Do You Support The "Gun Show Loophole?"

[Vast LWC]

This is a lie.
LaP and the NRA supports the NICS today, just as it did in 1993 when it was written into the Brady Act.
The NRA is the reason the NICS exists.

Yeah... Not so much.

Here's a video of him admitting it before Congress.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-oqfPojhec]Wayne LaPierre Speaks in Favor of Universal Background Checks - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Tech_Esq]

This is a lie.
LaP and the NRA supports the NICS today, just as it did in 1993 when it was written into the Brady Act.
The NRA is the reason the NICS exists.

Yeah... Not so much.

Here's a video of him admitting it before Congress.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M-oqfPojhec]Wayne LaPierre Speaks in Favor of Universal Background Checks - YouTube[/ame]

Virginia considered closing the loophole and instead decided to retain private alienation of property without government interference. We'll still let Wayne live here though.

 

[M14 Shooter]

This is a lie.
LaP and the NRA supports the NICS today, just as it did in 1993 when it was written into the Brady Act.
The NRA is the reason the NICS exists.

Yeah... Not so much.

Reality says otherwise.

Private Sales Restrictions and Gun Registration
The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), which became operational in 1998, verifies that a person seeking to buy a firearm from a gun dealer is not prohibited from doing so by federal or state law. The National Rifle Association supported its establishment. Gun control supporters opposed NICS, preferring to require a gun purchaser to wait several days after stating the desire to buy a gun, before receiving it from a firearm dealer.

NRA-ILA | Private Sales Restrictions and Gun Registration

Senate Passes NICS Improvement Act, House Concurs
(Note: On Jan. 8, 2008, President Bush signed H.R. 2640 into law.)
After months of careful negotiation, pro-gun legislation was passed through Congress on Wednesday, December 19, 2007. The National Rifle Association (NRA) worked closely with Senator Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) to address his concerns regarding H.R. 2640, the National Instant Check System (NICS) Improvement Act. These changes make a good bill even better. The end product is a win for American gun owners.

NRA-ILA | HR 2640

The National Rifle Association has always supported including the records of individuals adjudicated mentally defective into the National Instant Background Check System. We believe that the NICS should serve the intent of Congress, which is to prohibit the sale of firearms to criminals and other prohibited persons, such as adjudicated mental defectives. However, we must not forget that the NICS also serves the purpose of clearing firearm purchases by law-abiding Americans. Too often, the system has been abused and has not delivered on the promise of a fair and instant check.
In order for NICS to be effective and efficient, it should not be bogged down with unnecessary information or duplicative records. It should not be used to charge transaction fees on background checks; as a permanent repository of gun purchase information; or to unnecessarily delay the ability of law-abiding Americans to purchase firearms.
The NRA has achieved many improvements to the NICS over the years, including the destruction of approved transaction records within 24 hours, and prohibiting the FBI on an annual basis from charging a “user fee” on background checks.
We continue to support legislative efforts that:
•Improve the accuracy of NICS records
•Reduce delayed approvals for firearm purchasers
•Require federal and state governments to remove or update inaccurate records when discovered
•Provide the NICS with information on events such as criminal expungements and removal of restraining orders, thus lifting a person’s prohibition on possessing firearms
•Permanently prohibit the FBI from charging a “user fee” on NICS background checks
•Ensure that mentally defective adjudications are limited to adjudications following adversarial hearings only, not a solely administrative finding or short-term diagnosis from a doctor, as often occurs in cases of depression or post-traumatic stress disorder. Remove mental disability records from the NICS if a judge determines that the person is no longer a danger to himself or others, or no longer requires involuntary treatment
•Provide necessary funding for the NICS so that it can operate as accurately and quickly as possible, without unnecessary delays; and provide necessary funding for states to transmit records on prohibited classes of persons, so that the NICS is effective and efficient
We do not support proposals that allow for unnecessary or overly broad information to be included in the NICS; unfairly target individuals who have not been adjudicated mentally defective; seek to retain approved NICS transaction records for more than 24 hours; or anything else that would expand NICS beyond its original purpose.
The NRA will continue to work for the quickest and most accurate NICS possible on behalf of our members and law-abiding gun owners across the country.

The National Rifle Association has always supported including the records of individuals adjudicated mentally defective into the National Instant Background Check System. We believe that the NICS should serve the intent of Congress, which is to prohibit the sale of firearms to criminals and other prohibited persons, such as adjudicated mental defectives. However, we must not forget that the NICS also serves the purpose of clearing firearm purchases by law-abiding Americans. Too often, the system has been abused and has not delivered on the promise of a fair and instant check.

