It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

I don't get it - Executive Action

page: 2
9
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:
(post by LSU0408 removed for a manners violation)

posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 11:32 AM
link   
The obvious question is where is the data to show that these types of sales are a problem? Has there been a single gun killing that anyone can document where the gun was obtained in this manner?

This is nothing but a political move to rile up the moonbat liberal base knowing that Hillary's odds aren't looking to good going into an election year. Second, Obama is just trying to take the heat off his middle east policy failures.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 11:58 AM
link   
Ending the private sales loophole is THE best thing that can possibly happen to ensure all sales not made in strict compliance with background checks and notification of the sale, are illegal sales. Outside of theft, this is the single easiest way for bad people to acquire guns they could not get through a licensed dealer.

ALL sales of guns should require the same background check, and registration regardless of whether the gun is purchased through a dealer, online, at a gun show, or as a private person-to-person sale.

I say this as a fellow gun owner.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 12:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated
The obvious question is where is the data to show that these types of sales are a problem? Has there been a single gun killing that anyone can document where the gun was obtained in this manner?


Well, how do you think criminals gain access to gun purchases when they can't get one through a regular dealer? It's a simple way to level the playing field.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 12:49 PM
link   
Private Gun Sale Loophole Creates Invisible Firearms Market, Prompts Calls For Reforma reply to: Edumakated


In March 2010, John Patrick Bedell strolled up to the Pentagon and started shooting at two police officers with a semiautomatic handgun. Months before the attack, he tried to buy a gun in California but was denied, after a background check showed he had a documented history of mental illness. So Bedell instead went to neighboring Nevada, where gun laws are more lenient, and bought a 9mm handgun from a private seller who didn't have to check out his history.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 12:54 PM
link   
So...how often do FFL's get busted for not doing background checks?

These guns are being manufactured and sold to FFL's, then somehow ending up on the black market. Obviously there's a weak link somewhere.

Either a strawman is buying them and turning around and selling them on the black market, or shady FFLs are not doing their due diligence and checking backgrounds.
edit on 5-1-2016 by MystikMushroom because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 12:57 PM
link   
a reply to: usernameconspiracy

How in the world is the government going to stop private sales of guns between two people?

Private sales of drugs between two people is already illegal, and its pretty widespread. I fail to see how it would be enforceable.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 02:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
So...how often do FFL's get busted for not doing background checks?


Quite often actually.

I know several FFL holders who are regularly audited bt the BATFE, and the priciple focus of these audits is one to one parity with 4473 Forms down to the serial number. Even the tiniest mistake will result in fines. A missing 4473 is a HUGE mistake/infraction and would result in the suspension of their license. It's a BIG deal!!

Fortunately they guys I know have never had issues, but BATFE does not go about this lightly.


These guns are being manufactured and sold to FFL's, then somehow ending up on the black market. Obviously there's a weak link somewhere.


This is a pretty naive statement. Once firearms are sold new (from an FFL holder) they could be resold by a second party without an FFL, so this action attempts to solve this. However, most truly "illegal" firearms are not obtained this way, they are usually stolen or obtained from someone who obtained them illegally. And this action does nothing to solve the latter problem.


Either a strawman is buying them and turning around and selling them on the black market, or shady FFLs are not doing their due diligence and checking backgrounds.


Black market value is far, far, less than retail value so why would any sane person even do this?

Lastly, as noted above, an FFL isn't going to have his license very long at all if he doesn't have a 4473 for every sale. And further, when he buys a gun from a manufacturer the serial number now belongs to him. It's required by law, so he better have a 4473 for every sold gun by serial number, or be able to produce the gun with that serial number. Believe me, FFLS are not the problem. They are under the strictest rules and enforcement of anyone.
edit on 1/5/2016 by Flyingclaydisk because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 02:12 PM
link   
a reply to: 200Plus

And now by requiring your doctor to ask if you have firearms in the house, they build on that database because your medical records are readily accessible to Big Brother via Obamacare. There is no expectation of confidentiality anymore.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 02:15 PM
link   
a reply to: usernameconspiracy

And you stop it how?

Short of eyeballs watching everyone, everywhere or removing all guns, there IS no way to stop it. You can only make it ever more illegal.

If I want to pass a gun off to someone, I will based on terms we both agree on.

And two hoods will certainly do the same. They absolutely could care less about any EO Obama issues from on high no matter how many tears run down his cheeks.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 02:18 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

A person is not required to answer this question. They cannot be refused care if they refuse to answer.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 02:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Apparently "stolen guns" are not the no. 1 way they end up on the black market:



ATF agent Jay Wachtel says that most guns used in crimes are not stolen out of private gun owners' homes and cars. "Stolen guns account for only about 10% to 15% of guns used in crimes," Wachtel said. Because when they want guns they want them immediately the wait is usually too long for a weapon to be stolen and find its way to a criminal.

