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.
We already do. Felons get the guns illegally. They wouldn't abide by your universal background checks. There is always a black market for illegal guns. You need only look there to find the felon who want to buy guns.
That is not an answer...
ALL law abiding citizens should DEMAND that the laws protect the law abiding and FORCE ALL criminals and felons to have to resort to the black market to buy a gun. I WANT felons and criminals to have 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.
that is the current situation. criminals cannot buy guns legally in any state. law abiding citizens can buy guns but only after a background check.
What you libs say that you want is already in force.
Again with any objection to the STATE is PARANOIA meme, thank you for answering my questions regarding limited authority and individual liberty, obviously you do not understand or wish to even contemplate either of those concepts. It's probably better if you don't attempt to engage in any reasoned analysis on those points since it's quite apparent that your facilities for doing so have atrophied to the point of non-existence, far better if you stick to propaganda parroting, since at least you'll provide an endless stream of comic relief that way.
According to you we presume EVERYBODY is a felon until they prove otherwise, unfortunately the presumption of guilt mentality that you advocate isn't new, it's been a justification used by tyrants throughout history.
LOL, Apparently you didn't get the memo that illegally purchasing or manufacturing a firearm is already ILLEGAL, apparently that fact doesn't deter sociopaths from obtaining them anyways.
BTW would you like a napkin to wipe the foam off your lips?
HOW do we identify law abiding citizens from felons when they want to buy a gun? Do we just ASSume they are law abiding citizens until they blow someone's head off?
I expect an answer...
Yes genius that's what you assume, until you can prove a crime you do not go about infringing on the rights of the citizenry using a presumption of guilt as a justification, since doing so is the surest path to completely obliterating the freedom that the citizenry still has intact. It's the justification the federal government used for all the egregious infringements contained in the "Patriot Act", it's the justification the NSA is using to spy on innocent Americans, it was the justification FDR used to toss millions of innocent Japanese and German Americans into concentration camps during WW II, it's the justification that was used to oppress African-Americans during the Jim Crow Era and on..and on and on...
Like I said before if you can't live with a world where innocent people are free to exercise their liberty and aren't presumed guilty until they prove otherwise go check yourself into a PRISON 'cause that's apparently the only place you'll feel safe from your fellow citizens having any individual liberty at all.
They ARE enacted to protect innocent people unless people that think like you do enact them, in which case they are enacted to punish the innocent by presuming they are guilty and further centralizing power in Washington. The states are perfectly capable of handling this question, so why don't you stick to working on your own states regulatory regime and quit worrying about granting the federal government ever more power and inflicting your blatant liberty crushing ideas on the rest of the country.HOW do we identify law abiding citizens from felons when they want to buy a gun? Do we just ASSume they are law abiding citizens until they blow someone's head off?
I expect an answer...
Yes genius that's what you assume, until you can prove a crime you do not go about infringing on the rights of the citizenry using a presumption of guilt as a justification, since doing so is the surest path to completely obliterating the freedom that the citizenry still has intact. It's the justification the federal government used for all the egregious infringements contained in the "Patriot Act", it's the justification the NSA is using to spy on innocent Americans, it was the justification FDR used to toss millions of innocent Japanese and German Americans into concentration camps during WW II, it's the justification that was used to oppress African-Americans during the Jim Crow Era and on..and on and on...
Like I said before if you can't live with a world where innocent people are free to exercise their liberty and aren't presumed guilty until they prove otherwise go check yourself into a PRISON 'cause that's apparently the only place you'll feel safe from your fellow citizens having any individual liberty at all.
I always thought laws were enacted to protect innocent people. How foolish of me.
