Wednesday, January 6, 2016

Negro Coming For Your Guns!


Oh, the horror! He's finally lived up to the NRA hype, Obama is COMMMIN' FR-YUR GUNNS!!! And the widespread gun confiscation begins in 5.. 4.. 3.. 2..    well, actually there is no gun confiscation.

So then he's banning assault weapons, right? Get your M-16s and Kalashnikov's before Obama steals them all and hands them over to Black Lives Matter! Well, actually he's not banning assault weapons.

So then what is all the fuss about? Apparently, (maybe) a few more people might have to register as licensed gun dealers. Seriously.
Gun sellers fall into two categories: federal firearms licensees (FFLs) and private sellers. FFLs are regulated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), and conduct background checks on their customers. The same rules do not apply for private sellers who, in 32 states, operate without government oversight, and are not required to vet their purchasers to ensure that guns stay out of the wrong hands.

Under existing law, there's no expectation that a gun owner who occasionally sells a weapon from his or her personal collection—to offload an under-loved model, make room in the budget or gun cabinet for their next purchase, or set up a friend new to shooting—register as a licensed dealer. But anyone who sells guns with the primary goal of bringing in income, and "devotes time, attention, and labor" to that pursuit, is considered "engaged in the business." And that person is supposed to register as an FFL.

Why is the current definition a problem?
Because it leaves the question of who is "engaged in the business" open to broad interpretation—and by extension, makes the law subject to abuse. Private gun sellers can move large quantities of firearms while claiming to be hobbyists, not retailers, and never subject their customers to safety checks nor themselves to ATF oversight. Reform advocates have called for clarifying the "engaged in the business" standard to set more objective criteria that would in turn drive more sales out of the unregulated private market and into the background check system. As things stand, case logs indicated that persons who avidly peddle a significant number of guns are not merely cutting corners while selling to lawful owners, but instead have a tendency to be engaged in trafficking to the black market or flouting other gun restrictions.
As a former Libertarian I've been up close and personal with militias and gun nuts. In the culture there exists this fantasy of the noble rebels fighting against a tyrannical government. But in a realty where the government has drones and hell-fire missiles it's nothing but a dimwitted suicide cult. 

4 comments:

  1. Not JAI much longerJanuary 6, 2016 at 9:47 AM

    So the whole exercise was political theater and would not have stopped any of the mass shootings that brought such a heart wrenching tear to the President's eyes.

    http://bigstory.ap.org/article/d0a31a86e9a64d78aaf3213b034993fc/obama-measures-wouldnt-have-kept-guns-mass-shooters

    Of course, it probably sent gun sales through the roof, and will drive more people to poles to vote for Anyone But Hillary, so there is always a silver-lining.

    ReplyDelete
  2. So either it has to solve this massive problem in its entirety or it's theater. There is no in between. Got it!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Man, I haven't heard that song in ages. Recalling a concert of Gang of Four in Boston in what was then the Combat Zone. And drinking Scorpion Bowls at the Hong Kong. No more Combat Zone in Boston. All gentrified now. No more Gang of Four. No more 80's. Sucks.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I do love a man in uniform, but the 'guns' I like don't shoot bullets, and someone is more likely to be born than die.

    ReplyDelete