President to Close Gun Show LoopHole

[22hipower]

Let me ask the unpopular question, because I've never sold a firearm and frankly I'd really like to know: If you are selling or giving a gun to someone in person without going thru a dealer, exactly how do you know that person is legally eligible to possess a firearm?

Varies by state I presume but in Texas all you have to do is see the buyer's driver's license or other proof of age and being a Texas resident. We pretty much treat them like hammers here when buying from one another.

Jeff
SWCA #1457

 

[Matt_X]

A couple people have asked about this, and its useful to know beyond this particular topic.

"The Law" consists of Statuatory law, Rules & Regulations, and Court opinions and precedents.
The legislature writes and passes the statuatory law.

The agencies responsible for carrying them out have to develop the specifics including the procedures for executing them.

Decisions in court can further clarify (or muddy) the interpretations. (This is when lawyers from both sides come in with examples of at some other time/place/situation the same law was applied with the outcome they arguing for.)



This rule and definition change (already summaried and linked to) was ATF's job to come up with, post for comment, etc. because of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act passed by Congress in June 2022.
S.2938 - Bipartisan Safer Communities Act

If the changes don't seem to align with the Act, then when enforcement begins, the person(s) affected will have grounds to challenge in court.

The same three parts of law come into play when deadly force is used for self defence. IMO for this reason alone, fire arms owners in particular ought to be familiar with this, and the relevant specifics of all three for the locality you are in.

 

[22hipower]

Haven't read the whole bill but what it appears to do is expand the notion of what "being in the business" means. If you're selling guns "to make a profit" you need a FFL. In shows I visit I see the same guys show after show year after year buying from attendees and selling to attendees with no paperwork much less a NICS check. If the ATF has the resources I think they could fairly easily prove a profit motive for these sales and frankly, these folks sure appear to me to be "in the business."

The exclusion from needing a FFL for those collectors selling their collections still exists.

I doubt that the ATF has the manpower, or can get it, to implement what Biden is "ordering." However, those setting up at gun shows multiple times a year and buying from whoever walks by and then reselling, might want to consider getting an FFL.

The next election may have some impact on the effort to implement the President's order.

Jeff
SWCA #1457

 

[pharmer]

It would do more good to close the geek show pie hole. How about going after the "end users" that are murdering each other in droves in "conveniently located aggregate centers." Oh darn, I repeat myself.

Anyone trying to explain how this is a "good concept for use of .gov resources" needs a re-read of the US Constitution. Joe

 

[Truckman]

the boy looked and talked respectably. What was my buddy supposed to do?

He could have told the suit that the public conference with the others, followed by the large multiple transaction could be construed as a possible straw sale...He could have then turned down the sale...He's not required to sell a gun to anyone, and neither am I...I'm a private citizen walking the aisles, and I've turned away people who want to buy what I have in my hand, including vendors who look shady...

There are other reasons for being at a gun show than selling what you brought......Ben

 

[biku324]

If there are so many illegal gun dealers at gun shows, why doesn't the ATF just go there and arrest them? Why make up a new rule to burden law abiding citizens?

I'll answer the question: Because there aren't any to arrest.

Not true. Here's an example...and folks are mad because BATFE DID enforce the law. Released search warrant affidavit shows details of ATF case against Little Rock airport executive Bryan Malinowski | KARK

 

[deadin]

I need a usable definition of just what "profit" is.
If I bought gun in 1975 and paid $200.00 for it and sell it tomorrow for $1000.00, have I made a profit of $800.00 or a loss of $120.00 due to inflation.? (And would any loss be tax deductible....?)

 

[Beemerguy53]

Background checks are worthless for keeping guns away from criminals.

The last time I "ran the data" the US Government prosecutes less than 1/10 of one percent of those that lie on a 4473 and are denied the ability to buy a gun. AND the most important thing is that almost all of those prosecutions are just add on charges when the person is charged with other offenses.

One more attempt at criminalizing honest people while turning a blind eye toward criminals.

It's not just people who lie on a 4473 who don't get prosecuted. Last year in the City of Baltimore (population 570,000) there were more than 900 armed carjackings (in addition to about 11,000 simple car thefts). Armed carjacking is a federal crime, yet so far as I know, not one of these criminals was prosecuted by the US Attorney for Maryland. Disgusting…

 

[Valmet]

Another "reinterpretation" from a ATF. Talk about a rogue gov agency…

 

[WCCPHD]

There is another angle to this.

