Do You Support The "Gun Show Loophole?"

[Quantum Windbag]

"How strict would gun laws have to be to prevent massacres?"

Strict enough to prevent a criminal from buying guns in the safety, comfort and sanction of a gun show without having a background check run on him. There IS a loophole in the gun show law that allows a big gun dealer to pose as little uncle Joe selling a gun or two, and circumvent doing a background check.

FACT: Gun sellers who claim to be “occasional sellers” are not required by current federal law to conduct background checks on their customers. Furthermore, there is no clear definition of how many guns a person can sell as an “occasional seller” – it could be dozens, or even hundreds.

The Firearm Owners' Protection Act (FOPA) states: 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(21)(D), (22). Those not “engaged in the business” of dealing guns are exempt from the licensure requirement.

So, closing the gun show loophole would not punish any law abiding gun owner.

And, as citizens, we can't stop a criminal from buying an illegal firearm from the trunk of another criminal in some dark alley.

But, that's where the criminal should be forced to buy a gun. In a totally illegal setting, with all the inherent dangers that come with it. BUT, our current laws sanction criminals being able to walk into a gun show, receive expert advice, discounts, then buy whatever weapon(s) they desire without a background check or having to pay black market prices or risk the dangers of buying a weapon from another criminal in a dark alley.

Here is some info on the loophole...

What is the gun show loophole?

Federal law allows people who sell guns to avoid running background checks or keeping records by calling themselves occasional sellers, and these sellers often congregate at gun shows. The loophole provides criminals with easy access to firearms without having to worry about any background checks.

• Current law requires licensed gun dealers to conduct background checks, because that is the only way to determine whether a person is eligible to buy a gun. Licensed dealers must also keep records about the buyer so ATF can trace the gun if it is recovered at a crime scene.
  

• The law does not, however, require so-called occasional sellers to do these checks – and there’s no clear definition of what qualifies as an occasional seller.[ii]

• Many sellers at gun shows abuse that loophole by calling themselves occasional sellers. Because they concentrate at gun shows, it is easy for felons and other prohibited possessors to find someone who will sell to them without a background check.

...........*ATF concluded that “gun shows and flea markets are a major venue for illegal trafficking.”[iii]

• Gun shows linked to the Pentagon Shooting: In March 2010, John Bedell – who was prohibited by law from possessing guns – shot two Pentagon police officers with a gun purchased from a private seller at a Las Vegas gun show.

• Gun shows were tied to a broad range of violations, including straw purchases and the sale of kits to convert legal guns into illegal machine guns.

Solution: Require occasional sellers to run instant background checks.

Quick question, would any of this have stopped Dorner?

Didn't think so.

 

[Bfgrn]

You want to make all sales subject to government check then, not just the ones at gun shows, because the only loophole I see is not requiring checks on private sales.

"It is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners"
Albert Camus

Every gun sale should require a background check IMO. But what the gun show loophole allows is dealers who POSE as 'private' sellers to set up a booth at gun shows and sell weapons without a background check. If the 'private' seller suspects the buyer is a criminal, he is supposed to terminate the sale. Undercover buyers/investigators with hidden cameras went to seven gun shows across Ohio, Tennessee and Nevada, and found out just how easy it is for criminals and the mentally ill to walk in and buy guns -- no questions asked.

Investigators told the private sellers that they "probably couldn't pass a background check" -- and at that point, the seller should have sent them away. Because even private sellers are prohibited by federal law from selling to those who they have reason to suspect could not pass a background check.

Instead, 19 out of 30 private sellers made the sale.

The executioner always works for the government.

Just saying.

Care to explain how you want to use a quote from Camus to argue for more government power?

Care to prove to me that those undercover buyers who actually filmed transactions at gun shows did not set this up in advance by putting fake dealers in the shows? That would explain the fact that no criminal prosecutions ever came about as a result of these stings, unlike the MSNBC stings where they set up people trying to sleep with underage girls, wouldn't it?

Simple fact, the ATF monitors gun shows to prevent exactly the thing you are insisting is happening. They live for catching people selling to criminals, and would love to prove it is actually happening at gun shows so they could shut them down. How many cases have they filed over the years?

