|
Post by chris623 on Jan 6, 2016 16:57:53 GMT -5
"We" weren't responsible for getting the clown twice. Durned Libtards!
|
|
Paden
.375 Atomic
Lower Goldstream Creek
Posts: 1,132
|
Post by Paden on Jan 6, 2016 17:32:23 GMT -5
If you read thru the actual executive action on whitehouse.gov the whole thing is nearly meaningless right now. It's important to understand the difference between Executive Orders, Memoranda, talking points/press statements/etc. An executive Order carries the weight of law (and can be nullified by Congress). Anything short of an Executive Order, for all intents and purposes, at most amounts to just administrative direction issued by a CEO; no different than any memo issued by a private sector corporate CEO. To date, no Executive Order has been issued, regardless of what has been said in the media. If an Executive Order is issued, it will appear here (they do publish them pretty timely): www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/executive-orders
|
|
Snyd
.375 Atomic
The Last Frontier
Posts: 2,388
|
Post by Snyd on Jan 6, 2016 19:14:57 GMT -5
It will be interesting to see what all this actually means.... www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/01/05/fact-sheet-new-executive-actions-reduce-gun-violence-and-make-our • Clarify that it doesn’t matter where you conduct your business—from a store, at gun shows, or over the Internet: If you’re in the business of selling firearms, you must get a license and conduct background checks. Background checks have been shown to keep guns out of the wrong hands, but too many gun sales—particularly online and at gun shows—occur without basic background checks. Today, the Administration took action to ensure that anyone who is “engaged in the business” of selling firearms is licensed and conducts background checks on their customers. Consistent with court rulings on this issue, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has clarified the following principles: ◦ A person can be engaged in the business of dealing in firearms regardless of the location in which firearm transactions are conducted. For example, a person can be engaged in the business of dealing in firearms even if the person only conducts firearm transactions at gun shows or through the Internet. Those engaged in the business of dealing in firearms who utilize the Internet or other technologies must obtain a license, just as a dealer whose business is run out of a traditional brick-and-mortar store. ◦ 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. ◦ There are criminal penalties for failing to comply with these requirements. A person who willfully engages in the business of dealing in firearms without the required license is subject to criminal prosecution and can be sentenced up to five years in prison and fined up to $250,000. Dealers are also subject to penalties for failing to conduct background checks before completing a sale.Couple that with some things Lynch has said and it raises more questions than answers. We shall have to wait and see....
www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-moves-to-close-gun-show-loophole-for-background-checks/
The new guidance from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) announced Monday "puts in one place clear guidance... on who actually qualifies as a dealer," Lynch said. "It will help individuals who do want to comply and really do want to know the standards, and it will also put everyone else on notice that if they don't comply, there will be consequences."
Lynch insisted Monday that the new guidance on the gun show loophole sets "clear, definitive standards" for anyone who wants to sell firearms. However, the new guidance does not include a specific number of guns that must be sold to qualify as a dealer, since existing law does not specify a number.
However, court rulings have set a precedent that says a person could sell as few as one or two guns and still be considered a dealer, depending on the circumstances. For instance, Lynch explained, if an individual sells a gun clearly for profit, or if they buy and sell a gun kept in its original packaging, they may be considered a dealer.
"It's important to note the hobbyist and collector exception is still there," she said. Now, though, dealers can no longer "hide behind that."
The ATF will engage in a "business educational initiative" in the first part of 2016, Lynch said, to help gun dealers, hobbyists and collectors understand the new guidance. This effort will target gun shows, flea markets and online dealers. Lynch added, "We will be looking for those individuals who seek to avoid registering."
She added that the ATF is ramping up its enforcement efforts, particularly online. "If it does stop one act of violence, this effort will be worth it," she said.
|
|
|
Post by nolongcolt on Jan 6, 2016 19:17:54 GMT -5
You are right Paden, I just looked at that. The only thing official is a memorandum about promoting smart gun technology. That's it. No EO as of yet. Not to say it wont be there tomorrow but it aint there yet. Good point.
|
|
|
Post by nolongcolt on Jan 6, 2016 19:20:58 GMT -5
As Snyd lays out above, it is still very unclear what it amounts to. It sounds like our new lady AG Lynch (Holder in a skirt!) is quite anxious to ferret out scofflaws!
|
|
|
Post by chris623 on Jan 6, 2016 19:21:55 GMT -5
I've sent all my Senators and Representatives............and those of several adjoining States.....and even a couple not adjoining........e-mails asking if they'd like me to shove a broomstick up their backsides to give them some backbone to fight this idiot. Seems as if all we get is lip service and no real action. Where is our Winston Churchill? ?
