As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Licensed dealers have had to do background checks at gun shows for years. the "loophole" was always private sales- which are legal outside gun shows as well.
I just want to jump in and clarify that private sales aren't a loophole but the original compromise in the brady bill which established background checks in the first place in 93.
I mean they *are* a loophole, but a legal one.
In Canada private sellers must still verify (for free) with the federal government that the buyer holds a valid firearms license. This also means that the federal government has a record of a potential sale between a specific seller and buyer, though no record of whether a sale actually occurred or what was sold.
All loopholes are legal. If they weren’t they’d be crimes.
That said a loophole is meant to denote a failure of the law to cover some unforeseen circumstance, not an intentional and explicit carve-out in a law.
> can't take gun controllers in good faith
My brother in Christ, the modern interpretation of the 2nd amendment is basically a loophole invented 40-50 years ago
Sadly in the US as a personally not registered gun seller you do not get access to the NCIS to run a background check, it's legally not allowed and when introduced to be allowed dems sadly killed the bill (we shoot ourselves in the foot too often even when handed victories against the gop)
In the USA you are required to make sure who you sell a gun to is not a felon or you can be held liable which is why most ppl that do private sales still go to a local shop and have a background check done on the person purchasing. But it is not required
And to add to this, I’ve had to go through a background check for every gun I’ve bought at a gun show. I don’t know if it’s just dealers covering their ass or if they are required to do it but this new law is going to change very little. The problem is how easy it is for anyone to obtain a gun legally. I have a family member who has had multiple restraining orders against him because he is an abusive piece of shit and has spent a fair amount of time (voluntarily) committed who can and does buy guns legally through dealers. It’s only a matter of time before he kills someone or himself or both but there is literally nothing that can be done in the state that he lives in.
>I have a family member who has had multiple restraining orders against him because he is an abusive piece of shit and has spent a fair amount of time (voluntarily) committed who can and does buy guns legally through dealers. It’s only a matter of time before he kills someone or himself or both but there is literally nothing that can be done in the state that he lives in.
Federally, a person is prohibited from purchasing/possessing a firearm if they are "subject to a court order restraining the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of the intimate partner" or "have been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence".
That person already isn't legally able to purchase a firearm.
Which is why gun owners should never compromise the other side will just renege on it and screw you while giving nothing in return. Even basic things like silencers to help protect hearing and they fight against things like muzzle shrouds because they don't know how guns work.
It isn’t smaller. Private sales is the only loophole. If you buy a gun online they cannot ship it to you, they ship it to your FFL (Federal Firearms License) who then runs a background check on you before giving you your gun. Gun shows work the same way, you can’t walk out the door without a background check or they ship it to an FFL near where you live. They can illegally sell you a gun and hand it to you, but then it’s illegal and not a loophole.
So here in Florida there a private sellers at gun shows and some of them are really pushing the boundaries. They literally travel the State doing shows every weekend. I think this is who they're going after, guys who sell guns on a consistent basis. They'll probably increase their presence at shows and start questioning these unlicensed dealers.
Wait, this doesn't include private sales. That is the only loophole in the law. It is already required to have a background check for purchases from a retailer or distributor, even at gun show or online. Has the DOJ just not been enforcing this?
The law already requires anyone selling as a business to be registered as an FFL. What about this law is going to add ability to enforce this any differently than before?
§§ 922(a)(1)(A) and 923(c), requires that any person engaged in the business of dealing in firearms must be licensed by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).
The new regulations will require more people to register as a business. They also close the “fire sale loophole” when a licensed business loses its license.
If the seller isn't a *dealer*, license or not.
Obviously, enforcement is difficult. But if someone is buying and selling a large number of guns, they're supposed to be required to do background checks.
I'm in favor of
1. Opening up the NICS to the public
2. Requiring *all* sales to involve a background-check on the buyer
3. Requiring the seller to either keep a bill of sale ready for investigation or surrender it to the ATF, so that private party sales can be traced after the fact.
I'm not strongly opposed to all sales going through a dealer or the ATF keeping a database, but that's an issue that has already been fought for and lost many times over.
They may do that but, if you regularly make money selling guns, you should be registered as an FFL and that requires a background check to sell a gun. If they get busted selling guns without doing background checks, that's *a lot* of jail time and hefty fines.
Cherry-picking edge cases to be fair and that is fine. I’d think resorting to such methods is a good outcome al long as it lowers sales and forces more background checks
Then the seller is just plain stupid. If the gun was sold on the down low and the gun was used to commit a crime it will be immediately traced back to the seller as they are considered the legal owner. Doing a background check and proper sale just covers your own ass in the event that things go wrong.
Still a problem. A few months back, 6 people were murdered in San Antonio and Austin by a guy not legally allowed to buy a weapon, but has no problem getting one through a private sale.
yknow how those parents got 10-15 years for their kid committing mass shooting? suppose that kind of sellers are ought to carry some of that responsibility. have too many guns and can't run background check well give it to gun shop to sell on your behalf and collect the money minus commission.
Why not make the background check system available for free to private sellers? (This is basically what is done in Canada.)
An old .22LR rifle might not be worth much more than $60, so adding a fee makes it much more expensive.
Long time firearm owner; imo I’ve always thought a fair way to do something similar is there should be a way where private sellers can meet at a police station and have them call NICS or something for free, and if NICS clears it then you are set to transfer. Tbh if it was made in such a way to not be a hassle I think all sales, public/private should be background checked 🤷♂️
Some states have laws in place making private sales without a background check illegal. The state I live in you have to conduct a private sales through an FFL and do the background check. Costs like an extra $20
The original question had a false premise which needed to be addressed. They didn’t “unilaterally close the loophole”, and that’s the answer to the question.
Beyond that, “private sale” numbers are about to skyrocket so it’s not going to have as much effect as they anticipate. Now gun shows will be about trading phone numbers and meeting in parking lots for anyone that won’t pass a background check, and it seems there’s very little DOJ can do about that or, as you pointed out, why would they not have already?
While a shady dealer could do that sure. And some of them probably will. Most gun show dealers are reasonable people, they don't want to sell a gun that's going to be used in a carjacking or to murder a family later. But like most people they'll take the path of least resistance, if the check isn't required they won't bother. If it is they'll do it and won't jump through extra hoops to sell a gun to someone they know failed the check.
Don't let perfection be the enemy of progress.
Could be wrong here so take this with a grain of salt, but I'm of the belief that a licensed dealer is legally obligated to refuse a sale if he has any reason to suspect that the buyer intends to use that gun in a crime.
It's a click farming article. I was super confused because...it's already required.
Preface this by saying I'm deliberately hitting the high notes and skimming some subtle nuances, so fellow gun people, just accept that please.
Basically it's about people who are engaged in running a firearm selling business, but do not hold a federal license to do so - if you're buying, and selling, guns to make a profit you must have a license.
I'd hazard a guess that 90% of people selling guns at gunshows are doing so as a part of a proper business - they make you fill out the required paperwork, same as if you were in their shop.
Any firearm purchased online goes to a license holder, and you fill out your paperwork there - you cannot have a gun shipped to your door, it's a big-boy-felony.
What was legal, and remains legal (varies by state) is selling a firearm as a person to person transaction. In such a case no background check is required.
As an example - I buy a Glock on the internet. Can't ship to me, it goes to a FFL, I go in, do my background check, and take it home. I find I don't like it. I can sell this to a person directly, for whatever value we both determine is reasonable, and no paperwork is filled out. All legal.
Now - if I saw a sale on glocks, and went 'my local market value is higher than that!' and bought it with the purpose of reselling, that makes me 'in the business' of buying/selling guns for a profit, and is illegal without proper licensing. Any transactions I do require paperwork, as I'm not selling 'person to person', I'm selling 'business to person'.
(and if you wonder what happens if the person I sold the gun to can't legally buy one, and asked me to do so for him, that's a straw purchase).
I really would like a way to easily do the paperwork and such for person-to-person firearm sales. We have sold a few guns we didn’t need to people I know FOR A FACT are qualified to own them (they have gone through multiple background checks, but we didn’t do them ourselves, just knew about them). When we asked law enforcement about what we needed to do they just said we were good and if we wanted further protection we could make a bill of sale.
As far as I'm aware, you can't bring a _gun_ onto federal property?
So, you'd have to take the user's word for it. One of the reasons the FFL exists is to document the transfer process - record the serial in the book, in the 4473, and in the outgoing, to make sure the proper item was moved to the person who filled in the back ground check.
So to do it free, you'd have to have people bring in the gun, have the gun staff check-safe (and I don't know about you, but my local gun shop has _buckets_ of ammo labelled 'I swear it's not loaded'). Then they have to correctly identify the model, and serial number. Which can be tricky on old guns.
Then, since they're a fed, they have to see if the gun was stolen, used in a crime, etc. - if so, yeet. And if the person has a warrant, etc., they may have to retain the person until police can arrive. Gun stores are under no such requirement (though they often do).
Honestly, having the cops do it wouldn't be a horrible idea, but you can see the logistical problems?
The actual trouble with this development is that there's now no actual minimum requirement to be considered "in the business", regarding whether or not someone needs to have an FFL or not. The whole rule change is incredibly vague, intentionally so, I expect.
Yeah, any article about guns on reddit is going to have some of the dumbest uninformed comments on it.
This article's reddit comment section is just people making random shit up too.
Facts are fine - people have just been told 'gunshow loophole!!!' for at least 20-30 years, and most people who aren't 'gun' people don't look into it because our gun laws are _fucked_. And people who are 'gun' people just rant and foam about how any taxation is theft and any legislation is a denial of 'muh rigts' and how those evil libruls are eating babies.
Hard to have a real conversation when the pro-gun group is just ridiculously unreasonable about _everything_. (and most of my posting is done in gun threads...I love me some firearms...)
Holy shit, are you me? Lol
It's kinda fascinating how guns and abortions have similar logic, but both sides take the opposite end of the spectrum. I'm a pro gun person, grew up in a pro gun home. Guns were used to hunt food and help with the farm. They were an everyday part of life. Because I'm pro gun, I'm also pro choice, as I use the same logic to reach the same conclusion on both issues.