Stop trying to scare me with stupid stories just because you choose to go along with the executioner instead of thinking.

Ignorance is bliss. Yea, of course, everyone is a crook, except the gun sellers. They are saints.

BTW, an executioner does not have to work for the government.

 

[Dubya]

This issue isn't even universal background checks, because it only involves gun shows. You may notice like I did that the opinions are a complete yes or no pertaining to whether a background check should be required for all sales at gun shows.

I'm going to examine the people who said no. I noticed many pointed out that the issue was a non-issue, so it makes someone wonder why no to a non-issue is of so much importance to the person opposing a background check at a gun show.

My question to all the nayers is what is to prevent me paying my $150 for a booth at a gun show and making money by not giving background checks? If I can pass a background check, why can't I purchase a gun at the gun show and resell it to someone without a background check? For that matter, what is to prevent a licensed dealer setting up someone who isn't a licensed dealer to sell firearms without a background check at a premium price?

Because that is not legal.

If you don't think these private sales are an important issue, why do you oppose a background check?

Because it's a ridiculous idea, not to mention an unenforceable law.

Couldn't they just set up an area at a gun show to do background checks and require it being done before a private sale can be accomplished? Let me spell it out to you! Somebody wants to buy a gun for a price from a private person, but before it can be sold, they have to go to an area, pay a fee and get a background check done. It's possible a licensed dealer at the gun show may want to do it for the fees to give him a steady cash stream independent of sales. The person is handed paperwork that they passed the background check and uses it to buy the gun. Let's also say a private person takes a gun to a gun show to sell it. They could put the gun on display with someone at the gun show and get them to sell it in a way that includes a background check.

More likely: the dude that wants a gun just looks on Craigslist.

Don't allow firearm purchases without a background check and registration transfer, so a person isn't going to be allowed to sell firearms on Craigslist. The law is enforceable when people are charged with a crime for not having their guns registered. Possession of the gun should require registration and that should start when the gun is assembled.

A gun show can easily find a way to get background checks done on all purchases, but they just don't want to do it, because they want the market to sell to people who can't pass a background check. Since you all claim it isn't important, then stop the gun show loophole! The gun show can set up a way for non-licensed dealers to get background checks and may use a licensed dealer to do it for the gun show.

 

[martybegan]

"How strict would gun laws have to be to prevent massacres?"

Strict enough to prevent a criminal from buying guns in the safety, comfort and sanction of a gun show without having a background check run on him. There IS a loophole in the gun show law that allows a big gun dealer to pose as little uncle Joe selling a gun or two, and circumvent doing a background check.

FACT: Gun sellers who claim to be “occasional sellers” are not required by current federal law to conduct background checks on their customers. Furthermore, there is no clear definition of how many guns a person can sell as an “occasional seller” – it could be dozens, or even hundreds.

The Firearm Owners' Protection Act (FOPA) states: 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(21)(D), (22). Those not “engaged in the business” of dealing guns are exempt from the licensure requirement.

So, closing the gun show loophole would not punish any law abiding gun owner.

And, as citizens, we can't stop a criminal from buying an illegal firearm from the trunk of another criminal in some dark alley.

But, that's where the criminal should be forced to buy a gun. In a totally illegal setting, with all the inherent dangers that come with it. BUT, our current laws sanction criminals being able to walk into a gun show, receive expert advice, discounts, then buy whatever weapon(s) they desire without a background check or having to pay black market prices or risk the dangers of buying a weapon from another criminal in a dark alley.

Here is some info on the loophole...

What is the gun show loophole?

Federal law allows people who sell guns to avoid running background checks or keeping records by calling themselves occasional sellers, and these sellers often congregate at gun shows. The loophole provides criminals with easy access to firearms without having to worry about any background checks.

• Current law requires licensed gun dealers to conduct background checks, because that is the only way to determine whether a person is eligible to buy a gun. Licensed dealers must also keep records about the buyer so ATF can trace the gun if it is recovered at a crime scene.
  

