If Congress passes the proposed legislation . . .

[MattR]

Guess what, taxes would have to collected and paid also at that point.

[ray1970]

Guess what, taxes would have to collected and paid also at that point.

How do you figure that? If you, as the seller, collected taxes from the buyer then who would you forward those taxes on to?

[merl]

Sting operations...they'll set up "meets" to see if you will sell the gun without background check.

yep, this is how they'd do it. You'd never know if selling to an individual was going to land you in jail. I wouldn't stop selling to someone you know but that's not the point.

Guess what, taxes would have to collected and paid also at that point.

how so, the FFL doing the check would have no idea what money changed hands and since it did travel through their chop they couldn't collect the tax. Should any law state otherwise, average selling price of a used gun may drop to $0.99

[TS12000]

And then you see what happened with cars, the tax is levied by what the govt estimates a firearm of that type is worth no matter wtf you say you paid for it

[Great-Kazoo]

At this point in time the atfE does not have the funds to hire more agents. Concentrate them in different areas, that they can do.

[20X11]

They will only need to make examples of a few. They can do that with current staff and the help of local LEO

[roberth]

We just need to make a list of the people we will deal with, after a future date no one new is added to the list unless someone already on the list will vouch for them. F Troop be damned.

[Great-Kazoo]

We just need to make a list of the people we will deal with, after a future date no one new is added to the list unless someone already on the list will vouch for them. F Troop be damned.

We call that a Small Circle of Friends. You're not on it

Let's be realistic about this. IF, KEY WORD IF Any LE Agency wants you, you're screwed.

[DesertStorm1]

Rights Are NOT Gifts from Government. Following the recent school shootings, American citizens have once again displayed their total ignorance concerning the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Second Amendment. Facebook postings, comments to so-called news articles and letters to the editor are calling for repeal of the Second Amendment. These individuals believe the right to own a firearm is based on the Second Amendment and the right will vanish if the Amendment can be repealed. Unless the Second Amendment created the right, then repeal of the Amendment cannot constitutionally abolish the right.

Following the Federal [Constitutional] Convention of 1787 and the subsequent ratification of the Constitution in 1788, the several States began submitting amendments to Congress for consideration. By September of 1789, Congress had reduced approximately 210 separate amendments to 12. The amendments were inserted into a congressional resolution and submitted to the several States for consideration. Of these, numbers 2-12 were ratified by the States in 1791 and became the so-called Bill of Rights.


A little known fact about this resolution is that it contained a preamble declaring the purpose of the proposed amendments. Most modern editions of the Bill of Rights either do not contain the preamble or only include the last paragraph. The most important paragraph is the first one because it discloses the intent of the proposed amendments.

A review of this paragraph shows that the sole purpose of the proposed amendments was to prevent the federal government from ‘misconstruing or abusing its powers.’ To accomplish this, ‘further declaratory and restrictive clauses’ were being proposed. The amendments, if adopted, would place additional restraints or limitations on the powers of the federal government to prevent that government from usurping its constitutional powers. Every clause of the Bill of Rights, without exception, is either a declaratory statement or a restrictive provision.

[Teufelhund]

^^ Well said. It is sad (and a little frightening) this has to be explained to so many.