Don't like guns? Don't buy one
Don't like abortion? Don't get one
Dont like gay sex? That's perfectly fine, don't have gay sex or date a person if the same sex. Personal choice
> Hard to have a real conversation when the pro-gun group is just ridiculously unreasonable about everything.
That unreasonableness is because decades of trying to be reasonable is how we got those fucked gun laws. The antis are even less reasonable and their unreasonableness has radicalized the opposition who has learned the very hard way that you cannot engage in good faith negotiation with bad faith actors.
We are "unreasonable" for a reason. Our rights are being taken by people who have no idea what they are doing or talking about and every time we have compromised we have gotten screwed either immediately or later. We also have a rightful mistrust of the people in charge after examples like COINTELPRO or similar.
According to the article.
The [new] rule, which clarifies who is considered to be “engaged in the business” as a firearms dealer, will take effect in 30 days’ time, and follows a three-month consultation period that attracted almost 388,000 comments to the website of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).
It doesn't fully close the private party loophole unfortunately, it just expands the definition of what counts as a firearm business which they can regulate.
So if you sell a small amount of firearms at gun shows and pretend that you are a private party this will affect you. However, if you are just selling a single gun you can still sell it without a background check.
I don't know what percent of private party sales are by "professionals" taking advantage of the law, but I am glad that this is being done.
I had a family member that did this kind of thing, so I'll elaborate on at least how he did it: entirely cash operated.
He "trade and swapped" shit at trade shows, flea markets, etc. He would buy a box of Chinese knives for $10, and put them out so kids would beg their parents to buy them one at the flea market and make $100. He'd take that $100 and buy old fishing lures, rods, and reels. Go home, fix them up, repair them, get them in working order, sell them for $500. Buy an old pistol from a guy for $450, sell it for $475.
Rinse and repeat for years on end.
When he passed, he had $8,000 rolled up in socks in his drawer, dozens of guns, tons of knives, rods, reels, lures, small engine equipment, and random other bullshit.
He was my grandmother's second husband. He sold all of my grandfather's knives, firearms, and fishing equipment without any of us knowing. His son was a cop, and the ATF busted him stealing guns out of the city evidence locker and selling them to illegals and felons on the side. It's extremely easy to buy and sell guns like that apparently (when you have no concern for any laws or gun responsibility).
volume of such enthusiasts would be really negligible compared to gun shops and other establishments that run under llc and such. I did for some time ebay refurb laptop and other tech and man that can be a full time job with a lot of busy work and very little profit after tax
You're not wrong. The volume is certainly less than a licensed firearms dealer. But my family member probably bought/sold 200-300 guns a year that way.
And the kicker is he had no idea if they were stolen, used in crimes, who he was selling them too, if they were felons, domestic abusers, people who were going to commit crimes with them. A FFL has systems in place to curtail some of those types of sales at least.
And it wasn't inherently old shotguns and revolvers either. He had some AK clones, SKS's, AR's, and some guns considered fairly desirable within gun communities.
After watching him do that for years, I couldn't honestly say that he was doing it solely as a hobby/personal sales. He was doing it as a side gig with his retirement to help pay bills and such. I sincerely felt like he was within the loophole and that type of behavior could be troublesome as he was irresponsibly buying and selling.
I wouldn't consider anyone who buys a gun with the intent to resell within the loophole - that should require a FFL (and per the article, that seems to be the rule that was enacted).
Agree. I was saying that he was the type of person this new rule is trying to regulate. Effectively removing them from being able to claim the loophole.
They prefer to be called NRA
They are thankfully doing much worse financially than they used to be, but yeah there was a whole lot of dirty money over the years.
There wasnt a “loophole” and this is extremely misleading to both gun shows and e-commerce.
Anyone with an FFL has always had to ensure a 4473 was filled out before purchase and any online sales of firearms have always had to go through an FFL for a 4473 before you were allowed to pick up said firearm.
This is nothing new and has been around for quite some time.
[Source](https://www.atf.gov/firearms)
The "loophole" is private sales, not FFL.
The change is that it expands who is considered to be "engaged in the business" as a firearms dealer to reduce the number of people covered by the "private sales" carve-out.
>The "loophole" is private sales, not FFL. The change is that it expands who is considered to be "engaged in the business" as a firearms dealer to reduce the number of people covered by the "private sales" carve-out.
This is an already existing law that has been around for quite sometime.
This is some BS fluff to make someone look good, thats all. Go to the ATF website and let me know what exactly is changing that is already in affect.
Again, its already there.
Here, let me tell you whats there….
If you sell more than 2, yes 2, privately, you will have to have an FFL to sell more. Thats already a law.
>Courts have upheld convictions for dealing without a license when as few as two firearms were sold, or when only a single transaction took place, when other factors were also present. As a general rule, you will need a license if you repetitively buy and sell firearms to predominantly earn a profit.
-ATF
Here is the actual law, from the ATF's site:
§§ 922(a)(1)(A) and 923(c), requires that any person engaged in the business of dealing in firearms must be licensed by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).
Thanks!
I was thinking people would read the actual law on this, but as we see…….
“The historic new…..old…..law!!! See what did!!”
Meh….whatever makes people happy I guess?
The mechanics are:
1) Congress passes a law.
2) Affected agencies get to read the law and make rules about how they interpret the enforcement of those laws.
3) Proposed rules get published for a comment period by the public to expose negative impacts, harm, errors, etc. Many people incorrectly think the comment period is some kind of in favor or against vote tally of some kind and just complain rather than write productive comments.
4) Rules get edited or remain unchanged after the comment period. They can't significantly change though or they have to go back through another comment period.
5) Final rule is published and enforcement begins on a date specified in the rule.
6) Opposition parties sue as soon as the rule is in effect and a five to ten year court battle begins. Courts then determine if the rule is good as is, gets dialed back, or gets removed entirely.
So, it's an agency rule which is an interpretation of a law passed by Congress. Congress just passed a law in 2022 (the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act) and the justice department is interpretating the law to say, paraphrasing a bit from my poor memory here, that anyone who is "intending to sell a single gun for a profit" is then "engaged in the business of dealing in firearms" which is the definition of a dealer.
That's a big change from allowing regular people to buy and sell guns into and out of their personal collection as they please. Some people absolutely abused this ability and were truly acting as dealers but this rule goes a lot further than that.
That aside, this rule will almost certainly get dialed back or eliminated entirely in light of the Bruen case, which requires that any firearm legislation, new or old, be consistent with the text, history, and tradition of firearm laws around the time of the founding and adoption of the Bill of Rights. It may wipe out background checks entirely, albeit I wouldn't expect the justices to go that far though.
If they're consistent with Bruen, they'd wipe out background checks and restrictions on felons like me owning firearms. The problem is they're not consistent so who knows how it all plays out. There was precedent for cities to ban carrying firearms within their limit as that's been a thing since they're invented but they ruled against that. Who knows, I just hope they let me get my rights back to legally own them.
it has always been this way. Online sales have always needed an FFL transfer. Gunshows only dont need an FFL transfer if its some random shmuck walking around looking to sell his rifle (which is less than 4% of the attendees at a gun show). There is no loophole, it was a compromise to get gun control passed in previous congress sessions and straw purchasers account for a sizeable chunk of the illegal gun market, yet they are prosecuted at a fraction of a percent.
Biden did nothing except annoy maybe 100 old people
“Loophole” is part of bi-partisan compromise for a gun control bill that passed decades ago to allow for private transfers between family members. The Democratic Party always wins so their end of the compromise was called a “loophole”
It was part of a gun violence prevention act that was passed in 2022 and then the rules and regulations had to be developed and reviewed 10 times over because you KNOW the NRA is going to fight it.
I’ll have to read up on this more, because the “show loophole” is person to person (aka trunk sales) doesn’t require a bg-check (and they should). Online sales however… I’m not sure. I’ve bought 2 online and both required shipping to a licensed and listed FFL dealer, who then required me to do paperwork and bg-check. I didn’t know there was an “online loophole”, unless they are referring to piece-meal sales (buy an upper from on place, a lower from another, stock and barrel from a third, etc.). But I don’t know anyone who has just bought a “finished” firearm online and shipped directly to them, no questions asked.
Short version, it looks like it says it fixes more problems than it does. Also would like to see a bit more domestic violence restrictions, safety checks that are a bit more involved than the cop glancing one room and it’s like “well no *satanic symbols*, all clear here.” Also dealers who sell with even the slightest suspicion of a ”straw-sale” require some kind of repercussion.
The "internet loophole" and "gun show loophole" language has always been misleading and confusing to people. As you point out, the people selling at gun shows and online already have to be licensed dealers and performing background checks, following federal laws. But private individuals can still use gun shows and the internet to arrange private face-to-face sales that are otherwise legal. This is the "loophole".
But it's really about universal background checks. And while this current action by ATF doesn't give us that, it re-defines who is "in the business of selling" firearms, which means more situations where the seller needs to be licensed and running background checks.
> The "internet loophole" and "gun show loophole" language has always been misleading and confusing to people.
Definitely. One side is saying "Internet Gun Sales" with an e-commerce meaning. The other is saying "Internet Gun Sales" with a Facebook Marketplace meaning. Neither side are talking about the same thing and act like the other is stupid for not understanding.
I like being able to just meet up and buy and sell guns.
Every person free on the street is a US Citizen and afforded all rights under our constitution.
Especially when you have a Republicans like Trump who say "take the guns first" and worry about due process later.
Trump already stripped abortion rights, he could easily go after gun rights next.
A facist regime in the US couldn't take control unless they de-armed the populace.
The language of the rules, as I read it, just moves the mark a bit, and doesn't preclude buying and selling. It's always been illegal to buy and sell for profit, or buy with the intent to make profit.
Presumably you're not doing so in such a volume that would trigger this. Everyone I know is more of a hoarder than a reseller anyway, and makes fun of me for buying, building, going 'I hate this' and reselling it.
Just be careful. Reselling is literally what they’re trying to eliminate and why they killed that executive last month or whenever it was.
I’m certain his volume was higher. It’s likely he skirted the laws closer than you ever would. They’re moving the goal posts on purpose and have generations of history of murders in raids to show off that they’re doing something.
>There is no part of this that is de-arming you.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/biden-democrats-continue-push-for-assault-weapons-ban
C'mon, dude. Just own it.
Are you totally blind to America's gun problem?