Anyone already CAN buy a gun or did the existing state level restrictions on gun sales magically eliminate murder and gun related crime while I wasn't looking? Apparently you haven't learned from history with respect to the unintended negative consequences of prohibition, it doesn't work, never has worked and never is going to work. All you'll end up accomplishing with your dimwitted idea of further empowering the federal government is to make illegal arms sales and manufacture more lucrative while punishing innocent gun buyers with the loss of privacy and additional time & expense.So anyone should be able to buy a gun; felons, wife beaters, hoods from a crib, people with a criminal record or mental disorder. And our only recourse should be AFTER they use the gun to blow away a classroom of first graders, or murder your wife and kids, commit armed robbery, or engage in a gang murder.
They ARE enacted to protect innocent people unless people that think like you do enact them, in which case they are enacted to punish the innocent by presuming they are guilty and further centralizing power in Washington. The states are perfectly capable of handling this question, so why don't you stick to working on your own states regulatory regime and quit worrying about granting the federal government ever more power and inflicting your blatant liberty crushing ideas on the rest of the country.Yes genius that's what you assume, until you can prove a crime you do not go about infringing on the rights of the citizenry using a presumption of guilt as a justification, since doing so is the surest path to completely obliterating the freedom that the citizenry still has intact. It's the justification the federal government used for all the egregious infringements contained in the "Patriot Act", it's the justification the NSA is using to spy on innocent Americans, it was the justification FDR used to toss millions of innocent Japanese and German Americans into concentration camps during WW II, it's the justification that was used to oppress African-Americans during the Jim Crow Era and on..and on and on...
Like I said before if you can't live with a world where innocent people are free to exercise their liberty and aren't presumed guilty until they prove otherwise go check yourself into a PRISON 'cause that's apparently the only place you'll feel safe from your fellow citizens having any individual liberty at all.
I always thought laws were enacted to protect innocent people. How foolish of me.
Anyone already CAN buy a gun or did the existing state level restrictions on gun sales magically eliminate murder and gun related crime while I wasn't looking? Apparently you haven't learned from history with respect to the unintended negative consequences of prohibition, it doesn't work, never has worked and never is going to work. All you'll end up accomplishing with your dimwitted idea of further empowering the federal government is to make illegal arms sales and manufacture more lucrative while punishing innocent gun buyers with the loss of privacy and additional time & expense.So anyone should be able to buy a gun; felons, wife beaters, hoods from a crib, people with a criminal record or mental disorder. And our only recourse should be AFTER they use the gun to blow away a classroom of first graders, or murder your wife and kids, commit armed robbery, or engage in a gang murder.
Murderers don't care about the existing laws against murder but if you're to be taken seriously they're going to care about illegally obtaining a firearm?
They ARE enacted to protect innocent people unless people that think like you do enact them, in which case they are enacted to punish the innocent by presuming they are guilty and further centralizing power in Washington. The states are perfectly capable of handling this question, so why don't you stick to working on your own states regulatory regime and quit worrying about granting the federal government ever more power and inflicting your blatant liberty crushing ideas on the rest of the country.I always thought laws were enacted to protect innocent people. How foolish of me.
Anyone already CAN buy a gun or did the existing state level restrictions on gun sales magically eliminate murder and gun related crime while I wasn't looking? Apparently you haven't learned from history with respect to the unintended negative consequences of prohibition, it doesn't work, never has worked and never is going to work. All you'll end up accomplishing with your dimwitted idea of further empowering the federal government is to make illegal arms sales and manufacture more lucrative while punishing innocent gun buyers with the loss of privacy and additional time & expense.So anyone should be able to buy a gun; felons, wife beaters, hoods from a crib, people with a criminal record or mental disorder. And our only recourse should be AFTER they use the gun to blow away a classroom of first graders, or murder your wife and kids, commit armed robbery, or engage in a gang murder.
Murderers don't care about the existing laws against murder but if you're to be taken seriously they're going to care about illegally obtaining a firearm?
There is an old axiom; Robins and Bluejays don't nest together. Murderers don't care about the existing laws against murder and you right wing turds have no problem being accessories to murder. A match made in hell.