|
|
|
Post by jayhawker on Jan 7, 2016 1:18:02 GMT -5
I think we will see a big increase in BATF undercover agents at gun shows. Be carefull selling a modern handgun at a gun show unless to a licenced dealer. Ironically, when Clinton was Pres, I turned my FFL in because I did not have a store front and that was a new requirement. Now they have reversed that.
|
|
|
Post by magnumwheelman on Jan 7, 2016 6:50:21 GMT -5
I attend one gun show, that I sell at... it requires a MN tax ID number to get a table there... in effect, you are a business if you have a table there... because of this, I very rarely sell any guns, & if I do, they are antiques or a C&R gun or a "grandpas shotgun" type of gun... this is the only show I sell at... & I've never sold more than one at any gun show... thinking this would be a good year to just stick to my reloading stuff ( the bulk of what I sell ) however I have bought guns from tables at this show, that had 20 or more guns on them, from guys that had no FFL, & attend a show every weekend... I'd expect those are the guys "in reality" that they are trying to crack down on, from the Gun Shows... Internet sales??? I've bought many, many guns on Gun Broker over the years, I've never gotten so much as a C&R, without it going to an FFL, & have even had to have antiques sent to an FFL before... but maybe they are thinking along the lines or Craigs list or on which I've never purchased anything, but would think someone could sell a lot of guns, & come off as a hobbist seller, in those types of markets???
|
|
hairy
.30 Stingray
Posts: 319
|
Post by hairy on Jan 7, 2016 11:30:36 GMT -5
He seems to forget that the largest massacre of Americans came in 1890 in South Dakota when the US Government dis-armed citizens and then killed 290 people, mostly women and children.
Whether it is Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot or Obama they all want power over their own citizens. Weaponized Government Agencies are more dangerous than guns and this tyrant is far from being done.
|
|
jgt
.327 Meteor
Enter your message here...
Posts: 782
|
Post by jgt on Jan 7, 2016 12:52:11 GMT -5
I sold at gun shows for over 40 years and was sure I was approached by undercover ATF agents on several occasions. I was never bothered while many other venders around me report being threatened by the ATF. The key is to know the GCA and follow it to the letter. When in doubt, refuse the sale. I found there were some very basic things that they were using as criteria to accuse you of violating the GCA. Number one and most blatant, buy a gun from a gun show attendee and mark it up and tag it and put it on your table for immediate sale without the benefit of taking it home, shooting it and deciding it was not for your personal consumption. Second, not checking to see if the buyer of a hand gun are a resident of the state or in case of a long gun a resident of an adjoining state. Third, refusing sales to people who make it known through casual conversation or your questioning that the purchase is for their personal use or are they buying it for the companion who is ineligible to meet purchasing guidelines. Straw purchases, in other words. For instance, I had a very nicely dressed, articulate, seemingly well educated middle aged male with a female companion. She was also smartly dressed, well groomed, seemingly educated but 15 to 20 years his junior. He was interested in buying a handgun from the table. He ask me if I was a dealer, then questions about how long I had owned the gun, how it shot, and several questions that only later did I realize were questions that check to see if these were personal guns rather than buy and sell guns. After we talked a bit he decided to buy the handgun. I ask to see his drivers license and he ask why. I told him only to verify he was a resident and therefore legal to purchase a handgun. He stated he was from two states away but his daughter (companion) was a state resident and she could buy the handgun. At that time I told him what that constituted was a straw purchase and was illegal. He accepted my explanation and moved on down the isle. After thinking about the questions he asked and the attempt he made I realized it constituted a whole checklist of things listed in the GCA. Were they undercover agents? I don't know, but that is the way they operate. I did not always make money on the guns I sold. I bought guns I wanted for personal use. I sold the ones that didn't make the cut for personal use. Some I ended up taking a loss on to recoup the bulk of my purchase price to put into other gun I wanted to buy. The ones that made a profit offset this loss so it evened out. I sold gun related items to pay the table cost. Operating honestly built up a trust with the regular attendees over time so they would stop by to see what I had to offer. I would always try to work with them if it was at all possible when they wanted something I was selling because I knew how it was to find a gun you had been looking for. I stopped when it was not fun any longer. I recently saw a news piece about a person who went to a gun show and bought some long guns and walked out with out a background check. They were showing it as an example of the "gunshow loophole". This person was in no way ineligible to do what they did while exersizing their Second Amendment rights, yet they were complaining about having that freedom. This same idiot would be one of those first in line to get a gun if ISIS comes calling in his backyard. The stuff about having to have an FFL to sell one or two guns is pure BS. I had a friend that worked for the Department of Public Safety and had his FFL. We always got tables together so I could watch his table when he went to look around the show. He sold many more guns than I did, but after a couple of years the ATF refused to renew his FFL saying he was a hobby gun dealer and did not sell enough guns to warrant a gun dealers license. He was happy because he had that letter to prove he had jumped through the hoops and was only a hobby gun seller. They will not give a license to a person who sells their personal guns on occasion to use the money for guns they want more. The President does not have the Constitutional authority to circumvent the Second Amendment or the provisions of the Gun Control Act. The Gun Control Act is gun control and therefore an infringement on the Second Amendment and thus unconstitutional. This is communism at it's best. These terrorist are actually helping us keep the Second Amendment, because they show beyond a shadow of doubt that the police can not protect us from them. We are on our own to stop them until the police arrive. So BO is trying to take our guns while the terrorist are trying their best to kill us before the police get to the scene. We need to emphasize that fact. Shout it from the roof tops.