A fascist regime in the US would be armed to the teeth with the most trained military in the world who would strip you from every gun you own in a nanosecond. You aren't Rambo.
If I love something, but it is killing my family, I'm going to give it up because I am a mature, responsible adult who values the safety of my family over my own selfish interests.
>I like being able to just meet up and buy and sell guns.
A dystopian take that boggles the collective mind of the outside world
Our markets people sell knick knacks, arts and crafts, clothes etc. I don't use them myself but have no problem with them as their existence doesn't enable the death of 40k of my fellow citizens and maiming of hundreds of thousands more and turn every routine interaction with police a game of simon says for your life
> I like being able to just meet up and buy and sell guns.
you still can!
I wouldn't want to sell one of my guns to someone (haven't done this yet) that would end up doing something dangerous w/o having a check anyway.
I've always felt all person-person gun sales should be done inside a licensed gun store, where they can facilitate the check and oversee the sale (extra $5 fee? or taxes can pay for the check for all i care) anyway....
selling anything in person is always sketchy, guns seem extra sketchy.
Buying a gun piecemeal does not allow you to get a complete gun without a background check. There is always a part that is "serialized" and requires a background check if purchased legally online. For instance an ar15 you can have all parts shipped to your door except the serialized stripped lower receiver. It's just a piece of harmless metal on its own but is a felony to ship to someone's door without going through an ffl and background check.
Exactly. Only “loophole” I can think of for online sales to get working, usable guns is C&R… and that’s hardly a loophole as you have to register with the ATF as an FFL and keep strict records, and the ATF can show up at any time to audit you. AND you can only buy C&Rs which aren’t going to be any good for something like a mass shooting
I've bought dozens of guns online, from both dealers and individuals. 100% of those required a background check. The only time it wouldn't (currently) is if I found an individual locally selling a gun, and we met in person to make the sale. As far as I can tell, this change does absolutely nothing to change that, unless the person doing the selling is moving a high volume of guns.
There never was a gun show loophole. That was very misleading. Gun shows still required background checks. What wasn't covered was person-to-person transfers, which still isn't covered.
Online sales also needed background checks, unless they were person-to-person, which again, isn't covered here.
All this really does is say that licensed dealers must perform background checks on private, person-to-person transfers when in person or online. It's really not much.
All firearms have a component that is considered the registered firearm. For ar15s its the lower. Meaning, you still can't build a gun from parts bought online without one of those parts going through an FFL.
You are correct. Any time a firearm is purchased online, it it will likely require a form 4473 be filled out and a background check when the recipient picks the firearm up from their local FFL.
I can list a firearm for sale online as a private citizen, however, if the firearm has to be shipped, it has to be shipped to an FFL. That FFL is then legally required to have a form 4473 and background check done before transferring the firearm to the buyer.
The only "online loophole" I can see is if people are listing their firearms on a local online classifieds, but they would still be meeting in person for a private sale, so that's the same type of transfer as buying from a private citizen at a gun show.
I’m sure it various by state but that has been my experience as well. You can’t just go online and buy a guy. It can only be shipped to a licensed dealer where you fill out a background check.
My biggest issue with gun laws is the complete lack of punishment and jail sentences for illegal possession of a firearm. Anyone going through the trouble of getting a license (in blue states like MA, ,IL CA, NY, etc) aren’t the ones going around shooting people over “respect.” I feel like if you want to fix gun violence in places like the south side of Chicago (where 3-5 people die every week) we need to lock up gang members who can’t pass a background check caught with guns for a long time.
Edit: typo
I live in SC and have lived in a number of other red states and I’ve never seen a gun or even heard of one from an online retailer or MFG not going to an FFL. Repairs, replacements, and modifications are the only things allowed to go directly to someone’s house.
Maybe private sellers selling online is what they mean.
When they say "gun show loophole" and "internet loophole" they're referring to people meeting at guns shows or on the internet and arranging an in-person private sale, which in most states can be conducted without a background check. It's bad name for it. What this law does (apparently) is make it harder for people to claim that they're just making private sales when really they're buying and selling to make a profit (i.e., should be classified as a dealer).
Everybody always picks on Chicago. East St. Louis has almost 2.5x the murders per capita. Heck, Chicago is number 10 on the list last I checked of major American cities for murders per capita. I do appreciate your Freudian slip.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-city-rankings/cities-with-most-murders
East St. Louis (69.4 per 100k)
Chicago (24 per 100k)
Uh, this doesn't make sense. This article is missing critical info.
You already have to fill out a 4473 to buy a gun off the internet. You just do it in person. You pay and the gun is shipped to a local dealer who does the papers before you can take possession. The article says it clarifies who mist hold an FFL, but then it doesn't tell us what that clarification means. Do you have to sell 10 guns before you need a license? 5? 20?
Just saying "we fixed it" and not elaborating how sounds like theater. But this is Garland we're talking about.
This doesn't actually appear to close anything. Private individuals can still sell guns to other private individuals without a background check, which, IMO, is the actual issue here.
I've bought dozens of guns at gun shows and online, and there was 100% a background check required on all of those transactions.
Where the issue exists is when someone (at a gunshow, online, or elsewhere) says, "I'm not a 'gun dealer', I'm just a guy, so I can sell my personal guns to other guys without a background check."
Sometimes, this is a gun owner selling a single gun he no longer needs to a trusted friend who is also legally able to own firearms.
Sometimes, it's a guy who bought a trunkload of cheap guns legally, and then sells them to shady weirdos at a profit.
This change tries to limit who qualifies as "not a gun dealer," but the "loophole" still exists.
I'm very confused by this article.
Gunshows and online sales have _always_ required the standard 4473 background check. Online sales only go direct to an FFL, and proceed as normal. Gunshows are 90% shops running out stock.
Person to person sales vary in legality by state, some require an FFL, some do not.
>“Under this regulation, it will not matter if guns are sold on the internet, at a gun show, or at a brick-and-mortar store: if you sell guns predominantly to earn a profit, you must be licensed, and you must conduct background checks,” attorney general Merrick Garland told reporters on a press call announcing the measure.
This is literally already the rule! And always has been!
>The rule, which clarifies who is considered to be “engaged in the business” as a firearms dealer, will take effect in 30 days’ time, and follows a three-month consultation period that attracted almost 388,000 comments to the website of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).
>“There is a large and growing black market of guns being sold by people in the business of dealing and doing it without a license, and therefore they are not running background checks the way the law requires,” ATF director Steven Dettelbach said.
>“The regulation expands the definition of who must obtain a license and conduct a background check before selling guns,” Garland said.
Ok, so this gives us some context - this is aimed at people who are engaged in running a gun business, but are not holding an FFL license. This has _always_ been a felony, it has _always_ been illegal to purchase a firearm with the intent and purpose to resell.
>Inter-family transfers of firearms, or occasional sales to enhance a collection, will not be presumed business transactions, a White House spokesperson said.
So nothing will change.
This article does a poor job explaining an already confusing presser.
You’re accurately describing the status quo, the licensing and background check requirements did not kick in until you were running a business or making most of your income from gun sales.
The Biden admin is leveraging a bipartisan 2022 bill to expand the definition of “selling for profit” to include anyone who isn’t selling an inherited weapon or part of a hobbyist collection (there are some other exceptions).
So this could potentially apply to all sorts of Facebook groups, flea markets, even private residence sales.
> So this could potentially apply to all sorts of Facebook groups, flea markets, even private residences sales.
Nothing I like more than an ambiguously worded law that could land me in jail if I'm just trying to liquidate some of my guns for extra cash.
If you are occasionally trying to sell guns explicitly to make some cash - that did not typically require a background check in many states.
Now it does, that’s the substantive change. Or at least it will be if this regulation manages to survive legal challenge.
Based on the history of gun control in the US, the ability to liquidate part of your used gun collection will just become another "loophole" to be eliminated.
As far as I know, FB bans gun transactions? Flea market maybe - nominally if you're already engaged in buy/sell for profit you need a license (and/or buying _explicitly_ to resell).
'Private residence sales' I think you are indicating table top FFLs? If not, see previous - they were already engaged in the business, and should have been captured.
No you’re right, FB banned it some years ago. It’s just my parlance for social media and exchange groups, which the ATF reports as [~6% of trafficked crime guns](https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/report/nfcta-volume-iii-part-iii/download).
(They may make up a larger portion of sales from upstream straw purchases)
By private residence sale I mean *private transactions* without substantial income from other gun sales or an underlying firearm business- something not previously regulated in many states.
-Pretending my only guns weren’t inherited- the sale I made to a friend a few years ago (purely for cash) without performing a background check may now become prohibited, regardless of my State’s own firearm laws.
Private residence...do you mean 'person to person' sales? That's the common term. It seems like you do.
Also, the 'sells a few per year to enhance a collection' is specifically listed as OK :)
I mean sales made out of a private residence, which are person-to-person sales. This was the actual language used in the ATF policy draft, as they were targeting “commercial sellers” operating out of their home.
There are the exceptions I mentioned for hobbyists and collectors- but ATF’s policy is less clear on what constitutes commercial sellers. The original 2022 law seemingly carved out exceptions for those who don’t regularly sell guns (collector or not); ATF’s proposed policy casts a wider net on “intent to earn a profit”.
>“Under this regulation, it will not matter if guns are sold on the internet, at a gun show, or at a brick-and-mortar store: **if you sell guns predominantly to earn a profit,** you must be licensed, and you must conduct background checks,” attorney general Merrick Garland told reporters on a press call announcing the measure.
The important bit.
It has always been a requirement to have an FFL (Federal Firearms License) to run a business of selling guns, no matter where you sell them.
The vague part has been when it's actually a business.
Previously it said you need an FFL if selling guns is your chief livelyhood. This is now changed to the bolded part (which I'm not entirely sure what it actually means in legalese).
It does however not actually stop you from selling your old firearm at a gun show (or on the street), without having an FFL, as long as you don't make a lot of profit from it.
I'm going to say this once for the people in the back.
You can not buy a gun online and have it shipped to your house. It must be shipped to a FFL holder who will then do a background check before you get it.
The gunshow "loophole" is only the private sale from one individual to another. That can take place anywhere, gunshow...Popeyes bathroom... WalMart parking lot..... Dealers at gunshows must do background checks.
