Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

Showing Original Post only (View all)

Omaha Steve

(99,573 posts)
Mon Jan 4, 2016, 08:49 PM Jan 2016

President Obama Targets Gun Show Loophole in New Executive Actions [View all]

Source: Time

Maya Rhodan

After months of calling on Congress to act on guns to no avail, President Obama announced executive actions on Monday that would require more gun sellers to obtain licenses and conduct background checks, including those who sell firearms online and at gun shows.

The action aims to fix the so-called gun show loophole, which allows people to buy firearms at gun shows without undergoing a background check.

The new rules require people who are “engaged in the business of dealing in firearms,” to obtain licenses and conduct background checks on buyers. That requirement has not applied to people who “make occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms,” according to the ATF.

The White House says the action still won’t apply to those who buy and trade as collectors, but it will apply to people who represent themselves as dealers, sell firearms shortly after acquiring them, or sell firearms in their original packaging.

FULL story at link.


Martin H. Simon—Corbis
President Obama meets with Loretta Lynch (left), and other officials to discuss what executive actions he can take to curb gun violence, in Washington on Jan. 4, 2016.

Read more: http://time.com/4166989/gun-control-obama-executive-action/



Bernie Sanders Defends Obama's Planned Executive Action On Gun Control: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141302624
156 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
OMG HE IS GRABBING OUR GUNS Skittles Jan 2016 #1
Anything that can be done is better than what we have now. salib Jan 2016 #2
problems are Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #4
So there is no such thing as the "Gun show loophole"? salib Jan 2016 #11
there is no gun show loophole Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #14
So, from what you say salib Jan 2016 #19
you are indeed incorrect. Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #24
However, doesn't this change and broaden the group of people who salib Jan 2016 #30
it depends if he changes the definition of dealer Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #36
Private sales DashOneBravo Jan 2016 #83
Problem with your "argument" is that private sales can occur **ANYWHERE**. pablo_marmol Jan 2016 #90
thank you Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #96
Not arguring DashOneBravo Jan 2016 #103
Indeed they can Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #107
"You can accuse me of lying, that's fine. I don't care what you think." pablo_marmol Jan 2016 #127
Please proceed to flail and fail. pablo_marmol Jan 2016 #131
Not exactly Duckhunter, in some states, if background checks are not completed in THREE DAYS vkkv Jan 2016 #27
yes that is the option of the dealer Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #38
The three-day waiting time is the time the government has to return results of the check. Igel Jan 2016 #57
Roof's background check wasn't finished by the regulatory agency in the prescribed time... vkkv Jan 2016 #59
10 days worked real well Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #63
3 days worked fine in 1994 when the law was written? Travis_0004 Jan 2016 #82
That's the gun show loop hole DashOneBravo Jan 2016 #79
Nope. pablo_marmol Jan 2016 #91
this Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #98
Even some supporters of gun restriction are dumping your talking point. pablo_marmol Jan 2016 #129
People dislike the name because it's not a "loophole" and has nothing to do with gun shows Recursion Jan 2016 #84
Horseshit DashOneBravo Jan 2016 #89
Horseshit Recursion Jan 2016 #93
You claim to be a Marine DashOneBravo Jan 2016 #105
simply wrong in your description Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #108
Glad you've come around to agreeing with me Recursion Jan 2016 #109
that is horseshit Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #97
I don't have to link DashOneBravo Jan 2016 #104
it is also because I am correct Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #106
"Cause I don't give a shit what you think." pablo_marmol Jan 2016 #135