In order for NICS to be effective and efficient, it should not be bogged down with unnecessary information or duplicative records. It should not be used to charge transaction fees on background checks; as a permanent repository of gun purchase information; or to unnecessarily delay the ability of law-abiding Americans to purchase firearms.

The NRA has achieved many improvements to the NICS over the years, including the destruction of approved transaction records within 24 hours, and prohibiting the FBI on an annual basis from charging a “user fee” on background checks.

We continue to support legislative efforts that:
•Improve the accuracy of NICS records
•Reduce delayed approvals for firearm purchasers
•Require federal and state governments to remove or update inaccurate records when discovered
•Provide the NICS with information on events such as criminal expungements and removal of restraining orders, thus lifting a person’s prohibition on possessing firearms
•Permanently prohibit the FBI from charging a “user fee” on NICS background checks
•Ensure that mentally defective adjudications are limited to adjudications following adversarial hearings only, not a solely administrative finding or short-term diagnosis from a doctor, as often occurs in cases of depression or post-traumatic stress disorder. Remove mental disability records from the NICS if a judge determines that the person is no longer a danger to himself or others, or no longer requires involuntary treatment
•Provide necessary funding for the NICS so that it can operate as accurately and quickly as possible, without unnecessary delays; and provide necessary funding for states to transmit records on prohibited classes of persons, so that the NICS is effective and efficient

We do not support proposals that allow for unnecessary or overly broad information to be included in the NICS; unfairly target individuals who have not been adjudicated mentally defective; seek to retain approved NICS transaction records for more than 24 hours; or anything else that would expand NICS beyond its original purpose.

The NRA will continue to work for the quickest and most accurate NICS possible on behalf of our members and law-abiding gun owners across the country

.
NRA-ILA | NICS Legislative Efforts

After the Brady Act was originally proposed in 1987, the National Rifle Association (NRA) mobilized to defeat the legislation, spending millions of dollars in the process. While the bill eventually did pass in both chambers of the United States Congress, the NRA was able to win an important concession: the final version of the legislation provided that, in 1998, the five-day waiting period for handgun sales would be replaced by an instant computerized background check that involved no waiting periods.

Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Vast LWC]

This is a lie.
LaP and the NRA supports the NICS today, just as it did in 1993 when it was written into the Brady Act.
The NRA is the reason the NICS exists.

Yeah... Not so much.

Reality says otherwise.

(Large amount of data)

What part of what you just wrote contradicts the statement you called a "lie", which was:

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

Now? He's firmly against them.

?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Yeah... Not so much.

Reality says otherwise.
(Large amount of data)

What part of what you just wrote contradicts the statement you called a "lie", which was:

Interestingly enough, LaPierre was FOR background checks back in the 90's.
Now? He's firmly against them.

?

He, and the NRA, are for background checks now as they were in the 90s.
You state that they "now" oppose background checks. This is the lie; the position of the NRA has not changed.

 

[Vast LWC]

He, and the NRA, are for background checks now as they were in the 90s.
You state that they "now" oppose background checks. This is the lie; the position of the NRA has not changed.

The NRA supports closing the Gun Show Loophole?

Then why are we having this conversation?

Also, you'll notice that in my above video, Wayne LaPierre calls the background check thing a "Loophole".

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It’s not a ‘loophole’ because there is no way for a background check to be conducted in the context of a private, intrastate sale between residents of the same state, regardless the venue, hence the wording of the law.

A loophole exists either unintentionally, due to the poor drafting of a law, or intentionally, were a remedy is at hand but rejected, creating the loophole to benefit a special interest.

Since there was no way for the authors of the legislation to contrive the mechanics necessary for background checks for private sales, there was no remedy available, and consequently no ‘loophole.’

Again, and at the very least, it’s inappropriate to attempt to vilify gun shows and their attendees as some sort of nefarious conspiracy intended to allow criminals access to firearms.

Provide the 'wording' of the law?

Explain how states like California are able to require and execute background checks on all gun show sales including 'private' sellers?

I respect you, but you are wrong on this topic.

California has a higher than average rate of gun crime despite the allegedly universal background checks the have.

I think that makes you wrong.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

He, and the NRA, are for background checks now as they were in the 90s.
You state that they "now" oppose background checks. This is the lie; the position of the NRA has not changed.

The NRA supports closing the Gun Show Loophole?

