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.
Then let's check a textbook...
false dichotomy
Noun
false dichotomy (plural false dichotomies)
(logical fallacy) A situation in which two alternative points of views are presented as the only options, whereas others are available.
Now, ask the butler where you went wrong Jethro.
Let me see if you can understand something here.
You say background checks are effective, he says they are not. You accuse him of the logical fallacy of a false dichotomy because he disagrees with you.
Here comes the part that you might have trouble with, in order for their to be a false dichotomy their actually has to be more than two possible options. Care to explain what other alternatives apply here? We have background checks work, or they are ineffective, or...
This is your chance to show how smart you are.
Irrelevant and a false equivalency. The only way to know how effective background checks are, is to totally eliminate them. You can't measure the criminals who went elsewhere because they would be required to TAKE a background check. But that doesn't negate the need to close the gun show loophole and require every gun sold at a gun show to include a background check. The ATF could set up a booth to handle background checks for private sellers.
You made a fairly decent point, then you blew it by arguing that Fast and Furious happened because the dealers allowed straw purchases. What actually happened is the dealers reported the attempted purchases, and was told by the government to allow them even though they were illegal.For the 1001th time there is no gun show loophole.
There is in fact a "Gun Show Loophole".
However, it applies to any situation where a private, unlicensed owner, is selling a small number of weapons to another person.
Private sales via people who are not licensed dealers do not require a background check, whether said sale happens at a Gun Show or not.
They are simply more common at Gun Shows, and are thus referred to as the "Gun Show Loophole".
In other words, If I went and purchased 3 guns from a dealer, and then went home and sold them to some random guy up the road, there would be no paperwork necessary for the sale of said weapons.
Which is why straw buyers were able to go and purchase a bunch of weapons at gun shops and then turn around and hand them to the Mexican Mafia.
All you people that screamed and moaned about "Fast and Furious" should already know that.
And I am very sure that you were one of those people Gadawg.
The government goes out of its way to allow it, how will writing more laws stop it?
You made a fairly decent point, then you blew it by arguing that Fast and Furious happened because the dealers allowed straw purchases. What actually happened is the dealers reported the attempted purchases, and was told by the government to allow them even though they were illegal.There is in fact a "Gun Show Loophole".
However, it applies to any situation where a private, unlicensed owner, is selling a small number of weapons to another person.
Private sales via people who are not licensed dealers do not require a background check, whether said sale happens at a Gun Show or not.
They are simply more common at Gun Shows, and are thus referred to as the "Gun Show Loophole".
In other words, If I went and purchased 3 guns from a dealer, and then went home and sold them to some random guy up the road, there would be no paperwork necessary for the sale of said weapons.
Which is why straw buyers were able to go and purchase a bunch of weapons at gun shops and then turn around and hand them to the Mexican Mafia.
All you people that screamed and moaned about "Fast and Furious" should already know that.
And I am very sure that you were one of those people Gadawg.
I wasn't saying that was why Fast and Furious happened.
I was saying that fact was an integral point where Fast and Furious was concerned.
Thus if you know the details of Fast and Furious, than you know the loophole exists.
And the purchases weren't actually illegal, unless the dealers had reason to believe the people buying the weapons were buying them for criminal purposes.
The government goes out of its way to allow it, how will writing more laws stop it?
Because the government is not in fact a single entity.
When a member of the government commits a crime, there are usually many other people that would love to hold them to account and see them arrested, especially their political opponents.
Why didn't you answer the question I asked?
Just how many of these "Private Sellers" do you think show up at gun shows? What's the ratio to Licensed Dealers?
And to answer your question.. Unless the person had a CCW/CCP, they would be waiting the full three business days before they were able to get the gun, which would be Thursday.
And yes, if he was buying the gun to resell it, that would be considered a "Straw Purchase" which is illegal.
Are you trying to say that your gun laws you want pushed don't work?
Hell, we've been saying that for years.
You claim to have recently went to a gun show and now you act like you know it all. Here are some of the things you have said that are dishonest. You claim there is a waiting period, so be specific about your state, it's laws and whether other states have waiting periods! Be specific whether it involves all guns or certain types of guns! Let's start with just a few specific points and not hide behind the generalities. Is there a federal law about gun shows and what they can and can't do, or are those you mention state laws that vary greatly from place to place?
You can have a major city near many different states and many different laws. For the situation to change in that major city, it has to change in those nearby areas.
So now for a second time I am going to ask why you won't answer the question I asked you....
Just how many people, private sellers, do you think show up to sell guns at a gun show versus the number of Licensed Dealers?