PBS.org

The article goes on to talk about FFL's...



The next biggest source of illegal gun transactions where criminals get guns are sales made by legally licensed but corrupt at-home and commercial gun dealers. Several recent reports back up Wachtel's own studies about this, and make the case that illegal activity by those licensed to sell guns, known as Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs), is a huge source of crime guns and greatly surpasses the sale of guns stolen from John Q. Citizen. Like bank robbers, who are interested in banks, gun traffickers are interested in FFLs because that's where the guns are. This is why FFLs are a large source of illegal guns for traffickers, who ultimately wind up selling the guns on the street.

According to a recent ATF report, there is a significant diversion to the illegal gun market from FFLs. The report states that "of the 120,370 crime guns that were traced to purchases from the FFLs then in business, 27.7 % of these firearms were seized by law enforcement in connection with a crime within two years of the original sale. This rapid `time to crime' of a gun purchased from an FFL is a strong indicator that the initial seller or purchaser may have been engaged in unlawful activity."

The report goes on to state that "over-the-counter purchases are not the only means by which guns reach the illegal market from FFLs" and reveals that 23,775 guns have been reported lost, missing or stolen from FFLs since September 13, 1994, when a new law took effect requiring dealers to report gun thefts within 48 hours. This makes the theft of 6,000 guns reported in the CIR/Frontline show "Hot Guns" only 25% of all cases reported to ATF in the past two and one-half years.



edit on 5-1-2016 by MystikMushroom because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 03:01 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Seriously, you're going to cite PBS as a credible source in the gun debate??

I'd believe the DOJ before I'd believe them, and that ain't sayin' much.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 03:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: redoubt
Executive order or executive action... whatever.

In fact, when one person can issue such, the closest is imperial edict. That's not what this nation was founded into producing... where one person can issue such commands upon whim.

Unfortunately, this power plug will likely never be disconnected, regardless who becomes president from whatever party.


You can thank Ole abe lincoln for institutionalizing the EO. Traitor screwed over all americans.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 04:08 PM
link   
Don't liberals own guns?

No liberals on this forum own guns?

I was a little shocked they wanted to take guns away from senior citizens, there are a lot of mass shootings by that crowd,



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 04:12 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

Obama did say Lincoln was his inspiration.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 04:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
Reading the news this morning it looks like we're getting a glimpse of this executive action obama is seeking to put into action.

But there's something I don't understand. The plan seems to be targeting "gunshows, websites and flea markets". How is it that websites skirt background checks?

As it stands right now, if a person wants to buy a gun from a private seller online, that gun has to be shipped to an FFL (Federal Firearms License) holder who will not release it to the buyer until a background check is completed. So what is going to be different with this executive order? What could be different?

I guess I understand the gunshow and flea market piece. I don't agree with it, but I understand it. But the online component doesn't compute.

On a side note; most online sales involve shipping, and if I'm not mistaken no firearm can be shipped to anyone but an FFL, dealer or not...so how is this new imperial action going to change anything?

Does anyone know?

Here is one story for reference...

www.foxnews.com...


Could they be referring to black market websites? For example on BMR you could buy guns online and have them shipped directly to your home, it was more popular than buying drugs even. Granted, that's an illegal sale rather than a legal one. There's also the possibility that it's just lip service, most of this action is really just restating laws that are already on the books... it sounds good politically.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 05:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
So...how often do FFL's get busted for not doing background checks?

These guns are being manufactured and sold to FFL's, then somehow ending up on the black market. Obviously there's a weak link somewhere.

Either a strawman is buying them and turning around and selling them on the black market, or shady FFLs are not doing their due diligence and checking backgrounds.


Or programs such as Fast and Furious happen. How many hundreds of weapons were distributed as a result of that DOJ bright idea? Who has been charged with those crimes? I find it laughable that the administration wants to hold everyone who is NOT a governmental employee accountable and yet no government representative is held accountable before the court system.

Gun phobics will not be satisfied until only those in uniform have access to weapons. Their fear drives them and over-rides any rationality that might cause them to wonder what would happen if their wishes were granted.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 06:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: redoubt
Executive order or executive action... whatever.

In fact, when one person can issue such, the closest is imperial edict. That's not what this nation was founded into producing... where one person can issue such commands upon whim.

Unfortunately, this power plug will likely never be disconnected, regardless who becomes president from whatever party.


Their is a big difference between and action and a order. And since it was the founders who set the precedent it seems it was what this country was founded on. You want somebody to blame you can start with Washington he started it .



posted on Jan, 6 2016 @ 03:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: yuppa

Obama did say Lincoln was his inspiration.



Yep. he sure did.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join