Despite all the talking heads babbling about executive orders on “gun control,” there aren’t any. In fact, all I can find are a new FFL guidance pamphlet from the ATF, two versions of a “white paper,” officially “Presidential Memoranda,” and a Health and Human Services proposed rule change.
So what changes happened, or are going to happen?
Defining “dealer”: The ATF pamphlet, DO I NEED A LICENSE TO BUY AND SELL FIREARMS?, is getting nearly all the attention, with ignorant commentators claiming the “gun show loophole” is closed and dealers will have to get licenses. In fact, many people including myself expected that Obama would attempt to redefine “dealer.” According to the ATF publication, nothing changed.
18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(1)(A), 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(21)(C), and 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(22) already defined “dealer” (the key phrases are “predominantly one of obtaining livelihood and pecuniary gain” and “regular and repetitive purchase and disposition”). The ATF “guidance” merely reiterates that.
What to expect: Nothing. Sort of. Keep reading.
Investigations: “ATF has established an Internet Investigations Center (IIC) staffed with federal agents, legal counsel, and investigators to track illegal online firearms trafficking and to provide actionable intelligence to agents in the field.”
What to expect: Look for a lot more gun show stings. The ATF will be busting people for “dealing” even when they know the person is not legally required to be licensed. They don’t plan to win in court; they plan to destroy people through horrific legal expenses incurred fighting malicious prosecution. That’s why Barrycade is looking for an additional 200 ATF kitten-stompers.
Trusts: Rule-changes in progress to clarify that using a firearms trust doesn’t dodge “prohibited persons” restrictions. So far as law goes, this may even be a good thing in that the ATF has been selectively applying that at whim, sometimes revoking trusts retroactively. On the other hand, the ATF lives on whim, and this probably won’t really help.
What to expect: Continued confusion, and delays in establishing firearms trusts. Lawyers will be happy with their new Lexuses and Beemers.
Firearms Loss Reporting: To hear plastic-haired TV heads tell it, there’s a new requirement for FFLs to report lost or stolen firearms. No such thing; the reporting requirement has been there for years (not even counting simply recording inventory in the bound book). Supposedly this change clarifies that the licensee shipping the gun has the responsibility to report the loss. That’s no change, because the firearm is never in the inventory of the recipient until he receives it. The FFL in whose inventory the firearm is has always been responsible.
What to expect: Not much. FFLs with inventory responsibility already had a vested interest in knowing where their guns went.
Prohibited persons: This is a nasty one. Per the white paper: “Current law prohibits individuals from buying a gun if, because of a mental health issue, they are either a danger to themselves or others or are unable to manage their own affairs. The Social Security Administration (SSA) has indicated that it will begin the rule-making process to ensure that appropriate information in its records is reported to NICS.”
Current law prohibits persons from buying a gun if adjudicated a danger to themselves or others. Not because some SSA bureaucrat said so, due to someone having physical issues that make managing financial affairs difficult.
What to expect: Loss of rights by a large class of people. Cheering by idiots.
HIPAA & More Prohibited Persons: The HHS rule-change proposal is especially dangerous; probably the worst of all these actions. Currently, HIPAA forbids most disclosures by HIPAA-covered entities (doctors, nurses, insurance companies, hospital, etc) of patient data. There are large LEO loopholes, of course. The rule-change would eliminate much of the privacy protection and allow any HIPAA-covered entity to report directly to NICS and condition believed to be disqualifying. They could report adjudicated findings of mental incompetence. But they could also report suspected drug abuse, suspect domestic violence, and suspected any other disqualifying condition. Without proof, without adjudication, without any due process conditions.
What to expect: You told your doctor you’ve been feeling depressed? He may pick up the phone when you leave and abrogate your rights, without you knowing until you buy a .22 plinker for Junior. Of course, a prohibited person attempting to purchase a firearm is a felony… too bad.
Now imagine that your doctor is a dyed-in-the-wool believer in the AMA’s war on RKBA, and wants an excuse to disarm all his patients.
NICS: Throwing more money at NICS, supposedly hiring more people to man the phones, and extending working hours 24/7. Wonderful; more bureaucrats. If you are dependent on background checks, this –theoretically — is a good thing; FFLs would appreciate decreased phone-wait times.
What to expect: Hopefully, shorter wait times. We’ll need that with the brand new surge in sales triggered by the Salesman-In-Chief.
Smart Guns: Oh dear Bog… President Unicorn Dreams will direct the Departments of Defense, Justice, and Homeland Security to research, develop, and promote the use of smart guns. I can save them plenty of time and research bucks right now: Replace all firearms held by all three department with Armatix iP1s. There. Done. And all the anti-war, anti-police, anti-rights protesters are happy.
What to expect: Lucrative R&D contracts, but no workable solutions until technology in general advances greatly.
Summary: Essentially, all the rhetoric comes down to this: A bunch of claims that they’re cracking down on “gun violence” while doing almost nothing new, but setting the ATF loose to conduct more more questionable operations. But hidden in the bureaucratic rule-making is the plan to let any health professional render nearly anyone a prohibited person by slandering them as “crazy.”
No.
Your move.
The Social Security thing shows the true colors of the Statists. Make the weak – helpless and make the needy – dependent.
As to the HIPAA thing, I thought we were attempting to remove the stigma of seeking help, at least that is what veterans are being told. Not only is that a lie, but now, an entire new cadre of snitches for the glory of the state.
Evil has a name.
“Make the weak – helpless and make the needy – dependent.”
And they’re proud of it. Notice how pleased Obama et al are every time food assistance enrollment jumps. “See how well we’re doing at helping people?” They might as well offer My Little Pony rainbow and unicorn stamps, too.
The funny thing is that when I have gone to doctors lately, they always ask me on paperwork if I have firearms in the home. I must be mentally unstable, as I always develop amnesia at that point, and I default to no. I have even been asked by the doctors themselves at times. I don’t stay with them for long.
The thing I find most concerning is not what has been done, but the fact that the administration is conditioning us for more edicts further down the road. Obama and his minions will tout the wonderful results, after all, polls can be made to say anything you want them to say. So, if we just take things one step further, think of all the good we can do. Of course, as everyone knows, I can be wrong. But I doubt it.
If I am in fact wrong, i promise, I will try and whip up some artificial tears. I have got the recipe down pat now. If you don’t know what I am talking about, just watch the president making his announcement. Oscar worthy.
Medicare/Medicaid requires them to ask, or they don’t get paid. Even if you aren’t on those, some will just use the same forms to simplify their own operations.
Just another database slipping under the radar.
Doctors, etc. are NOT required to ask about guns. I just saw a doctor for the first time in 10 years and was all set to deal with it, but the question never came up.
The best strategy is to have the bare minimum of medical history, description of your problem, and a list of current medications already written down. Hand that to the doctor. Allow only questions directly related to the problem for which you are being seen. Be sure to ask plenty of questions yourself, especially about proposed treatments or new/changed medications. Insist that the doctor give you specific and relevant reasons for them, not just “toss it at the wall and see what sticks.” You are not a medical experiment…. Take charge of your own life and health, and most doctors will be glad – and actually able to help you much better.
Those are my recommendations after 30 years as a nurse.
My doctor has more guns than me!
All I ever give is name , rank, and serial number; I thought the US was signatory to the Geneva Convention!
i cant wait until we get a republican in the white house and he or she starts issuing executive orders about background checks for abortions and not crossing state lines to get an abortion…and taxing abortions to pay for other stuff…just to see liberals wet their pants and their heads explode…