Do You Support The "Gun Show Loophole?"

[C_Clayton_Jones]

There is no ‘gun show loophole’ in the context of some lawless venue where criminals can acquire firearms without fear of punitive regulatory policies.

State and Federal laws apply to gun shows as anywhere else, including background checks for a criminal record.

 

[The Rabbi]

Somebody gets it.

 

[Vast LWC]

There is no ‘gun show loophole’ in the context of some lawless venue where criminals can acquire firearms without fear of punitive regulatory policies.

State and Federal laws apply to gun shows as anywhere else, including background checks for a criminal record.

Said state and federal laws only apply to licensed dealers who sell guns for a living, as per the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986.

Therefore, while the laws do in fact apply, they are specifically written to allow private sellers to sell without background checks. Thus the loophole.

Repeatedly stating that something doesn't exist, doesn't make it so, no matter how many times it's repeated.

 

[The Rabbi]

There is no ‘gun show loophole’ in the context of some lawless venue where criminals can acquire firearms without fear of punitive regulatory policies.

State and Federal laws apply to gun shows as anywhere else, including background checks for a criminal record.

Said state and federal laws only apply to licensed dealers who sell guns for a living, as per the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986.

Therefore, while the laws do in fact apply, they are specifically written to allow private sellers to sell without background checks. Thus the loophole.

Repeatedly stating that something doesn't exist, doesn't make it so, no matter how many times it's repeated.

I think you might be retarded or delusional. Numerous posters have shown you there is no gunshow loophole. A nd yet you insist it's real. Like an imaginery friend.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The problem with that argument is two fold.

First, nowhere in that link do I see the words "Gun show loophole."

Second, the legislation currently pending to close the "gun show loophole" specifically states it does not apply to private transactions.

First, that is a ridiculous statement, as a Loophole is:

An ambiguity or inadequacy in the law or a set of rules.

Second, that is due to the fact that the legislators are not in fact closing the Gun Show loophole in said pending legislation. Congress is attempting to pull the wool over the eyes of the populace once again.

Keep telling yourself I am ridiculous while you insist that something that is neither ambiguous nor inadequate is a loophole.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Ok, you prove there is no loophole.
Is the fact that anyone can sell his private possessions without gov't interference ambiguous? No, it is quite clear. Anyone can do that. Is it inadequate? The question is, inadequate for what? Obviously not inadequate to prevent crime. Perhaps inadequate to facilitate further gov't control over our lives? Yes, perhaps.
So there is no loophole. It is the plain law. Any more than it is a loophole that allows people to hold yard sales. Maybe we need to close the "yardsale loophole"?

It is inadequate because it allows private sellers to sell weapons to criminals and the insane without fear of recrimination.

Since it is illegal to knowingly sell weapons to these groups, then that is quite definitely an inadequacy, and thus a loophole.

And if someone were to sell a deadly weapon to an insane murderer at a yard sale, then that would indeed be dangerous behavior.

It does not allow people to do that because the law we are talking about is aimed at holders of a federal firearms license, not people who just want to get rid of grandfather's WWII memento.

By the way, other laws exist which specifically address a person selling a weapon to someone they know is a criminal. I doubt they cover insanity, but most insane people are actually harmless, so I see no real reason to force private sellers to give people MMPIs.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The problem with that argument is two fold.

First, nowhere in that link do I see the words "Gun show loophole."

Second, the legislation currently pending to close the "gun show loophole" specifically states it does not apply to private transactions.

First, that is a ridiculous statement, as a Loophole is:

An ambiguity or inadequacy in the law or a set of rules.

Second, that is due to the fact that the legislators are not in fact closing the Gun Show loophole in said pending legislation. Congress is attempting to pull the wool over the eyes of the populace once again.

I think a universal background check (UBC) bill would pass and it would do away with the gun show loophole. It would require background checks on all purchases of firearms, even private sales. Without firearm registration though, the law would be nearly impossible to enforce, but it would prevent the open sale of firearms without background checks, like in gun shows and flea markets to a lesser extent, because they are less watched by law enforcement.

If a gun was involved in a crime and it could be proven the gun was purchased and resold without a background check after the law went into effect, that would result in a person being charged for a crime. That makes it risky to avoid selling a newly purchased gun, but if someone sold older firearms, how could it be proven when they were sold. That's why registration is needed as well, amongst the many other reasons why registration is needed.

You also think that most Americans support Obama's attempt to ban normal magazines.

 

[Bfgrn]

There is no ‘gun show loophole’ in the context of some lawless venue where criminals can acquire firearms without fear of punitive regulatory policies.

