT has happened.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I also guarantee THAT has happened.

Alright, someone give Hough the Door Prize. He's right.

Other ways to show criminal intent to deal in controlled substances--Tippecanoe County edition:

1. Hit on the cute, young Drug Task Force detective by telling her, on tape of course, "yo, so me and meye squad are all about breaking off those rocks and making those Benjamins."

2. Carry crack in paper bag, demarcated "drugs, For Selling"

3. Keep business records on your iPod about your horse selling.

4. Write your "street name" on index cards (they were small like for a rolodex) and hand them out, especially to Drug Task Force detectives.

 

[pudly]

.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Alright, someone give Hough the Door Prize. He's right.

Other ways to show criminal intent to deal in controlled substances--Tippecanoe County edition:

1. Hit on the cute, young Drug Task Force detective by telling her, on tape of course, "yo, so me and meye squad are all about breaking off those rocks and making those Benjamins."

2. Carry crack in paper bag, demarcated "drugs, For Selling"

3. Keep business records on your iPod about your horse selling.

4. Write your "street name" on index cards (they were small like for a rolodex) and hand them out, especially to Drug Task Force detectives.

How about combining all of the above, hit on cute detective, give her your street name card with the invitation to come ride the 'horse' and get samples out of the marked bag where you carry the rocks you broke off and the Benjamins you got for it?

 

[Kirk Freeman]

How about combining all of the above, hit on cute detective, give her your street name card with the invitation to come ride the 'horse' and get samples out of the marked bag where you carry the rocks you broke off and the Benjamins you got for it?

Dude, it's coming. As much horse as I see now, I know that stuff is coming any day. (Don't forget it will be on video too).