Do you think the ratio is 1:1? 10:1? 1:10? 1:20? Something different? You are throwing all kinds of numbers out there, making all kinds of proclaimations.. Demanding answers to your questions.. So how about answering one for a change?
This is the third time that I have asked the question. Are you going to ignore it again?
This is going to be fun.
I do not own a gun, and happen to be a really lousy shot. I am not a gun nut, I am a freedom nut, and I understand that my freedom requires other people to be just as free as I am.
Since you can't even get what I am correct, why should I believe that you understand something as complicated as law?
And those 20 first graders and 6 teachers from Connecticut are 'free'...you moron.
"The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government."
Thomas Jefferson to the Republican Citizens of Washington County, Maryland" (March 31, 1809).
Misusing a quote does not prove anything other than your inability to comprehend English.
And those 20 first graders and 6 teachers from Connecticut are 'free'...you moron.
"The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government."
Thomas Jefferson to the Republican Citizens of Washington County, Maryland" (March 31, 1809).
Misusing a quote does not prove anything other than your inability to comprehend English.
Misusing? Thomas Jefferson couldn't be any more clear. He made similar statements.
"The equal rights of man, and the happiness of every individual, are now acknowledged to be the only legitimate objects of government. Modern times have the signal advantage, too, of having discovered the only device by which these rights can be secured, to wit: government by the people, acting not in person, but by representatives chosen by themselves, that is to say, by every man of ripe years and sane mind, who contributes either by his purse or person to the support of his country." --Thomas Jefferson to A. Coray, 1823. ME 15:482
"I willingly acquiesce in the institutions of my country, perfect or imperfect, and think it a duty to leave their modifications to those who are to live under them and are to participate of the good or evil they may produce. The present generation has the same right of self-government which the past one has exercised for itself." --Thomas Jefferson to John Hampden Pleasants, 1824. ME 16:29
"What is true of every member of the society, individually, is true of them all collectively; since the rights of the whole can be no more than the sum of the rights of the individuals." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1789. ME 7:455, Papers 15:393
"To unequal privileges among members of the same society the spirit of our nation is, with one accord, adverse." --Thomas Jefferson to Hugh White, 1801. ME 10:258
"The most sacred of the duties of a government [is] to do equal and impartial justice to all its citizens." --Thomas Jefferson: Note in Destutt de Tracy, "Political Economy," 1816. ME 14:465
You claim to have recently went to a gun show and now you act like you know it all. Here are some of the things you have said that are dishonest. You claim there is a waiting period, so be specific about your state, it's laws and whether other states have waiting periods! Be specific whether it involves all guns or certain types of guns! Let's start with just a few specific points and not hide behind the generalities. Is there a federal law about gun shows and what they can and can't do, or are those you mention state laws that vary greatly from place to place?
You can have a major city near many different states and many different laws. For the situation to change in that major city, it has to change in those nearby areas.
So now for a second time I am going to ask why you won't answer the question I asked you....
Just how many people, private sellers, do you think show up to sell guns at a gun show versus the number of Licensed Dealers?
Do you think the ratio is 1:1? 10:1? 1:10? 1:20? Something different? You are throwing all kinds of numbers out there, making all kinds of proclaimations.. Demanding answers to your questions.. So how about answering one for a change?
This is the third time that I have asked the question. Are you going to ignore it again?
You don't know, so what's the difference. Gun shows aren't all the same. The real point is people who oppose universal or gun show background checks aren't interested in solving the problems of our open gun market.
The potential exists to resell a weapon at a gun show to someone who can't pass a background check and just because it's illegal doesn't mean there is a way of catching someone doing it or that a gun show doesn't promote doing it.
Sensible gun control laws would require registration of all firearms from the time of manufacturing and sales involving transfer of registration, which would always require a background check. Let me explain it in simple terms! Every gun from the time of manufacture is registered with an ID. The registration can be transferred to an organization or individual, but the organization has to be something like the military or law enforcement. Every gun is registered and checked each year to determine the same person owns it. The rifled firearms are periodically ballistics tested with the bullets being sent to FBI for scanning and the data is put in a data base. The FBI can work out a quick scan process. People would think twice before using a gun in a crime and the reason to possess a gun on the streets of our cities would fade away.
It's the nature of criminals to draw heat, so possessing an illegal firearm should be dealt with severely, when they've drawn heat. Let's say the cops find a firearm in the residence of someone suspected for a crime. I doubt a criminal wipes down his weapon everytime he touches it, so fingerprints can be lifted connecting a person to the weapon. A weapon could be associated with any type of crime the police would get a search warrant for and listed on the warrant.
