U.S. Police Chiefs Call For Background Checks For All Gun Purchases

[2aguy]

You didn't correct squat. My statement was accurate.

Nope. You quoted the OP, which is an article about police chiefs who want background checks for gun shows. You then said, "There is already a law mandating background checks on gun purchases."

For most states, there are no background checks mandated for gun shows, which I pointed out.

I corrected you, and you've been butt hurt since.

Yes, and my statement was accurate.

I must perform a background check on every buyer I sell to from my store.

Which is not a gun show or private sale.

Read the OP. Then come back and try again.

Dude get over yourself already, the OP is not only talking about gun shows and private sales it pertains to ALL gun purchases.

Damn you are one dense fuck!

When they talk about ALL gun purchases in the OP, they are saying they want background checks to apply to ALL gun purchases and that they currently don't. They don't apply to 40 percent of ALL gun purchases.

So when you came along and said background checks are already mandated, you sounded like one dense fuck who wasn't following.

And you still do.

The 40% number is from 1994....when they were just about to implement current background checks...you guys have been using that number for 21 years........and the background checks you wanted then....and that you used the 40% number to explain why we needed them back then....is now the same number you are using to push for more background checks after the original background checks didn's stop criminals or mass shooters from getting guns.....

 

[2aguy]

Post 63:

To date, NICS queries of criminal databases have resulted in 1,065,090 denials, with 88,479 in 2012 alone.

NICS 15th Anniversary: Stats Show Success of Gun Background Check System

Post 78:

Between 70,000 and 80,000 people are denied guns each year for providing false or inaccurate information on their background check forms, according to the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

Do We Enforce Our Gun Laws?

Post 82:

Post 186:

The number of criminals stopped by the checks is also quite small. In 2010, there were over 76,000 initial denials, but only 44 of those were deemed worthy for prosecution by the federal government and only 13 individuals were convicted. Even those 13 cases don’t tend to be the “dangerous” criminals Obama claims are being stopped. There are additional state prosecutions, but those are rare as well.

So as we can see, it has been proven time and time and time again that background checks prevent about 80,000 people a year from getting a gun.


And if we read the link in 2AGuy's post, we find this:

The most common reason for denial by the FBI was a record of a felony indictment or conviction (over 47%), followed by fugitives from justice (19%), and state law prohibitions (about 11%)

Boom!

This means background checks are effective, unlike Voter ID.

And this is why you anti gun jihadis are so vile....the 76,000 denials were normal gun owners who could legally own the gun but were denied due to clerical errors and screw ups in the system.....the background check system did not stop one criminal or mass shooter from getting a gun.

 

[2aguy]

Mandatory background checks went into effect in 1993.

Concealed carry started in 1993.......criminals still get guns...now citizens can carry guns for self defense....

 

[2aguy]

Look, I know the long term strategy of the liberal leaders is to repeal the Second Amendment and confiscate everyone's guns. They don't say it out loud, and a lot of common everyday liberals don't know that is the long term strategy of their leadership.

So it is understandable that someone who loves and supports the Second Amendment will feel like they can't give an inch. I get that.

But this background check thing is the right and sane thing to do. It actually works and actually prevents dangerous criminals from acquiring guns. The Constitution says we can remove someone's rights through due process. We take away a lot of freedoms from felons. Taking away their right to a gun is no different, and only an idiot would be opposed to that.

Don't be idiots.

It doesn't stop one criminal or mass shooter from getting a gun.....

 

[2aguy]

Availability of firearms is not why we have a violence problem. It's parenting (or more precisely the lack of good parenting,) general destruction of the respect for authority figures we had not too long ago in the country, increasing marginalization of faith (admittedly I don't have a huge problem with this one but conceed it has downsides,) and the increasing villification of sex and pleasure in general.

As we see with internet 'nutshot' videos and self-harming stunts and behaviours, youth in this country have been conditioned not to have sex. So if their sexual organs aren't needed let's get ourselves on the net and tv by harming ourselves.

Want less violence? Encourage sex, encourage kids to date and touch (consensually,) and quit repressing healthy sexuality. When you do that that desire and energy doesn't go away. It stagnates until it explodes in some negative behaviour like rape, assault, murder, etc.

All those things are true, but until somebody comes up with a way to change all that, background checks are needed.

can one of you guys explain how background checks keep criminals from getting guns...since they steal their guns....which means they don't get a background check....or get a straw purchaser to buy the gun....means the criminals don't go a background check....

