If the next Congress passes any version of the "Gun Show Loophole" bills, it is certain that either Obama, Hillary, or McCain would sign it into law.
Remember, McCain, in 2000 made a 30sec TV ad for initiatives to pass gun show "loopholes" in Colorado and Oregon.
"Our" only hope is that there are enough Senators (41) to vote against it and keep it from getting out of Congress. I don't have much hope for this outcome -- anything to close something called a "loophole" is exactly the kind of "reasonable regulation", that too many weaselly legislators jump all over to pass.
All the Federal laws impossed on FFLs are based on "commerce clause" authority -- the only way it had been thought to impose such laws. And it was the fact that they were involved in interstate commerce that opened the door.
Since then, the courts have increased "commerce clause" scope -- and surely the courts would uphold the claim that private FTF sales have an effect in interestate commerce.
The only question now seems to be whether "they" will go for all FTF sales immediately, or get to "private sale loophole" after[/ U] the "gun show loophole".
The Ch.5 "investigative" report might be a testing the waters for the "full monty".
A possible alternative for us could be a push for an "OK to possess firearms" indicator on the Federal "Real ID" and a requirement that any FTF transfer to include a check of said ID.
It'd be better than to jave to do all FTFs in the presence of an FFL (along with the attendant fees).
Remember, McCain, in 2000 made a 30sec TV ad for initiatives to pass gun show "loopholes" in Colorado and Oregon.
"Our" only hope is that there are enough Senators (41) to vote against it and keep it from getting out of Congress. I don't have much hope for this outcome -- anything to close something called a "loophole" is exactly the kind of "reasonable regulation", that too many weaselly legislators jump all over to pass.
All the Federal laws impossed on FFLs are based on "commerce clause" authority -- the only way it had been thought to impose such laws. And it was the fact that they were involved in interstate commerce that opened the door.
Since then, the courts have increased "commerce clause" scope -- and surely the courts would uphold the claim that private FTF sales have an effect in interestate commerce.
The only question now seems to be whether "they" will go for all FTF sales immediately, or get to "private sale loophole" after[/ U] the "gun show loophole".
The Ch.5 "investigative" report might be a testing the waters for the "full monty".
A possible alternative for us could be a push for an "OK to possess firearms" indicator on the Federal "Real ID" and a requirement that any FTF transfer to include a check of said ID.
It'd be better than to jave to do all FTFs in the presence of an FFL (along with the attendant fees).