I haven't been advocating these piecemeal, feelgood changes in the law, but have advocated a comprehensive approach that reduces gun violence and discourages illegal ownership of guns. Closing the gun show loophole is just a small part of what should be done.
I'm not the one claiming that so many guns are sold at gunshows without background checks by private citizens.
You are.
You should have the data to back up your claim for without any supporting data that either shows that you are:
1 - merely repeating what others have said without verifing it for yourself,
2 - trying to blow smoke up everyone's ass,
3 - making things up,
4 - lying,
5 - and / or just being a typical left wing gun grabber who dances around with the blood of dead children on your hands, happy that you finally have something to use to advance your Un-Constituitonal agenda.
Personally, I think it is a combination of all 5, not because I know you, but because I have known people just like you since the mid-80 to late 80's when I first started discussing politics on-line.
Of course, if you post back that you are not a comibination of all 5, but are just one of them, I will give you the benefit of the doubt as I have not caught you in a lie about yourself yet. Spreading false information, yes, You have been doing a lot of that... But if you honestly believe it, than all I can say is that you are wrong and present you with the evidence to support my position, but I won't say you are a liar.
And, here is a point that I'd like to know the answer to:
Why are private sellers exempt from the same sort of rules that licensed gun sellers must follow in the first place?
The only reason I can see for this loophole to exist is to put guns in the hands of people that shouldn't have guns.
You don't know, so what's the difference. Gun shows aren't all the same. The real point is people who oppose universal or gun show background checks aren't interested in solving the problems of our open gun market.
The potential exists to resell a weapon at a gun show to someone who can't pass a background check and just because it's illegal doesn't mean there is a way of catching someone doing it or that a gun show doesn't promote doing it.
Sensible gun control laws would require registration of all firearms from the time of manufacturing and sales involving transfer of registration, which would always require a background check. Let me explain it in simple terms! Every gun from the time of manufacture is registered with an ID. The registration can be transferred to an organization or individual, but the organization has to be something like the military or law enforcement. Every gun is registered and checked each year to determine the same person owns it. The rifled firearms are periodically ballistics tested with the bullets being sent to FBI for scanning and the data is put in a data base. The FBI can work out a quick scan process. People would think twice before using a gun in a crime and the reason to possess a gun on the streets of our cities would fade away.
It's the nature of criminals to draw heat, so possessing an illegal firearm should be dealt with severely, when they've drawn heat. Let's say the cops find a firearm in the residence of someone suspected for a crime. I doubt a criminal wipes down his weapon everytime he touches it, so fingerprints can be lifted connecting a person to the weapon. A weapon could be associated with any type of crime the police would get a search warrant for and listed on the warrant.
I haven't been advocating these piecemeal, feelgood changes in the law, but have advocated a comprehensive approach that reduces gun violence and discourages illegal ownership of guns. Closing the gun show loophole is just a small part of what should be done.
And those 20 first graders and 6 teachers from Connecticut are 'free'...you moron.
"The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government."
Thomas Jefferson to the Republican Citizens of Washington County, Maryland" (March 31, 1809).
Misusing a quote does not prove anything other than your inability to comprehend English.
Misusing? Thomas Jefferson couldn't be any more clear. He made similar statements.
"The equal rights of man, and the happiness of every individual, are now acknowledged to be the only legitimate objects of government. Modern times have the signal advantage, too, of having discovered the only device by which these rights can be secured, to wit: government by the people, acting not in person, but by representatives chosen by themselves, that is to say, by every man of ripe years and sane mind, who contributes either by his purse or person to the support of his country." --Thomas Jefferson to A. Coray, 1823. ME 15:482
"I willingly acquiesce in the institutions of my country, perfect or imperfect, and think it a duty to leave their modifications to those who are to live under them and are to participate of the good or evil they may produce. The present generation has the same right of self-government which the past one has exercised for itself." --Thomas Jefferson to John Hampden Pleasants, 1824. ME 16:29
"What is true of every member of the society, individually, is true of them all collectively; since the rights of the whole can be no more than the sum of the rights of the individuals." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1789. ME 7:455, Papers 15:393
"To unequal privileges among members of the same society the spirit of our nation is, with one accord, adverse." --Thomas Jefferson to Hugh White, 1801. ME 10:258
"The most sacred of the duties of a government [is] to do equal and impartial justice to all its citizens." --Thomas Jefferson: Note in Destutt de Tracy, "Political Economy," 1816. ME 14:465
Misusing a quote does not prove anything other than your inability to comprehend English.
Misusing? Thomas Jefferson couldn't be any more clear. He made similar statements.
