Background noise

A step, but only a step

Buried in the story about the Biden administration’s new rule to help tighten (but not close) the gun-show loophole was this from somebody speaking for Gun Owners of America—which obviously doesn’t represent all gun owners of America:

The rule, which would make more people submit to checks of their police records and rap sheets before they buy a gun, is only a “backdoor” attempt to get “universal background checks.” Hmmm.

Yes, and having rules in place banning alcoholic open containers in the cupholders of vehicles is a “backdoor” attempt to prevent drinking and driving.

Who is against background checks? Answer: Not many Americans. Not even those who own a closet full of guns. It wasn’t that long ago that Fox News—not CNN, not MSNBC—came out with a national poll showing that 90 percent of Americans favored requiring background checks on all gun buyers, including those who buy guns at gun shows and from private collectors.

Only 7 percent opposed this idea. We suppose “Gun Owners of America” might represent those 7 percent. But then again, 7 percent of Americans think chocolate milk comes from brown cows. (The joke is, we’re not kidding: The Washington Post, June 2017.)

Something tells us, mainly lived experience, that the new rule will prevent some gun sales, but felons and kids and others who aren’t supposed to buy them still will. Because the new rule still has the problem the old rule had: semantics.

As those who’ve been following the Bryan Malinowski death in central Arkansas have already read, selling guns at gun shows and over the Internet, or even in your garage, isn’t illegal. Apparently the difference between selling Bubba a shotgun and getting the attention of the ATF has been a matter of volume and intention.

If you sell “a bunch” of guns with the “intention” to make a business out of it, then you should be licensed as a dealer. But if you sell “a few” with the “intention” of making this thing a hobby, you don’t. As we’ve mentioned before in this column, try to define, legally, the difference between a bunch and a few. And try to explain to a judge how you know somebody else’s intentions.

So the Biden administration announced it will change the rules. From our story in Friday’s paper: “The rule, which was finalized this week, makes clear that anyone who sells firearms predominantly to earn a profit must be federally licensed and conduct background checks, regardless of whether they are selling on the Internet, at a gun show or at a brick-and-mortar store, Attorney General Merrick Garland told reporters.”

Predominantly to earn a profit? What does that mean? That he bought a gun with intentions of reselling it at a profit? Or that most of the money he makes every year comes from selling guns, and not farm income or an office job? And if Bubba resells the gun next year to Bo, is he predominantly doing anything?

Ay-yi-yi. Wethinks the administration isn’t making things much better.

In a nation where there are more guns than people, the bad guys are going to get guns, even if they have to do it the old-fashioned way: stealing them.

But the best way to close a loophole is to close a loophole. No ifs, ans or buts.

And the best way to close the gunshow loophole is for Congress to do it. (Some groups, like the one listed above, will take the administration to court, saying it doesn’t have the power to make these changes.) If Congress passes a universal background check, that would be a big step in the right direction.

What the Biden administration did was a step. But a small step. And might be walked-back in court someday.