An email I sent out this morning to my “small cadre” of advisors:
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2024-04-19/pdf/2024-07838.pdf
“The definition of ‘to predominantly earn a profit’ now focuses only on whether the intent underlying the sale or disposition of firearms is predominantly one of obtaining pecuniary gain… ’ to define the terms ‘purchase’ and ‘sale’ as they apply to dealers to include any method of payment or medium of exchange for a firearm…”
Did they just tank anonymous “buybacks” with “no questions asked”? I know some gun owners publicize selling cheap junk for a profit… I don’t see a carve out for buybacks in the text (albeit I only did a word search and have not pored through the whole mess).
It turns out Armed Attorneys addressed that in a video Len Savage sent me the link to, along with this observation:
Fun fact: The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act was touted to close the “gun show loophole” to prevent buying a firearm without a background check,
However; There is NOTHING in the rule (based on the law passed) that effects or applies to a BUYER.
NOTHING!
Meaning it would only affect the seller of a firearm to a buyback program.
Don’t take my word on it, here are two attorneys discussing it.
The relevant section starts at 8:12:
So it looks like they outsmarted themselves, and now need to ignore their own rule.
So, every time the antis hold a buyback, why not loudly complain and warn people they’re being invited to violate “commonsense gun safety laws”?