They ARE enacted to protect innocent people unless people that think like you do enact them, in which case they are enacted to punish the innocent by presuming they are guilty and further centralizing power in Washington. The states are perfectly capable of handling this question, so why don't you stick to working on your own states regulatory regime and quit worrying about granting the federal government ever more power and inflicting your blatant liberty crushing ideas on the rest of the country.
Anyone already CAN buy a gun or did the existing state level restrictions on gun sales magically eliminate murder and gun related crime while I wasn't looking? Apparently you haven't learned from history with respect to the unintended negative consequences of prohibition, it doesn't work, never has worked and never is going to work. All you'll end up accomplishing with your dimwitted idea of further empowering the federal government is to make illegal arms sales and manufacture more lucrative while punishing innocent gun buyers with the loss of privacy and additional time & expense.
Murderers don't care about the existing laws against murder but if you're to be taken seriously they're going to care about illegally obtaining a firearm?
There is an old axiom; Robins and Bluejays don't nest together. Murderers don't care about the existing laws against murder and you right wing turds have no problem being accessories to murder. A match made in hell.
Yes that's the spirit! When your irrational argument gets completely annihilated by logic and reason pull out some ad hominem.
Have a nice day.
OIC, you're a "let the beatings continue until moral improves kinda guy", well since you do provide a source of comedic relief I'll oblige.There is an old axiom; Robins and Bluejays don't nest together. Murderers don't care about the existing laws against murder and you right wing turds have no problem being accessories to murder. A match made in hell.
Yes that's the spirit! When your irrational argument gets completely annihilated by logic and reason pull out some ad hominem.
Have a nice day.
That's it, cut & run with your tail between your legs.
If standing for individual liberty against coercion by the state is radical, then count me as a radical every time, at least I don't have to replace my reason and morality with propaganda like you are so found of doing.Just be aware that YOU are the radical on this issue.
Americans "overwhelmingly" support expanding background checks
Heres a rundown of all such polls we could find that addressed an expansion of background checks:
Washington Post-ABC News poll, April 11-14, 2013: "Would you support or oppose a law requiring background checks on people buying guns at gun shows or online?" Support: 86 percent. Oppose: 13 percent.
CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll, April 5-7, 2013: "Some proposals would require a background check on anyone attempting to purchase a gun in order to determine whether the prospective buyer has been convicted of a felony or has a mental health problem. Please tell me whether you would favor or oppose a background check for a prospective gun buyer under each of the following circumstances. ... If the buyer is trying to purchase a gun at a gun show." Favor: 83 percent. Oppose: 17 percent.
"If the buyer is trying to purchase a gun from another person who is not a gun dealer but owns one or more guns and wants to sell one of them." Favor: 70 percent. Oppose: 29 percent.
"If the buyer is purchasing a gun from a family member or receiving it as a gift." Favor: 54 percent. Oppose: 45 percent.
"Please tell me whether you would favor or oppose a background check for anyone who wants to buy ammunition for a gun." Favor: 55 percent. Oppose: 44 percent.
Quinnipiac University poll, March 26-April 1, 2013. "Do you support or oppose requiring background checks for all gun buyers?" Support: 91 percent. Oppose: 8 percent.
CBS News poll, March 20-24, 2013. "Would you favor or oppose background checks on all potential gun buyers?" Favor: 90 percent. Oppose: 8 percent.
I think "radical" is when you compare people you disagree with to being accessories to murder. I'm still waiting for the Hitler comparisons and race baiting. I know it's coming.
HOW do we identify law abiding citizens from felons when they want to buy a gun? Do we just ASSume they are law abiding citizens until they blow someone's head off?
I expect an answer...
We already do. Felons get the guns illegally. They wouldn't abide by your universal background checks. There is always a black market for illegal guns. You need only look there to find the felon who want to buy guns.
That is not an answer...
ALL law abiding citizens should DEMAND that the laws protect the law abiding and FORCE ALL criminals and felons to have to resort to the black market to buy a gun. I WANT felons and criminals to have 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.
OIC, you're a "let the beatings continue until moral improves kinda guy", well since you do provide a source of comedic relief I'll oblige.Yes that's the spirit! When your irrational argument gets completely annihilated by logic and reason pull out some ad hominem.
