After Congress passed the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA) in June of last year, Joe Biden triumphantly signed the bill as making good on a campaign promise to enact tougher gun legislation. Everyone saw this bill for what it was, a trojan horse for further gun control. A leaked ATF document shows the ATF plans to run an end around congress and force universal background checks by the end of the year appears to confirm the warnings.
Ammoland's Reporting on the ATF Leak—
Ammoland reporting sources confirmed the validity of a leaked ATF document stating that by the end of the year, President Joe will direct the ATF to close the “private sales” and “digital” loopholes. This shouldn't be a surprise as Joe Biden and all the anti gun, antifreedom proponents have long dreamed of and worked toward an America where only the Government possesses firearms.
The plan stated in the document means that Biden and his politicized ATF will use the corrupt, redefined definition of what it means to be “engaged in the business” of selling firearms, contained in the BSCA.
The passing of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act last year changed the definition of what it means to be “engaged in the business” of dealing firearms. Section 12002 of the law outlines the definition. Read the BSCA at https://t.co/AA0Mu10KYc. #ATF pic.twitter.com/Rmi3u73uyV
— ATF HQ (@ATFHQ) August 4, 2023
Ambiguity Invites The ATF's Abuse of Universal Background Checks—
The ambiguous wording defining what it means to be engaged in the business of selling firearms in the BSCA was purposeful. The language left broad discretion for the ATF to essentially include anyone who sells a gun as someone engaged in the business of selling guns and thus requiring a background check for the sale. Here is how Ammoland reporter John Crump explained it:
The bill changed the definition of a “gun seller.” The BSCA altered the wording of Section 921(a) of Title 18, United States Code. The BSCA altered the definition of someone “engaged in the business” of selling guns from “with the principal objective of livelihood and profit” to the ambiguous statement of “to predominantly earn a profit.”
From the text of the BSCA:
(22) The term `to predominantly earn a profit’ means that the intent underlying the sale or disposition of firearms is predominantly one of obtaining pecuniary gain, as opposed to other intents, such as improving or liquidating a personal firearms collection: Provided, That proof of profit shall not be required as to a person who engages in the regular and repetitive purchase and disposition of firearms for criminal purposes or terrorism. John Crump-Ammoland
What is a Gun Dealer?
Guns actually maintain their value fairly well and many Americans regularly buy, sell or trade guns in private party transactions. The original wording says someone who is engaged in the business of selling guns acts “with the principal objective of livelihood and profit“. This seems to describe someone whose business and primary way they make money is selling firearms; and not someone who periodically buys and sells firearms privately. This is really the only way to interpret the words intent honestly.
However, what this means is that someone could privately buy and sell guns without conducting background checks legally, provided it wasn't their business. If your goal is to require a background check for every single gun sale, so you can create a gun registry and begin confiscating firearms from individuals, this law needs to be changed. But contrary to the messaging, universal background check law isn't popular enough to pass on a federal level.
So, capitalizing on the tragic shooting deaths of school children who were unprotected in a federally defined “gun free zone,” Democrats recruited turncoat Republicans to get the BSCA passed. Changing the wording from “with the principal objective of livelihood and profit,“ to “predominantly earn a profit,” the BSCA opened the door for the ATF to define anyone who sells firearms that “aren't from a personal collection” a firearms dealer, even if they don't make a profit on those sales.
We've seen the courts strike down the ATF's overreach in redefining terms to create their own law. Two recent examples are the pistol brace issue, and the redefining of what is a firearm. This is different in my opinion because the ATF has a better argument that it isn't the agency redefining anything, it was congress that redefined the term. I'm quite positive that if or when the President's handlers roll out this initiative, many lawsuits asking for immediate injunctions will follow.
Gun owners usually blame Democrate politicians for not supporting gun rights, and that isn't a baseless claim. But this garbage BSCA legislation could only pass with the support of 10 Republicans. Here are the names of those who you can write to and thank for ignoring the legitimate warnings about this legislation.
- Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas)
- Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.)
- Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) Changed Parties
- Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.)
- Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.)
- Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.)
- Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine)
- Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)
- Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio)
- Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah)
- Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.)