How hard is that for you guys to understand...well...you are left wing gun grabbers so 2 + 2 is really hard for you guys....

 

[2aguy]

80,000 felons and fugitives prevented from buying a gun every year, thanks to background checks.

It is pretty hard to defend being opposed to that.

Get back to us when you have implemented background checks for buying alcohol, it kills and injures way more people each year. Got a DUI on your record sorry DENIED!!

If you get a DUI, you aren't allowed a driver's license.

So you lose. Again.

Get a DUI and your banned for life from purchasing alcohol. For that matter banned for life from owning a vehicle. That goes for private sales and parties too, if you invite a friend over to your home and serve him alcohol and he's on the banned list you go to jail so you better run a background check on your party guests. Buy someone a drink at a bar, oh man you are taking a big legal risk.

Every gun control law you can come up with should be equally applied to the sale and use of alcohol. I mean if your goal is really to save lives.

This is the best you can do to oppose background checks that prevent 80,000 felons and fugitives and other maniacs from buying a gun every year?

You realize you are off the rails now, right?

and again you lie......the denials of background checks are normal, law abiding citizens who can legally buy the gun but the system screws up and gives them an initial denial.......the criminals don't go through a background check.

 

[2aguy]

Citing the popularity of an idea is not the same as showing it will be effective in reducing crime. It will not. Oregon has UBC and we see how that turned out a couple of weeks ago.
Such measures are nothing more than an attempt to stick it to lawful gun owners. It will not reduce crime one bit.

The states with the weakest gun laws have the highest rate of gun violence. Those with the strongest gun laws have the lowest rate of gun violence.

https://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/AmericaUnderTheGun-4.pdf

Finally, by plotting the performance of states across the two variables—strength of gun laws versus gun-violence outcomes—we find a clear correlation between the strength of a state’s gun laws and lower rates of gun violence. The statistical relationship is visually apparent (see Figure 3 below), suggested quantitatively by our model’s coefficient of determination (R2 ), which measures the proportion of variation in the dependent variable—gun outcomes—that is statistically explained by variation in the independent variable—strength of gun laws. As Figure 3 below shows, our model produces an R2 of 0.42, implying a significant correlation between a state’s gun laws and its prevalence of gun violence and suggesting that as a state’s gun laws improve in strength, the state is more likely to have lower rates of gun violence.

State rankings by strength of gun laws State rankings by overall gun-violence outcomes 10 states with strongest gun laws 10 states with weakest gun laws Other states R2 =+0.4214 FIGURE 3 Correlation between state gun laws and gun-violence outcomes Source: Center for American Progress analysis based on data from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,

Sorry...they include suicide because they have to include it to get their gun deaths up....notice they don't say gun murder......

From your link moron....

The table below details each state’s overall rate of deaths by firearm in 2010.

These data include intentional and accidental shootings, as well as suicides.

In 2010 Alaska, Louisiana, and Montana topped this list, each with more than 16 firearm deaths for every 100,000 residents. In contrast, the three states with the lowest rate of firearm deaths—Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and Hawaii—each had fewer than five firearm deaths for every 100,000 people.


They include suicide because if they don't it shoots their tables to shit.....

 

[2aguy]

The "gun show loophole" is a myth; fabricated to frighten the weak minded.

It is a fact you can buy a gun at a gun show and other private sales without a background check.

Private sales......not licensed dealers at gun shows......

And if you put universal background checks on individual, private sales...criminals will have a friend or relative with a clean record buy that gun through the individual private seller....he will then do a mandatory background check....if he can get it done since many gun stores will not bother doing those for sales they aren't making, or they can go to the police.....who will either waste man hours doing these checks or will make them wait days or weeks till they get around to it....

And after the background check, which the straw buyer will pass because they have a clean record...the straw buyer will give it or sell it to the actual criminal....

So tell me how these new, improved background checks work?

 

[2aguy]

Post 63:

To date, NICS queries of criminal databases have resulted in 1,065,090 denials, with 88,479 in 2012 alone.

NICS 15th Anniversary: Stats Show Success of Gun Background Check System

Post 78:

Between 70,000 and 80,000 people are denied guns each year for providing false or inaccurate information on their background check forms, according to the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

Do We Enforce Our Gun Laws?

Post 82:

Post 186:

The number of criminals stopped by the checks is also quite small. In 2010, there were over 76,000 initial denials, but only 44 of those were deemed worthy for prosecution by the federal government and only 13 individuals were convicted. Even those 13 cases don’t tend to be the “dangerous” criminals Obama claims are being stopped. There are additional state prosecutions, but those are rare as well.

