The gun show loophole- What do you think?

[bigj480 203]

I believe that anyone not incarcerated should be allowed to own a gun. Yes, I know that many dangerous people are out on the street but that is the fault of our legal system, which needs to be fixed. People who can not be trusted with a firearm should be off of the streets. Prison overcrowding you say? We focus on punishment so much that we don't try to rehabilitate enough, this leads to repeat offenders. Felons are disfranchised for the rest of there lives, can't vote, own a gun and job opportunities are limited. It's a life sentence. Too many relatively minor crimes are felonies, so fix that. The "war on drugs" is to blame for creating a black market for criminals to thrive on, stop that. Many crimes are committed by those who cross our border illegally, stop that. All of these things play a much bigger role than the gun show "loophole". Instead of focusing on taking the gun out of "gun crime", why don't get rid of the crime in "gun crime"? Because it is much easier to pass do-nothing feel-good legislation than to tackle the CAUSE of crime.

[rcimhoff 0]

Ok, question. Joe Felon walks into a gun show. Walks up to a private seller, has a friendly conversation, negotiates a deal and buys a gun off the guy. Joe Felon flashes his drivers license to show he lives in state. The two make a sale and part ways. You don't see anything wrong with that?

 

This is why we have laws in place to throw someone like Joe Felon in prison for a very very long time if he purchases a firearm when he is not suppose to. You don't ruin FTF transactions for the other 99% of citizens who can legally purchase a firearm just because 1% of the population is a bunch of deviants. Thinking like that is why the Left is so out of wack with reality. If there were no gun shows then he would just be able to get a gun through other means.

[SOPMOD 254]

4/5 of so called felonies are for victimless crimes,and felons used to be handed a horse and and a gun when released from prison prior to the instatement of JP Morgan's police state scheme.

 

Pedos do 2-4 years while dope smokers,unlicensed gun dealers and backyard weed growers do 10-20 large?

 

 

I wipe my ass with this system and I can't wait until it's goons are begging for bread in the street so I can plant my foot in their chest and tell them to "get in line"

Edited April 15, 2009 by SOPMOD

[Wotan1105 7]

True there too, justice system is about as screwed as the whole political system, economic system too go figure. Everywhere we look, screwed screwed screwed.

Edited April 15, 2009 by Wotan1105

[SOPMOD 254]

Joe Felon was a legal free man until the early 1900s unless he was a thief,rapist,bully,cheat or pervert but now less than 11% of people labeled "felons" fall into that category with 28% if Americans being in controlled custody in their lifetime..

 

"Felon" mean nothing to me because most of the bankers,attorneys and CEOs I have dined with over he years would be "felons" if there was a righteous judge in all these United States...

[vbrtrmn 167]

good Conservative Christian Republican

 

 

LOL

 

OXYMORON ALERT

 

Wow, now stooping so low as to insult friends of mine, go back to your fucking bridge you fucking worthless troll.

[sudaevpps43 31]

So im in the mood for a good politically charged discussion today ! I wanted to see what you think about the gun show loophole where you can buy everything in cash and never get checked or fill out any forms.

 

Here is my 2 cents. I love guns, and I want to keep what I have and get some more. I follow the law and dont mind the one page yellow sheet as a requirement at a gun shop cause I am a law abiding type person. I feel like the gun show loophole is something that is feeding the fire of gun control when you read all the stuff about mexico and the cartels getting 90 percent of the guns there(assuming thats true). Is it time for a change on the gun show loophole? I say maybe but to be honest cant commit one way or the other because it wont address the straw buyer issue so maybe it doesnt really matter. Wanted to know what other gun lovers think about the subject.

Heres a recent NY times article on the subject that got me thinking.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/15/us/15gun...rss&emc=rss

 

And dont shoot the messenger, everyone is entitled to their opinion.