• The law does not, however, require so-called occasional sellers to do these checks – and there’s no clear definition of what qualifies as an occasional seller.[ii]

• Many sellers at gun shows abuse that loophole by calling themselves occasional sellers. Because they concentrate at gun shows, it is easy for felons and other prohibited possessors to find someone who will sell to them without a background check.

...........*ATF concluded that “gun shows and flea markets are a major venue for illegal trafficking.”[iii]

• Gun shows linked to the Pentagon Shooting: In March 2010, John Bedell – who was prohibited by law from possessing guns – shot two Pentagon police officers with a gun purchased from a private seller at a Las Vegas gun show.

• Gun shows were tied to a broad range of violations, including straw purchases and the sale of kits to convert legal guns into illegal machine guns.

Solution: Require occasional sellers to run instant background checks.

You know claiming to be an occasional seller and then not being one is illegal and a violation of the law, right?

Why not let government crack down on this and leave the rest of us alone?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

"It is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners"
Albert Camus

Every gun sale should require a background check IMO. But what the gun show loophole allows is dealers who POSE as 'private' sellers to set up a booth at gun shows and sell weapons without a background check. If the 'private' seller suspects the buyer is a criminal, he is supposed to terminate the sale. Undercover buyers/investigators with hidden cameras went to seven gun shows across Ohio, Tennessee and Nevada, and found out just how easy it is for criminals and the mentally ill to walk in and buy guns -- no questions asked.

Investigators told the private sellers that they "probably couldn't pass a background check" -- and at that point, the seller should have sent them away. Because even private sellers are prohibited by federal law from selling to those who they have reason to suspect could not pass a background check.

Instead, 19 out of 30 private sellers made the sale.

The executioner always works for the government.

Just saying.

Care to explain how you want to use a quote from Camus to argue for more government power?

Care to prove to me that those undercover buyers who actually filmed transactions at gun shows did not set this up in advance by putting fake dealers in the shows? That would explain the fact that no criminal prosecutions ever came about as a result of these stings, unlike the MSNBC stings where they set up people trying to sleep with underage girls, wouldn't it?

Simple fact, the ATF monitors gun shows to prevent exactly the thing you are insisting is happening. They live for catching people selling to criminals, and would love to prove it is actually happening at gun shows so they could shut them down. How many cases have they filed over the years?

Stop trying to scare me with stupid stories just because you choose to go along with the executioner instead of thinking.

Ignorance is bliss. Yea, of course, everyone is a crook, except the gun sellers. They are saints.

BTW, an executioner does not have to work for the government.

If an executioner is not working for the government he is, by definition, a murderer.

Just saying.

I oppose background checks because I assume everyone has the right to own a gun.

You support background checks because you think gobs of crooks are buying guns.

And, somehow, this means I think everyone is a crook.

Gotta love the absolute lack of logic and thinking that went int this post.

Keep up the great work.

 

[Oddball]

How is that a loophole? It's the law isn't it? Private sales doesn't require a background check. It isn't a loophole.

Authoritarian douchebags always call freedom a "loophole".

Freedom for criminals to buy weapons without a background check is what you are fighting for...great cause Jethro...great cause!

Piss up a rope, dickweed.

Background checks didn't stop Columbine, Paducah, Jonesboro, Aurora, Sandy Hook, any given post office shooting or the thousands of gangland murders perpetrated in the inner cities across the country.

Your stupid background check are completely ineffective and prevent nothing.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Attention CharlesMAin.

This is the guy you are surrendering to, he is not interested in compromise.

This issue isn't even universal background checks, because it only involves gun shows. You may notice like I did that the opinions are a complete yes or no pertaining to whether a background check should be required for all sales at gun shows.

I'm going to examine the people who said no. I noticed many pointed out that the issue was a non-issue, so it makes someone wonder why no to a non-issue is of so much importance to the person opposing a background check at a gun show.

My question to all the nayers is what is to prevent me paying my $150 for a booth at a gun show and making money by not giving background checks? If I can pass a background check, why can't I purchase a gun at the gun show and resell it to someone without a background check? For that matter, what is to prevent a licensed dealer setting up someone who isn't a licensed dealer to sell firearms without a background check at a premium price?