So as we can see, it has been proven time and time and time again that background checks prevent about 80,000 people a year from getting a gun.


And if we read the link in 2AGuy's post, we find this:

The most common reason for denial by the FBI was a record of a felony indictment or conviction (over 47%), followed by fugitives from justice (19%), and state law prohibitions (about 11%)

Boom!

This means background checks are effective, unlike Voter ID.

And of course you are wrong again......from your link.....

NICS 15th Anniversary: Stats Show Success of Gun Background Check System

Records are not kept on individuals whose transactions are approved to proceed. By law, they are purged within 24 hours. NICS has an appeal process in place for individuals whose transactions are denied.

Nice way they hide the fact that their background checks don't work....

 

[2aguy]

Post 63:

To date, NICS queries of criminal databases have resulted in 1,065,090 denials, with 88,479 in 2012 alone.

NICS 15th Anniversary: Stats Show Success of Gun Background Check System

Post 78:

Between 70,000 and 80,000 people are denied guns each year for providing false or inaccurate information on their background check forms, according to the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

Do We Enforce Our Gun Laws?

Post 82:

Post 186:

The number of criminals stopped by the checks is also quite small. In 2010, there were over 76,000 initial denials, but only 44 of those were deemed worthy for prosecution by the federal government and only 13 individuals were convicted. Even those 13 cases don’t tend to be the “dangerous” criminals Obama claims are being stopped. There are additional state prosecutions, but those are rare as well.

So as we can see, it has been proven time and time and time again that background checks prevent about 80,000 people a year from getting a gun.


And if we read the link in 2AGuy's post, we find this:

The most common reason for denial by the FBI was a record of a felony indictment or conviction (over 47%), followed by fugitives from justice (19%), and state law prohibitions (about 11%)

Boom!

This means background checks are effective, unlike Voter ID.

The truth and facts show you are wrong again....

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/grants/239272.pdf

The DENI Branch screened 76,142 NICS denials received from the FBI during 2010, and referred 4,732 denials (approximately 6%) within the established guidelines to field divisions.

The referred cases were made up of 2,265 delayed denials (3% of all denials) and 2,467 standard denials (over 3%).

The remaining denials (71,410, or nearly 94%) did not meet referral guidelines or were overturned or canceled.

----------

Field offices declined to refer 4,184 cases for prosecution.

The most common reasons for declinations were no prosecutive merit (1,661 cases or almost 40%), federal or state guidelines were not met (1,092 cases or 26%), and subjects found to not be prohibited (480 cases or about 12%). (Table 4). Other reasons for declination by a field office included closure by a supervisor (457 or 11%) and no potential or unfounded (396 cases or about 10%). (Appendix table D.)

 

[g5000]

On background checks....

Why Background Checks Couldn’t Stop Dylan Roof

Irrelevant. The only thing that could stop Roof is to repeal the Second Amendment, which is not going to happen.

However, background checks do stop 80,000 people a year from getting a gun who shouldn't have one.

Demonstrate.

Are you not reading post 207? Irrefutable proof right there.

Yet it is fully refuted EVERY TIME a prohibited person obtains a gun.

Nope. It is not refuted unless you can show all 80,000 were able to get a gun after being denied.

Your argument is the same as claiming laws against murder are fully refuted every time someone is murdered.

We have hard, undeniable evidence that 80,000 felons, fugitives, and other undesirables are denied a gun each year. That is an incredibly effective law.

 

[2aguy]

On background checks....

Why Background Checks Couldn’t Stop Dylan Roof

Irrelevant. The only thing that could stop Roof is to repeal the Second Amendment, which is not going to happen.

However, background checks do stop 80,000 people a year from getting a gun who shouldn't have one.

Demonstrate.

Are you not reading post 207? Irrefutable proof right there.

Yet it is fully refuted EVERY TIME a prohibited person obtains a gun.

Nope. It is not refuted unless you can show all 80,000 were able to get a gun after being denied.

Your argument is the same as claiming laws against murder are fully refuted every time someone is murdered.

We have hard, undeniable evidence that 80,000 felons, fugitives, and other undesirables are denied a gun each year. That is an incredibly effective law.

And of course you are wrong again......from your link.....

NICS 15th Anniversary: Stats Show Success of Gun Background Check System

Records are not kept on individuals whose transactions are approved to proceed. By law, they are purged within 24 hours. NICS has an appeal process in place for individuals whose transactions are denied.

Nice way they hide the fact that their background checks don't work....

and....

