ISTM the “gun show” part of “gun show loophole” is partly a misnomer, as Bear_Nenno well explained on Post 35. The other side, where IMO it isn’t a misnomer, is that it seems many people run a real onging business buying and selling at gun shows. They aren’t private parties in the sense that you or I might be. They’re like the equivalent of kiosks at the mall or food trucks on the street. Not exactly licensed retailers with fixed premises, but certainly ongoing businesses in the trade, not hobbyists or enthusiasts.
At the time the Federal background check law with the private sale exception was passed, things like Facebook, Craigslist, etc., were well in the future. Classified ads have existed for a hundred years. But as a practical matter, the cost effective way for a semi-formal retailer to engage in a regular ongoing business of unlicensed or barely-licensed retailing is to attend shows which attract a critical mass of buyers.
Could someone with a clean record go to the gun show, buy a bunch of dealer sold guns offered at good prices, and then take em home to be on the safe side. He’d maybe fire a round or 2 through each gun on a range just in case the feds are following him.
Then, the next gun show, this guy has the guns at a table, sold for a markup. He “didn’t want em anymore”. Done this way, it probably doesn’t violate the rules against a “straw purchase”, even though that is essentially what this is. (a straw purchase would probably be a criminal sending a person to a gun store with the express purpose of buying a gun on their behalf)
You probably wouldn’t make very much money doing this because there’s too many other people also doing it.
IMHO it would be more effective to buy them elsewhere and then mark them up at a show. Deals can be had there but it’s not really consistent. And besides, it would be obvious.
Doesn’t sound like a straw purchase if there is no intent to buy for a known person.
The Feds would be interested but not only the BATFE. The IRS would be interested to know why you didn’t declare your business, and the local authorities would be looking for a business license. The rules on hobby vs. business vary, but here it isn’t so ambiguous.
Was it? If lawmakers didn’t want the occasional seller to assume that risk, they could have simply required all private sales to be conducted via a licensed firearm seller, like interstate sales are handled now. That way a background check will be conducted and the seller assumes no risk. AIUI, the reason all private sales aren’t required to go through an FFL is because that’s considered an undue burden on rural sellers, with the poster child being grandpa gifting a gun to his grandson (at least, that’s the story I’ve heard over and over).
And I get that, it makes sense that at some level you wouldn’t expect someone who lives out in hill country to drive into the city to find an FFL in order to sign some 90 year old heirloom shotgun over to a relative. But it seems to me that it would be possible to carve out an exemption for that scenario and require all other private sales to go through an FFL in order to shield the seller from liability, and the reason that doesn’t happen is because the gun lobby wants to protect the rights of private individuals to sell their guns without the burden of involving the government.
The internet has made the gun aficionado community much more connected, and allowed gun fans to surround themselves with gun fans. If Airman Doors or Bear Nenno really wanted to buy an AR-15 today without a background check, they could probably just start texting their friends and find someone somewhere selling one for way cheaper than they could get at a gun show. If that doesn’t work there’s armslist, forums, facebook groups, etc. The idea that gun shows are mythical places where unregulated transactions are happening constantly seems farcical, but only because folks like that are very deep in the community.
But think about it from the perspective of a liberal journalist. If a random Wired writer wants to buy an AR-15 without a background check, his friends list is going to be useless. Maybe he can google around and stumble on armslist, but that’s a morass of confusion for the uninitiated. From an outsiders perspective, guns are something that you can get at a gun store, and that’s about it. Buying a legal AR-15 without a background check would be harder than buying ecstasy.
But gun shows are advertised heavily. I can google “gun show <city>” and find out when and where I should be this month to buy a gun without a background check. And the gun lovers of the world might scoff at my naivete, as I set off to buy an overpriced gun in a shady environment, but where else would I go? Sure, the “gun show loophole” might seem like antiquated phrasing for those in the know, but for many it still seems relevant.
Would it make anyone any happier if we started referring to the loophole in question as the “private sale loophole” instead of the “gun show loophole”? It’s the same thing, after all, and what you call it hardly matters.
As for the textbook case of Grampa giving his old hunting rifle to his grandson, why not just require the background check for all sales? Grampa isn’t selling his hunting rifle; he’s giving it away. But if you want money for it, you have to do the paperwork.