First, the rewrite will define many more people as being engaged in the business so they will need an FFL.

Second, getting an FFL is much more difficult than it used to be. The government cracked down on "table top dealers" some time ago. Many will not qualify as they don't have a store front or local zoning precludes a business being operated from a residence.

Third, ATF is cracking down on FFL's, putting many out of business for minor paperwork violations.

Take all this together it is obvious the intended outcome is to stop sales of guns.

IF you can't sell 'em, you can't have 'em.

One more cut in the death by a thousand cuts of the gun grabbers in their ultimate goal of repeal of the Second Amendment and confiscation of those guns in private hands.

 

[CH4]

Perhaps in NY, but in the shows in my area, non FFL outnumber FFL's by a large margin.

Always wondered how FFLs feel about this. Seems non FFLs are the path of least resistance, especially in states where private party sales that don't require BGs sales are legal. Unfortunately, many FFLs just have new guns and not the cool stuff I am looking for. It's the non FFLs who have the vintage Smiths, Colts, Marlins, pre 64,Winchesters, etc.

 

[HJBM&P22Custom]

Yea, so they should just make criminals have a background check to buy a gun at a gun show. Law abiding citizens should not be forced to do that.

 

[FZ1UKS&W]

Law Abiding Citizen

Well,
I'm not a FFL but I have bought and sold for the betterment of my collection. Some of the purchases I have made were guns not even in my wheelhouse just so I could improve my collection.

Since I have joined this forum starting with a Model 28 (S prefix) I've improved at a steady pace to an increase of quite a bit LOL. I will continue to buy and sell as I see fit rule or no rule as its all for the betterment of my collection. Most of my buying is from Organizations with memberships, meaning if you don't know somebody you don't get in the club. They are not open to the public. We meet every few months buy and sell no BGC. Even if I fit the definition how does the BATF get in the show? We have members that are Leo's none of them would raise an hand to even bother. Most members are truly collectors. Coming in by warrant will not work as everyone will simply pack up and leave. As I see it ,it is simply unenforceable in my circle. I guess I could be tracked by purchases from FFL or internet buys? Hopefully it ends in the courts to be decided and life goes on without it harming us LAC's

This really just banter as I usually thumb my nose to Libtards anyways. People on this forum are all LAC's and I thank you for the help I have received, the purchases I have made and all around excellent knowledge.
Just my 2 pennies
Ed

 

[TXBryan]

Loophole?

First things first. I am no fan of additional restrictions on our freedom and rights.

I do not know if it "counts" as anything like a "loophole" associated with gun shows but I've had new experiences since I began attending rural gun shows - as opposed to big city shows.

There is a regular show in a relatively small town near where I live that has no restrictions on selling table space to non-FFLs. That was, apparently, new to me as previously I had no concept whatsoever of what a gun show loophole might be. In Austin and close proximity there was the occasional guy walking the show with a firearm he would obviously like to sell and I believed that was the extent of a gun show loophole. Not a very big deal as the local police always checked these guys out on the way into the show and ensured they knew state and local law.

The small town show I attend is a bit different as most of the sellers do not possess an FFL. They generally look at an I.D. (I show them my concealed carry license), you write a check, and pick up your new toy. This seemed to me to be a bit more characteristic of a "loophole" than I had previously experienced. I have no particular issue with this procedure as I've never witnessed anyone purchasing that looked the slightest bit nefarious.

Does the new Biden rule cover this sort of situation/transactions?

Bryan

 

[pawngal]

First things first. I am no fan of additional restrictions on our freedom and rights.

I do not know if it "counts" as anything like a "loophole" associated with gun shows but I've had new experiences since I began attending rural gun shows - as opposed to big city shows.

There is a regular show in a relatively small town near where I live that has no restrictions on selling table space to non-FFLs. That was, apparently, new to me as previously I had no concept whatsoever of what a gun show loophole might be. In Austin and close proximity there was the occasional guy walking the show with a firearm he would obviously like to sell and I believed that was the extent of a gun show loophole. Not a very big deal as the local police always checked these guys out on the way into the show and ensured they knew state and local law.

The small town show I attend is a bit different as most of the sellers do not possess an FFL. They generally look at an I.D. (I show them my concealed carry license), you write a check, and pick up your new toy. This seemed to me to be a bit more characteristic of a "loophole" than I had previously experienced. I have no particular issue with this procedure as I've never witnessed anyone purchasing that looked the slightest bit nefarious.

