Pending Gun EO Chatter, Update See Post #114

[GlockSpock]

The way it looks, NFA trusts that are already set up will remain (I hope)


But the way Im reading it, any individual selling a firearm will have to obtain an FFL or go through an FFL to exchange hands.

But this "law" or EO will require that LEO and LEO agencys will have to become heavily involved in the firearm community in order to enforce that law. Setting up sting ops on armslist or other websites... I dont see that happening...

I don't think it literally said ANY. I think it will be debatable and flexible but I personally think it is aimed more at the personal sellers at gun shows with 3 tables buying and selling private firearms for income.

Stings or ArmsLost and other websites? Don't think they are already doing it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[martinjd]

Tiny tiny tiny baby steps.

This...

 

I just finished reading a book titled "Gun Control in the Third Reich". It started out innocent enough (or so it seems) and within a year of setting up a registry that "must never fall into the wrong hands" the political party that implemented the policy was no longer in charge and guess what happened.

[martinjd]

And they were patient. It took almost a decade for guns to be taken away from dissenting political parties and Jews and anyone else that didn't "have a need to defend themselves". It was the job of the army and the police to defend people. Granted the Germany of that time did not have a concept of a constitutional right to bear arms.

[Oh Shoot]

I certainly think that it intentionally leaves things "grey"

 

Again though, it would, either way, require significant LEO involvement...and Im pretty sure that isnt going to happen,

 

The standard that must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt is in post 109. If you fit that, well...

 

I have always thought and even said here that if one turns as many firearms per year as some I see, one should document where the bucks went to cover ass just in case.

 

- OS

Edited January 5, 2016 by Oh Shoot

[TGO David]

This...

 

I just finished reading a book titled "Gun Control in the Third Reich". It started out innocent enough (or so it seems) and within a year of setting up a registry that "must never fall into the wrong hands" the political party that implemented the policy was no longer in charge and guess what happened.

 

REALLY good book.  Read it recently.  History seems to repeat itself!

[btq96r]

The 41P thing we've been ready for a while now.  Just makes County Sheriff elections more important...not the worst side effect.  It's annoying, but not a substantial blow by any means.

 

Judging people incompetent to handle firearms via the Social Security Administration...once someone is screwed over by this, the gun rights groups can challenge it in court and hopefully get the whole thing thrown out if they get the right judge to hear the case.

 

As for smart gun research, more ATF investigators & processors, you'll see the words "the President's FY 2017 budget" tied to that, and for those of you who don't study politics, trust me when I say that's as laughable as a passing of the buck can be while sounding legit. 

1. If it's on time (only one annual budget in this President's tenure has been passed before the start of the fiscal year), there is still a Republican Congress that would have to pass the FY 2017 budget, and they can just cut out line items as they see fit.  This is where the appropriations subcommittees in the House and in the Senate have the biggest role and where the real fight is. 
2. I really doubt that there is even a FY 2017 budget passed before the election.  If I had to make a bet right now, I'd say we have continuing resolutions that take us to about March 1st, so this President will be gone before the FY 2017 budget is enacted and it will be up to his successor, so Hillary can just copy and paste it and see how bad it gets gutted as described above.

 

 

My biggest questions are how this will shake out for internet sales.  Will places like PSA and Primary Arms still be able to ship to a local FFL and let them do the background check?  The term "engaged in the business" seems to put the onus on them to do it, and short of me snail mailing a 4473 so they have the original signed one on file, I'm not sure how they comply if it's enforced that way.  Let's face it, if they wanted to screw with gun sales, that would be the biggest way to do it.  Local gun shops would cheer, as it would have more people buying from their stock, but that's about it.

 

 

Not that it wouldn't have happened anyway, but I'd like to thank asshats like this guy for the whole "gun show loophole" reasoning we've been subjected to.  Thanks "PRIVATE COLLECTOR" who wants 3% added to the final price for credit card purchases like a lot of other business selling guns to compensate for tight profit margins.

Edited January 5, 2016 by btq96r

[Wingshooter]

I'm trying to understand what this will mean regarding trusts. I've been planning to get one to buy a silencer (or three). How does this change that... Just have to do a background check?

[Possumslayer]

I wouldn't be surprised if the scotus backs obama and calls this eo a law......

[runco]

I see nothing new in these EO as any new laws, but merely enforcing current laws.  Looks like the media firestorm to stir up people is worse than the EO!

