‘Historic’ action by justice department closes ‘doggone dangerous’ loophole in Biden administration’s fight against gun violence

The sale of firearms on the internet and at gun shows in the US will in future be subject to mandatory background checks, the justice department said on Thursday as it announced a “historic” new action to keep weapons out of the hands of criminals.

The closing of the so-called gun show loophole, which exempts private transactions from restrictions that apply to licensed dealers, has long been a goal of the Biden administration, and is specifically targeted in the rule published in the federal register today.

The White House estimates that 22% of guns owned by Americans were acquired without a background check and that about 23,000 more individuals will be required to be licensed as a dealer after the rule’s implementation.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    3 months ago

    Even a background check on every sale wouldn’t be enough to catch some previous offenders, those on watch lists, or people with serious mental illness issues because the system is woefully incomplete. The whole thing is ridiculous. You shouldn’t be able to buy guns at conventions or on websites to begin with. Honestly, I’m amazed licensed gun dealers haven’t been pushing congress to make it so that people have to buy guns through them- or if they have, I haven’t heard about it.

    I don’t think it is realistic to get guns out of the equation in America any time soon, but it’s become such an insane free-for-all. Nothing enforced, everything has a loophole.

    • SupraMario@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Guns bought online require a bgc and shipped to an FFL. Why are you assuming they don’t?

    • FireTower@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      What’s the qualm with online sales? They get shipped to an FFL and a background check is performed before the transfer anyways. Online sales add more competition to the market and increases consumer choice.

      As for why FFLs don’t lobby for protectionist practices beyond principal, FFLs have terrible margins, are generally small businesses without much lobbying power, and lobbying for anti consumer practices generally doesn’t go well in that market. People are still mad at Springfield Armory (the company) for rescinding opposition on a failed Illinois bill after they got a carve out exemption so it wouldn’t apply to them (unlike their competition).

      • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Just wondering, if you buy a gun online, how is it packaged? Would it for instance be evident to someone that might want to steal a gun?

        • shalafi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          It’s pretty mundane looking. I’ve always just got a plain brown box. Same for ammo.

          BUT, it’s not legal to ship guns directly to you or I. I order a gun on guns.com and it goes to my FFL guy. I go sit in his kitchen, fill out the forms and give him his $20.

        • FireTower@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          Typically a cardboard box, maybe also a hard case in the box. Depends on who you are buying it from. They’ll be mailed via USPS directly to a FFL (think gun store) and delivered into the store (not just left on a porch).

          I had this box laying around in case I ever needed to RMA.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        In every year since 2018, there have been more than one million ads offering firearms for sale by unlicensed sellers in states that do not legally require a background check, a circumstance that creates endless opportunities for individuals with dangerous histories to easily acquire guns. Federal law requires a background check of a prospective gun buyer only when the seller is a licensed gun dealer, leaving all other sales—such as unlicensed gun sales negotiated over the internet—unregulated and with no background check required.

        For more than a decade, the online firearm marketplace has emerged as a growing market for anonymous gun purchases through websites such as Armslist, the self-proclaimed “largest free gun classifieds on the web.” Everytown has worked to understand the scope and threat of this type of commerce. This report lays out the results of Everytown’s analysis of Armslist ads between 2018 and 2020, and the findings of our prior investigations examining the criminal backgrounds of buyers, how transactions are carried out, and whether unlicensed sellers would require a background check on a private gun sale.

        https://everytownresearch.org/report/unchecked-an-investigation-of-the-online-firearm-marketplace/

        • FireTower@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          3 months ago

          Those kind of transfers aren’t online sales but face to face sales facilitated by a post. None of the actual transaction is online.

          In an online sale a buyer pays a seller through e-commerce then the seller mails the firearms to an FFL near the buyer where they go and pick it up after a background check.

          That source seems to unintentionally conflate the former with the latter.

        • shalafi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          states that do not legally require a background check

          Bald faced lie, not even going to read the rest. Background checks are federally required. States can impose additional restrictions, but they cannot bypass this. It would be a Bulgarian cluster fuck if they did. They do not.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            If you had read the rest, you would have seen that is literally mentioned in the next sentence of what I quoted…