|
|
Snyd
.375 Atomic
The Last Frontier
Posts: 2,388
|
Post by Snyd on Jan 7, 2016 13:50:22 GMT -5
One interesting thing to note. No where in any of the new "common sense gun safety reforms" as is stated in the Fact Sheet, is the word Education used. We constantly hear negative even hateful, vitriolic rhetoric about the NRA, or Gun Lobby but never in the context of the NRA being a gun safety training organization which is their primary mission. I was recently told by a long term NRA board member Joe Nava that only 12% (if I remember correctly) of their budget is spent on political activism. At any rate it is a small percentage.
With the Feds being so concerned about saving ourselves from ourselves in practically every other area of our lives and promoting or engaging in education, why are they not promoting or engaging in simple basic gun safety? Wouldn't it be worth it if it saved even one life? To use the Presidents words.
The NRA provides gun safety training. The only type of training the Fed provide is how to kill people with guns..... ie Military and LE.
Regarding illegal arms sales.... no mention of Fast and Furious
|
|
|
Post by arokcrwlr on Jan 7, 2016 16:02:09 GMT -5
As much as I dislike Hussein Obama and think him a traitor, it pains me to admit that he isn't stupid. He meant what he said to fundamentally change America (make us weaker on the global stage, global economic parity, racial upheaval, etc.) - all to promote his dream world and he has done a masterful job of it. He is very calculated and conniving and is looking at the "long game" on guns as the author of the article below puts it. www.nationalreview.com/article/429303/obamas-guns-executive-action-opens-door-state-actionThe guy is dangerous and we will not know the extent of the damage he has done for years to come.
|
|
cable
.327 Meteor
Posts: 681
|
Post by cable on Jan 7, 2016 18:23:25 GMT -5
I think we will see a big increase in BATF undercover agents at gun shows. Be carefull selling a modern handgun at a gun show unless to a licenced dealer. Ironically, when Clinton was Pres, I turned my FFL in because I did not have a store front and that was a new requirement. Now they have reversed that. me too.....and at that time I was selling a few, and helping friends buy thru on line auctions etc. and taking a fee for that. I didn't want the hassle of trying to comply with the 'store front' requirement.
|
|
cable
.327 Meteor
Posts: 681
|
Post by cable on Jan 7, 2016 18:26:21 GMT -5
He seems to forget that the largest massacre of Americans came in 1890 in South Dakota when the US Government dis-armed citizens and then killed 290 people, mostly women and children. Whether it is Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot or Obama they all want power over their own citizens. Weaponized Government Agencies are more dangerous than guns and this tyrant is far from being done. damn right!!! wish the the Indians HAD a few maxim machine guns that time to even the odds with those Hotchkiss gunsthat were used on them.
|
|
|
Post by whiterabbit on Jan 7, 2016 18:55:00 GMT -5
My understanding is this "loophole" was designed to protect the 2A in rural areas where two people might be dozens of miles away from the nearest dealer. In AK I imagine that may be hundreds of miles. In these cases the buyer or seller might not be able to travel to an area where they can legally conduct the transaction. Assuming universal BG checks.
Not only does the president get to look down on 2A rights, but in one fell swoop he can push forward an attack on the city vs rural culture war as well. Well played, mr president, I guess you CAN kill two birds with one stone.
|
|