Because that is not legal.



Because it's a ridiculous idea, not to mention an unenforceable law.

Couldn't they just set up an area at a gun show to do background checks and require it being done before a private sale can be accomplished? Let me spell it out to you! Somebody wants to buy a gun for a price from a private person, but before it can be sold, they have to go to an area, pay a fee and get a background check done. It's possible a licensed dealer at the gun show may want to do it for the fees to give him a steady cash stream independent of sales. The person is handed paperwork that they passed the background check and uses it to buy the gun. Let's also say a private person takes a gun to a gun show to sell it. They could put the gun on display with someone at the gun show and get them to sell it in a way that includes a background check.

More likely: the dude that wants a gun just looks on Craigslist.

Don't allow firearm purchases without a background check and registration transfer, so a person isn't going to be allowed to sell firearms on Craigslist. The law is enforceable when people are charged with a crime for not having their guns registered. Possession of the gun should require registration and that should start when the gun is assembled.

A gun show can easily find a way to get background checks done on all purchases, but they just don't want to do it, because they want the market to sell to people who can't pass a background check. Since you all claim it isn't important, then stop the gun show loophole! The gun show can set up a way for non-licensed dealers to get background checks and may use a licensed dealer to do it for the gun show.

Anyone at a gun show that wants to go sell his weapon through a background check can get a dealer to run one. Anyone that does not is none of my business.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

More: Gun Show Loophole - Coalition to Stop Gun Violence

The Brady Campaign to Ban Every Fucking Gun on the Planet is hardly an objective source.

Prove the facts are wrong - with credible sources.

Actually the way this works is YOU have to prove your claim is true not us proving it is wrong. Or don't you know how debates work?

 

[Charles_Main]

I see no reason to compromise with anyone that wants to lock me in a cage.

I own a handful of guns Including an AR15 that I will not give up even if they say I have to, I am fully Pro Second. I just think Compromise now, or lose bigger later. If you have not noticed we are losing a lot of fights lately lol.

Do you honestly think the Brady Campaign to ban Handguns has changed its spots simply because they call themselves the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence? They are in this for the long haul, their compromise is to let you lose small now, more later, and big in a few years because the only way to prevent gun violence is to get rid of the guns.

Like I said, we are losing big right now. The game is totally rigged in their favor. They own the Press, they Educate our kids, they make our movies and entertainment. We are slowly losing this country, and I fear the best we can do now is try and make it as slow a march as possible.

 

[squeeze berry]

This issue isn't even universal background checks, because it only involves gun shows. You may notice like I did that the opinions are a complete yes or no pertaining to whether a background check should be required for all sales at gun shows.

I'm going to examine the people who said no. I noticed many pointed out that the issue was a non-issue, so it makes someone wonder why no to a non-issue is of so much importance to the person opposing a background check at a gun show.

My question to all the nayers is what is to prevent me paying my $150 for a booth at a gun show and making money by not giving background checks? If I can pass a background check, why can't I purchase a gun at the gun show and resell it to someone without a background check? For that matter, what is to prevent a licensed dealer setting up someone who isn't a licensed dealer to sell firearms without a background check at a premium price?

Because that is not legal.



Because it's a ridiculous idea, not to mention an unenforceable law.

Couldn't they just set up an area at a gun show to do background checks and require it being done before a private sale can be accomplished? Let me spell it out to you! Somebody wants to buy a gun for a price from a private person, but before it can be sold, they have to go to an area, pay a fee and get a background check done. It's possible a licensed dealer at the gun show may want to do it for the fees to give him a steady cash stream independent of sales. The person is handed paperwork that they passed the background check and uses it to buy the gun. Let's also say a private person takes a gun to a gun show to sell it. They could put the gun on display with someone at the gun show and get them to sell it in a way that includes a background check.

More likely: the dude that wants a gun just looks on Craigslist.

Don't allow firearm purchases without a background check and registration transfer, so a person isn't going to be allowed to sell firearms on Craigslist. The law is enforceable when people are charged with a crime for not having their guns registered. Possession of the gun should require registration and that should start when the gun is assembled.