The truth and facts show you are wrong again....

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/grants/239272.pdf

The DENI Branch screened 76,142 NICS denials received from the FBI during 2010, and referred 4,732 denials (approximately 6%) within the established guidelines to field divisions.

The referred cases were made up of 2,265 delayed denials (3% of all denials) and 2,467 standard denials (over 3%).

The remaining denials (71,410, or nearly 94%) did not meet referral guidelines or were overturned or canceled.

----------

Field offices declined to refer 4,184 cases for prosecution.

The most common reasons for declinations were no prosecutive merit (1,661 cases or almost 40%), federal or state guidelines were not met (1,092 cases or 26%), and subjects found to not be prohibited (480 cases or about 12%). (Table 4). Other reasons for declination by a field office included closure by a supervisor (457 or 11%) and no potential or unfounded (396 cases or about 10%). (Appendix table D.)

 

[2aguy]

We need to stop background checks for this reason as well...

Background checks are racist.....they will simply use them to look for "Black" sounding names and deny blacks just because they are Black.......pure racism.....

Background checks are also Islamaphobic....they will use background checks to look for Islamic sounding names and then deny them their guns.....

 

[g5000]

Post 63:

To date, NICS queries of criminal databases have resulted in 1,065,090 denials, with 88,479 in 2012 alone.

NICS 15th Anniversary: Stats Show Success of Gun Background Check System

Post 78:

Between 70,000 and 80,000 people are denied guns each year for providing false or inaccurate information on their background check forms, according to the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

Do We Enforce Our Gun Laws?

Post 82:

Post 186:

The number of criminals stopped by the checks is also quite small. In 2010, there were over 76,000 initial denials, but only 44 of those were deemed worthy for prosecution by the federal government and only 13 individuals were convicted. Even those 13 cases don’t tend to be the “dangerous” criminals Obama claims are being stopped. There are additional state prosecutions, but those are rare as well.

So as we can see, it has been proven time and time and time again that background checks prevent about 80,000 people a year from getting a gun.


And if we read the link in 2AGuy's post, we find this:

The most common reason for denial by the FBI was a record of a felony indictment or conviction (over 47%), followed by fugitives from justice (19%), and state law prohibitions (about 11%)

Boom!

This means background checks are effective, unlike Voter ID.

The truth and facts show you are wrong again....

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/grants/239272.pdf

The DENI Branch screened 76,142 NICS denials received from the FBI during 2010, and referred 4,732 denials (approximately 6%) within the established guidelines to field divisions.

The referred cases were made up of 2,265 delayed denials (3% of all denials) and 2,467 standard denials (over 3%).

The remaining denials (71,410, or nearly 94%) did not meet referral guidelines or were overturned or canceled.

----------

Field offices declined to refer 4,184 cases for prosecution.

The most common reasons for declinations were no prosecutive merit (1,661 cases or almost 40%), federal or state guidelines were not met (1,092 cases or 26%), and subjects found to not be prohibited (480 cases or about 12%). (Table 4). Other reasons for declination by a field office included closure by a supervisor (457 or 11%) and no potential or unfounded (396 cases or about 10%). (Appendix table D.)

You have a reading comprehension problem. The 71,410 denials do not meet the "delayed denial" criteria for further processing. They are standard denials and require no further processing. Those 71,410 denials mean 71,410 people did not get guns.

The "delayed denials" are referred to the ATF for further processing, and they have a final outcome of a 3.3% denial rate, which is much higher than the 1% of background checks which result in a standard denial.

 

[2aguy]

Post 63:

To date, NICS queries of criminal databases have resulted in 1,065,090 denials, with 88,479 in 2012 alone.

NICS 15th Anniversary: Stats Show Success of Gun Background Check System

Post 78:

Between 70,000 and 80,000 people are denied guns each year for providing false or inaccurate information on their background check forms, according to the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

Do We Enforce Our Gun Laws?

Post 82:

Post 186:

The number of criminals stopped by the checks is also quite small. In 2010, there were over 76,000 initial denials, but only 44 of those were deemed worthy for prosecution by the federal government and only 13 individuals were convicted. Even those 13 cases don’t tend to be the “dangerous” criminals Obama claims are being stopped. There are additional state prosecutions, but those are rare as well.

So as we can see, it has been proven time and time and time again that background checks prevent about 80,000 people a year from getting a gun.


And if we read the link in 2AGuy's post, we find this:

The most common reason for denial by the FBI was a record of a felony indictment or conviction (over 47%), followed by fugitives from justice (19%), and state law prohibitions (about 11%)

Boom!

