New Background Check Rule
- Thread starter Nathan
- Start date
- Status
The Verminator
Moderator
It's not.
The Verminator
Moderator
If we allow ourselves to be panicked by this "Change" that really changes nothing.......then we really are no better than rats in a maze.
Aguila Blanca
Staff
I suspect that to many politicians and career bureaucrats, this is viewed as a feature, not as a bug.mehavey said:
The Verminator
Moderator
How would I do that?
I do wish I knew what was eventually going to be a crime in this new interpretation...
From other people/other venues then....
How many guns sold over a period of time would too many ?
- (I currently can't tell)
How short a period of time is too short?
- (I currently can't tell)
How many guns in an inherited "collection" sold would too many?
- (I currently can't tell)
In that possibly-LEgal sale of a 'collection' of guns, what is/would an ILlegal sale of a "self-defense" gun look like?
- (I currently can't tell)
What is a "self-defense" gun ?
- (I currently can't tell)
How often can I sell guns and not run afoul of this new interpretation?
- (I currently can't tell)
How long would I have to wait before gaining possession of a gun and selling it ?
- (I currently can't tell)
In selling a gun, do I base "profit" on price then vs price now ... or inflated/constant year dollars?
- (I currently can't tell)
In bartering a gun for "other than dollars"... what is actually going to be considered alternative "good & valuable consideration" ?
- (I currently can't tell)
But probably most important (since some say the ATF wouldn't show up at the doorstep of the little people)... what multi-facted mathematical/polynomial equation will ATF be using to combine all those factors above into tripping a Master ALERT Light ?
- (That we will probably never know)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So what would I suggest the first Gentle Reader/Test Rat consider doing to tweak the boundaries of the new interpretation ?
I would suggest the Test Rat do absolutely nothing at this point.
(...which may in fact be the point.)
.
From other people/other venues then....
How many guns sold over a period of time would too many ?
- (I currently can't tell)
How short a period of time is too short?
- (I currently can't tell)
How many guns in an inherited "collection" sold would too many?
- (I currently can't tell)
In that possibly-LEgal sale of a 'collection' of guns, what is/would an ILlegal sale of a "self-defense" gun look like?
- (I currently can't tell)
What is a "self-defense" gun ?
- (I currently can't tell)
How often can I sell guns and not run afoul of this new interpretation?
- (I currently can't tell)
How long would I have to wait before gaining possession of a gun and selling it ?
- (I currently can't tell)
In selling a gun, do I base "profit" on price then vs price now ... or inflated/constant year dollars?
- (I currently can't tell)
In bartering a gun for "other than dollars"... what is actually going to be considered alternative "good & valuable consideration" ?
- (I currently can't tell)
But probably most important (since some say the ATF wouldn't show up at the doorstep of the little people)... what multi-facted mathematical/polynomial equation will ATF be using to combine all those factors above into tripping a Master ALERT Light ?
- (That we will probably never know)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
So what would I suggest the first Gentle Reader/Test Rat consider doing to tweak the boundaries of the new interpretation ?
I would suggest the Test Rat do absolutely nothing at this point.
(...which may in fact be the point.)
.
Last edited:
The intent is to allow Biden to make an election year claim that he has closed the gun show and internet "loopholes".
If properly enforced it will likely stop most of those gun show sellers who do not have an FFL but who everyone knows are really "engaged in the business", i.e. are purchasing and reselling firearms for a profit on a repetitive basis at a temporary physical space. They will either have to get an FFL and conduct background checks, stop selling, or justify to the ATF that they are just disposing of or enhancing a private collection. If the ATF is not convinced they will conduct an investigation and attempt to gather sufficient evidence to make a case in court that a prosecutor will accept.
The same may apply to intrastate internet sales that meet the criteria for being engaged in the business.
Have you read the rule? Because your questions don't really make sense based on the rule.
The ATF will show up on your doorstep if it looks like you are repeatedly buying and selling firearms for a profit. i.e. if it looks like you are dealing firearms without a license. It's really as simple as that.
The Verminator
Moderator
So you suggest that I break the law just to see what happens?this one's easy....
Just go do what the ATF says is a crime, then go tell them you did it and provide proof.
The system will take it from there, and as long as you don't plead out and do go to court, congratulations! You're the test case!!
LOL!
I'll pass.
The Verminator
Moderator
Correct.
And as I have mentioned before, this will only impact about one percent of gun owners (the ones who make the rest of us look bad).
It will also make Biden's gun-hating base happy and fire them up to get out and vote for him.
For most of us it means nothing.
The Verminator
Moderator
True.
Except (at least in my experience) agents will not OPENLY show up at his door.
First they will show up as buyers and fellow gun enthusiasts, collectors, hunters, etc.
They will work as a team--first one will sell him a gun at a surprisingly low price and then one of the others will buy it from him at his asking price........thus he makes a profit and they have it on record. Rinse and repeat several times.
They'll also get to know him and his friends and gather many incriminating statements and examples of ads posted in various mediums (even going so far as to take down and save a hand written offer to sell from a shooting range & gun club bulletin board).
THEN they'll show up at his door and say, "Hello, old gun buddy......you're under arrest."
Faced with overwhelming evidence.........he will plead guilty, lose his guns, lose his rights to own guns and get probation. He will be a felon.
I had a couple friends so nailed.........and I almost got caught up in one of these myself and but for a fluke bit of luck due to a nice .35 Remington and an upcoming deer season.........I was saved.
I later used to see one of these guys at gun shows. He had a table full of collectible knives, flint Indian arrowheads, war memorabilia and books........and a sad look on his face.
This happened many years ago and tactics could have changed........But I offer it as my own experience.
Does creating a bill of sale matter at all? I could possibly see that in of itself being considered engaged in business.
Still unclear of why "occasionally" was included in the language? So if I buy and then trade 10 guns over the course of a year, I(and some here would say that's occasional but, uneducated folk might say that's frequently.
Still unclear of why "occasionally" was included in the language? So if I buy and then trade 10 guns over the course of a year, I(and some here would say that's occasional but, uneducated folk might say that's frequently.
The Verminator
Moderator
Bill of sale? Yes, protect yourself.
In many states you are now required to get ID from buyer and keep that information.
If that gun turns up at the scene of a crime you want to be able to show it was legally sold to a qualified buyer.
I won't even mess with this anymore. Too dangerous in several ways. I'll just sell to my local shop or THROUGH my local shop on Gun Broker.
If that is the intent, and I am not saying it isn't, then it shouldn't be hard for congress to write a law saying just that. If a new law is not necessary, and a new ATF rule will suffice, then why is it written so vague? You had no problem spelling out what you think the purpose of the law is, or what you think it should be. You wrote it so everyone can understand it. The ATF did not.
Here's the problem I have with the new ruling, first off, we have laws concerning everything you mentioned above. If the law needed different wording to be clear, that is congress's job. In the ATF's rule, there was no attempt for clarification, no attempt for everyone to understand. Hell, they put out pages trying to explain what they meant rather than rewriting the rule so all could understand. In other words we are suppose to just trust them. Sorry, they do not exactly have a track record to earn anyone's trust.
Two, even with all the voices proclaiming what the ATF meant, I have yet to see from the ATF what THEY DID NOT MEAN. We can discuss everything the rule "does not mean" but that means nothing. Right now, with the rule they wrote, everything is still on the table. Third, I am not seeing any attempt that the rule will be rewritten, which indicates they have the rule they want, in the way they want.
Aguila Blanca
Staff
FWIW, the NSSF reported that the new rule was published in the Federal Register today. Like it (or understand it) or not, it's now the law.
- Status