State and Federal laws apply to gun shows as anywhere else, including background checks for a criminal record.

There is a loophole. Criminals can and have acquired firearms at gun shows from 'so called' private sellers, who are not required to run a background check unless the seller believes the buyer is questionable. The loophole was written into the Brady Bill. Chuck Schumer explained that it was a concession to the gun lobby to pas the bill.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

There is no ‘gun show loophole’ in the context of some lawless venue where criminals can acquire firearms without fear of punitive regulatory policies.

State and Federal laws apply to gun shows as anywhere else, including background checks for a criminal record.

Said state and federal laws only apply to licensed dealers who sell guns for a living, as per the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986.

Therefore, while the laws do in fact apply, they are specifically written to allow private sellers to sell without background checks. Thus the loophole.

Repeatedly stating that something doesn't exist, doesn't make it so, no matter how many times it's repeated.

Do you want to hold a person who sells a car responsible if the person that buys it kills someone?

How about if I sell my knife and the person that buys it uses it to kill someone, should I have made sure that they were not going to kill someone first? Should I be held liable?

It is not a loophole because no law anywhere makes a private individual responsible for the actions of a person he has no control over. Calling it a loophole just makes you look incredibly stupid, something you usually manage to avoid.

 

[Vast LWC]

LOL. You people are just silly.

Seriously.

Rabbi seems to think that the fact that numerous posters repeated the mantra about the loophole not existing, and I'm not even sure what tangent Quantum is going on now.

Quantum, if something is inadequate in the existing law in my view, then I have every right to call it a loophole.

You can call it something else, like I said earlier, that's fine and dandy.

That does not however mean that the situation I am referring to doesn't exist. It does.

So, go ahead, call it the "Gun provider's freedom, rights, liberty, constitutional provision to save American jobs".

Feel free.

Your Orwellian double-speak still doesn't change the fact that the situation exists, as described, and can accurately be described, by someone who feels the law is inadequate, as a "Loophole".

 

[Quantum Windbag]

There is no ‘gun show loophole’ in the context of some lawless venue where criminals can acquire firearms without fear of punitive regulatory policies.

State and Federal laws apply to gun shows as anywhere else, including background checks for a criminal record.

There is a loophole. Criminals can and have acquired firearms at gun shows from 'so called' private sellers, who are not required to run a background check unless the seller believes the buyer is questionable. The loophole was written into the Brady Bill. Chuck Schumer explained that it was a concession to the gun lobby to pas the bill.

Criminals have also acquired guns by buying them from licensed dealers that conduct background checks, what's your point?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

LOL. You people are just silly.

Seriously.

Rabbi seems to think that the fact that numerous posters repeated the mantra about the loophole not existing, and I'm not even sure what tangent Quantum is going on now.

Quantum, if something is inadequate in the existing law in my view, then I have every right to call it a loophole.

You can call it something else, like I said earlier, that's fine and dandy.

That does not however mean that the situation I am referring to doesn't exist. It does.

So, go ahead, call it the "Gun provider's freedom, rights, liberty, constitutional provision to save American jobs".

Feel free.

Your Orwellian double-speak still doesn't change the fact that the situation exists, as described, and can accurately be described, by someone who feels the law is inadequate, as a "Loophole".

I don't recall saying you can't call it whatever you want, I am just pointing out that calling it a loophole makes you look just as stupid as those people that call a dog a cat.

 

[Vast LWC]

It does not allow people to do that because the law we are talking about is aimed at holders of a federal firearms license, not people who just want to get rid of grandfather's WWII memento.

And that's the entire point. Private sellers should have been included in the law. That's why it's a loophole.

By the way, other laws exist which specifically address a person selling a weapon to someone they know is a criminal. I doubt they cover insanity, but most insane people are actually harmless, so I see no real reason to force private sellers to give people MMPIs.

They do cover insanity, but only if they know the person is either, and without a background check, in most cases, a seller wouldn't be able to determine that, now would they?

And, you see no reason? What if you sold a gun to a guy who lived down the street, who turned out to be a murderer, and they killed your whole family? Would that be a reason?

 

[Bfgrn]

There is no ‘gun show loophole’ in the context of some lawless venue where criminals can acquire firearms without fear of punitive regulatory policies.

State and Federal laws apply to gun shows as anywhere else, including background checks for a criminal record.

There is a loophole. Criminals can and have acquired firearms at gun shows from 'so called' private sellers, who are not required to run a background check unless the seller believes the buyer is questionable. The loophole was written into the Brady Bill. Chuck Schumer explained that it was a concession to the gun lobby to pas the bill.