This means background checks are effective, unlike Voter ID.

The truth and facts show you are wrong again....

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/grants/239272.pdf

The DENI Branch screened 76,142 NICS denials received from the FBI during 2010, and referred 4,732 denials (approximately 6%) within the established guidelines to field divisions.

The referred cases were made up of 2,265 delayed denials (3% of all denials) and 2,467 standard denials (over 3%).

The remaining denials (71,410, or nearly 94%) did not meet referral guidelines or were overturned or canceled.

----------

Field offices declined to refer 4,184 cases for prosecution.

The most common reasons for declinations were no prosecutive merit (1,661 cases or almost 40%), federal or state guidelines were not met (1,092 cases or 26%), and subjects found to not be prohibited (480 cases or about 12%). (Table 4). Other reasons for declination by a field office included closure by a supervisor (457 or 11%) and no potential or unfounded (396 cases or about 10%). (Appendix table D.)

You have a reading comprehension problem. The 71,410 denials do not meet the "delayed denial" criteria for further processing. They are standard denials and require no further processing. Those 71,410 denials mean 71,410 people did not get guns.

The "delayed denials" are referred to the ATF for further processing, and they have a final outcome of a 3.3% denial rate, which is much higher than the 1% of background checks which result in a standard denial.

The denials were overturned....

which means they went through...

The remaining denials (71,410, or nearly 94%) did not meet referral guidelines or were overturned or canceled.

 

[g5000]

And the truth about background checks...

NRA Debunks Bogus Universal Background Check Justification - The Truth About Guns


I want to caution you against repeating that claim. The facts are below.

• Media outlets including the Richmond Times-Dispatchand the Washington Post have concluded that this claim is false. Washington Post gave the claim 3 out of 4 Pinochios for being way off target.

• Most of the survey covered sales before there was a federal background check system.

• The 1994 survey was conducted eight months after the Brady Act went into effect, mandating background checks on individuals seeking to buy firearms from federally licensed dealers. Survey participants were asked about their gun acquisitions going back two years. Some of the participants likely made gun purchases before the Brady Act, when they were not required to undergo federal background checks.

• Self-reports are inherently unreliable – not actual data of sales.

• Only a small group of gun owners — 251 people — answered the survey question about the origin of their weapons. Some of the gun owners were not sure how they had gotten their guns, answering “probably” or “probably not” on whether they got the gun from a licensed firearm dealer.

• Additionally, the federal survey simply asked buyers if they thought they were buying from a licensed firearms dealer. While all Federal Firearm Licensees (FFLs) do background checks, only those perceived as being FFLs were counted. Yet, there is much evidence that survey respondents who went to the smallest FFLs, especially the “kitchen table” types, had no idea that the dealer was actually “licensed.” Many buyers seemed to think that only “brick and mortar” stores were licensed dealers, and so the survey underestimating the number of sales covered by the checks.

• The researchers gave this number for all transactions, including gifts, not just “sales.” Count only guns that were bought, traded, borrowed, rented, issued as a job requirement or won through raffles, and 85 percent went through federally licensed gun dealers; just 15 percent would’ve been transferred without a background check.

• Economist John Lott, the author of several landmark studies on the real-world impact of gun control, has concluded that if you take out transfers of guns either between FFLs or between family members, the remaining number of transfers falls to about 10 percent. Lott stated, “We don’t know the precise number today, but it is hard to believe that it is above single digits.” (Op-Ed: The truth on background checks | Buckeye Firearms Association)

The long and the short of that article which you felt the need to colorize is that they dispute the figure that 40 percent of gun sales are done without background checks.

They do not deny you can legally buy a gun without a background check. They do not deny the loophole exists.

 

[2aguy]

Background checks are racist.

 

[g5000]

Post 63:

To date, NICS queries of criminal databases have resulted in 1,065,090 denials, with 88,479 in 2012 alone.

NICS 15th Anniversary: Stats Show Success of Gun Background Check System

Post 78:

Between 70,000 and 80,000 people are denied guns each year for providing false or inaccurate information on their background check forms, according to the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

Do We Enforce Our Gun Laws?

Post 82:

Post 186:

The number of criminals stopped by the checks is also quite small. In 2010, there were over 76,000 initial denials, but only 44 of those were deemed worthy for prosecution by the federal government and only 13 individuals were convicted. Even those 13 cases don’t tend to be the “dangerous” criminals Obama claims are being stopped. There are additional state prosecutions, but those are rare as well.