 

I like how that article selectively uses statistics, saying that 90% of the 12,000 guns Mexico had asked to be traced last year were determined to have originated in the U.S., while leaving out the fact that last year Mexico had actually seized a total of about 63,500 guns. But of course saying 90% sells more newspapers than saying 17% would, so I hardly expect different from the New York Times.

 

Setting aside the manipulated stats, there is no such thing as a gunshow loophole. It is a made up phrase, specifically intended to have a negative (not truthful) connotation, created by those with an agenda (politicians and others who believe self-defense rights should be eliminated in this country). These sort of made up phrases are used all the time by groups all across the political spectrum. 'Patriot Act', 'partial birth abortion', 'death tax', and of course 'assault weapons ban', are all names and phrases made up from scratch by people trying to force their own agenda on the rest of the country. A group that wants to destroy our self-defense rights doesn't call themselves a 'self-defense rights opposition group', they call themselves a 'gun-control' group. And when they say they want to close down the 'gunshow loophole', what they really mean is that they want to make it illegal for a private citizen to sell certain kinds of private property without first getting government approval, and it has nothing to do with reducing crime or inhibiting criminals from getting guns. Just look at the so called 'drug war' our country has been engaged in for the last several decades. Cocaine and heroin have been completely illegal to buy, sell, trade, use, or possess for a long time, but it hasn't inhibited the ability of criminals to traffic in these drugs one bit.

 

And for those who say they understand all this, but say we should still outlaw private sales of firearms without a background check as a matter of principle, I would ask if its a matter of principle why you then don't also favor doing the same thing for all other private sales of commodities which could also possibly be used illegally by the buyer. Why not require a guy selling an old set of kitchen knives at a garage sale to have to ask the government to do a background check on the buyer, to make sure the buyer wasn't some ex-con convicted of stabbing someone to death? Why not require someone selling their old PC on E-Bay to have to ask the government to do a background check on the buyer, to make sure the buyer isn't a convicted sex offender barred from ever owning a PC again because he preyed on children through the internet. There is just as much logic in supporting government required background checks on these private sales as there is for requiring it on private firearms sales, yet no one is calling for closing the 'garage sale loophole' or 'E-bay loophole'.

[BronCobraJet 80]

I believe that anyone not incarcerated should be allowed to own a gun. Yes, I know that many dangerous people are out on the street but that is the fault of our legal system, which needs to be fixed. People who can not be trusted with a firearm should be off of the streets. Prison overcrowding you say? We focus on punishment so much that we don't try to rehabilitate enough, this leads to repeat offenders. Felons are disfranchised for the rest of there lives, can't vote, own a gun and job opportunities are limited. It's a life sentence. Too many relatively minor crimes are felonies, so fix that. The "war on drugs" is to blame for creating a black market for criminals to thrive on, stop that. Many crimes are committed by those who cross our border illegally, stop that. All of these things play a much bigger role than the gun show "loophole". Instead of focusing on taking the gun out of "gun crime", why don't get rid of the crime in "gun crime"? Because it is much easier to pass do-nothing feel-good legislation than to tackle the CAUSE of crime.

So many people are fixated on staring at the rotten flowers that they neglect to notice the rotten roots from which they came.

[sacsucks 3]

Thanks for the excellent dialog. Its been very educational for me to hear what yall think. Its certainly a complex issue with lots of what ifs, and I see the points made from a new light.

[G O B 3,516]

I have two thoughts.

 

1. The 'gun show loophole' is a construction of the radical extremist left. It does not exist.

 

2. If they are really so worried about protecting the world from felons buying guns from honest citizens under false pretenses, let them pay the freight to run paperless NICS checks as a voluntary service for private sellers at gun shows. It would be rather popular if it was free AND was a simple yes/no, without it becoming a registration.

[Nailbomb 10,221]

Theres a loophole? i'm usualy great at finding those and i havn't seen one.