 

I broke them down from my perspective:

• The so called closing the gun show loop law looks like nothing more than enforcing what is already on the books, maybe just tightening down and scrutinizing more who qualifies as in engaged in the business as opposed to someone who trades and sells every now and then with quantity and frequency as leading indicators.  Suggestion:  As to not help the government, I do recommend sites like Gunbroker and maybe even here, I would do away with the tracking of Positive Feedback numbers as this could be used as a indicator of transactions.  Not sure what would replace it, or even if its needed.
• The NFA trust (which I know very little about) looks like adding background check, which I assume is the same as TICS or the national version. 
• Requiring states to provide records and work cooperatively might titter on a new law, but may be nothing more than a "please request" vs. "requirement".   
• The improving of the efficiency of the background check should be a given, not just a memo from the president.  This will likely be where the no fly list people meet up with the can't buy a gun list.  Problem, the no fly list is secret and how does one get on that list is not public.
• The theft and loss comment, well when I was a FFL, it was a requirement to report such things, I remember I had a couple of thefts and had to report those.  Not sure why this needed a memo as well. 
• The reminder memo on domestic violence, no problem here, again just a memo. 
• The reporting of mental health  to the background check system might titter on a new law qualifier, but I admit I know nothing about mental health reporting, but do know that HIPAA cannot be violated without new legislation. 
• What really concerns me the most with these EO is the Social Security crackdown on grandpas.  Meaning if grandpa cannot run his own affairs, they will take his guns.  A play from VA administration.  To me this is the biggy out of all of these. 
• The new gun safety research and push, I would recommend going to 60 minutes website and reviewing one of their stories from October/November timeframe.  Though it sounds good, in the end, it could be undermining all existing guns as per the NRA. Example if proven and reliable which is a another problem, the story could be made that only new technology guns should be in the hands of society therefore requiring all guns without the technology to be turned in. 

[TripleDigitRide]

Contact your congressional representatives. They CAN reverse this mess.

[Grand Torino]

Contact your congressional representatives. They CAN reverse this mess.

Well yeah they can...question is will they? They seem to do nothing but collect their checks and benefits anymore. I have no faith in any of them to do the right thing about anything.

[blueghost]

I suspect the SS aspect of the EO will boil down like this: If you are receiving a SS check for a mental issue (schizophrenia, paranoia, or some other psychotic disorder) then you will not pass the background check. If there is an appeals process (which there should be) and the aforementioned group is considered mentally "capable" then their SS check should be cut off, can't have it both ways.  I bet the vast majority of the "crazies" would rather stay on the government tit than deal with purchasing a firearm.

 

My only problem with this part of the EO is the number of people who might get swept under some disability coding error and are classified incorrectly.

[300winmag]

This executive action does not change anything except for NFA items bought with trusts IF 41P regs are put in place.  Just like I said before, the president cannot on his own force all private intrastate gun sales to go through a dealer.

[mikegideon]

This is pretty strong...

 

http://www.allenbwest.com/2016/01/president-obama-before-you-make-your-gun-announcement-today-you-better-read-this/

[NoBanStan]

It's hard to read through the list of "facts" about gun control when they throw in this tidbit:

 

"As the single largest purchaser of firearms in the country, the Federal Government ......"

 

Some would point out that I'm taking that line out of context because I'm omitting how our government plans to research and employ smart gun tech. But I think it's more potent that they themselves freely admit they are the largest customer for the firearms industry. Do as I say, not as I do?

 

cited from https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/01/04/fact-sheet-new-executive-actions-reduce-gun-violence-and-make-our

[xsubsailor]

I'm trying to understand what this will mean regarding trusts. I've been planning to get one to buy a silencer (or three). How does this change that... Just have to do a background check?

This was signed by the AG yesterday. It's a very long read (248 pages) and loads slow on my computer but it might answer your question.

 

 http://www.nfatca.org/pubs/ag_order_3608-2016.pd

 

Never mind, it won't let me access it anymore

Edited January 5, 2016 by xsubsailor

[battleop]

Your link is not complete....

 

 

http://www.nfatca.org/pubs/ag_order_3608-2016.pdf

 

 

Edit:  Looks like if I copy and paste the link (and ad the f at the end of .pdf) it works fine.  If I post the corrected link I get a 404 as well.   I guess the forum software is doing something to manipulate the link when you click on it. 

Edited January 5, 2016 by battleop

[polecat]

ATF guidance on who qualifies as a firearms dealer

Just saw this as put out by the ATF on who qualifies as a dealer. This is a web pdf file and can be downloaded here:

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01/05/atf-guidance-on-who-qualifies-as-firearms-dealer.html?intcmp=hpbt1

Edited January 5, 2016 by polecat

[pieslinger]

Obumer speaking now live.

[justincase]

it will be great to have an expert like Chip Cain or others talk more about this and how it involves trust owners going forward

[Mike.357]

Zero is nauseating.

 

This little speech of his is nothing more than innuendo, lies and fables. 

[xsubsailor]

Let's try this one

 

https://www.atf.gov/file/100896/download

[GlockSpock]

Zero is nauseating.

This little speech of his is nothing more than innuendo, lies and fables.

And the general public that knows nothing of gun culture or how things work will think this is doing a lot. Next time something happens per se, we will be told not enough has been done so let's do more.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[felinesNfreedom]

Good lord BHO is a douche. Am I the only one that gets irritated seeing him leaning over the podium and just the way he handles him self in general while giving these speeches? It's like he is sitting at the kitchen table shooting the sh.t.

[Mike.357]

And the general public that knows nothing of gun culture or how things work will think this is doing a lot.

 

exactly.  Oh heck he just wiped a tear.