A gun show can easily find a way to get background checks done on all purchases, but they just don't want to do it, because they want the market to sell to people who can't pass a background check. Since you all claim it isn't important, then stop the gun show loophole! The gun show can set up a way for non-licensed dealers to get background checks and may use a licensed dealer to do it for the gun show.

every time i made a purchase at a gun show there was a background check .

WTF am I missing?

Also, how do you do a background check on a private sale. None of you gun control advocates have answered that question

 

[Charles_Main]

I see no reason to compromise with anyone that wants to lock me in a cage.

I own a handful of guns Including an AR15 that I will not give up even if they say I have to, I am fully Pro Second. I just think Compromise now, or lose bigger later. If you have not noticed we are losing a lot of fights lately lol.

Hate to say this, but you are a fool. Show me one instance where the left has ever been satisfied with just one step, they will get everything the can now and will be back for more later when this shit proves to be ineffective. They always have and always will, my answer is not just no but HELL NO!

No Argument there man, But like I said, I think we are going to lose either way. Would rather have it be small now and big later than Big right now.

 

[Dubya]

"How strict would gun laws have to be to prevent massacres?"

Strict enough to prevent a criminal from buying guns in the safety, comfort and sanction of a gun show without having a background check run on him. There IS a loophole in the gun show law that allows a big gun dealer to pose as little uncle Joe selling a gun or two, and circumvent doing a background check.

FACT: Gun sellers who claim to be “occasional sellers” are not required by current federal law to conduct background checks on their customers. Furthermore, there is no clear definition of how many guns a person can sell as an “occasional seller” – it could be dozens, or even hundreds.

The Firearm Owners' Protection Act (FOPA) states: 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(21)(D), (22). Those not “engaged in the business” of dealing guns are exempt from the licensure requirement.

So, closing the gun show loophole would not punish any law abiding gun owner.

And, as citizens, we can't stop a criminal from buying an illegal firearm from the trunk of another criminal in some dark alley.

But, that's where the criminal should be forced to buy a gun. In a totally illegal setting, with all the inherent dangers that come with it. BUT, our current laws sanction criminals being able to walk into a gun show, receive expert advice, discounts, then buy whatever weapon(s) they desire without a background check or having to pay black market prices or risk the dangers of buying a weapon from another criminal in a dark alley.

Here is some info on the loophole...

What is the gun show loophole?

Federal law allows people who sell guns to avoid running background checks or keeping records by calling themselves occasional sellers, and these sellers often congregate at gun shows. The loophole provides criminals with easy access to firearms without having to worry about any background checks.

• Current law requires licensed gun dealers to conduct background checks, because that is the only way to determine whether a person is eligible to buy a gun. Licensed dealers must also keep records about the buyer so ATF can trace the gun if it is recovered at a crime scene.
  

• The law does not, however, require so-called occasional sellers to do these checks – and there’s no clear definition of what qualifies as an occasional seller.[ii]

• Many sellers at gun shows abuse that loophole by calling themselves occasional sellers. Because they concentrate at gun shows, it is easy for felons and other prohibited possessors to find someone who will sell to them without a background check.

...........*ATF concluded that “gun shows and flea markets are a major venue for illegal trafficking.”[iii]

• Gun shows linked to the Pentagon Shooting: In March 2010, John Bedell – who was prohibited by law from possessing guns – shot two Pentagon police officers with a gun purchased from a private seller at a Las Vegas gun show.

• Gun shows were tied to a broad range of violations, including straw purchases and the sale of kits to convert legal guns into illegal machine guns.

Solution: Require occasional sellers to run instant background checks.

You know claiming to be an occasional seller and then not being one is illegal and a violation of the law, right?

Why not let government crack down on this and leave the rest of us alone?

Let's see you define what an occasional seller is and what makes a person qualified to become an occasional seller!