[gunman1 1,753]

good Conservative Christian Republican

 

 

LOL

 

OXYMORON ALERT

I've noticed that when dialogue doesn't go your way you come out with personal attacks.....fuck you, there. That's the reply you hope to inspire and I just had a breif lapse of sanity.

 

I'm done.

[RangerM9 1]

I am 100% pro gun rights, but I do have to wonder how many people that legally cannot own a gun go to gun shows and buy FTF at them so there is no paper trail? I would have to assume that it does happen.

 

Of course it also happens out of the back of car trunks in dark alleys too, so it is not a simple problem with a simple solution.

 

 

I do wonder also, tried selling my CZ-52 at a show about a year ago, guy and i agreed on price, he had cash, i said i needed his info for my records since i bought it with my 03 FFL, guy turned pale white and moved away quickly....deal off.

 

dude wanted no record of him having a gun.

 

Traded the CZ-52 + cash for a S-308 about 30 minutes later.....through an 01 FFL. No loop holes.

 

I agree though....private sale, no records needed in general.....that said i do worry that i may sell a gun that could be used later in some event.....and damn i don't want that weighing on my conscience......nor my prints or DNA on the gun at the scene!

[Azrial 1,091]

So im in the mood for a good politically charged discussion today ! I wanted to see what you think about the gun show loophole where you can buy everything in cash and never get checked or fill out any forms.....And dont shoot the messenger, everyone is entitled to their opinion.

 

Have you ever even been to a Gun Show? THERE IS NO GUN SHOW LOOPHOLE! Meet me at a local gun show and show me how you buy guns from FFL Dealers, with NO PAPERWORK. This is northing but a media generated lie and you are here repeating it.

 

I have a question for you. Who the hell in Georgia gives a damn what the New York Times says?

 

I am sorry, I do not believe that anyone that knows anything, even a little about firearms, would have to come here and ask if a spin piece in the NYT was true! I say that you are a media troll. I notice that we did not get to meet you at the Tea Party tonight!

 

That is my opinion.

[railman1 0]

Prior to JFK being killed, you could mail order guns. No questions asked. Forty six years, and many thousands of gun laws later...Is there anyone who doesnt spend his day with his face stuck in a bong who would say America is a safer country than it was in 1963? It bothers me that many gun owners have become so numbed to government interference, that it doesnt piss them off when they have to sign a form asking permission to exercise a constitutional right.

 

Gun show loophole?..there is no such thing. There is only the attempt to erode a few more rights.

[t165 30]

Okay, correct me If I am wrong (as if I really had to ask ). The ATF, BATFE, or one of it's other many names started out as a tax collection unit of the United States Treasury Department. I think it was initially housed within the IRS (or one of it's many names through the years). The ATF has been shifted in and out of the DOJ over the years and although I keep mistakenly saying it is under the direction of the Treasury I think it is now under DOJ control and the proper acronym is actually BATFE. I thought the Transfer forms which a dealer to private citizen has to fill out were for tax collection reasons more than anything else in days past. Now they are morphing into much more than that.

 

The point I'm trying to make is...if private guns sales within a state at "Gun Shows" are made illegal then will it be against the law for private citizen to sell/trade/gift/give firearms to each other without having to employ a FFL to handle the exchange? It just seems to me that "closing the gun show loophole" is a subterfuge for additional taxing and tracking of firearms owned by private citizens by the government.

 

And if the BATFE (ATF) is now under the Department of Justice control then why are they still collecting/regulating taxes...isn't that the sole domain of the Treasury Department? What am I missing here.

[Bvamp 604]

IF, now bear with me here guys IF -

 

I somehow got that mad that i did something stupid, and had to ferfeit my guns.

 

and IF lets say IF now again -

 

I was that mad that I would take further action againt some party -

 

 

I could readily -

 

and intentionally -

 

produce ONLY my ID (in some states they dont even require this)

 

and plop cash on the table

 

 

and walk out with a saiga 12 conversion and drum. IF it was to be bought, at whatever price.

 

 

THAT is the loophole.

