- Messages
- 313
- Reactions
- 543
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It's done by state police, but 3 entities are checked:I thought Oregons BGCs were done by the state police. I will be surprised if this affected.
Good reason to choose a shop who does no response releases.I tried to purchase a handgun the last time gov shutdown for 1 day.
the form 4473 is federal and therefore could not be processed due to being new business for federal. cannot create new business during shutdown.
even though the background checks are done at state level, its still federal forms and cant be processed during a fed shutdown.
Everything that's old . . .
DC brewery sues government over shutdown, citing lack of labels, speech concerns
Washington D.C. brewery Atlas Brew Works is suing the government over the shutdown, saying it cannot ship beer without new government-approved labels.www.usatoday.com
Is new again
DMV-based brewing company says government shutdown would hurt operations
SILVER SPRING, Md. (DC News Now) — A Maryland-based brewery with plans to open a new location in Warrenton, Virginia in the coming days, says the potential government shutdown would have a ne…www.dcnewsnow.com
I mean yes, but also it address the issue of a business not being able to operate because a federally mandated requirement can't be met because the federal government isn't doing the thing they are telling the business they have to do.
Agreed! There should be a, "while the cats away..." clause in the feeb registry.Like process 4473's. The (corect IMHO) argument is that if the Fed Gov requires a business to do something that needs the Fed Gov's participation to complete the Fed Gov should be required to do their part, or the requirement is non enforceable
Except that only the legislatures have power of the purse-strings, not the executive or judicial branch…. and that's NOT a bad thing, especially with the currently "installed" Potato in Chief "presiding".Every time we have a "shut down" the POTUS decides what will operate and what will not. The normal mode here is anything the guy at the top (or in this case whoever is behind him) thinks will cause the most anger is what is shut off. If they really wanted to stop this they would cut off the money to the law makers, ALL money. Watch how fast a deal is struck. That is of course not going to happen.
That is why we play this little game every so often when GOP holds House. The "norm" here is they can't agree, we have a "shut down", they still can't agree so we get another continue. How many years do we go without a budget? All we really have is a lot of arguing, and then they print a crap ton more money to hand out. We are now starting to see the pain caused by this. I have no doubt that since the Executive Branch decides what will keep running and what will shut down they will pick out things that really piss people off the most. The Bureaucrats who are told to stop working still get paid. This amounts to paid vacation for many who have no show jobs to begin with. Law makers still get paid of course. So we will have the "news" fan the flames of why this is all the GOP ultra nut jobs. They will cave, tell them to print even more money, pretend that all is well again.Except that only the legislatures have power of the purse-strings, not the executive or judicial branch…. and that's NOT a bad thing, especially the the currently "installed" Potato in Chief "presiding".
I know is this state an FFL "can" release a gun if the state is the hold up. Now if the Feds are the hold up? I have to guess no FFL is going to go against that? Any FFL's here could answer this but, I have never heard an FFL say there was a provision for them to let a gun walk if they were not getting the all clear from the feds.Does Oregon immediately submit the background check to the feds after it's submitted to the state or do they wait until it gets state approval (or starts to be reviewed by a human in the case of non-instants)? Or is there any reason an FFL couldn't/wouldn't release after a background check is approved but the federal system is down?
Isn't there a provision in the Brady Act that a FFL has the option to release the firearm to the purchaser after 3 days if no response from NICS check?I know is this state an FFL "can" release a gun if the state is the hold up. Now if the Feds are the hold up? I have to guess no FFL is going to go against that? Any FFL's here could answer this but, I have never heard an FFL say there was a provision for them to let a gun walk if they were not getting the all clear from the feds.
Damn, don't know how I missed this one but looks like you're correct. Searching it comes up with a ton of articles that law makers have been trying to close this and so far looks like they could not get it to the POTUS's desk. One thing that kept popping up was that kook who killed a bunch of people in that church while back. Said he got a gun due to the feds taking too long to tell the FFL no on the sale. I had to have read this back then and must have just written this off at the time. Thinking the same thing I thought just now when I read this. If that scum was told no at the FFL he would have just bought a gun from another source. The kook law makers using this as an excuse to pass more laws really want people to believe that if some scum is willing to go shoot people that they will be foiled when a legal gun is not available. They are literally saying a new law will stop this kind of scum?Isn't there a provision in the Brady Act that a FFL has the option to release the firearm to the purchaser after 3 days if no response from NICS check?
Edit, what the anti2A groups and media have been calling "Charleston Loophole"