Under current federal law, when an FBI background check cannot be immediately resolved, NICS may issue a delay. At that point, Federal Firearms Licensees, or firearm retailers, may choose to lawfully transfer the firearm after three full business days have passed (which is five calendar days or longer if there’s a weekend or a holiday). That’s not the case with the overwhelming majority of background checks.
The law currently allows — but does not require — firearm retailers to transfer the firearm after three business days if nothing comes back to deny the transfer. That’s the safety feature that keeps the government from denying a legal firearm transfer through bureaucratic red tape.
The BCCA would scrap that delay period by putting background checks into an never-ending cycle by striking the relevant clause in federal statute, effectively requiring a completed check before a transfer can be finalized with a “proceed” response in all cases.
A $400,000 payout after Maduro’s capture is putting prediction markets in the spotlight
Excerpt:
Prediction markets let people wager on anything from a basketball game to the outcome of a presidential election — and recently, the downfall of former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.
The latter is drawing renewed scrutiny into this murky world of speculative, 24/7 transactions. Last week, an anonymous trader pocketed more than $400,000 after betting that Maduro would soon be out of office.
The bulk of the trader’s bids on the platform Polymarket were made mere hours before President Donald Trump announced the surprise nighttime raid that led to Maduro’s capture, fueling online suspicions of potential insider trading because of the timing of the wagers and the trader’s narrow activity on the platform. Others argued that the risk of getting caught was too big, and that previous speculation about Maduro’s future could have led to such transactions.
Polymarket did not respond to requests for comment.
The commercial use of prediction markets has skyrocketed in recent years, opening the door for people to wage their money on the likelihood of a growing list of future events. But despite some eye-catching windfalls, traders still lose money everyday. And in terms of government oversight in the U.S., the trades are categorized differently than traditional forms of gambling — raising questions about transparency and risk.
How prediction markets work
The scope of topics involved in prediction markets can range immensely — from escalation in geopolitical conflicts, to pop culture moments and even the fate of conspiracy theories. Recently, there’s been a surge of wages on elections and sports games. But some users have also bet millions on things like a rumored — and ultimately unrealized — “secret finale” for the Netflix’s “Stranger Things,” whether the U.S. government will confirm the existence of extraterrestrial life and how much billionaire Elon Musk might post on social media this month.
In industry-speak, what someone buys or sells in a prediction market is called an “event contract.” They’re typically advertised as “yes” or “no” wagers. And the price of one fluctuates between $0 and $1, reflecting what traders are collectively willing to pay based on a 0% to 100% chance of whether they think an event will occur.
The more likely traders think an event will occur, the more expensive that contract will become. And as those odds change over time, users can cash out early to make incremental profits, or try to avoid higher losses on what they’ve already invested.
Proponents of prediction markets argue putting money on the line leads to better forecasts. Experts like Koleman Strumpf, an economics professor at Wake Forest University, think there’s value in monitoring these platforms for potential news — pointing to prediction markets’ past success with some election outcomes, including the 2024 presidential race.
Still, it’s never a “crystal ball,” he noted, and prediction markets can be wrong, too.
Who is behind all of the trading is also pretty murky. While the companies running the platforms collect personal information of their users in order to verify identities and payments, most people can trade under anonymous pseudonyms online — making it difficult for the public to know who is profiting off many event contracts. In theory, people investing their money may be closely following certain events, but others could just be randomly guessing.
****************************
Orlando CBS station so be warned lots of mush, but it does bring up good point of how insiders could bet on future events that they have knowledge on. “Insiders” like politicians DC admin. or military personnel and since it is anonymous no one would know.