 

I dont know what should be done about it, and I dont know what good any of it is, but i think maybe, just maybe, us good citizens could trasde a FIX to this for our RIGHT.

 

 

and head it off at the pass.....just me thinking here. sorry guys.

 

 

and if you do sell off your "private collection" that magically multiplies and is RESOLD, you BETTER have a paper trail to whom you sold these serial'd items to.....if you dont have a paper trail to the gun, and they trace it to you, you may as well done the crime too, cause you are an accomplice at this point.

[Azrial 1,091]

.....I could readily - and intentionally - produce ONLY my ID (in some states they dont even require this)

and plop cash on the table and walk out with a saiga 12 conversion and drum. IF it was to be bought, at whatever price.

 

 

THAT is the loophole.

 

Ben, I like you, but your problem is you were raised in a state where your basic rights were restricted and you think that is natural order of things! You can not buy a Saiga 12 from a FFL Dealer without paperwork. Now "registration" which is what you are talking about is not done in most parts of the South, nor should any civil right ever be. Please explain to me all the crime that registration has prevented.

 

There is no "fix" needed, except in the way you constantly glorify the way everything is done up North. I have nothing against the North, but if you want your guns registered, take pictures with serial numbers and mail them to the BATF, they will hook you up.

 

Frankly, you are just plain wrong here.

 

and if you do sell off your "private collection" that magically multiplies and is RESOLD, you BETTER have a paper trail to whom you sold these serial'd items to.....if you dont have a paper trail to the gun, and they trace it to you, you may as well done the crime too, cause you are an accomplice at this point.

 

And here as well. You have no idea what the hell you are talking about. There is no liability from a criminal prosecution view point. Quit trying to invest firearms with some special liability that no other machine has. It is just a tool, that can be bought, sold and used. IF that use by a subsequent owner is illegal then HE is responsible, no one else.

Edited April 16, 2009 by Azrial

[Nailbomb 10,221]

I dont know what should be done about it, and I dont know what good any of it is, but i think maybe, just maybe, us good citizens could trasde a FIX to this for our RIGHT.

 

 

and head it off at the pass.....just me thinking here. sorry guys.

People do stuff like this way too often. You give so you think they will be happy but they will just want more. This is how our rights have gotten erroded.

 

In theory this SOUNDS good, but really you and i both know the point to this whole thing is not even the example your giving.

 

Why would you as a criminal WAIT for a gun show? you spend $1 on a swap sheet and there they are at the beck and call of your wallet and a phone.

 

the fact is that this really is just a attempt at either registration, or removing ALL face to face transactions of firearms from citizens.

Edited April 16, 2009 by Nailbomb

[sacsucks 3]

Azrial,

Despite living in GA, I care about what I read in the NYTs and other national papers because that is what legislators will be reading when they decide to take our rights away. As I stated in my initial post, I question the truth of what I read and posted it here to spur discussion. I have been to a gun show, and I know plenty about firearms. I understand you are upset by the term loophole, and I agree its not a fair term to refer to private gun sales. But I was referring to the article.

 

I was at the tea party and believe me after paying 10 grand in taxes this year for a BS reason, I am furious with the IRS. I didn't know you were there. Hope to meet you sometime and share more polite conversation. As I said, dont shoot the messenger, I thought this was a place to share general topics and spur conversation, and with two pages of posts, I believe we did have a lively discussion on the topic.

[Bounce12 407]

Azrial,

Despite living in GA, I care about what I read in the NYTs and other national papers because that is what legislators will be reading when they decide to take our rights away. As I stated in my initial post, I question the truth of what I read and posted it here to spur discussion. I have been to a gun show, and I know plenty about firearms. I understand you are upset by the term loophole, and I agree its not a fair term to refer to private gun sales. But I was referring to the article.