Let's see you describe how the government closing the gun show loophole is bothering you to the point where you have to respond "and leave the rest of us alone." You are left alone with closing the gun show loophole, unless you are an occasional seller or buying a gun from them, aren't you? Is it that big of a deal to get a background check? Is it that big of a deal to make these occasional sellers run background checks at a gun show with many licensed gun dealers running background checks? If the gun show wants to have occasional sellers present, can't they work out a way to easily run background checks?

This is a minor change compared to all that should be done. You NRA types better get off your lazy asses and start supporting common sense changes to gun laws or it's time for us to declare war against your interests and we'll see if the majority of Americans can take away even more of your so-called gun rights. You better start figuring out, we aren't playing with you psychos. Keep pissing us off with your hard line NRA stance and see what you get for doing it! Your New York experience is only the beginning of what you can expect and I could care less how it will inconvenience you. When a group proves itself to be uncooperative with our nation's problems, they lose any consideration for what they desire in society. As far as I'm concerned, they can make the laws as strict as possible just to punish you clowns for being so stubborn. That is the reaction you are creating amongst citizens who have just as much say in what the law will be as you do. Your days of getting away with this bullshit are over and if you don't cooperate, you aren't going to have the political power in the future to maintain your beloved status quo. You are making enemies who are more powerful than you are.

 

[Charles_Main]

I see no reason to compromise with anyone that wants to lock me in a cage.

When you are pinned in the corner with no where to go, it's OK to use your common sense on what your actual stances are, and not the ultra-right wing views the propaganda machine tries to brainwashed you with,..

My actual stance is that the 2nd Amendment says that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Since I can easily point to thousands of right wing Republicans that disagree with me, care to point out how that makes me right wing?

You are right, it says that. But the courts have already ruled on "reasonable Infringements before" So that mold is set. It is the courts after all tasked with interpreting the Constitution is it not?

 

[Dubya]

Because that is not legal.



Because it's a ridiculous idea, not to mention an unenforceable law.



More likely: the dude that wants a gun just looks on Craigslist.

Don't allow firearm purchases without a background check and registration transfer, so a person isn't going to be allowed to sell firearms on Craigslist. The law is enforceable when people are charged with a crime for not having their guns registered. Possession of the gun should require registration and that should start when the gun is assembled.

A gun show can easily find a way to get background checks done on all purchases, but they just don't want to do it, because they want the market to sell to people who can't pass a background check. Since you all claim it isn't important, then stop the gun show loophole! The gun show can set up a way for non-licensed dealers to get background checks and may use a licensed dealer to do it for the gun show.

every time i made a purchase at a gun show there was a background check .

WTF am I missing?

Also, how do you do a background check on a private sale. None of you gun control advocates have answered that question

You don't allow private sales without transferring the registration of the weapon and this has been pointed out many times. Gun shows could be used as a means to allow a legal private sale. Gun shops could also be used. There is no potential liability in selling a gun to someone who has passed a background check.

Occasional sellers are allowed to sell weapons at gun shows and not run background checks.

 

[OriginalShroom]

I just left a gunshow.

There must have been been close to 2,000 people there and I counted 35 people taking the morning CCW/CCP class. I left before the afternoon one started.

At the private owners area, people who were not licensed sellers, there was only about 15 people there selling up to 10 weapons.. Most only had one or two.

As I entered the gun show, I walked by 3 Deputy Sheriffs. There were 2 more just inside the door doing safety checks on all weapons. Each of the 5 rooms of vendors at at least 3 more Deputies standing by the door and or rooming the room.

I also saw 3 City Police there, who were not in uniform, but they weren't buying either.

The first question I heard nearly every vendor ask when someone wanted to buy gun was "Do you have your license?" When the answer was "No" the response was "You will need to come back in 3 days, that will be on Thursday ( I know that is more than 3 days, but the way the law works is that you can't pick up your weapon on the 3rd day, but on the 4th and weekend day do not count. )

 

[Dubya]

Attention CharlesMAin.

This is the guy you are surrendering to, he is not interested in compromise.

Because that is not legal.



Because it's a ridiculous idea, not to mention an unenforceable law.

More likely: the dude that wants a gun just looks on Craigslist.