Have a nice day.
That's it, cut & run with your tail between your legs.
If standing for individual liberty against coercion by the state is radical, then count me as a radical every time, at least I don't have to replace my reason and morality with propaganda like you are so found of doing.Just be aware that YOU are the radical on this issue.
Americans "overwhelmingly" support expanding background checks
Heres a rundown of all such polls we could find that addressed an expansion of background checks:
Washington Post-ABC News poll, April 11-14, 2013: "Would you support or oppose a law requiring background checks on people buying guns at gun shows or online?" Support: 86 percent. Oppose: 13 percent.
CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll, April 5-7, 2013: "Some proposals would require a background check on anyone attempting to purchase a gun in order to determine whether the prospective buyer has been convicted of a felony or has a mental health problem. Please tell me whether you would favor or oppose a background check for a prospective gun buyer under each of the following circumstances. ... If the buyer is trying to purchase a gun at a gun show." Favor: 83 percent. Oppose: 17 percent.
"If the buyer is trying to purchase a gun from another person who is not a gun dealer but owns one or more guns and wants to sell one of them." Favor: 70 percent. Oppose: 29 percent.
"If the buyer is purchasing a gun from a family member or receiving it as a gift." Favor: 54 percent. Oppose: 45 percent.
"Please tell me whether you would favor or oppose a background check for anyone who wants to buy ammunition for a gun." Favor: 55 percent. Oppose: 44 percent.
Quinnipiac University poll, March 26-April 1, 2013. "Do you support or oppose requiring background checks for all gun buyers?" Support: 91 percent. Oppose: 8 percent.
CBS News poll, March 20-24, 2013. "Would you favor or oppose background checks on all potential gun buyers?" Favor: 90 percent. Oppose: 8 percent.
That's nice and if polls showed that the majority of Americans favored doing away with their freedom of speech, I suppose you'd support that too. Hate to break it to you but appealing to group think as a basis for your argument is still inferior to utilizing reason. I do understand though that you don't have the capacity for reason and thus your propaganda muddled mind is forced to find alternatives.
Got any other laughable arguments in your bag of tricks?
There is an old axiom; Robins and Bluejays don't nest together. Murderers don't care about the existing laws against murder and you right wing turds have no problem being accessories to murder. A match made in hell.
Yes that's the spirit! When your irrational argument gets completely annihilated by logic and reason pull out some ad hominem.
Have a nice day.
That's it, cut & run with your tail between your legs.
Just be aware that YOU are the radical on this issue.
Americans "overwhelmingly" support expanding background checks
Heres a rundown of all such polls we could find that addressed an expansion of background checks:
Washington Post-ABC News poll, April 11-14, 2013: "Would you support or oppose a law requiring background checks on people buying guns at gun shows or online?" Support: 86 percent. Oppose: 13 percent.
CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll, April 5-7, 2013: "Some proposals would require a background check on anyone attempting to purchase a gun in order to determine whether the prospective buyer has been convicted of a felony or has a mental health problem. Please tell me whether you would favor or oppose a background check for a prospective gun buyer under each of the following circumstances. ... If the buyer is trying to purchase a gun at a gun show." Favor: 83 percent. Oppose: 17 percent.
"If the buyer is trying to purchase a gun from another person who is not a gun dealer but owns one or more guns and wants to sell one of them." Favor: 70 percent. Oppose: 29 percent.
"If the buyer is purchasing a gun from a family member or receiving it as a gift." Favor: 54 percent. Oppose: 45 percent.
"Please tell me whether you would favor or oppose a background check for anyone who wants to buy ammunition for a gun." Favor: 55 percent. Oppose: 44 percent.
Quinnipiac University poll, March 26-April 1, 2013. "Do you support or oppose requiring background checks for all gun buyers?" Support: 91 percent. Oppose: 8 percent.