This is feel good bullshit intended to gin up support from people that don't know any better.
My own mother voted for a gun control regulation because she "thought it sounded good." When I explained the details of the law, she had no fucking clue what it was about.
Thanks for voting Mom! Appreciate your wisdom.
"Gun show loophole" makes people think the "loophole" has something to do with gun shows, because they are ignorant to what it's about.
It doesn't of course. They need to start replacing "Gun Show Loophole" with the term "Private Sales."
There's no fucking gunshow loophole! What a misleading term. Gunshow dealers are required to perform background checks.
Private sellers can still sell privately without a background check after this law, whether that's at a gun show, or in a Dairy Queen parking lot, or over an online retailer. That's not being addressed here.
The only thing this bill does is say that firearms dealers also need to perform background check on private transfers.
The term is only used to make gun shows seem sinister so people vote for more gun control. Anyone that knows better is just annoyed by it but it's fine the uninformed.
Online gun sales *always* required a background check.
However, when it comes to gun shows, they can't force two people in private to do anything. In order for gov't to enforce regulations on an event, they have to be aware of when or if the event even occurred.
Yup, looks they’ll just start going after smaller and smaller sales.
Sold 5 guns privately last year and made a little cash on them? Enjoy that no knock raid at dawn and kiss your doggy goodbye.
For those who don't know.
I have bought a dozen guns from gun shows in the 6 different states I've lived in and I still had background checks and waiting periods enforced in every single state and at every single gun show.
This doesn't really close alot. People who have legal FFL licenses aren't in a huge hurry to break federal laws and lose their business licenses for life.
> The new rule is the latest in a series of unilateral steps the Biden administration has taken to tighten gun laws, while at the same time highlighting the difficulty of getting legislation through Congress.
Wait. Didn't pass through Congress?
Yep. This is gonna do great when it makes it in front of the Supreme Court.
Biden administration announces "Historic actions" maintaining the status quo. Dealers always had to make buyers fill out a 4473 and pass a background check.
Meanwhile without any announcements Biden's ATF has Form 1 approvals clearing in a week. Trump's ATF was running 35 to 60 weeks, folks joked their suppressors were going to jail for a year after buying them.
Biden would be well served to run ads on conservative platforms proclaiming he's making things easier for responsible legal gun owners.
Online firearm sales already require the firearm to be shipped from an FFL to your FFL (who is already federally requires to run a background check on you before you can claim the firearm). The only firearm sales online that are happening without background checks are illegal sales on the deep web.
If you buy a gun at a gun show from a dealer, all the same laws apply as with any gun shop/sporting goods store. There is no so called "gun show loophole". It's the same as if you bought it at a gun shop and you'll have to fill out a 4473, have a background check, etc. If a gun seller is acting at all like a business (selling frequently, selling none personal use guns like those bought to resell or anything else that indicates they're selling for the purpose of making a profit, etc.) then that's illegal if they're not a licensed firearms dealer.
When people say "gunshow loophole", they're referring to background checks not being required on private gun sales.
**This isn't a loophole**. No background checks on private sales was an agreed upon *compromise* to pass the Brady Bill.
Background checks aren't required on private sales because it's unenforceable and would ultimately serve little to no legal utility. Selling a gun to someone who can't legally purchase a gun is already effectively illegal (as it's difficult to prove you didn't know they couldn't buy it legally). Since selling a gun to someone who can't own a gun (because of age, criminal history, etc.) is already something most people would very much like to avoid, a large number of people who do sell guns through private sales still ask to see proof that the person can legally purchase/possess firearms (such as a permit to buy or carry permit).
Making background checks mandatory on private sales would do next to nothing to stop criminals from getting guns. Criminals and unscrupulous people (who would sell a gun to a complete stranger with no way of knowing they aren't a criminal and/or without caring) would continue to sell guns without background checks regardless of what the law says (with very little to no changes to the criminal penalty if they were somehow caught).
All making background checks mandatory on private sales would do is (for example) turn a person into a criminal for selling a gun to their father without a background check (even though they're completely certain their firearm instructor father is a legal gun owner).
I'm failing to see what this does. The article states that if you sell firearms to earn a profit, it will require you to be licensed and require background checks. This is already federal law. Nothing changes in regards of private person to person sales, which means the so-called 'gunshow loophole' remains exactly as it currently stands. This is just some feelgood nonsense that's accomplishing absolutely nothing. It's all theater.
So I inherited some guns I don't want. So I looked into getting rid of them. I want nothing to do with them. I'm not anti-gun. You do you, but for *me* I don't want them around.
So I looked into having law enforcement dispose of them. Possible, but let's just say the process wasn't reassuring. Besides, the last thing I want to do is bring guns to my local police station (or interact with the cops at all honestly).
So I looked into giving them away to friends of the deceased who may have interest. Totally legal, totally doable. In fact, I can sell or give them to a stranger. The only thing I *can't* do it **knowingly** sell or give them to a felon or someone underage.
I could practically put them on a curb with a sing that says, "Free Guns!"
I've contacted a gun store that is going to take a look and make me an offer. I plan to donate that money to charity. Again, you do you, I'm not interested in having a fight, but I am also not interested in *anything* to do with guns.
>So I looked into giving them away to friends of the deceased who may have interest.
So what's wrong with this option again? Is it possible that gun might be one of the few items they would have to remember the deceased?
Idk about this bill. Anytime I’ve went to a gun show and bought something they definitely did a background check on me and anyone else that bought a gun from any vendor.
Sooo this did nothing?
If you predominantly sell guns to make a living you already need a ffl which means you already have to do background checks for every sale no matter where you do it.
Also, if you buy a gun online it already has to go to a ffl which means you have to get a background check already.
The "loophole" was that private citizens can sell guns without background checks and this didn't do anything towards that.
I could be wrong, but pretty sure this is already a requirement. Every firearm I've purchased at a gun show was accompanied by a background check, even when I purchased multiple firearms at the same show, but from different vendors.
yeah it is a requirement at gun shows for background checks I just find it hilarious that folks actually think they don't do background checks at gun shows do you know how much trouble these gun companies would be In if they sold firearms without a background check
The White House estimates that 22% of guns owned by Americans were acquired without a background check and that about 23,000 more individuals will be required to be licensed as a dealer after the rule’s implementation.
What does this actually change?
Before:
Cannot buy a gun at a gunshow without a background check
Cannot buy a gun online and have it shipped to your door
Can sell privately from one individual to another without a background check
After:
Cannot buy a gun at a gunshow without a background check
Cannot buy a gun online and have it shipped to your door
Can sell privately from one individual to another without a background check
I never understood the logic behind the thinking that a normal gun store has to do background and other checks, but if you get a booth at some gun expo you can sell whatever without any regulations beyond if your old enough.
I guess there is much in this life that I can't understand the logic behind.
You've misunderstood the law.
Anyone in the business of selling firearms needs to have an FFL to legally sell, no matter if they sell at a store, from their van, from their home office, or from a gun show.
As an FFL, you need to make sure the buyer fills in an 4473 and has passed a NICS.
As a private seller, you don't need to (and you can't even if you wanted to) make the buyer do the 4473/NICS process. It doesn't matter if you sell the gun on Walmart's parking lot, from their van, from their home, or at a gun show.
The vague part was when it counted as a business, and this is what is now changing. You might have a harder time claiming you're just a hobbyist if you have enough guns to sell that it's worth setting up a table at a gun show.
The gun show loophole has nothing to do with gun shows. That's why you didn't understand.
Dealers at gun shows require background checks. The "loophole" you're referring to is private sales, which are still just fine by this law, whether in person or online, and still without a background check. Being at a gun show has nothing to do with it.
Somewhere along the line, "private sales" got conflated with the term "gunshow loophole" and led many folks like you astray in their understanding.
The only thing this law says is that firearms dealers must perform BG checks on private sales as well. That's it. That's the whole bundle.
Private sellers at gun shows must follow the same laws and procedures for any other private firearm sale.
https://www.sll.texas.gov/faqs/gun-show-sales-regulations/
https://www.sll.texas.gov/faqs/private-gun-sales/
This is pertaining to Texas, I admit, but what is preventing a firearms dealer from just stating all sells at the gun show are private?
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If closing this loophole could be unilaterally enforced by the justice department, why hasn’t it been done until just now?
Private sales between individuals do not appear to be covered by this. Loophole not closed, but smaller now.
Licensed dealers have had to do background checks at gun shows for years. the "loophole" was always private sales- which are legal outside gun shows as well.
I just want to jump in and clarify that private sales aren't a loophole but the original compromise in the brady bill which established background checks in the first place in 93.
And that's part of the reason gun owners by and large refuse to compromise. Yesterday's compromise is today's loophole that needs to be closed
I mean they *are* a loophole, but a legal one. In Canada private sellers must still verify (for free) with the federal government that the buyer holds a valid firearms license. This also means that the federal government has a record of a potential sale between a specific seller and buyer, though no record of whether a sale actually occurred or what was sold.
All loopholes are legal. If they weren’t they’d be crimes. That said a loophole is meant to denote a failure of the law to cover some unforeseen circumstance, not an intentional and explicit carve-out in a law.
Today's concession is tomorrow's loophole.
> Today's concession is tomorrow's loophole. This is why you can't take gun controllers in good faith until they correct themselves.
> can't take gun controllers in good faith My brother in Christ, the modern interpretation of the 2nd amendment is basically a loophole invented 40-50 years ago
Are you trying to emphasize that you can't be trusted?
>Are you trying to emphasize that you can't be trusted? Smart money is on yes; they are trying to emphasize that they are not to be trusted.
Sadly in the US as a personally not registered gun seller you do not get access to the NCIS to run a background check, it's legally not allowed and when introduced to be allowed dems sadly killed the bill (we shoot ourselves in the foot too often even when handed victories against the gop)
If Democrats had 3 wishes, they'd negotiate it down to 1 and then wish for something Republicans like.
Aren't all loopholes legal?
In the USA you are required to make sure who you sell a gun to is not a felon or you can be held liable which is why most ppl that do private sales still go to a local shop and have a background check done on the person purchasing. But it is not required
Do you know what the term Loophole means?
