Practical considerations in closing the "loophole"

IMO,its a setup for having to inventory every firearm you have into some database.

One chance,by such and such date all firearms have to be in the database.

After that,we would be subject to audit.

One gun more or less than what the database says you are supposed to have,prima facia evidence of unlawful transaction.Now you are a felonious prohibited person....
 
The gun show NICS for private sales will be easy to implement. Have table for such and a small fee. Betcha if this comes to pass, at some shows there will be undercover agents and stings.

The parking lots will be covered the same way.

For ones at home - might have a sting or two. They do it for drugs and terrorists.
Click to expand...
Don't leave out the two most important points.
- Fear
- Intimidation

Count on a few being made examples of with very stiff fines, felony charges and long prison sentances.
 
A hand written receipt can be forged, signed by the seller etc. I doubt selling to anyone and showing up with a hand written receipt as proof is going to be considered legitimate by any stretch of the imagination.
Click to expand...

Why? They are 100% legal and produced in court every day to settle disputes. If it makes you feel any better I can type one up on my printer identical to what you get from Walmart.
 
Tracking of guns and gun Owners

Part of what that clown Joe Biden suggested as being able to be implemented by executive order was national tracking of guns and gun Owners. If I'm not mistaken when the NRA acquiesced on the instant background check was the provision that any of the search info gained on a law abiding citizen would be destroyed after a short time (I think 24 hours) so it would be impossible to build a national registry of gun owners? I think the prohibition of a national gun registry was actually codified as part of that law. Am i right about this? The only purpose of a national registry is to facilitate confiscation that would certainly be proposed in the heat of the next "gun tragedy".
 
jimbob86 said:
Maybe somebody can correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me the "loophole" they want to close is in fact private sales. They want a paper trail of some kind.
Click to expand...
You're exactly right. The term "gun show loophole" has nothing at all to do with gun shows. It's simply the fact that FFL sales are treated differently than private sales. IMHO, the use of the term "loophole" is simply a mechanism to make the public believe that there's something shady going on.
 
As mentioned, in California (and, I believe, some other States) pretty much all transfers must go through an FFL. I'm sure that there are illegal, fully private transfers, but I'm not sure that anyone knows how many.

I suspect that the level of voluntary compliance is quite high. It's not all that inconvenient, and most folks want to avoid the potential complications of participating in an illegal, felonious act. It will take two people willing to accept the risk to do an illegal transfer.

How to catch people is law enforcement's problem. But I bet a few get caught by bragging about it on the Internet or to their buddies at the LGS or range (perhaps withing earshot of an LEO).
 
Biden's focus

Seems that Joe Biden is going to suggest universal backgound checks for all firearm sales. I'd like to know how this is supposed to work. Most private sales are between friends and familly. The only way this law could have any teeth is if all guns are registered first. That's pretty much a no starter for most folks.
The other focus is on high cap mags. I don't know if this will be a ban on new sales or an out right ban on their use.
 
Last edited:
If universal BG checks are the only thing...

...I could live with it. There are ways of implementing a program like this that could work, maybe. Where I draw the line is banning anything that a sane, law abiding citizen wants to own. Even this could be tweaked around the edges by requiring a BG check for purchasing magazines with a capacity of over 10 rounds, just don't ban high capacity magazines.
While we do need to keep firearms out of the hands of lunatics and criminals, what we don't need is an idiotic AWB like the previous one. Write your senators and representatives as well as the White House and do it now. I have done and doubled down on the White House by not only writing but calling. Of course I only talked to a volunteer but I let my views be known. I had to wait less than 4 minutes to talk to a real person. Please be polite and respectful and don't threaten an armed insurrection!
 
Rather than living with it, why don't you write your representatives, and donate to NRA-ILA, SAF, GOA, or your choice of RKBA groups?

I am appalled at the number of, "Well, I could live with..." threads and posts, lately.
 
Here's my bet - worth what you paid for it.