Yeah......too bad, so sad. The horseshit comes from you. pablo_marmol Jan 2016 #130
I never said it was a good name DashOneBravo Jan 2016 #141
"You guys like to dismiss any non-gun person over terminology." pablo_marmol Jan 2016 #144
Feel free to go check. DashOneBravo Jan 2016 #149
What the hell are you talking about? pablo_marmol Jan 2016 #150
truth matters and Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #153
If you are not a "dealer" because you only sell on occassion, you can still drape a confederate flag Hoyt Jan 2016 #28
nobody denies Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #39
You can set up a table at a gun show and sell to yahoos who can't pass a background check. Hoyt Jan 2016 #71
It's not as easy as that Hoyt, GGJohn Jan 2016 #73
GG, it is not illegal if you don't do it often enough to be deemed a dealer. I could go to a gun Hoyt Jan 2016 #76
Reading comprehension is your friend Hoyt. GGJohn Jan 2016 #77
Fact is, it is not illegal for anyone to do what I just said. It's actually pretty easy. Rent a Hoyt Jan 2016 #95
You obviously haven't been to too many gun shows Hoyt. eom. GGJohn Jan 2016 #99
Been to enough to know attendees are mostly white wingers with a lot of hatred. Hoyt Jan 2016 #111
. trillion Jan 2016 #122
I wish we could treat guns like cars Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #126
I'm for universal background checks with no loopholes. trillion Jan 2016 #145
I see you did not answer my question Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #148
not worried Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #3
But bad optics for the lancer78 Jan 2016 #80
Could be. pablo_marmol Jan 2016 #92
Pres Clinton cut the number of Dealer FFL's issued elmac Jan 2016 #5
online sales that cross state lines Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #7
I undersatand but a non licensee can purchase local from a yard sale, a friend, ect... elmac Jan 2016 #21
if that person ships out of state Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #25
Homeland Security will be replacing the F in ATF sooner than gun humpers think. onehandle Jan 2016 #6
To what, Alcohol, Tobacco and Forearms? vkkv Jan 2016 #8
bolt and pump action are Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #10
I see little reason for more than a five round magazine. vkkv Jan 2016 #17
why the AR Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #20
The AR platform is an exceptional hunting rifle, GGJohn Jan 2016 #22
I have a right to express my opinion and vote accordingly given the opportunity - vkkv Jan 2016 #33
My firearms are NOT for fighting the govt, that's just ludicrous. GGJohn Jan 2016 #37
my AR style rifles Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #41
"I have a right to express my opinion..........." pablo_marmol Jan 2016 #134
I'd say "high capacity" is more rounds than "standard capacity" jmowreader Jan 2016 #35
How so? mwrguy Jan 2016 #13
Really? GGJohn Jan 2016 #15
President Obama: NutmegYankee Jan 2016 #58
With snarky comments alone, I can see how one could get up to over 104 thousand posts vkkv Jan 2016 #9
so true, lol Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #12
Full fact sheet on the Executive Action here.... Kang Colby Jan 2016 #16
thanks Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #18
Not a moment too soon. forest444 Jan 2016 #23
too bad it will have almost no effect Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #26
You may be right that it will take stronger action to get gunners to stop their perverse behavior. Hoyt Jan 2016 #31
LOLOLOLOLOL GGJohn Jan 2016 #32
Once again, excess in gun acquisition and gun promotion, as you have admitted to, is not helping Hoyt Jan 2016 #34
Once again Hoyt, you're lying, GGJohn Jan 2016 #40
FYI... petronius Jan 2016 #43
LOL, GGJohn Jan 2016 #44
cool Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #47
guess someone can't alert for 24 hours Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #45
Awww HOYT - did YOU send an ALERT for THAT ??? n/t, too risky... vkkv Jan 2016 #55
You MIGHT want to either edit or delete this post, GGJohn Jan 2016 #56
yep not worth it Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #64
Exactly right. Existing laws are ineffective. onehandle Jan 2016 #74
... GGJohn Jan 2016 #75
Reading this thread it appears crim son Jan 2016 #113