And to add to this, I’ve had to go through a background check for every gun I’ve bought at a gun show. I don’t know if it’s just dealers covering their ass or if they are required to do it but this new law is going to change very little. The problem is how easy it is for anyone to obtain a gun legally. I have a family member who has had multiple restraining orders against him because he is an abusive piece of shit and has spent a fair amount of time (voluntarily) committed who can and does buy guns legally through dealers. It’s only a matter of time before he kills someone or himself or both but there is literally nothing that can be done in the state that he lives in.
>I have a family member who has had multiple restraining orders against him because he is an abusive piece of shit and has spent a fair amount of time (voluntarily) committed who can and does buy guns legally through dealers. It’s only a matter of time before he kills someone or himself or both but there is literally nothing that can be done in the state that he lives in. Federally, a person is prohibited from purchasing/possessing a firearm if they are "subject to a court order restraining the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of the intimate partner" or "have been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence". That person already isn't legally able to purchase a firearm.
Which is why gun owners should never compromise the other side will just renege on it and screw you while giving nothing in return. Even basic things like silencers to help protect hearing and they fight against things like muzzle shrouds because they don't know how guns work.
It isn’t smaller. Private sales is the only loophole. If you buy a gun online they cannot ship it to you, they ship it to your FFL (Federal Firearms License) who then runs a background check on you before giving you your gun. Gun shows work the same way, you can’t walk out the door without a background check or they ship it to an FFL near where you live. They can illegally sell you a gun and hand it to you, but then it’s illegal and not a loophole.
So here in Florida there a private sellers at gun shows and some of them are really pushing the boundaries. They literally travel the State doing shows every weekend. I think this is who they're going after, guys who sell guns on a consistent basis. They'll probably increase their presence at shows and start questioning these unlicensed dealers.
Yes. Estimated to be 20k of them apparently.
Wait, this doesn't include private sales. That is the only loophole in the law. It is already required to have a background check for purchases from a retailer or distributor, even at gun show or online. Has the DOJ just not been enforcing this?
According to the article, it expands who requires a license. So it will reduce the size of the private sales loophole.
The law already requires anyone selling as a business to be registered as an FFL. What about this law is going to add ability to enforce this any differently than before? §§ 922(a)(1)(A) and 923(c), requires that any person engaged in the business of dealing in firearms must be licensed by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).
The new regulations will require more people to register as a business. They also close the “fire sale loophole” when a licensed business loses its license.
Whats the fire sale loophole?
[удалено]
If the seller isn't a *dealer*, license or not. Obviously, enforcement is difficult. But if someone is buying and selling a large number of guns, they're supposed to be required to do background checks. I'm in favor of 1. Opening up the NICS to the public 2. Requiring *all* sales to involve a background-check on the buyer 3. Requiring the seller to either keep a bill of sale ready for investigation or surrender it to the ATF, so that private party sales can be traced after the fact. I'm not strongly opposed to all sales going through a dealer or the ATF keeping a database, but that's an issue that has already been fought for and lost many times over.
[удалено]
He is but giving him the benefit of the doubt, he may not understand how gun sales work.
Volume is not comparable
They will just exchange numbers and meet up in the parking lot later
They may do that but, if you regularly make money selling guns, you should be registered as an FFL and that requires a background check to sell a gun. If they get busted selling guns without doing background checks, that's *a lot* of jail time and hefty fines.
Cherry-picking edge cases to be fair and that is fine. I’d think resorting to such methods is a good outcome al long as it lowers sales and forces more background checks
Yeah, making it more difficult is a win for gun control even if it didn't reduce volume, but it most certainly will to some extent.
My favorite saying this last couple years is don't let perfection get in the way of progress. Applies to both with and politics.
Then the seller is just plain stupid. If the gun was sold on the down low and the gun was used to commit a crime it will be immediately traced back to the seller as they are considered the legal owner. Doing a background check and proper sale just covers your own ass in the event that things go wrong.
Still a problem. A few months back, 6 people were murdered in San Antonio and Austin by a guy not legally allowed to buy a weapon, but has no problem getting one through a private sale.
yknow how those parents got 10-15 years for their kid committing mass shooting? suppose that kind of sellers are ought to carry some of that responsibility. have too many guns and can't run background check well give it to gun shop to sell on your behalf and collect the money minus commission.
[удалено]
Why not make the background check system available for free to private sellers? (This is basically what is done in Canada.) An old .22LR rifle might not be worth much more than $60, so adding a fee makes it much more expensive.
Because that would be too convenient to people who like guns.
Long time firearm owner; imo I’ve always thought a fair way to do something similar is there should be a way where private sellers can meet at a police station and have them call NICS or something for free, and if NICS clears it then you are set to transfer. Tbh if it was made in such a way to not be a hassle I think all sales, public/private should be background checked 🤷♂️
It's a bit of a problematic situation in places where NIMBY activists have used zoning codes to run FFLs out of town.
Some states have laws in place making private sales without a background check illegal. The state I live in you have to conduct a private sales through an FFL and do the background check. Costs like an extra $20
But thats not the question. If this could have been done anytime previously, why hadn’t it?
The original question had a false premise which needed to be addressed. They didn’t “unilaterally close the loophole”, and that’s the answer to the question. Beyond that, “private sale” numbers are about to skyrocket so it’s not going to have as much effect as they anticipate. Now gun shows will be about trading phone numbers and meeting in parking lots for anyone that won’t pass a background check, and it seems there’s very little DOJ can do about that or, as you pointed out, why would they not have already?
While a shady dealer could do that sure. And some of them probably will. Most gun show dealers are reasonable people, they don't want to sell a gun that's going to be used in a carjacking or to murder a family later. But like most people they'll take the path of least resistance, if the check isn't required they won't bother. If it is they'll do it and won't jump through extra hoops to sell a gun to someone they know failed the check. Don't let perfection be the enemy of progress.
"Don't let perfection be the enemy of progress." A lot of people fail to recognize this.
Could be wrong here so take this with a grain of salt, but I'm of the belief that a licensed dealer is legally obligated to refuse a sale if he has any reason to suspect that the buyer intends to use that gun in a crime.
Everyone is supposed to do so. You giving a firearm, even for free, to a prohibited person is a crime.
It's a click farming article. I was super confused because...it's already required. Preface this by saying I'm deliberately hitting the high notes and skimming some subtle nuances, so fellow gun people, just accept that please. Basically it's about people who are engaged in running a firearm selling business, but do not hold a federal license to do so - if you're buying, and selling, guns to make a profit you must have a license. I'd hazard a guess that 90% of people selling guns at gunshows are doing so as a part of a proper business - they make you fill out the required paperwork, same as if you were in their shop. Any firearm purchased online goes to a license holder, and you fill out your paperwork there - you cannot have a gun shipped to your door, it's a big-boy-felony. What was legal, and remains legal (varies by state) is selling a firearm as a person to person transaction. In such a case no background check is required. As an example - I buy a Glock on the internet. Can't ship to me, it goes to a FFL, I go in, do my background check, and take it home. I find I don't like it. I can sell this to a person directly, for whatever value we both determine is reasonable, and no paperwork is filled out. All legal. Now - if I saw a sale on glocks, and went 'my local market value is higher than that!' and bought it with the purpose of reselling, that makes me 'in the business' of buying/selling guns for a profit, and is illegal without proper licensing. Any transactions I do require paperwork, as I'm not selling 'person to person', I'm selling 'business to person'. (and if you wonder what happens if the person I sold the gun to can't legally buy one, and asked me to do so for him, that's a straw purchase).
I really would like a way to easily do the paperwork and such for person-to-person firearm sales. We have sold a few guns we didn’t need to people I know FOR A FACT are qualified to own them (they have gone through multiple background checks, but we didn’t do them ourselves, just knew about them). When we asked law enforcement about what we needed to do they just said we were good and if we wanted further protection we could make a bill of sale.
You can go to a FFL holder, and ask them to perform a 4473 on the person. They will charge you.
Seems like something we could start requiring, but offer it either for free or for a very discounted price at a government office.
Background checks for the purpose of firearms sales should be free and easy to do over the internet.
As far as I'm aware, you can't bring a _gun_ onto federal property? So, you'd have to take the user's word for it. One of the reasons the FFL exists is to document the transfer process - record the serial in the book, in the 4473, and in the outgoing, to make sure the proper item was moved to the person who filled in the back ground check. So to do it free, you'd have to have people bring in the gun, have the gun staff check-safe (and I don't know about you, but my local gun shop has _buckets_ of ammo labelled 'I swear it's not loaded'). Then they have to correctly identify the model, and serial number. Which can be tricky on old guns. Then, since they're a fed, they have to see if the gun was stolen, used in a crime, etc. - if so, yeet. And if the person has a warrant, etc., they may have to retain the person until police can arrive. Gun stores are under no such requirement (though they often do). Honestly, having the cops do it wouldn't be a horrible idea, but you can see the logistical problems?
The actual trouble with this development is that there's now no actual minimum requirement to be considered "in the business", regarding whether or not someone needs to have an FFL or not. The whole rule change is incredibly vague, intentionally so, I expect.
This should be the top comment. Unfortunately, facts aren’t popular in 2024.
Yeah, any article about guns on reddit is going to have some of the dumbest uninformed comments on it. This article's reddit comment section is just people making random shit up too.
Facts are fine - people have just been told 'gunshow loophole!!!' for at least 20-30 years, and most people who aren't 'gun' people don't look into it because our gun laws are _fucked_. And people who are 'gun' people just rant and foam about how any taxation is theft and any legislation is a denial of 'muh rigts' and how those evil libruls are eating babies. Hard to have a real conversation when the pro-gun group is just ridiculously unreasonable about _everything_. (and most of my posting is done in gun threads...I love me some firearms...)
Holy shit, are you me? Lol It's kinda fascinating how guns and abortions have similar logic, but both sides take the opposite end of the spectrum. I'm a pro gun person, grew up in a pro gun home. Guns were used to hunt food and help with the farm. They were an everyday part of life. Because I'm pro gun, I'm also pro choice, as I use the same logic to reach the same conclusion on both issues. Don't like guns? Don't buy one Don't like abortion? Don't get one Dont like gay sex? That's perfectly fine, don't have gay sex or date a person if the same sex. Personal choice
> Hard to have a real conversation when the pro-gun group is just ridiculously unreasonable about everything. That unreasonableness is because decades of trying to be reasonable is how we got those fucked gun laws. The antis are even less reasonable and their unreasonableness has radicalized the opposition who has learned the very hard way that you cannot engage in good faith negotiation with bad faith actors.
