Here Comes the Executive Order on Background Checks

[printcraft]

.gov is already here.

We need a "report post" link that goes to .gov instead of the mods..... It should be in the new exec. orders.

This

Or maybe this.....

 

[Hoosier8]

Got a kick out of one of the comments on this.

https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/684417935478243328

Comment:

only if you're a felon tho, thats where people have it mixed up. Only felons can buy online without ffa check.

 

[KG1]

Would you quit quoting that brady campaign mass mailer. I have them on ignore.

 

[tbhausen]

Limbaugh NAILS IT on gun control and the Obama regime:

Snarling Obama Issues Gun Fatwa - The Rush Limbaugh Show

 

[jbombelli]

Every single solitary one is an honor student and completely innocent.

Allegedly.

 

[Bill of Rights]

If two sales are the line separating sellers who need licenses from the rest of us, doesn't that pretty well eliminate the concept of private sales? Granted, it would be extremely difficult to prove aside from encountering guns manufactured after the cutoff date in hands other than the original buyer, but still, this sounds like a hell of a lot more threat than what some of you are laughing off.

Not following. There is no such proposal cited.

I remember when the seat belt law came into effect, we were told they couldn't ticket you for that alone.
This is a wedge.

Kirk, I saw the part he's speaking of, wherein with other facts and evidence, as few as two sales or even one or two transactions have already been cited as someone "being in the business". I agree that there's no proposal reference dates of manufacture, but it sounded to me like he meant that if a gun is in the hands of other than the original buyer, without having gone through a FFL, and it was made after the enactment of this Obama action, it would be evidence that it had been sold privately, and thus, the original owner, absent a FFL, would possibly be cited as "in the business".

The point here is that even on the ATF site, they specify that if you, say, inherit a large collection of firearms and decide you want the money they're worth more than the guns themselves, you may sell them off without a FFL, with impunity. Your goal is neither livelihood nor profit, you are only liquidating the collection. Were you to restock that collection and again sell them off, that would likely change things.

Here's the info I read:
https://www.atf.gov/file/100871/download

And yes, dieselrealtor... you are correct. This is a wedge.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Good grief. No one in the Media has any idea what is going on.

Bill O"Reilly is babbling about "registration". Just wait until someone tells him that registration is against federal law.

 

[KG1]

Good grief. No one in the Media has any idea what is going on.

Bill O"Reilly is babbling about "registration". Just wait until someone tells him that registration is against federal law.

Bill O'Reilly babbles about a lot of things.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Bill O'Reilly babbles about a lot of things.

It would help Bill O'Reilly a lot if he would start talking out the correct end for a change rather than out his rear.

 

[KG1]

It would help Bill O'Reilly a lot if he would start talking out the correct end for a change rather than out his rear.

I think his rear has been his spokesperson for quite some time now. Plus I think it's the brains of the partnership.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I think his rear has been his spokesperson for quite some time now. Plus I think it's the brains of the partnership.

Sad butt true!

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Cracks in the dam? Mainstream Media casts doubt on Obama's EAs: Obama measures wouldn't have kept guns from mass shooters

 

[IndyDave1776]

Cracks in the dam? Mainstream Media casts doubt on Obama's EAs: Obama measures wouldn't have kept guns from mass shooters

That's awful fast. Maybe we are going to see the clamor for universal background checks or a push for prohibition next week rather than next year or thereafter as I suspected this may be engineered to set up when it is proven ineffective for any of the purposes listed in the brochure.

 

[lionhunt64]

It would help Bill O'Reilly a lot if he would start talking out the correct end for a change rather than out his rear.

I wish he would just move to the other side.

 

[KG1]

That's awful fast. Maybe we are going to see the clamor for universal background checks or a push for prohibition next week rather than next year or thereafter as I suspected this may be engineered to set up when it is proven ineffective for any of the purposes listed in the brochure.

You could be right. At some point in time they might start to realize that closing this whole manufactured "gun show loophole" thing was a scam and they will be hungry for some real red meat.

 

[1775usmarine]

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.

Seller has around 50 posts with over 100 more in the classifieds.

 

[dwh79]

I agree that the fed code and the atf doc referenced above would say private sales are not all illegal. However the White House reps have eluded that a lot more sales will require a ffl now than they did prior to this executive order. Maybe all talk but I don't know if I want to rely on this alone. I would like a little less vagueness on these EO's they should be very specific if they are trying to act because they don't believe congress is following the will of the people.

 

[dieselrealtor]

This may just be the move of a pawn to position a more powerful piece into play.

 

[KG1]

I agree that the fed code and the atf doc referenced above would say private sales are not all illegal. However the White House reps have eluded that a lot more sales will require a ffl now than they did prior to this executive order. Maybe all talk but I don't know if I want to rely on this alone. I would like a little less vagueness on these EO's they should be very specific if they are trying to act because they don't believe congress is following the will of the people.

That's the point. They are intentionally trying to be vague that's why they declined to put a specific threshold number on sales because they said it could potentially limit their ability to prosecute. Then they turn around and say it could be as few as one or two if certain other vague criteria is present.

We are dealing with some very shady tactics here indeed and some people wonder why there are a great majority of us that are dead set against making any kind of compromises with this shifty bunch and they in turn have the gall to try and label us as unreasonable.

 

[IndyDave1776]

This may just be the move of a pawn to position a more powerful piece into play.