"The equal rights of man, and the happiness of every individual, are now acknowledged to be the only legitimate objects of government. Modern times have the signal advantage, too, of having discovered the only device by which these rights can be secured, to wit: government by the people, acting not in person, but by representatives chosen by themselves, that is to say, by every man of ripe years and sane mind, who contributes either by his purse or person to the support of his country." --Thomas Jefferson to A. Coray, 1823. ME 15:482
"I willingly acquiesce in the institutions of my country, perfect or imperfect, and think it a duty to leave their modifications to those who are to live under them and are to participate of the good or evil they may produce. The present generation has the same right of self-government which the past one has exercised for itself." --Thomas Jefferson to John Hampden Pleasants, 1824. ME 16:29
"What is true of every member of the society, individually, is true of them all collectively; since the rights of the whole can be no more than the sum of the rights of the individuals." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1789. ME 7:455, Papers 15:393
"To unequal privileges among members of the same society the spirit of our nation is, with one accord, adverse." --Thomas Jefferson to Hugh White, 1801. ME 10:258
"The most sacred of the duties of a government [is] to do equal and impartial justice to all its citizens." --Thomas Jefferson: Note in Destutt de Tracy, "Political Economy," 1816. ME 14:465
Jefferson tree of liberty is my favorite of Jefferson's quote, why don't you use it
Misusing? Thomas Jefferson couldn't be any more clear. He made similar statements.
"The equal rights of man, and the happiness of every individual, are now acknowledged to be the only legitimate objects of government. Modern times have the signal advantage, too, of having discovered the only device by which these rights can be secured, to wit: government by the people, acting not in person, but by representatives chosen by themselves, that is to say, by every man of ripe years and sane mind, who contributes either by his purse or person to the support of his country." --Thomas Jefferson to A. Coray, 1823. ME 15:482
"I willingly acquiesce in the institutions of my country, perfect or imperfect, and think it a duty to leave their modifications to those who are to live under them and are to participate of the good or evil they may produce. The present generation has the same right of self-government which the past one has exercised for itself." --Thomas Jefferson to John Hampden Pleasants, 1824. ME 16:29
"What is true of every member of the society, individually, is true of them all collectively; since the rights of the whole can be no more than the sum of the rights of the individuals." --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1789. ME 7:455, Papers 15:393
"To unequal privileges among members of the same society the spirit of our nation is, with one accord, adverse." --Thomas Jefferson to Hugh White, 1801. ME 10:258
"The most sacred of the duties of a government [is] to do equal and impartial justice to all its citizens." --Thomas Jefferson: Note in Destutt de Tracy, "Political Economy," 1816. ME 14:465
Jefferson tree of liberty is my favorite of Jefferson's quote, why don't you use it
I think it is because he wants to pretend Jefferson never advocated open rebellion against the US government if it got to uppity.
I'm not the one claiming that so many guns are sold at gunshows without background checks by private citizens.
You are.
You should have the data to back up your claim for without any supporting data that either shows that you are:
1 - merely repeating what others have said without verifing it for yourself,
2 - trying to blow smoke up everyone's ass,
3 - making things up,
4 - lying,
5 - and / or just being a typical left wing gun grabber who dances around with the blood of dead children on your hands, happy that you finally have something to use to advance your Un-Constituitonal agenda.
Personally, I think it is a combination of all 5, not because I know you, but because I have known people just like you since the mid-80 to late 80's when I first started discussing politics on-line.
Of course, if you post back that you are not a comibination of all 5, but are just one of them, I will give you the benefit of the doubt as I have not caught you in a lie about yourself yet. Spreading false information, yes, You have been doing a lot of that... But if you honestly believe it, than all I can say is that you are wrong and present you with the evidence to support my position, but I won't say you are a liar.
Here's a study from UC Davis:
http://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/vprp/pdf/IGS/IGScoverprefweb.pdf
I imagine there'd be more studies out there if Congress hadn't forbidden the federal government from conducting such studies in order to help out the Gun Industry lobbyists.
And, here is a point that I'd like to know the answer to:
Why are private sellers exempt from the same sort of rules that licensed gun sellers must follow in the first place?
The only reason I can see for this loophole to exist is to put guns in the hands of people that shouldn't have guns.
That study says that gun shows account for less than 10% of all gun sales. It then estimates that 66% of sales at gun shows are made by licensed dealers.
That would mean that 3.4% of guns sold in this country do not go through background checks. That is slightly less than the 40% figure you are attempting to defend.
It then goes on to reference the same 20 year old numbers from the ATF that you insist prove your point.
Private sellers still need to ask for an ID and if they are not sure if the person can legally buy a gun they still aren't supposed to sale them one.
However most private sales are conducted between friends and you already know the back ground of your friend.