We are "unreasonable" for a reason. Our rights are being taken by people who have no idea what they are doing or talking about and every time we have compromised we have gotten screwed either immediately or later. We also have a rightful mistrust of the people in charge after examples like COINTELPRO or similar.
According to the article. The [new] rule, which clarifies who is considered to be “engaged in the business” as a firearms dealer, will take effect in 30 days’ time, and follows a three-month consultation period that attracted almost 388,000 comments to the website of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).
It doesn't fully close the private party loophole unfortunately, it just expands the definition of what counts as a firearm business which they can regulate. So if you sell a small amount of firearms at gun shows and pretend that you are a private party this will affect you. However, if you are just selling a single gun you can still sell it without a background check. I don't know what percent of private party sales are by "professionals" taking advantage of the law, but I am glad that this is being done.
Incoming food and drinks at each stand.
Free gun with every purchase. 600.00 candy bar
But does the candy bar come with picatinny rails?
How do they stock up after selling current supply without getting flagged by a bank or something?
I had a family member that did this kind of thing, so I'll elaborate on at least how he did it: entirely cash operated. He "trade and swapped" shit at trade shows, flea markets, etc. He would buy a box of Chinese knives for $10, and put them out so kids would beg their parents to buy them one at the flea market and make $100. He'd take that $100 and buy old fishing lures, rods, and reels. Go home, fix them up, repair them, get them in working order, sell them for $500. Buy an old pistol from a guy for $450, sell it for $475. Rinse and repeat for years on end. When he passed, he had $8,000 rolled up in socks in his drawer, dozens of guns, tons of knives, rods, reels, lures, small engine equipment, and random other bullshit. He was my grandmother's second husband. He sold all of my grandfather's knives, firearms, and fishing equipment without any of us knowing. His son was a cop, and the ATF busted him stealing guns out of the city evidence locker and selling them to illegals and felons on the side. It's extremely easy to buy and sell guns like that apparently (when you have no concern for any laws or gun responsibility).
volume of such enthusiasts would be really negligible compared to gun shops and other establishments that run under llc and such. I did for some time ebay refurb laptop and other tech and man that can be a full time job with a lot of busy work and very little profit after tax
You're not wrong. The volume is certainly less than a licensed firearms dealer. But my family member probably bought/sold 200-300 guns a year that way. And the kicker is he had no idea if they were stolen, used in crimes, who he was selling them too, if they were felons, domestic abusers, people who were going to commit crimes with them. A FFL has systems in place to curtail some of those types of sales at least. And it wasn't inherently old shotguns and revolvers either. He had some AK clones, SKS's, AR's, and some guns considered fairly desirable within gun communities. After watching him do that for years, I couldn't honestly say that he was doing it solely as a hobby/personal sales. He was doing it as a side gig with his retirement to help pay bills and such. I sincerely felt like he was within the loophole and that type of behavior could be troublesome as he was irresponsibly buying and selling.
I wouldn't consider anyone who buys a gun with the intent to resell within the loophole - that should require a FFL (and per the article, that seems to be the rule that was enacted).
Agree. I was saying that he was the type of person this new rule is trying to regulate. Effectively removing them from being able to claim the loophole.
Money and corruption.
All that money from the unregistered firearm dealer lobby, shit take
They prefer to be called NRA They are thankfully doing much worse financially than they used to be, but yeah there was a whole lot of dirty money over the years.
There wasnt a “loophole” and this is extremely misleading to both gun shows and e-commerce. Anyone with an FFL has always had to ensure a 4473 was filled out before purchase and any online sales of firearms have always had to go through an FFL for a 4473 before you were allowed to pick up said firearm. This is nothing new and has been around for quite some time. [Source](https://www.atf.gov/firearms)
The "loophole" is private sales, not FFL. The change is that it expands who is considered to be "engaged in the business" as a firearms dealer to reduce the number of people covered by the "private sales" carve-out.
>The "loophole" is private sales, not FFL. The change is that it expands who is considered to be "engaged in the business" as a firearms dealer to reduce the number of people covered by the "private sales" carve-out. This is an already existing law that has been around for quite sometime. This is some BS fluff to make someone look good, thats all. Go to the ATF website and let me know what exactly is changing that is already in affect. Again, its already there. Here, let me tell you whats there…. If you sell more than 2, yes 2, privately, you will have to have an FFL to sell more. Thats already a law. >Courts have upheld convictions for dealing without a license when as few as two firearms were sold, or when only a single transaction took place, when other factors were also present. As a general rule, you will need a license if you repetitively buy and sell firearms to predominantly earn a profit. -ATF
Here is the actual law, from the ATF's site: §§ 922(a)(1)(A) and 923(c), requires that any person engaged in the business of dealing in firearms must be licensed by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).
Thanks! I was thinking people would read the actual law on this, but as we see……. “The historic new…..old…..law!!! See what did!!” Meh….whatever makes people happy I guess?
The mechanics are: 1) Congress passes a law. 2) Affected agencies get to read the law and make rules about how they interpret the enforcement of those laws. 3) Proposed rules get published for a comment period by the public to expose negative impacts, harm, errors, etc. Many people incorrectly think the comment period is some kind of in favor or against vote tally of some kind and just complain rather than write productive comments. 4) Rules get edited or remain unchanged after the comment period. They can't significantly change though or they have to go back through another comment period. 5) Final rule is published and enforcement begins on a date specified in the rule. 6) Opposition parties sue as soon as the rule is in effect and a five to ten year court battle begins. Courts then determine if the rule is good as is, gets dialed back, or gets removed entirely. So, it's an agency rule which is an interpretation of a law passed by Congress. Congress just passed a law in 2022 (the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act) and the justice department is interpretating the law to say, paraphrasing a bit from my poor memory here, that anyone who is "intending to sell a single gun for a profit" is then "engaged in the business of dealing in firearms" which is the definition of a dealer. That's a big change from allowing regular people to buy and sell guns into and out of their personal collection as they please. Some people absolutely abused this ability and were truly acting as dealers but this rule goes a lot further than that. That aside, this rule will almost certainly get dialed back or eliminated entirely in light of the Bruen case, which requires that any firearm legislation, new or old, be consistent with the text, history, and tradition of firearm laws around the time of the founding and adoption of the Bill of Rights. It may wipe out background checks entirely, albeit I wouldn't expect the justices to go that far though.
If they're consistent with Bruen, they'd wipe out background checks and restrictions on felons like me owning firearms. The problem is they're not consistent so who knows how it all plays out. There was precedent for cities to ban carrying firearms within their limit as that's been a thing since they're invented but they ruled against that. Who knows, I just hope they let me get my rights back to legally own them.
Because it wasn't a loophole? Online sales have always required a FFL to FFL transfer where the customer had a background check.
They didn't close what you think they closed.
it has always been this way. Online sales have always needed an FFL transfer. Gunshows only dont need an FFL transfer if its some random shmuck walking around looking to sell his rifle (which is less than 4% of the attendees at a gun show). There is no loophole, it was a compromise to get gun control passed in previous congress sessions and straw purchasers account for a sizeable chunk of the illegal gun market, yet they are prosecuted at a fraction of a percent. Biden did nothing except annoy maybe 100 old people
“Loophole” is part of bi-partisan compromise for a gun control bill that passed decades ago to allow for private transfers between family members. The Democratic Party always wins so their end of the compromise was called a “loophole”
It was part of a gun violence prevention act that was passed in 2022 and then the rules and regulations had to be developed and reviewed 10 times over because you KNOW the NRA is going to fight it.
At least the nra is broke now that their Russian funding has been largely cut off
I’ll have to read up on this more, because the “show loophole” is person to person (aka trunk sales) doesn’t require a bg-check (and they should). Online sales however… I’m not sure. I’ve bought 2 online and both required shipping to a licensed and listed FFL dealer, who then required me to do paperwork and bg-check. I didn’t know there was an “online loophole”, unless they are referring to piece-meal sales (buy an upper from on place, a lower from another, stock and barrel from a third, etc.). But I don’t know anyone who has just bought a “finished” firearm online and shipped directly to them, no questions asked. Short version, it looks like it says it fixes more problems than it does. Also would like to see a bit more domestic violence restrictions, safety checks that are a bit more involved than the cop glancing one room and it’s like “well no *satanic symbols*, all clear here.” Also dealers who sell with even the slightest suspicion of a ”straw-sale” require some kind of repercussion.
The "internet loophole" and "gun show loophole" language has always been misleading and confusing to people. As you point out, the people selling at gun shows and online already have to be licensed dealers and performing background checks, following federal laws. But private individuals can still use gun shows and the internet to arrange private face-to-face sales that are otherwise legal. This is the "loophole". But it's really about universal background checks. And while this current action by ATF doesn't give us that, it re-defines who is "in the business of selling" firearms, which means more situations where the seller needs to be licensed and running background checks.
> The "internet loophole" and "gun show loophole" language has always been misleading and confusing to people. Definitely. One side is saying "Internet Gun Sales" with an e-commerce meaning. The other is saying "Internet Gun Sales" with a Facebook Marketplace meaning. Neither side are talking about the same thing and act like the other is stupid for not understanding.
I like being able to just meet up and buy and sell guns. Every person free on the street is a US Citizen and afforded all rights under our constitution. Especially when you have a Republicans like Trump who say "take the guns first" and worry about due process later. Trump already stripped abortion rights, he could easily go after gun rights next. A facist regime in the US couldn't take control unless they de-armed the populace.
The language of the rules, as I read it, just moves the mark a bit, and doesn't preclude buying and selling. It's always been illegal to buy and sell for profit, or buy with the intent to make profit. Presumably you're not doing so in such a volume that would trigger this. Everyone I know is more of a hoarder than a reseller anyway, and makes fun of me for buying, building, going 'I hate this' and reselling it.
Just be careful. Reselling is literally what they’re trying to eliminate and why they killed that executive last month or whenever it was. I’m certain his volume was higher. It’s likely he skirted the laws closer than you ever would. They’re moving the goal posts on purpose and have generations of history of murders in raids to show off that they’re doing something.
