AP Puff Piece on New Biden Background Check Rule Hides Dangers to Freedom

Curious how much less “gun violence” there was in this country before Democrats started imposing all this “progress.” [More]

Once more we’re being lied to, and the biggest ally would-be totalitarians have in imposing their treachery are complicit Fourth Estate Fifth Columnists.

Share on Facebook

Save

Author: admin

David Codrea is a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. View all posts by admin

2 thoughts on “AP Puff Piece on New Biden Background Check Rule Hides Dangers to Freedom”

Archer says:

April 12, 2024 at 7:17 pm

For such a short pull-quote, there are an awful lot of lies:

“There is a large and growing black market of guns …” Translation: There is a large and growing market we don’t completely control.

“… that are being sold by people who are in the business of dealing and are doing it without a license …” Because until you changed the rules, they didn’t need a license to sell a personally-owned firearm.

“… and therefore, they are not running background checks the way the law requires.” Correction: They are running exactly the background checks the law requires. Private sellers have never been required to use NICS; even if they wanted to, the FBI never allowed it. But don’t let the truth get in the way of your narrative.

“[…] Today’s Final Rule is about ensuring compliance with an important area of the existing law …” Compliance was already happening (see above). You’re changing the rules to turn compliance into non-compliance at your whim.

“… where we all know, the data show, and we can clearly see …” Debatable; the data has always been inconclusive at best.

“… that a whole group of folks are openly flouting that law.” Again, they are following the law as the FBI has always enforced it. Private sellers without FFLs have never been allowed access to NICS, even if they wanted it. That’s not “flouting” the law; that’s complying with it.

But none of this is new to anyone who’s been paying attention.
DDS says:

April 13, 2024 at 12:59 pm

“Because until you changed the rules, they didn’t need a license to sell a personally-owned firearm.”

And couldn’t get one if they tried since they didn’t buy/sell enough guns to meet the never stated quota for being “engaged in the business.”

“… and therefore, they are not running background checks the way the law requires.”

Actually, they couldn’t run a background check if they wanted to since one of the pieces of info required by NICS was an FFL number, and BATFE wouldn’t let them have one.

But rest assured, Joe is on the case, and you still can’t buy a cannon per the Second Amendment.

https://southbendreplicas.com/

https://cannonsdirect.com/

https://www.downrangecannons.com/shop/full-size-reproduction-cannons/full-size-reproduction-civil-war-cannons/

Comments are closed.

HOW THINGS WORK AROUND HERE

Satisfaction Guaranteed

Anyone not happy with anything on this site at any time will get 100% of all money they paid to me refunded, no questions asked. (No gratuities solicited or accepted.)

Comment House Rules

Keep them on topic. Trying to hijack threads really grinds my gears. No spam.
I moderate them so I’ll get to them when I can.
No threats against anyone except me. No fights–this is my place and if things get ugly, I treat unruly visitors the same way as I would in my home. Do not feed trolls–I’ll take out the trash.
Try to keep it clean.
I’m the final arbiter. If you don’t like the rules, start your own damn blog.

WarOnGuns Correspondents

Story tips received via email and social media messages will be credited. Just let me know how you want to be recognized (real name, first name/last initial, or screen name.)

Link Policy

I maintained a WogRoll at the old Blogspot place predicated on reciprocity with like-minded RKBA-related sites. Truth be told, I never got much in terms of site visits to make the effort worth the time. I may try to do something again in the future, but for now, my hands are more than full trying to get a new site started.

Advertising Disclosure

This is a placeholder for now because I have not done ads on the old blog for years. In case I ever start them up here, this will be the policy in effect: The FTC has some fool nonsense rules about ads on blogs or some such and presumes authority over the First Amendment to compel the unfunded mandate that we who earn ad revenues make some kind of disclosure so you don’t think we’re getting paid to say nice things about people or God knows what, meaning they must think you’re stupid, too. I have had a few ads on the old site in the past and may do so again if I think it’s worth a try. Combined, I probably couldn’t buy a box of good cigars each year, let alone a bottle of George T. Stagg, and that is somehow supposed to compromise my morality to force me to say nice things about products and services I don’t mean simply in exchange for filthy lucre. If you believe that, leave now–you’re not smart enough to be here. Bottom line, aside from welcoming a sponsor, I will do no posts related to their products or services, or reviews of what they offer without complete disclosure.

About “The Only Ones”

So named from a comment by DEA agent Lee Paige, who told a classroom full of kids he was “the only one” qualified to be armed and then promptly shot himself in the foot, the purpose of this feature has never been to bash cops. The only reason I do this is to amass a credible body of evidence to present when those who would deny our right to keep and bear arms use the argument that only government enforcers are professional and trained enough to do so safely and responsibly. And it’s also used to illustrate when those of official status, rank, or privilege, both in law enforcement and in some other government position, get special breaks not available to we commoners, particularly (but not exclusively) when they’re involved in gun-related incidents.