 

I was at the tea party and believe me after paying 10 grand in taxes this year for a BS reason, I am furious with the IRS. I didn't know you were there. Hope to meet you sometime and share more polite conversation. As I said, dont shoot the messenger, I thought this was a place to share general topics and spur conversation, and with two pages of posts, I believe we did have a lively discussion on the topic.

 

 

Hey, take it from me...

 

If the shit doesn't fly, the subject didn't get fully discussed.

 

LOL

 

Shit storms are a good thing.

[Bean.223 365]

good Conservative Christian Republican

 

 

LOL

 

OXYMORON ALERT

 

Wow, now stooping so low as to insult friends of mine, go back to your fucking bridge you fucking worthless troll.

 

 

He's a troll get used to it. All he does is insult people in threads. Put him on ignore like me!!

Edited April 16, 2009 by Bean.223

[Juggernaut 11,054]

There is no "gun show" loophole... these aren't the Droids you're looking for.... Move along....

[Azrial 1,091]

Edited April 16, 2009 by Azrial

[sacsucks 3]

No, I am not a member of the media. Ive been to plenty of gun shows where I suspect the person is an FFL or agent of such a person selling new guns as a private citizen transferring them without checking jack. Or a private citizen selling a bunch of new guns. I dont know for sure, it just seems weird that a person would have a table of new guns and not be tied to a dealer. Its a valid question to ask if that makes sense or not. You are so focused on the word loophole you missed the point, to have fun and discuss a timely article and topic. Anyone reading your message would find a tone to it intended or not. Sure its loaded when you quote the media, thats what makes it fun to talk about. And after how you have responded over this post, why would I want to make any effort to meet someone who has spent time trying to insult me? Its people like you that drive members away from the posts here and prevent good discussion and info from getting out there. Totally unnecessary. If you find a topic loaded or silly, you dont have to respond. I sure dont go around finding people to bash in the forum. Im done with this post.

Edited April 17, 2009 by sacsucks

[elvis christ 451]

No, I am not a member of the media. Ive been to plenty of gun shows where an FFL is selling new guns as a private citizen transferring them without checking jack. Its a valid question to ask if that makes sense or not. You are so focused on the word loophole you missed the point, to have fun and discuss a timely article and topic. Anyone reading your message would find a tone to it intended or not. Sure its loaded when you quote the media, thats what makes it fun to talk about. And after how you have responded over this post, why would I want to make any effort to meet someone who has spent time trying to insult me? Its people like you that drive members away from the posts here and prevent good discussion and info from getting out there. Totally unnecessary. If you find a topic loaded or silly, you dont have to respond. I sure dont go around finding people to bash in the forum. Im done with this post.

 

You mean to tell me that you have seen an FFL "pose" as a private citizen, at a booth in a gunshow and sell a firearm to someone, without running the proper background check? I may have to call bullshit on this one. I could possibly see someone with an FFL "purchasing" a gun in their name and selling it to a friend (I don't know what an FFL holder's requirement is as far as selling a privately owned gun in a private transaction), but at a gun show would be one of the top 3 worst places to pull a stunt of that nature. At the gun shows around here, there are usually a decent amount of ATF/ABI/what the fuck ever else kind of law enforcement, with a fair amount of them that stand on a elevated section of the auditorium and basically look out over the convention center. For someone to risk their FFL and face whatever kind of penalties would come with that offense just doesn't jive. Way too much potential for scrutiny at the gun show.

[Bounce12 407]

No, I am not a member of the media. Ive been to plenty of gun shows where an FFL is selling new guns as a private citizen transferring them without checking jack. Its a valid question to ask if that makes sense or not. You are so focused on the word loophole you missed the point, to have fun and discuss a timely article and topic. Anyone reading your message would find a tone to it intended or not. Sure its loaded when you quote the media, thats what makes it fun to talk about. And after how you have responded over this post, why would I want to make any effort to meet someone who has spent time trying to insult me? Its people like you that drive members away from the posts here and prevent good discussion and info from getting out there. Totally unnecessary. If you find a topic loaded or silly, you dont have to respond. I sure dont go around finding people to bash in the forum. Im done with this post.