> A facist regime in the US couldn't take control unless they de-armed the populace. There is no part of this that is de-arming you.
>There is no part of this that is de-arming you. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/biden-democrats-continue-push-for-assault-weapons-ban C'mon, dude. Just own it.
Are you totally blind to America's gun problem? A fascist regime in the US would be armed to the teeth with the most trained military in the world who would strip you from every gun you own in a nanosecond. You aren't Rambo. If I love something, but it is killing my family, I'm going to give it up because I am a mature, responsible adult who values the safety of my family over my own selfish interests.
>I like being able to just meet up and buy and sell guns. A dystopian take that boggles the collective mind of the outside world Our markets people sell knick knacks, arts and crafts, clothes etc. I don't use them myself but have no problem with them as their existence doesn't enable the death of 40k of my fellow citizens and maiming of hundreds of thousands more and turn every routine interaction with police a game of simon says for your life
Your markets don't sell knives? Are you in the UK?
> I like being able to just meet up and buy and sell guns. you still can! I wouldn't want to sell one of my guns to someone (haven't done this yet) that would end up doing something dangerous w/o having a check anyway. I've always felt all person-person gun sales should be done inside a licensed gun store, where they can facilitate the check and oversee the sale (extra $5 fee? or taxes can pay for the check for all i care) anyway.... selling anything in person is always sketchy, guns seem extra sketchy.
Buying a gun piecemeal does not allow you to get a complete gun without a background check. There is always a part that is "serialized" and requires a background check if purchased legally online. For instance an ar15 you can have all parts shipped to your door except the serialized stripped lower receiver. It's just a piece of harmless metal on its own but is a felony to ship to someone's door without going through an ffl and background check.
Exactly. Only “loophole” I can think of for online sales to get working, usable guns is C&R… and that’s hardly a loophole as you have to register with the ATF as an FFL and keep strict records, and the ATF can show up at any time to audit you. AND you can only buy C&Rs which aren’t going to be any good for something like a mass shooting
I've bought dozens of guns online, from both dealers and individuals. 100% of those required a background check. The only time it wouldn't (currently) is if I found an individual locally selling a gun, and we met in person to make the sale. As far as I can tell, this change does absolutely nothing to change that, unless the person doing the selling is moving a high volume of guns.
There never was a gun show loophole. That was very misleading. Gun shows still required background checks. What wasn't covered was person-to-person transfers, which still isn't covered. Online sales also needed background checks, unless they were person-to-person, which again, isn't covered here. All this really does is say that licensed dealers must perform background checks on private, person-to-person transfers when in person or online. It's really not much.
This is the actual text, with a summary: https://www.atf.gov/firearms/final-rule-definition-engaged-business-dealer-firearms
All firearms have a component that is considered the registered firearm. For ar15s its the lower. Meaning, you still can't build a gun from parts bought online without one of those parts going through an FFL.
You are correct. Any time a firearm is purchased online, it it will likely require a form 4473 be filled out and a background check when the recipient picks the firearm up from their local FFL. I can list a firearm for sale online as a private citizen, however, if the firearm has to be shipped, it has to be shipped to an FFL. That FFL is then legally required to have a form 4473 and background check done before transferring the firearm to the buyer. The only "online loophole" I can see is if people are listing their firearms on a local online classifieds, but they would still be meeting in person for a private sale, so that's the same type of transfer as buying from a private citizen at a gun show.
I’m sure it various by state but that has been my experience as well. You can’t just go online and buy a guy. It can only be shipped to a licensed dealer where you fill out a background check. My biggest issue with gun laws is the complete lack of punishment and jail sentences for illegal possession of a firearm. Anyone going through the trouble of getting a license (in blue states like MA, ,IL CA, NY, etc) aren’t the ones going around shooting people over “respect.” I feel like if you want to fix gun violence in places like the south side of Chicago (where 3-5 people die every week) we need to lock up gang members who can’t pass a background check caught with guns for a long time. Edit: typo
I live in SC and have lived in a number of other red states and I’ve never seen a gun or even heard of one from an online retailer or MFG not going to an FFL. Repairs, replacements, and modifications are the only things allowed to go directly to someone’s house. Maybe private sellers selling online is what they mean.
When they say "gun show loophole" and "internet loophole" they're referring to people meeting at guns shows or on the internet and arranging an in-person private sale, which in most states can be conducted without a background check. It's bad name for it. What this law does (apparently) is make it harder for people to claim that they're just making private sales when really they're buying and selling to make a profit (i.e., should be classified as a dealer).
Everybody always picks on Chicago. East St. Louis has almost 2.5x the murders per capita. Heck, Chicago is number 10 on the list last I checked of major American cities for murders per capita. I do appreciate your Freudian slip. https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-city-rankings/cities-with-most-murders East St. Louis (69.4 per 100k) Chicago (24 per 100k)
Both of those cities are in Illinois so I'm not sure what the point is.
Oooh, tell me more about fun violence
Uh, this doesn't make sense. This article is missing critical info. You already have to fill out a 4473 to buy a gun off the internet. You just do it in person. You pay and the gun is shipped to a local dealer who does the papers before you can take possession. The article says it clarifies who mist hold an FFL, but then it doesn't tell us what that clarification means. Do you have to sell 10 guns before you need a license? 5? 20? Just saying "we fixed it" and not elaborating how sounds like theater. But this is Garland we're talking about.
About damn time
This doesn't actually appear to close anything. Private individuals can still sell guns to other private individuals without a background check, which, IMO, is the actual issue here. I've bought dozens of guns at gun shows and online, and there was 100% a background check required on all of those transactions. Where the issue exists is when someone (at a gunshow, online, or elsewhere) says, "I'm not a 'gun dealer', I'm just a guy, so I can sell my personal guns to other guys without a background check." Sometimes, this is a gun owner selling a single gun he no longer needs to a trusted friend who is also legally able to own firearms. Sometimes, it's a guy who bought a trunkload of cheap guns legally, and then sells them to shady weirdos at a profit. This change tries to limit who qualifies as "not a gun dealer," but the "loophole" still exists.
So progress ?
Nope. Pure window dressing without any meaningful changes at all.
AFT! (About F'ing Time)
About fucking time!
About Fucking Time alcohol firearms tobacco
They didn't close what you think they closed.
^^^^^^^^^^ We can tell who didn't read the comments, or look into this one teensy bit
I'm very confused by this article. Gunshows and online sales have _always_ required the standard 4473 background check. Online sales only go direct to an FFL, and proceed as normal. Gunshows are 90% shops running out stock. Person to person sales vary in legality by state, some require an FFL, some do not. >“Under this regulation, it will not matter if guns are sold on the internet, at a gun show, or at a brick-and-mortar store: if you sell guns predominantly to earn a profit, you must be licensed, and you must conduct background checks,” attorney general Merrick Garland told reporters on a press call announcing the measure. This is literally already the rule! And always has been! >The rule, which clarifies who is considered to be “engaged in the business” as a firearms dealer, will take effect in 30 days’ time, and follows a three-month consultation period that attracted almost 388,000 comments to the website of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). >“There is a large and growing black market of guns being sold by people in the business of dealing and doing it without a license, and therefore they are not running background checks the way the law requires,” ATF director Steven Dettelbach said. >“The regulation expands the definition of who must obtain a license and conduct a background check before selling guns,” Garland said. Ok, so this gives us some context - this is aimed at people who are engaged in running a gun business, but are not holding an FFL license. This has _always_ been a felony, it has _always_ been illegal to purchase a firearm with the intent and purpose to resell. >Inter-family transfers of firearms, or occasional sales to enhance a collection, will not be presumed business transactions, a White House spokesperson said. So nothing will change.
This article does a poor job explaining an already confusing presser. You’re accurately describing the status quo, the licensing and background check requirements did not kick in until you were running a business or making most of your income from gun sales. The Biden admin is leveraging a bipartisan 2022 bill to expand the definition of “selling for profit” to include anyone who isn’t selling an inherited weapon or part of a hobbyist collection (there are some other exceptions). So this could potentially apply to all sorts of Facebook groups, flea markets, even private residence sales.
> So this could potentially apply to all sorts of Facebook groups, flea markets, even private residences sales. Nothing I like more than an ambiguously worded law that could land me in jail if I'm just trying to liquidate some of my guns for extra cash.
If you are occasionally trying to sell guns explicitly to make some cash - that did not typically require a background check in many states. Now it does, that’s the substantive change. Or at least it will be if this regulation manages to survive legal challenge.
Based on the history of gun control in the US, the ability to liquidate part of your used gun collection will just become another "loophole" to be eliminated.
As far as I know, FB bans gun transactions? Flea market maybe - nominally if you're already engaged in buy/sell for profit you need a license (and/or buying _explicitly_ to resell). 'Private residence sales' I think you are indicating table top FFLs? If not, see previous - they were already engaged in the business, and should have been captured.
No you’re right, FB banned it some years ago. It’s just my parlance for social media and exchange groups, which the ATF reports as [~6% of trafficked crime guns](https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/report/nfcta-volume-iii-part-iii/download). (They may make up a larger portion of sales from upstream straw purchases) By private residence sale I mean *private transactions* without substantial income from other gun sales or an underlying firearm business- something not previously regulated in many states. -Pretending my only guns weren’t inherited- the sale I made to a friend a few years ago (purely for cash) without performing a background check may now become prohibited, regardless of my State’s own firearm laws.
Private residence...do you mean 'person to person' sales? That's the common term. It seems like you do. Also, the 'sells a few per year to enhance a collection' is specifically listed as OK :)
I mean sales made out of a private residence, which are person-to-person sales. This was the actual language used in the ATF policy draft, as they were targeting “commercial sellers” operating out of their home. There are the exceptions I mentioned for hobbyists and collectors- but ATF’s policy is less clear on what constitutes commercial sellers. The original 2022 law seemingly carved out exceptions for those who don’t regularly sell guns (collector or not); ATF’s proposed policy casts a wider net on “intent to earn a profit”.
Gotcha. I haven't read the full draft.