Don't allow firearm purchases without a background check and registration transfer, so a person isn't going to be allowed to sell firearms on Craigslist. The law is enforceable when people are charged with a crime for not having their guns registered. Possession of the gun should require registration and that should start when the gun is assembled.

A gun show can easily find a way to get background checks done on all purchases, but they just don't want to do it, because they want the market to sell to people who can't pass a background check. Since you all claim it isn't important, then stop the gun show loophole! The gun show can set up a way for non-licensed dealers to get background checks and may use a licensed dealer to do it for the gun show.

Anyone at a gun show that wants to go sell his weapon through a background check can get a dealer to run one. Anyone that does not is none of my business.

It's my business if a gun is sold to someone who can't pass a background check at a gun show, so since it isn't your business, butt out and mind your own business!

 

[OKTexas]

I own a handful of guns Including an AR15 that I will not give up even if they say I have to, I am fully Pro Second. I just think Compromise now, or lose bigger later. If you have not noticed we are losing a lot of fights lately lol.

Hate to say this, but you are a fool. Show me one instance where the left has ever been satisfied with just one step, they will get everything the can now and will be back for more later when this shit proves to be ineffective. They always have and always will, my answer is not just no but HELL NO!

No Argument there man, But like I said, I think we are going to lose either way. Would rather have it be small now and big later than Big right now.

I don't accept that, there is no will in congress to push this. The commiecrats know what happened last time and they are not really up for the fight. We have to draw the line here and let them know it in no uncertain terms, if they try there will be a price. We don't have the right to surrender the rights of future generations, on the contrary we have a duty to protect them.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Attention CharlesMAin.

This is the guy you are surrendering to, he is not interested in compromise.

Don't allow firearm purchases without a background check and registration transfer, so a person isn't going to be allowed to sell firearms on Craigslist. The law is enforceable when people are charged with a crime for not having their guns registered. Possession of the gun should require registration and that should start when the gun is assembled.

A gun show can easily find a way to get background checks done on all purchases, but they just don't want to do it, because they want the market to sell to people who can't pass a background check. Since you all claim it isn't important, then stop the gun show loophole! The gun show can set up a way for non-licensed dealers to get background checks and may use a licensed dealer to do it for the gun show.

Anyone at a gun show that wants to go sell his weapon through a background check can get a dealer to run one. Anyone that does not is none of my business.

It's my business if a gun is sold to someone who can't pass a background check at a gun show, so since it isn't your business, butt out and mind your own business!

It's none of your fucking business what I do with my fucking private property nor is it the governments.

 

[Bfgrn]

They should change the name of every law to lets take away some more freedom from law abiding citizens act and tack a different number on the end.

No law abiding citizen is losing his or her freedom or liberty making background checks mandatory for all gun sales. It should make perfect SENSE to any law abiding citizen, then, only a criminal would object.

If it does not infringe anyone's rights to go through a background check maybe we can require them before an abortion also. Would that make sense to you, or do you suddenly see background checks as a violation of rights when they are applied to things other than guns?

If you require all change of ownership on guns to go through a background check every law abiding citizen will lose a bit of their privacy because the government will eventually know exactly who does, and does not, own a gun. That not only violates the rights of people who buy and sell guns, it violates the rights of those who do not.

Like I said before, stop pretending to be the person who is thinking when all you are doing is going along with the executioner.

The executioners usually use GUNS. It is the right of law abiding citizens to do demand that laws are in place and enforced to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill. The ONLY way to identify criminals and the mentally ill is a background check.

Over 90% of citizens support universal background checks on all gun sales. Only gun manufacturers, the NRA which is a shill for the manufacturers, criminals and a tiny percentage of extremist zealots oppose this no brainer law. That makes you an enemy of the people. You are an accomplice to criminals buying guns in a legal setting.

 

[Two Thumbs]

How is that a loophole? It's the law isn't it? Private sales doesn't require a background check. It isn't a loophole.

Authoritarian douchebags always call freedom a "loophole".

Freedom for criminals to buy weapons without a background check is what you are fighting for...great cause Jethro...great cause!

Liar

We are standing up for our Constitutional rights.

as a lying liberal, you wouldn't understand