 

You mean to tell me that you have seen an FFL "pose" as a private citizen, at a booth in a gunshow and sell a firearm to someone, without running the proper background check? I may have to call bullshit on this one. I could possibly see someone with an FFL "purchasing" a gun in their name and selling it to a friend (I don't know what an FFL holder's requirement is as far as selling a privately owned gun in a private transaction), but at a gun show would be one of the top 3 worst places to pull a stunt of that nature. At the gun shows around here, there are usually a decent amount of ATF/ABI/what the fuck ever else kind of law enforcement, with a fair amount of them that stand on a elevated section of the auditorium and basically look out over the convention center. For someone to risk their FFL and face whatever kind of penalties would come with that offense just doesn't jive. Way too much potential for scrutiny at the gun show.

 

 

Here's the thing.... What would the motivation be for the FFL to do that? It's not like guns are hard to sell. If someone doesn't want to fill out the paperwork, the guy behind him in line would be glad to do so.

 

I don't see that the FFL has ANYTHING to gain by skirting the law like that (and he has everything to lose).

 

I haven't heard of anything like that and the idea doesn't seem plausible to me. There is no reason for the FFL to cheat.

[sacsucks 3]

Sorry, had to correct that, didnt read it right. I supect they are ffls, dont know for sure. But at the end of the day, still not the point here.

[RobRez 1,895]

Lots of good points here. It seems like lots of Americans are killed by cars. In fact aprox. 4400 PEDESTRIANS are killed by cars driven by fellow Americans, not Mexican mobsters or Middle Eastern terrorists! So if we sell a car to someone and they kill someone with that car we should be held responsible for that as well. We should go to jail when they drive drunk, because in this country a criminal minded person can clearly not be held responsible for his own actions. Where do we draw the line? Before selling that old baseball bat or set of golf clubs at your yard sale you'd better make sure the purchaser has no prior assault record! You could be killing innocent children! Is there a form for "Bat-ground" checks?

[Azrial 1,091]

....Ive been to plenty of gun shows where I suspect the person is an FFL or agent of such a person selling new guns as a private citizen transferring them without checking jack. Or a private citizen selling a bunch of new guns. I dont know for sure, it just seems weird that a person would have a table of new guns and not be tied to a dealer. Its a valid question to ask if that makes sense or not. You are so focused on the word loophole you missed the point, to have fun and discuss a timely article and topic. Anyone reading your message would find a tone to it intended or not. Sure its loaded when you quote the media, thats what makes it fun to talk about. And after how you have responded over this post, why would I want to make any effort to meet someone who has spent time trying to insult me? Its people like you that drive members away from the posts here and prevent good discussion and info from getting out there. Totally unnecessary. If you find a topic loaded or silly, you dont have to respond. I sure dont go around finding people to bash in the forum. Im done with this post.

 

How the hell does an FFL order new firearms from a manufacturer then turn around and sell them through a strawman or directly, without paperwork? How does he balance his bound book? I mean the importer, manufacturer or wholesaler has to keep books as well! They show who they shipped firearms out to. What happens when the FFL can not show how he disposed of them? The BATF takes a dim view of "Inventory Shrinkage." At best, you simply don't know what you are talking about.

 

As to the "fun" aspect of your post, that is one of the problems, I do not see an assault on my rights as "fun." That is the problem with this wave of fad followers that have decided that they suddently need a firearm, they think that this is a "hobby" and being the fickle nitwits that they are will move on soon to the newest rage.

 

I should have realized that you only wanted responses that stroked your ego or that validated your statement, when you asked the question in the loaded manner that you did. Now you get all butt hurt because it did not go the way you planned! I mean I did not pout and cry when you started that condescending shit and presumed to divine my feelings and pronounced me "upset."

 

I have not insulted you at all, you have insulted yourself.