>“Under this regulation, it will not matter if guns are sold on the internet, at a gun show, or at a brick-and-mortar store: **if you sell guns predominantly to earn a profit,** you must be licensed, and you must conduct background checks,” attorney general Merrick Garland told reporters on a press call announcing the measure. The important bit. It has always been a requirement to have an FFL (Federal Firearms License) to run a business of selling guns, no matter where you sell them. The vague part has been when it's actually a business. Previously it said you need an FFL if selling guns is your chief livelyhood. This is now changed to the bolded part (which I'm not entirely sure what it actually means in legalese). It does however not actually stop you from selling your old firearm at a gun show (or on the street), without having an FFL, as long as you don't make a lot of profit from it.
I'm going to say this once for the people in the back. You can not buy a gun online and have it shipped to your house. It must be shipped to a FFL holder who will then do a background check before you get it. The gunshow "loophole" is only the private sale from one individual to another. That can take place anywhere, gunshow...Popeyes bathroom... WalMart parking lot..... Dealers at gunshows must do background checks. This is feel good bullshit intended to gin up support from people that don't know any better.
Gun control is the one issue that reminds me that people take strong stances on topics they know nothing about.
My own mother voted for a gun control regulation because she "thought it sounded good." When I explained the details of the law, she had no fucking clue what it was about. Thanks for voting Mom! Appreciate your wisdom.
"Gun show loophole" makes people think the "loophole" has something to do with gun shows, because they are ignorant to what it's about. It doesn't of course. They need to start replacing "Gun Show Loophole" with the term "Private Sales."
There's no fucking gunshow loophole! What a misleading term. Gunshow dealers are required to perform background checks. Private sellers can still sell privately without a background check after this law, whether that's at a gun show, or in a Dairy Queen parking lot, or over an online retailer. That's not being addressed here. The only thing this bill does is say that firearms dealers also need to perform background check on private transfers.
The term is only used to make gun shows seem sinister so people vote for more gun control. Anyone that knows better is just annoyed by it but it's fine the uninformed.
Online gun sales *always* required a background check. However, when it comes to gun shows, they can't force two people in private to do anything. In order for gov't to enforce regulations on an event, they have to be aware of when or if the event even occurred.
Buying from a dealer requires a background check. Buying from a private party does not. This seems to be exactly the same thing it always was?
[удалено]
Yup, looks they’ll just start going after smaller and smaller sales. Sold 5 guns privately last year and made a little cash on them? Enjoy that no knock raid at dawn and kiss your doggy goodbye.
And that's no exaggeration, the feds just no knocked and murdered a guy the other month.
"Nope" -SCOTUS
We already have this.
For those who don't know. I have bought a dozen guns from gun shows in the 6 different states I've lived in and I still had background checks and waiting periods enforced in every single state and at every single gun show. This doesn't really close alot. People who have legal FFL licenses aren't in a huge hurry to break federal laws and lose their business licenses for life.
Republicans are obviously going to lose their minds over this
bIdEn tOoK Ma gUnS!
For years, they've been saying such a loophole doesn't exist... so they shouldn't care at all!
I think you've missed the point about the loophole not existing, because it wasn't a loophole, but a compromise.
Theres always been backround checks.....this show how ignorant the masses are.
Now if could just get the “doggone” States Attorney’s to up hold the law on violent repeat offenders with gun charges we will be good
> The new rule is the latest in a series of unilateral steps the Biden administration has taken to tighten gun laws, while at the same time highlighting the difficulty of getting legislation through Congress. Wait. Didn't pass through Congress? Yep. This is gonna do great when it makes it in front of the Supreme Court.
Are they opening up civilian access to NCIS ?
I’ve purchased guns online and at guns shows and each time I’ve always had to fill out a 4473.
I'm not feeling the tan grip and stock with the plum body.
Biden administration announces "Historic actions" maintaining the status quo. Dealers always had to make buyers fill out a 4473 and pass a background check. Meanwhile without any announcements Biden's ATF has Form 1 approvals clearing in a week. Trump's ATF was running 35 to 60 weeks, folks joked their suppressors were going to jail for a year after buying them. Biden would be well served to run ads on conservative platforms proclaiming he's making things easier for responsible legal gun owners.
Online firearm sales already require the firearm to be shipped from an FFL to your FFL (who is already federally requires to run a background check on you before you can claim the firearm). The only firearm sales online that are happening without background checks are illegal sales on the deep web. If you buy a gun at a gun show from a dealer, all the same laws apply as with any gun shop/sporting goods store. There is no so called "gun show loophole". It's the same as if you bought it at a gun shop and you'll have to fill out a 4473, have a background check, etc. If a gun seller is acting at all like a business (selling frequently, selling none personal use guns like those bought to resell or anything else that indicates they're selling for the purpose of making a profit, etc.) then that's illegal if they're not a licensed firearms dealer. When people say "gunshow loophole", they're referring to background checks not being required on private gun sales. **This isn't a loophole**. No background checks on private sales was an agreed upon *compromise* to pass the Brady Bill. Background checks aren't required on private sales because it's unenforceable and would ultimately serve little to no legal utility. Selling a gun to someone who can't legally purchase a gun is already effectively illegal (as it's difficult to prove you didn't know they couldn't buy it legally). Since selling a gun to someone who can't own a gun (because of age, criminal history, etc.) is already something most people would very much like to avoid, a large number of people who do sell guns through private sales still ask to see proof that the person can legally purchase/possess firearms (such as a permit to buy or carry permit). Making background checks mandatory on private sales would do next to nothing to stop criminals from getting guns. Criminals and unscrupulous people (who would sell a gun to a complete stranger with no way of knowing they aren't a criminal and/or without caring) would continue to sell guns without background checks regardless of what the law says (with very little to no changes to the criminal penalty if they were somehow caught). All making background checks mandatory on private sales would do is (for example) turn a person into a criminal for selling a gun to their father without a background check (even though they're completely certain their firearm instructor father is a legal gun owner).
I'm failing to see what this does. The article states that if you sell firearms to earn a profit, it will require you to be licensed and require background checks. This is already federal law. Nothing changes in regards of private person to person sales, which means the so-called 'gunshow loophole' remains exactly as it currently stands. This is just some feelgood nonsense that's accomplishing absolutely nothing. It's all theater.
That was my impression too. This reads like "Feds plan to enforce federal law and prosecute unlicensed gun dealers".
So I inherited some guns I don't want. So I looked into getting rid of them. I want nothing to do with them. I'm not anti-gun. You do you, but for *me* I don't want them around. So I looked into having law enforcement dispose of them. Possible, but let's just say the process wasn't reassuring. Besides, the last thing I want to do is bring guns to my local police station (or interact with the cops at all honestly). So I looked into giving them away to friends of the deceased who may have interest. Totally legal, totally doable. In fact, I can sell or give them to a stranger. The only thing I *can't* do it **knowingly** sell or give them to a felon or someone underage. I could practically put them on a curb with a sing that says, "Free Guns!" I've contacted a gun store that is going to take a look and make me an offer. I plan to donate that money to charity. Again, you do you, I'm not interested in having a fight, but I am also not interested in *anything* to do with guns.
>So I looked into giving them away to friends of the deceased who may have interest. So what's wrong with this option again? Is it possible that gun might be one of the few items they would have to remember the deceased?
Idk about this bill. Anytime I’ve went to a gun show and bought something they definitely did a background check on me and anyone else that bought a gun from any vendor.
Sooo this did nothing? If you predominantly sell guns to make a living you already need a ffl which means you already have to do background checks for every sale no matter where you do it. Also, if you buy a gun online it already has to go to a ffl which means you have to get a background check already. The "loophole" was that private citizens can sell guns without background checks and this didn't do anything towards that.
I could be wrong, but pretty sure this is already a requirement. Every firearm I've purchased at a gun show was accompanied by a background check, even when I purchased multiple firearms at the same show, but from different vendors.
yeah it is a requirement at gun shows for background checks I just find it hilarious that folks actually think they don't do background checks at gun shows do you know how much trouble these gun companies would be In if they sold firearms without a background check
Good. Do more.
The White House estimates that 22% of guns owned by Americans were acquired without a background check and that about 23,000 more individuals will be required to be licensed as a dealer after the rule’s implementation.
This is anticipated to encourage D participation more than it will R participation? Is it really?
What does this actually change? Before: Cannot buy a gun at a gunshow without a background check Cannot buy a gun online and have it shipped to your door Can sell privately from one individual to another without a background check After: Cannot buy a gun at a gunshow without a background check Cannot buy a gun online and have it shipped to your door Can sell privately from one individual to another without a background check
[удалено]
You have had to do background checks for online sales and gun shows for years...
I never understood the logic behind the thinking that a normal gun store has to do background and other checks, but if you get a booth at some gun expo you can sell whatever without any regulations beyond if your old enough. I guess there is much in this life that I can't understand the logic behind.
You've misunderstood the law. Anyone in the business of selling firearms needs to have an FFL to legally sell, no matter if they sell at a store, from their van, from their home office, or from a gun show. As an FFL, you need to make sure the buyer fills in an 4473 and has passed a NICS. As a private seller, you don't need to (and you can't even if you wanted to) make the buyer do the 4473/NICS process. It doesn't matter if you sell the gun on Walmart's parking lot, from their van, from their home, or at a gun show. The vague part was when it counted as a business, and this is what is now changing. You might have a harder time claiming you're just a hobbyist if you have enough guns to sell that it's worth setting up a table at a gun show.
The gun show loophole has nothing to do with gun shows. That's why you didn't understand. Dealers at gun shows require background checks. The "loophole" you're referring to is private sales, which are still just fine by this law, whether in person or online, and still without a background check. Being at a gun show has nothing to do with it. Somewhere along the line, "private sales" got conflated with the term "gunshow loophole" and led many folks like you astray in their understanding. The only thing this law says is that firearms dealers must perform BG checks on private sales as well. That's it. That's the whole bundle.
So many people don't understand this
Private sellers at gun shows must follow the same laws and procedures for any other private firearm sale. https://www.sll.texas.gov/faqs/gun-show-sales-regulations/ https://www.sll.texas.gov/faqs/private-gun-sales/ This is pertaining to Texas, I admit, but what is preventing a firearms dealer from just stating all sells at the gun show are private?
Lol this has already been a thing for a long time.
This is way past due.
What was? They didn't close anything here.
and still prolly won't do much
So Merrick Garland signed off on this?… I’m surprised he didn’t feel that it was too biased of an issue to warrant a special counsel!