Biden Administration to close gun show loophole

the federal government claimed it could demand licenses and require licensees to conduct background checks under the FDR mutated expansion of the commerce clause since only those who hold FFLs can buy and sell firearms across state lines. Private sellers are specifically banned from transferring firearms to another unlicensed individual across state lines. that destroys the interstate commerce jurisdictional nexus for the federal government to demand INTRASTATE sales be subject to the background check.

Yes, under the FDR mindset, his minions on the courts wouldn't have cared. But if you examine supreme court jurisprudence of the last 30 years, the court has refused to extend the reaches of the commerce clause nonsense-striking down the ban on guns near schools under LOPEZ and 5 justices found that the Obama care law couldn't be justified under the commerce clause.

 

there are 100 million private gun owners in the USA. How would a foreign army maintain control of this country if even 20% of those people were trying to shoot them?

 

As I understand, evidence of intent to make a profit is enough to be required to obtain a license.

"Evidence that a person placed ads online or reserved a table at a gun show shows that the person is intending to profit from the sale....

"The final rule clarifies that even a single firearm transaction may be sufficient to require a license, if there is other behavior to suggest commercial activity. For example, a person selling just one gun and then saying to others they are willing and able to purchase more firearms for resale may be required to obtain a license and run background checks."
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing...firearm-background-checks-to-fight-gun-crime/

 

How does the federal government prove you sold, in private, any of your guns, at a profit, or with the intent to make a profit?

Baseless assumption.
Intent has to be proven, not assumed - simply offering a gun for sale does not prove intent.

 

You don't seem to have a very good grasp on human history. The last people who are subjugated by those who are seeking power or to control or overthrow some area... Are the people with the best weapons.

The people who have slingshots and pitchforks are the ones who are invariably conquered first.

I'm sorry that you're afraid of guns and think that you shouldn't use one to defend yourself but that doesn't mean that they are not a very effective tool for self-defense

And it's almost hilarious how you are basically verbatim, echoing Joe biden's idiotic claim that you can't take on any military with your rifle when they have tanks and fighter jets..... And yet you are the same people who are breathlessly and hysterically claiming that a group of unarmed people with flagpoles and buffalo horns almost conquered America

 

yep, the leftists claim that the right has guns everywhere: guns under our pillows, guns stashed in the shower stall, guns in the car, guns in the workroom, guns in the horse stable and the furnace room, yet the "masses intent on overthrowing the government" didn't deploy a single handgun, let alone the fearsome AR 15s that would allow one man to slay the entire capitol police force in the blink of an eye!!

 

You want my opinion - no problem. I say let the Brady campaign draft meaningful legislation. It's obvious, after many years of being one of the leaders of firearm deaths, the US needs to set a different course.

 

What would you say to the numerous Americans who have been able to prevent themselves from having been a victim of a crime or becoming a statistic, by using lawful ownership and deployment of a firearm?

They can all just bugger on off?

 

So you're planning on using words on a piece of paper to stop killings and suicides?

I don't think the people that do that care about words on paper if they did they wouldn't do that.

 

I don't know why people have to make it so complicated....... All we have to do to stop people from getting shot, is to do the same exact thing we did to make people stop doing drugs.

Make drugs and guns illegal and suddenly..... The problem is solved

 

That's why I don't buy the gun control is for safety crap. That's just manipulation.

Gun control is for dictatorships

 

What you all refuse to acknowledge or admit is that most civilized countries of the world make it work - Australia, Japan, United Kingdom, etc.

 

you fail to understand (or deliberately ignore) several factors that make your specious comparisons to other countries worthless
1) none of those countries had much gun violence before they started banning guns
2) their crime rates did not plummet or even noticeably go down after their bans
3) none of those countries have the amount of open borders, ethnic mixes and of course 400 million firearms in them
4) trying to pretend Japanese fascist laws or the nanny state authoritarianism of England or Australia would work here is intellectually bankrupt

 

The issue that a thing not made for killing kills far more than a thing that is purpose built for killing.

 

Literally: Don't need to be or want to be. This is the guy who whined he was no firearms expert on the incoming dumbasses panel.
He's also incorrect in that what he wants is specifically exempted from the law and therefore does not violate it.

You got taken in by his rhetoric because you know even less about the subject than he does.

 

Credit card and bank statements mostly. That and collector's ledgers.

 

This will be the same guy who tells you you can't win a war in Afghanistan because of insurgency.

Or posts a welcome to the rice fields *********ker meme.

 

That doesn't satisfy either prong of the hypo.

1) Outline your plan. WHAT legislation.
2) Prove how it works.

You haven't done either.

 

the Brady organization is both inherently dishonest and hateful of our rights. And most of us doubt that firearms deaths is what motivates your anti gun arguments. The Brady organization constantly lies about its real goals. They are hard core gun banners.

 

For good reason. It’s mostly people who have lost loved ones to gun toting lunatics who had no problem acquiring the weapon of death.

 

only the least intellectually able maintain that someone who is not deterred by the consequences of being convicted of murder, will somehow be deterred by the potential penalties of violating a gun control law.

Most of the Brady scum are hard core leftwing operatives, not the emotionally crippled grieving family members of crime victims

 

No they don't look at the suicide rates there is not working.

 

Sadly, I'm sure this is the best you can do.

 

So people like you own the "best weapons" for military conflict? The response will probably just be more bluffing....

"Victims using a gun were no less likely to be injured after taking protective action than victims using other forms of protective action. Compared to other protective actions, the National Crime Victimization Surveys provide little evidence that self-defense gun use is uniquely beneficial in reducing the likelihood of injury or property loss."
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/gun-threats-and-self-defense-gun-use-2

Seems pretty pathetic to me if you can achieve the same results without a gun.

 

I love these studies that ignore the obvious-everyone who is likely to have to deal with criminals in a professional capacity: cops, judges, parole officers, criminal defense attorneys, prosecutors, bail agents, and the support staff who work for those professionals-guess what-almost all of them carry firearms. Why?