By following Craigslist ads, and by going to gun shows, and checking up on all the other venues where private buying and selling of guns is done in significant volume. No, you wouldn’t be able to catch everyone, but the same is true of all laws. You’d still be able to make it a lot harder for people who shouldn’t have guns to get them.
I’m not so sure there are a lot of people doing that. It’s easier than it was to get a FFL and the risk isn’t worth the reward.
What can get invoked there is the “implied dealership” provision and if you do it without a FFL you can be busted. I have no idea what the current threshold is but back 25 years it was selling three guns (to people other than FFL holding dealers) within a year for a total profit of more than $99. I don’t know how much its used today but back then it was common for most bigger shooting clubs to have at least one member who had been dragged through the courts over that one.
It would make me happier, and I am not trying to simply be pedantic. Calling it the “Gun Show Loophole” takes focus off the true issue. Those wanting something done about the issue are going to be more successful and effective if they actually understand what the issue is. When people think the issue is specific to gun shows, then what they will end up creating is specific legislation focused on gun shows, which does nothing at all to actually combat the problem that they are trying to fix.
That is how stupid gun laws get passed. People are ignorant of the actual issue. When people think that gun shows are the problem, they will demand “Background Checks for All Gun Show Sales!!!” Then, maybe they are successful in doing that, only to realize down the road that 95% of gun show sales are done by licensed dealers who are already required to do background checks and they actually didn’t fix the problem which is the ability of felons to purchase firearms through private sales.
I’m a member of several Facebook gun groups, and will say that there is a strong preference among sellers to only sell to buyers who possess a concealed carry license.
Also, Wisconsin has an online searchable database of circuit court records, and each Facebook group that I belong to has a note that sellers should research buyers before the sale (and buyers should search the weapon’s serial number at HotGunz to see if the firearm is stolen).
It isn’t the “wild west” in these groups, there is a high level of self-policing.
I’m not a member of any such group but I’ve been selling guns for 3 decades and never heard of such a thing.
It doesn’t make much sense. For one thing, Wisconsin has only had legal CCW for a little over 3 years. For another, some guns aren’t owned for carry. And finally, one doesn’t need a license to open carry.
It’s been touched on here some, but where the “loophole” comes in is as a sales or selling loophole, not a buying loophole.
Yes - private sales can happen anywhere by individuals. In order to be a firearms retailer one needs a license. That sales license comes with all sorts of govt oversight and IRS rules, implications, etc.
What happens at a gun show is that a private seller can rent a table and offer up dozens of firearms for sale - accepting cash only. That person can make their way around the country - buying and selling firearms as they go - cash only - no paper trail, and earn income. Savvy sellers will buy low in certain areas and sell high in others, as well as rely on a fair to considerable markup on their sales at shows because they know a desperate buyer who could not otherwise buy a gun from a licensed retailer because they couldn’t pass the background check is willing to pay a premium. Or, because the buyer is the libertarian type (just an example, not ALL libertarians) who doesn’t believe the govt has any right to know their business. These sorts of people are willing to pay a markup from the “private” seller who operates for practical purposes as a retailer but doesn’t have any sort of store front and is more often than not violating the law. BUT - due to the “loophole,” there is little to be done because gathering evidence against these sorts of sellers is extremely difficult. No paper trail, no records of sales, no claiming the income, etc., etc.
I’m talking about sellers on the facebook groups, not dealers. Probably 80% of the posts selling guns say something like “will sell only to CCW holder or will do CCAP check”, it’s a de facto background check for private sellers since you have to have gone through a background check to get your CCW.
I can only speak to PA; the idea is that our CWP/CCP requires almost the same background check and paperwork as buying a firearm. Personally, even for the crude kinds of longarms I may sell to a friend or relative now and then (I won a Henry .45LC I really didn’t want and sold it cheap to a cousin-in-law) I’m asking to see a CCW or I’m probably going to head to some shop and do a full formal transfer. I may not have to but its the way I want it.
What you are describing is illegal under federal law.
As per the BATFE, if you sell guns as an occupation or derive significant income from selling guns, then you are de facto a dealer in guns and if you do not register as one, you have committed a felony. You would also have committed seperate felonies for each gun sold without a background check, as you are a dealer and are required to do so.
In addition, they’ve committed tax fraud if they did not declare that income.
So, seeing as they’re already committing crimes and getting away with it because no one is reporting them, why on earth do you think ‘closing the loophole’ is going to make any difference whatsoever?