CBS News poll, March 20-24, 2013. "Would you favor or oppose background checks on all potential gun buyers?" Favor: 90 percent. Oppose: 8 percent.
We already do. Felons get the guns illegally. They wouldn't abide by your universal background checks. There is always a black market for illegal guns. You need only look there to find the felon who want to buy guns.
That is not an answer...
ALL law abiding citizens should DEMAND that the laws protect the law abiding and FORCE ALL criminals and felons to have to resort to the black market to buy a gun. I WANT felons and criminals to have 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.
It is not an answer because it isn't an answer conforming with your flawed viewpoint. Does that about sum it up for you? I smell a bit of rage in your words.
Bolded:
You what? You are flailing now. I'll give you time to chill out my friend. Either that was a faux pas, or just a blatantly stupid statement.
I think "radical" is when you compare people you disagree with to being accessories to murder. I'm still waiting for the Hitler comparisons and race baiting. I know it's coming.
If you are aware that there is a loophole in the law that allows murderers to walk into a gun show, buy any gun(s) they choose without having to submit to a background check, walk out without having to face the inherent risk of buying those weapons from other criminals, and you OPPOSE closing that loophole, what term would you wish to be called?
Yes that's the spirit! When your irrational argument gets completely annihilated by logic and reason pull out some ad hominem.
Have a nice day.
That's it, cut & run with your tail between your legs.
Just be aware that YOU are the radical on this issue.
Americans "overwhelmingly" support expanding background checks
Heres a rundown of all such polls we could find that addressed an expansion of background checks:
Washington Post-ABC News poll, April 11-14, 2013: "Would you support or oppose a law requiring background checks on people buying guns at gun shows or online?" Support: 86 percent. Oppose: 13 percent.
CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll, April 5-7, 2013: "Some proposals would require a background check on anyone attempting to purchase a gun in order to determine whether the prospective buyer has been convicted of a felony or has a mental health problem. Please tell me whether you would favor or oppose a background check for a prospective gun buyer under each of the following circumstances. ... If the buyer is trying to purchase a gun at a gun show." Favor: 83 percent. Oppose: 17 percent.
"If the buyer is trying to purchase a gun from another person who is not a gun dealer but owns one or more guns and wants to sell one of them." Favor: 70 percent. Oppose: 29 percent.
"If the buyer is purchasing a gun from a family member or receiving it as a gift." Favor: 54 percent. Oppose: 45 percent.
"Please tell me whether you would favor or oppose a background check for anyone who wants to buy ammunition for a gun." Favor: 55 percent. Oppose: 44 percent.
Quinnipiac University poll, March 26-April 1, 2013. "Do you support or oppose requiring background checks for all gun buyers?" Support: 91 percent. Oppose: 8 percent.
CBS News poll, March 20-24, 2013. "Would you favor or oppose background checks on all potential gun buyers?" Favor: 90 percent. Oppose: 8 percent.
Lovely how you cite only liberal polling sources. Could you not be any more disingenuous? I've given you enough rope, time for a neg. Stop calling people extreme or radical. Thank you.
That is not an answer...
ALL law abiding citizens should DEMAND that the laws protect the law abiding and FORCE ALL criminals and felons to have to resort to the black market to buy a gun. I WANT felons and criminals to have 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.
It is not an answer because it isn't an answer conforming with your flawed viewpoint. Does that about sum it up for you? I smell a bit of rage in your words.
Bolded:
You what? You are flailing now. I'll give you time to chill out my friend. Either that was a faux pas, or just a blatantly stupid statement.
I'm sorry, what was I thinking. Felons are people too. All they need to straighten their lives is a gun. So let's cater to felons and let them walk into a secure setting to buy that gun. We sure don't want them buying that gun in some dark alley. Someone could double cross them, maybe even shoot them. We sure don't want that, now do we? Let's make them feel all warm and fuzzy and then we can all sit around and sing kumbaya...
That's it, cut & run with your tail between your legs.
Just be aware that YOU are the radical on this issue.