Criminals have also acquired guns by buying them from licensed dealers that conduct background checks, what's your point?

Then they are either not criminal enough to be disqualified, or they lied on the application, thus committing a crime.

We are on page 77 of this thread. The gun show loophole is so simple to understand, a small child could comprehend what it is and how it is abused. Yet you bunch of right wing pea brains either can't digest it, or are so dogmatic and parrots of the gun lobby that you are willing to aid and abet murderers to protect your doctrinaire. You are UN-American scum.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It does not allow people to do that because the law we are talking about is aimed at holders of a federal firearms license, not people who just want to get rid of grandfather's WWII memento.

And that's the entire point. Private sellers should have been included in the law. That's why it's a loophole.

By the way, other laws exist which specifically address a person selling a weapon to someone they know is a criminal. I doubt they cover insanity, but most insane people are actually harmless, so I see no real reason to force private sellers to give people MMPIs.

They do cover insanity, but only if they know the person is either, and without a background check, in most cases, a seller wouldn't be able to determine that, now would they?

And, you see no reason? What if you sold a gun to a guy who lived down the street, who turned out to be a murderer, and they killed your whole family? Would that be a reason?

Let me get this straight.

If there is a law that prevents criminals from buying guns, but it does not prevent non criminals from buying guns, it is a loophole.

By the way, thanks for admitting that laws already prohibit private sellers from doing exactly what you claim they can do.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

There is a loophole. Criminals can and have acquired firearms at gun shows from 'so called' private sellers, who are not required to run a background check unless the seller believes the buyer is questionable. The loophole was written into the Brady Bill. Chuck Schumer explained that it was a concession to the gun lobby to pas the bill.

Criminals have also acquired guns by buying them from licensed dealers that conduct background checks, what's your point?

Then they are either not criminal enough to be disqualified, or they lied on the application, thus committing a crime.

We are on page 77 of this thread. The gun show loophole is so simple to understand, a small child could comprehend what it is and how it is abused. Yet you bunch of right wing pea brains either can't digest it, or are so dogmatic and parrots of the gun lobby that you are willing to aid and abet murderers to protect your doctrinaire. You are UN-American scum.

You are right about one thing, the gun show loophole is easy to understand.

There Is No Gun Show Loophole.

 

[Bfgrn]

Criminals have also acquired guns by buying them from licensed dealers that conduct background checks, what's your point?

Then they are either not criminal enough to be disqualified, or they lied on the application, thus committing a crime.

We are on page 77 of this thread. The gun show loophole is so simple to understand, a small child could comprehend what it is and how it is abused. Yet you bunch of right wing pea brains either can't digest it, or are so dogmatic and parrots of the gun lobby that you are willing to aid and abet murderers to protect your doctrinaire. You are UN-American scum.

You are right about one thing, the gun show loophole is easy to understand.

There Is No Gun Show Loophole.

Thank you for proving my point. So now all we need to determine is if you are obtuse or a lying sack of shit. I vote for BOTH.

If a felon can walk into a gun show, choose a private seller and buy weapons without being required to submit to a background check...WHAT WOULD YOU CALL IT???

 

[ABikerSailor]

Interestingly enough, LaPierre was FOR background checks back in the 90's.

Now? He's firmly against them.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Then they are either not criminal enough to be disqualified, or they lied on the application, thus committing a crime.

We are on page 77 of this thread. The gun show loophole is so simple to understand, a small child could comprehend what it is and how it is abused. Yet you bunch of right wing pea brains either can't digest it, or are so dogmatic and parrots of the gun lobby that you are willing to aid and abet murderers to protect your doctrinaire. You are UN-American scum.

You are right about one thing, the gun show loophole is easy to understand.

There Is No Gun Show Loophole.

Thank you for proving my point. So now all we need to determine is if you are obtuse or a lying sack of shit. I vote for BOTH.

If a felon can walk into a gun show, choose a private seller and buy weapons without being required to submit to a background check...WHAT WOULD YOU CALL IT???

I would call that an invitation to get arrested. Go to a gun show and see how many cops are there in plain sight, then tell me that there aren't undercover cops all over the place. I bet they even set up stings to try to trap criminals into buying from them.

The last place any crook will ever buy a gun is at a gun show.

 

[Vast LWC]

You also think that most Americans support Obama's attempt to ban normal magazines.

That I do not support. Nor assault weapon bans.

Both things are just not going to help the situation much.