Biden:

1. Will not recommend an EBR ban. He will say that one is needed but it can't be done at this time.
2. Ban hicaps - knowing that that probably won't happen. Suggest that states do this. So NY can demand any that exist there (if they do) get mandatory turn in. Don't know the laws there but some states have grandfathered mags - so turn them in.
3. Tighten up mental health reporting on NICS. Some states screw this up. VA did for Cho, it is argued. Better funding would get support from all. Will go through.
4. NICS for all private sales - won't happen but recommended. NICS for private sales at gun shows - may happen.
5. Antiroyalty provisions in the Constitution will be waved and King Piers coronated at the Inauguration.

We will see.
 
Yeah, personally, there is zero chance I am going to "live with" or support the same people who just announced that they can and should confiscate my lawfully owned firearms having an exact list of what I own in that regard.
 
Most private sales are between friends and familly. The only way this law could have any teeth is if all guns are registered first.
Click to expand...

While I certainly do not condone required NICS for all transfers, the idea that registration is needed to make people comply with the law is flawed. It is unlikely that after all this many people would be ignorant of the fact that such a law has passed. A transfer then requires two people willing to break the law or ignorant of the law to occur. This flies in the face of much of the we are law abiding citizens arguments that are made, if all these law abiding citizens are now breaking the law.

It would work because a majority of people are law abiding. This is not to say there wouldn't be people who, out of ignorance or misguided principle, would not obey the law, but they would be in the minority.


An interesting consideration; If some sort of universal background check legislation were to pass, would it address and revise the current exemption for certain states' ccw permit(or similar such as the case of NE's purchase permit), create a legislative conflict(such as the legislation explicitly says all transfers, but doesn't create changes in the previous Brady language), or just leave it be. If left with the exemption, for permit holders...then presumably private sales could continue "unchecked" between permit holders as they are exempted.
 
I wonder how much apoplexy I could cause some of these folks by asking two questions:

1. Thoreau - conscientious objector, or tax evader?

2. Harriet Tubman - human rights hero, or smuggler?

I strongly suspect that some of the antis who would tell us that if a law passes, then of course we must follow it, would not have applied the same rationales to war or slavery protestors.
 
While I understand what you're getting at Mleake. In the case of Thoreau, I think most would point out he did accept and understand the consequences of his decision to not pay taxes(going to jail). Also that his situation was not remedied by his objections being recognized as just, but by someone paying his taxes for him.

I'm not so sure that many of those who might object to universal background checks would be quite as willing to accept the consequences of their actions and be preferential that no remedy be rendered until their actions were determined just. Coincidentally, I also don't think they'd have volumes of well written prose describing their personal philosophies and reasoning for their conscientious objection.
 
I doubt that, too, but my point was about the hypocrisy of those who assume that if they like a law, it should apply, but thumbing one's nose at other laws is romantically heroic.

(FWIW, I approve of Harriet Tubman breaking the law, but I think Thoreau was a bit of a windbag.)
 
If private sales were required to go through a dealer it would be up to the government to prove that you sold or purchased a gun in violation of the law.

You do not have to prove that you complied with the law.
 
If private sales were required to go through a dealer it would be up to the government to prove that you sold or purchased a gun in violation of the law
Click to expand...

True, but in many cases this would not be all that difficult to prove, particularly as time goes on beyond the enactment date. One example, those that wish to flout the law could never safely transfer to/from a fellow scofflaw a firearm made after the enactment of such a law.

Regardless of this, a law being difficult to enforce has never stopped the government from passing it anyway.
 
Or like happened in Canada...you hold out, they extend the deadline, you hold out, they extend the deadline..then you finally get organized enough to elect someone (PM Harper) that campaigns on "ending the long gun registration as a waste of money".

If they actually try for a gun registraion program, you can point to Canada, it was originally supposed to cost $30 million...after several years of an ineffective registration program, when it had cost $3 Billion...it was finally canceled
 
I am appalled at the number of, "Well, I could live with..." threads and posts, lately.
Click to expand...
Hear, hear! Fatalism and sullen acceptance seem to be preferable to taking even the simples of actions in opposition lately.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top