Americans "overwhelmingly" support expanding background checks
Heres a rundown of all such polls we could find that addressed an expansion of background checks:
Washington Post-ABC News poll, April 11-14, 2013: "Would you support or oppose a law requiring background checks on people buying guns at gun shows or online?" Support: 86 percent. Oppose: 13 percent.
CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll, April 5-7, 2013: "Some proposals would require a background check on anyone attempting to purchase a gun in order to determine whether the prospective buyer has been convicted of a felony or has a mental health problem. Please tell me whether you would favor or oppose a background check for a prospective gun buyer under each of the following circumstances. ... If the buyer is trying to purchase a gun at a gun show." Favor: 83 percent. Oppose: 17 percent.
"If the buyer is trying to purchase a gun from another person who is not a gun dealer but owns one or more guns and wants to sell one of them." Favor: 70 percent. Oppose: 29 percent.
"If the buyer is purchasing a gun from a family member or receiving it as a gift." Favor: 54 percent. Oppose: 45 percent.
"Please tell me whether you would favor or oppose a background check for anyone who wants to buy ammunition for a gun." Favor: 55 percent. Oppose: 44 percent.
Quinnipiac University poll, March 26-April 1, 2013. "Do you support or oppose requiring background checks for all gun buyers?" Support: 91 percent. Oppose: 8 percent.
CBS News poll, March 20-24, 2013. "Would you favor or oppose background checks on all potential gun buyers?" Favor: 90 percent. Oppose: 8 percent.
Lovely how you cite only liberal polling sources. Could you not be any more disingenuous? I've given you enough rope, time for a neg. Stop calling people extreme or radical. Thank you.
Fox News poll: Majorities support new gun measures
A new Fox News poll finds the most popular measure continues to be universal background checks: A large 85-percent majority of voters favors requiring checks on all gun buyers, including at gun shows and private sales. That includes most Democrats (90 percent), Republicans (83 percent) and independents (82 percent), as well as most of those living in a gun-owner household (81 percent).
There is also sizable public support for requiring mental health checks on gun buyers (72 percent) and background checks on ammunition purchases (70 percent).
Read more: Fox News poll: Majorities support new gun measures | Fox News
Lovely how you cite only liberal polling sources. Could you not be any more disingenuous? I've given you enough rope, time for a neg. Stop calling people extreme or radical. Thank you.
Fox News poll: Majorities support new gun measures
A new Fox News poll finds the most popular measure continues to be universal background checks: A large 85-percent majority of voters favors requiring checks on all gun buyers, including at gun shows and private sales. That includes most Democrats (90 percent), Republicans (83 percent) and independents (82 percent), as well as most of those living in a gun-owner household (81 percent).
There is also sizable public support for requiring mental health checks on gun buyers (72 percent) and background checks on ammunition purchases (70 percent).
Read more: Fox News poll: Majorities support new gun measures | Fox News
Thing is, we already have background checks? I know for a fact because I had to submit to them for my assault rifle and two handguns here in Georgia. No wonder they are popular, they already exist!
Fox News poll: Majorities support new gun measures
A new Fox News poll finds the most popular measure continues to be universal background checks: A large 85-percent majority of voters favors requiring checks on all gun buyers, including at gun shows and private sales. That includes most Democrats (90 percent), Republicans (83 percent) and independents (82 percent), as well as most of those living in a gun-owner household (81 percent).
There is also sizable public support for requiring mental health checks on gun buyers (72 percent) and background checks on ammunition purchases (70 percent).
Read more: Fox News poll: Majorities support new gun measures | Fox News
Thing is, we already have background checks? I know for a fact because I had to submit to them for my assault rifle and two handguns here in Georgia. No wonder they are popular, they already exist!
Willful ignorance is a lack of honesty and morals.
"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 theres no clear definition of what qualifies as an occasional seller.[ii]
...........*ATF concluded that gun shows and flea markets are a major venue for illegal trafficking.[iii]
- 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.
- 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.
