I 100% agree any erosion of rights is horrible, and I believe most gun laws on the book are unconstitutional. But in this case, all he did is regurgitate existing law. Word for word. The definition of a dealer as someone "in the business" has been law since 1968. The funny thing is [some] gun owners have been asking for a definition for that ever since. I bet you can find threads here on ingo asking that exact question. And we still don't have a definition, other that we know they are hiring more govt employees to hunt down unlicensed people "in the business." I don't agree with the law, but there's nothing new here. Have people been "pushing the limit" under the law? probably. Those people should be the ones thinking this will affect them. If tomorrow I want to sell a gun privately, I will just as I always have. I've sold 5 in 15 yrs that I recall and I'm certainly not in the business; that part of the EA doesn't affect me. Fed Prosecutors have just as much opportunity to abuse this EA as they have had under the GCA.
The response to this should be pointing and laughing, not gnashing of teeth. Expose his weakness and how this EA is only bolstering enforcement of laws already on the books (as many gun-owners and NRA clamor for... be careful what you ask for, you just might get it) from an administration with a dismal record of prosecuting violations of these existing laws. GOP response could be tweaks in the code to make it ever simpler to get an FFL or create a "hobby FFL" for folks w/ other day jobs.
The other part of this, the NFA trust part, was going to happen anyway.
If we want this encroachment of freedom gone, we should look for candidates w/ the balls to say GCA should be repealed, as well as the NFA. The slippery slope was created in '34 and steepened in '68.
my 2c.
-rvb
So then you do not believe that the prosecution of individuals who trade often will increase? I find that to be no laughing matter...