Then why are we having this conversation?

Also, you'll notice that in my above video, Wayne LaPierre calls the background check thing a "Loophole".

Because you insist that everyone conform to your version of reality even though it has been repeatedly pointed out that there is no gun show loophole?

 

[Lakhota]

NRA logic...

 

[Vast LWC]

He, and the NRA, are for background checks now as they were in the 90s.
You state that they "now" oppose background checks. This is the lie; the position of the NRA has not changed.

The NRA supports closing the Gun Show Loophole?

Then why are we having this conversation?

Also, you'll notice that in my above video, Wayne LaPierre calls the background check thing a "Loophole".

Because you insist that everyone conform to your version of reality even though it has been repeatedly pointed out that there is no gun show loophole?

What part of Wayne LaPierre calling it a gun show loophole did you not get?

Or do you feel that good ol' Wayne shares my liberal version of reality?

 

[M14 Shooter]

He, and the NRA, are for background checks now as they were in the 90s.
You state that they "now" oppose background checks. This is the lie; the position of the NRA has not changed.

The NRA supports closing the Gun Show Loophole?

You are being intentionally dishonest.
Please contrast the NRA position regarding background checks in 1998 and its position today - show how they differ, especially in terms of universal background checks.
That is, show how their position "now" is different than back then.

 

[OODA_Loop]

NRA logic...

You agree to speed controls as a drivers licensee.

Liberal logic.

 

[M14 Shooter]

NRA logic...

You agree to speed controls as a drivers licensee.
Liberal logic.

Never nind that driving a car on public streets puts eveyone on or near that street in a condition of clear, present and imminent danger, whereas simple ownership/posession of any sort of firearm does not.

Its amazing how stupid these people make themselves out to be, when they try to be clever.

 

[Vast LWC]

He, and the NRA, are for background checks now as they were in the 90s.
You state that they "now" oppose background checks. This is the lie; the position of the NRA has not changed.

The NRA supports closing the Gun Show Loophole?

You are being intentionally dishonest.
Please contrast the NRA position regarding background checks in 1998 and its position today - show how they differ, especially in terms of universal background checks.
That is, show how their position "now" is different than back then.

Do they support closing it now, or not?

You all keep changing your position.

If they do support it, then there's no argument here.

Unless you guys are even more extreme than the NRA on this issue...

 

[M14 Shooter]

The NRA supports closing the Gun Show Loophole?

You are being intentionally dishonest.
Please contrast the NRA position regarding background checks in 1998 and its position today - show how they differ, especially in terms of universal background checks.
That is, show how their position "now" is different than back then.

Do they support closing it now, or not?

The NRA has NEVER supported UBC, and so say that they do not support it "now", implying that they once did and changed their position, is a lie.

No two ways around it - you are lying.

 

[Vast LWC]

The NRA has NEVER supported UBC, and so say that they do not support it "now", implying that they once did and changed their position, is a lie.

No two ways around it - you are lying.

I didn't make a statement, I asked a question.

How could I be lying?

Apparently you believe Wayne LaPierre is lying in the video clip I posted.

Did you even bother to watch it? It's not very long.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The NRA has NEVER supported UBC, and so say that they do not support it "now", implying that they once did and changed their position, is a lie.
No two ways around it - you are lying.

I didn't make a statement, I asked a question. How could I be lying

You said:

LaPierre was FOR background checks back in the 90's. Now? He's firmly against them.

The NRA has NEVER supported UBC, and so say that they do not support it "now", implying that they once did and changed their position, is a lie.

 

[Vast LWC]

You said:

LaPierre was FOR background checks back in the 90's. Now? He's firmly against them.

I did not. That was an entirely different poster.

The NRA has NEVER supported UBC, and so say that they do not support it "now", implying that they once did and changed their position, is a lie.

So, again, was Wayne LaPierre lying in the video I posted, or was he not speaking for the NRA?

 

[Lakhota]

Universal background checks may not be gun-control utopia - but they would be a good speed-bump.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The gun show ‘loophole’ is an example of the complex question fallacy:

Two otherwise unrelated points are conjoined and treated as a single proposition. The reader is expected to accept or reject both together, when in reality one is acceptable while the other is not. A complex question is an illegitimate use of the "and" operator.

The Logical Fallacies: Complex Question

In this case the fallacy is conjoining gun shows and background checks, where Federal law not requiring background checks for private sales has nothing to do with gun shows.

Consequently there is no gun show 'loophole.'