Then you need to improve your reading comprehension. eom. GGJohn Jan 2016 #117
Bold? GGJohn Jan 2016 #29
Politics, John, is the art of the possible. forest444 Jan 2016 #42
Don't get me wrong, GGJohn Jan 2016 #46
and are not the big bold moves Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #48
Yup, now just watch MDA, Brady Org., MAIG, VPC, etc GGJohn Jan 2016 #49
They wont. beevul Jan 2016 #110
No doubt about it. forest444 Jan 2016 #51
yep, why did he not do this Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #54
That's what I want to know! forest444 Jan 2016 #61
Well...keep in mind Kang Colby Jan 2016 #60
Sounds like a quiltwork of standards in dire need of not just updating, but nationalization forest444 Jan 2016 #70
Not exactly. Kang Colby Jan 2016 #72
So what we have is a case of excessive latitude and runaway CLEOs. forest444 Jan 2016 #78
Thank you for the kind words. Kang Colby Jan 2016 #81
FYI... Kang Colby Jan 2016 #100
Is the laughing emoticon really necessary? UncleTomsEvilBrother Jan 2016 #50
problem is Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #52
"Is the laughing emoticon really necessary?" GGJohn Jan 2016 #53
Good question. AngryOldDem Jan 2016 #94
numbers DustyJoe Jan 2016 #62
every incident I have seen is Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #66
don't worry Skittles Jan 2016 #67
Why are you here? vkkv Jan 2016 #85
Oh look, Only 100 thousand non-sensical posts and I CAN BE RIGHT THERE with YOU!! vkkv Jan 2016 #87
Don't YOU live in Texas Skittles? Surely, you MUST relate! vkkv Jan 2016 #88
So.. no actual change, just more enforcement of existing laws. X_Digger Jan 2016 #65
if you look Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #68
Yeah, I just finished reading the WH press release doublespeak. X_Digger Jan 2016 #69
You read it wrong - it is a change._________n/t vkkv Jan 2016 #86
Feel free to actually point to the section in the above press release that is a real change. X_Digger Jan 2016 #101
Here you go! This is right up your alley:: Fox News digest vkkv Jan 2016 #120
Nope. Anyone 'in the business of' is ALREADY required to have a FFL. Try again. n/t X_Digger Jan 2016 #121
"In the business"..... Welcome to my ignore list. vkkv Jan 2016 #124
For those who refuse to put their heads in the sand (unlike dear vkkv here) X_Digger Jan 2016 #125
"Welcome to my ignore list." pablo_marmol Jan 2016 #133
Still waiting. n/t X_Digger Jan 2016 #119
I bet this works just as well as his presidential order to close gitmo. nt Javaman Jan 2016 #102
Good timing Mr President workinclasszero Jan 2016 #112
Great! Duppers Jan 2016 #114
I am so glad I am not so afraid Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #115
Oh you haven't met DU trolls yet? Some people you just gotta hide or they hijack whole threads and trillion Jan 2016 #132
I see lots of posts and people Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #139
should have been done long ago but better late than never wordpix Jan 2016 #116
So how much will this decrease gun violence by? NobodyHere Jan 2016 #118
. trillion Jan 2016 #123
Democracynow.org has a good discussion on this today on their daily show. trillion Jan 2016 #128
The dead giveaway that the "gun show loophole" is pure culture war: pablo_marmol Jan 2016 #136
Actually, this law closes the internet loophole and a whole lot of guns are being sold on the trillion Jan 2016 #137
what Internet loophole? Duckhunter935 Jan 2016 #140
No end to the ignorance is there, Duckhunter? pablo_marmol Jan 2016 #143
So, you don't know anything about this law and the internet. Got it. trillion Jan 2016 #146
"culture war" on what culture? trillion Jan 2016 #138
Gun owners --- and there's a LOT of them who don't like being equated with criminals....... pablo_marmol Jan 2016 #142
There is a war on the culture of gun owners? trillion Jan 2016 #147
"I would say there is a war on kids by who's actually dying over that war though." pablo_marmol Jan 2016 #151
Can you site this "Lying" you keep accusing dems of doing? trillion Jan 2016 #154
You meant to say 'cite', of course. pablo_marmol Jan 2016 #155
Here's a great example, recently posted, of what I'm talking about. pablo_marmol Jan 2016 #156
Post removed Post removed Jan 2016 #152
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»President Obama Targets G...