The big issue I see, from a Constitutional perspective, is not the restriction on gun purchases. But rather that they are trying to impose background checks on all intra-state firearm transactions. Not sure the Commerce Clause provides for that authority.
DelPen wrote: tifosi77 wrote:
AlexPKeaton wrote:Hahaha the new senate compromise gun bill looks like it was written by the NRA. As far as I can tell, it doesn't do anything except make those pages of paperwork you fill out for a rifle purchase at a store, also mandatory for a gun show... which you had to do at a gun show anyway if you were buying from a licensed dealer. So it doesn't do anything at all really lololol.
It actually does close the so-called private-party 'loophole' by requiring background checks for all gun show purchases, exempting temporary and inter-familial transfers. In fact, this proposed legislation would require gun show background checks be given priority over in-store purchases.
I'm reading that it doesn't apply to private sales at all, FFL holders currently run checks at gun shows, private sellers don't, not sure this will change it. They will just meet at a Walmart parking lot a few miles away and make their sales instead of actually at the gun shows if this will even apply to them.
But if closing this mythical gun show loophole makes people feel better then sure, create legislation that doesn't really solve anything.
Manchin's statement today at the presser: " Under current law, if you buy a gun at a gun show from a licensed dealer, you have to undergo a background check by that dealer. But you can go to a non-dealer table at the gun show, or into the parking lot, and buy a gun without a background check. Our bill ensures that anyone buying a gun at a gun show has to undergo a background check
by a licensed dealer."
Haven't found the actual text of the legislation.
Shyster wrote:I also wonder what they mean by “internet sales.” Pretty much every gun sold through places like gunbroker.com must first be shipped to a FFL before transferred to the buyer, and a check is done at the time. It’s already illegal under federal law to sell a handgun across state lines without an FFL being involved. If I see a classified ad for a rifle on craigslist, does that mean that I must have the deal run through an FFL just because I saw the ad online? What would be the difference between that and a classified ad in the Post-Gazette?
I'm taking it to mean the medium in which the exchange of money takes place. And they're using overly broad language like "includes advertising" as a backdoor into requiring NICS on as many types of commercial venues as possible.