So as we can see, it has been proven time and time and time again that background checks prevent about 80,000 people a year from getting a gun.


And if we read the link in 2AGuy's post, we find this:

The most common reason for denial by the FBI was a record of a felony indictment or conviction (over 47%), followed by fugitives from justice (19%), and state law prohibitions (about 11%)

Boom!

This means background checks are effective, unlike Voter ID.

The truth and facts show you are wrong again....

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/grants/239272.pdf

The DENI Branch screened 76,142 NICS denials received from the FBI during 2010, and referred 4,732 denials (approximately 6%) within the established guidelines to field divisions.

The referred cases were made up of 2,265 delayed denials (3% of all denials) and 2,467 standard denials (over 3%).

The remaining denials (71,410, or nearly 94%) did not meet referral guidelines or were overturned or canceled.

----------

Field offices declined to refer 4,184 cases for prosecution.

The most common reasons for declinations were no prosecutive merit (1,661 cases or almost 40%), federal or state guidelines were not met (1,092 cases or 26%), and subjects found to not be prohibited (480 cases or about 12%). (Table 4). Other reasons for declination by a field office included closure by a supervisor (457 or 11%) and no potential or unfounded (396 cases or about 10%). (Appendix table D.)

You have a reading comprehension problem. The 71,410 denials do not meet the "delayed denial" criteria for further processing. They are standard denials and require no further processing. Those 71,410 denials mean 71,410 people did not get guns.

The "delayed denials" are referred to the ATF for further processing, and they have a final outcome of a 3.3% denial rate, which is much higher than the 1% of background checks which result in a standard denial.

The denials were overturned....

which means they went through...

The remaining denials (71,410, or nearly 94%) did not meet referral guidelines or were overturned or canceled.

The remaining 71,410 did not need further processing, which means they stood. Some were overturned or canceled.

Read it until you get it. If they were all overturned or cancelled, it would say that.

"Did not meet referral guidelines" would be redundant if it meant what you think it does. You have it wrong. Read it again, in context.

Think about it. A felon or fugitive tries to get a gun and is flatly turned down. Done. No referral for further processing needed. You are a fool if you think "did not meet referral guidelines" for most of the denials meant the fugitives were allowed to buy a gun.

 

[g5000]

Background checks are racist.

I actually was hoping we could go there. I was hoping someone would push the fact that almost none of the annual 80,000 felons and fugitives get prosecuted for trying to buy a gun.

 

[g5000]

Nope. You quoted the OP, which is an article about police chiefs who want background checks for gun shows. You then said, "There is already a law mandating background checks on gun purchases."

For most states, there are no background checks mandated for gun shows, which I pointed out.

I corrected you, and you've been butt hurt since.

Yes, and my statement was accurate.

I must perform a background check on every buyer I sell to from my store.

Which is not a gun show or private sale.

Read the OP. Then come back and try again.

Dude get over yourself already, the OP is not only talking about gun shows and private sales it pertains to ALL gun purchases.

Damn you are one dense fuck!

When they talk about ALL gun purchases in the OP, they are saying they want background checks to apply to ALL gun purchases and that they currently don't. They don't apply to 40 percent of ALL gun purchases.

So when you came along and said background checks are already mandated, you sounded like one dense fuck who wasn't following.

And you still do.

The 40% number is from 1994....when they were just about to implement current background checks...you guys have been using that number for 21 years........and the background checks you wanted then....and that you used the 40% number to explain why we needed them back then....is now the same number you are using to push for more background checks after the original background checks didn's stop criminals or mass shooters from getting guns.....

I posted the gun homicide rate for before and after the Brady bill. There has been a dramatic, sustained decrease of gun homicides since that law was passed.

See, you are trying the stupid trick that if ALL crime isn't stopped, then a law should be repealed, and that is just retarded. If you can show it has NO effect, then I am with you. But in this case, it has had a dramatic effect.

So now it is time to introduce you to the expression, "The perfect is the enemy of the good."

It has been demonstrated time and time again that the background check requirement is incredibly effective.

As for "you guys" using the 40 percent figure, I never saw that figure before today. I merely quoted it from the OP article to inform someone what this topic was about. It is about the fact you can buy a gun legally without a background check, and that these police chiefs want to close that loophole.

We can argue all day long about what percent of guns are bought this way, but it cannot be argued that background checks are ineffective. They are very effective.

I defy anyone to show me any law which completely stopped every occurrence of a particular crime. You are making a dumb argument in the face of the facts.