Does the new Biden rule cover this sort of situation/transactions?

Bryan

Yes, that is what is referred to as the "gun show loophole"
Whether it is covered under the latest ruling depends on what kind of business they are doing. If they are selling mostly new guns they are considered a for profit dealer and need to have an FFL. And the BATF will be very interested in how they sourced new firearms without an FFL.
So far, a person can sell at a gun show as a non-FFL to sell from their personal collection and buy and trade to add to their collection.
Hope that helps clarify it for you.

 

[Oldengineer]

The fact remains that people from out of the country and out of the state, and just generally illegal know that gun shows have vendors (dealers with out licenses) that will sell a firearm without asking any questions except if the buyer has the cash. If you can't legally buy a firearm in California, no problem - drive to Arizona with a pocket full of Franklins; problem solved. A back ground check forces the buyer to identify him/herself.

 

[walnutred]

The fact remains that people from out of the country and out of the state, and just generally illegal know that gun shows have vendors (dealers with out licenses) that will sell a firearm without asking any questions except if the buyer has the cash. If you can't legally buy a firearm in California, no problem - drive to Arizona with a pocket full of Franklins; problem solved. A back ground check forces the buyer to identify him/herself.

I suspect that someone who can't pass a background check but has cash is also likely to have connections on the street that can provide a firearm. They have connections to purchase other items not available legally, why not firearms. At a gun show they run the risk of being spotted by an undercover LEO of some sort. The shows I attend have uniformed officers for security.

 

[22hipower]

I need a usable definition of just what "profit" is.
If I bought gun in 1975 and paid $200.00 for it and sell it tomorrow for $1000.00, have I made a profit of $800.00 or a loss of $120.00 due to inflation.? (And would any loss be tax deductible....?)

There is no recognition of the impact of inflation on profit when an item is sold. You bought it for $200 and sold it whenever for $1000. You have an $800 profit on which you're expected to pay income tax. I'm no accountant but on our Form 1040 there's a line item for miscellaneous income and I suppose that's where, as an individual rather than a business, you'd report your "profit." For a business it's a little more complicated as there are accounting provisions for writing down the value of inventory but I don't think that applies to individually owned firearms which have appreciated in value.

Jeff
SWCA #1457

 

[22hipower]

There is another angle to this.

First, the rewrite will define many more people as being engaged in the business so they will need an FFL.

Second, getting an FFL is much more difficult than it used to be. The government cracked down on "table top dealers" some time ago. Many will not qualify as they don't have a store front or local zoning precludes a business being operated from a residence.

Third, ATF is cracking down on FFL's, putting many out of business for minor paperwork violations.

Take all this together it is obvious the intended outcome is to stop sales of guns.

IF you can't sell 'em, you can't have 'em.

One more cut in the death by a thousand cuts of the gun grabbers in their ultimate goal of repeal of the Second Amendment and confiscation of those guns in private hands.

Wouldn't an option be for repeat sellers at gun shows to partner with an FFL to run the NICS check for them? Pay the FFL dealer to do it but of course it is the buyer who actually pays. More cost for the buyer but what else is new. Everybody's legal at that point, are they not? Plenty of FFLs around here willing to accept shipments and do the NICS check and paperwork for whatever transfer fee they can get. Would some of those at gun shows not be willing to do it too?

Jeff
SWCA #1457

Jeff
SWCA #1457

 

[glowe]

The "loophole", as its called, is to stop 2 private people from dealing in the parking lot at the gun show . . .

Not exactly true. Today, sellers in most states do not need an FFL to rent a table at a gun show. Gun show sellers in most states do not need an FFL to sell long guns at their table, simply cash and carry. Handguns, on the other hand are controlled in most states. To buy a handgun at a gun show needs to have a NICS check or the buyer needs to have an FFL.

in my area, Wisconsin and Michigan differ greatly. Recent laws in Michigan require NICS checks by an FFL before leaving a gun show. In Michigan, FFLs can be set up at some shows to transfer guns from a private seller to the buyer before leaving the show. No FFL, no handgun. This is what the Biden administration is trying to do for all firearms at all gun shows everywhere. In Wisconsin, there are no background checks required unless buying from a dealer or being an out-of-state buyer. A felon can walk into a gun show and buy just about any gun for sale without ID unless buying from an FFL.

If you buy a gun on the street in WI, two WI residents meeting outside of a gun show can sell anything to a buyer as long as the state laws allow. That transaction has nothing to do with a gun show loophole.