Loophole? Please 'splain -

[cussedemgun]

While watching the Senate Judiciary Comm. hearings, I heard several references to "the gunshow loophole".

They are worried that someone already prevented by law will be able to purchase a gun at a gunshow when the background check at a dealer would prevent the sale.

Said prohibited person is already prevented 'by law' from possesing a firearm. Said person breaks the law no matter how he comes into possesion. How is this a loophole in the law?

How will "one more law" fix anything when said person plainly chose to ignore the existing law? If a prohibited person is that bent on illegally possesing, this merely forces the need to steal!

When anyone hears "gunshow loophole" please ask the speaker to stop & explain. The term has been used without challenge so often, lots of people assume there really is a loophole & it is a fact NO LOOPHOLE IN THE LAW EXISTS!

OK, I'll end my rant with "maybe the 'anti-crowd' are trying to make it "againster the law"

HHMMMmmmmmm- -?

[mkess]

I've wondered the same thing. The only thing I can think they mean is the private sales that happen at the shows, which is no different then me selling to a complete stranger on any given day.

[Simmer down]

It does sound like putting up one more hurtle if someone walks around the others, like being under age, non-resident, or legally barred. This hurtle is the best so they saved it for last. Finally, a rule that will alter reality just by it being in print.

[sigp220.45]

The loophole is a felon can walk into a gunshow and not be able to buy a gun at one table (an FFL) but buy one at the next table (a private sale).

Yes, its illegal. But that is the loophole people are talking about.

We all know the same thing can happen with a private sale in a parking lot or through an ad in a Pennysaver paper or through a cleverly worded Craigslist ad. Its just simpler for the opposition to say "gun show loophole" than "unregulated private sale".

[usm1rifle]

These idiots think it is a loophole because they think criminals will obey the law and believe the lies the like of Handgun Control tell them.

[cowart]

Originally Posted by sigp220.45

Its just simpler for the opposition to say "gun show loophole" than "unregulated private sale".

In theory at least, Congress doesn't have the authority to regulate in-state non-FFL private sales, since they don't involve interstate commerce.

[cussedemgun]

Originally Posted by sigp220.45

The loophole is a felon can walk into a gunshow and not be able to buy a gun at one table (an FFL) but buy one at the next table (a private sale).

Yes, its illegal. But that is the loophole people are talking about..

My point is by use of "loophole" the anti's imply a weak spot or missing link in the law. NONE EXISTS, there are laws in place that are being broken, not avoided as implied.

The use of "loophole" implies the need for inacting a new law. When the said action is already unlawful but not being enforced on the criminal, their point is to control the law-abiding so they can feel like they tried.

[Oddball]

They are referring to sales and trades between private individuals at a gun show which are not required by law to go through a background check. The way I see it is if there is no law against it how can there be a "loophole"? Just another scare tactic by the anti gunners to confuse the gun uneducated.

[Simmer down]

There are many citizens that don't understand a law doesn't control behavior, it only specifies a consequence if the rule isn't followed.

I cringe when I hear anyone explain how a law will affect reality. It just doesn't work that way.

[kwselke]

Plugging the loophole means that private transfers between individuals would be outlawed.

Last year my then 88 year old father realized he may not be able to properly handle his Glock 23. He gave it to me. That would need to go through a FFL and my background would be checked. A few months later my dad's garage was burglarized. Now at 89 he felt like he needed a simple firearm for home protection. I gave him a S&W Model 67. That transfer would need to go through a FFL and his background checked.

The buzz words... Gun Show Loophole, equate to private transfers.

[Old TexMex]

Actually, the government DOES understand that laws control behavior of law abiding citizens. When hypocrites write law, law favors hypocrisy. When criminals write law, laws favor criminals.
It's a simple test: "Who comes out ahead if this law is passed?"

The executive branch and senate left understands there is no "loophole". They use emotional language and imagery to obscure their agenda, whether it is Alar in apples or ethanol in gasolene or the right to engage in intrastate commerce without federal regulation.

By using "gun show" in the phrase, they cast aspersion on the gatherings of "gun nuts". Most antigunners would prefer all gun sales to be through government operated outlet, "one time only" sales(no second hand guns).

[cussedemgun]

Banning "over 7 round clips" has a different meaning than "7 round magazines".

Pluging a loophole is imposible when no loophole exists.

ESPECIALLY from congress, we should expect, no make that DEMAND that they speak clearly & exactly. By telling the paranoid masses they are fixing a loophole, they can sell enacting a new more restrictive law that is not really needed. This new law they propose will come with greater expense too, at a time when the budget is already in the red.

[Rule3]

Originally Posted by sigp220.45

The loophole is a felon can walk into a gunshow and not be able to buy a gun at one table (an FFL) but buy one at the next table (a private sale).

Yes, its illegal. But that is the loophole people are talking about.

We all know the same thing can happen with a private sale in a parking lot or through an ad in a Pennysaver paper or through a cleverly worded Craigslist ad. Its just simpler for the opposition to say "gun show loophole" than "unregulated private sale".

^^^^
This is what "they" are concerned about.

I know several individuals who buy a LOT of guns at the local gun/pawn shops for low prices and then go to every gun show around to sell them.

Now I am not here to argue the law with anyone, but they are in effect running a business without being a FFL and all that involves. In Florida all you need to do is say you are a Resident.
I think it is a bit different than me or and individual occasionally selling a gun to a friend or someone at your club or whatever.

No, I do not have the answer, private sales are legal and I have no problem with that but when does it become an unlicensed business???

[feralmerril]

The goverment wants to disarm the citizens as much as possible pure and simple. They have been trying it a chip at a time forever and wont quit.
We make a mistake by falling to their level by even argueing with them about it. It should be totaly non negoticable.
Its like the very old story about a famous moralistic speaker giveing a speech at a womans club. He started out by asking a show of hands if a lady would be willing to be unfaithfull to her husband just once for a million dollars if they needed the money for hospital bills, food etc.
Most were willing to save their familys by "sacrificeing themselves.
Then he cut it in half etc. Still got a lot of raised hands . Then he kept dropping the price untill he got down to a couple hundred bucks. Finaly the last lone woman that had hung in there said NO! What do you think I am, a prositute? The speaker said, "Mam, we already established what you are long ago, now we are just haggeling over the price!"
There is going to be collateral damage occasionaly when we want to keep ourselves free. Thats the price of freedom. For the most part europe turned in their guns. That cost what, 12 million lives? A politican wants power and their 10 minuets of fame. The more they get, the more they want. They never can get all they want as long as there are guns out there to keep them from going totaly biserck like hitler and stalin etc.

[feralmerril]

Maybe the goverment is worried they arent collecting taxs from those unlicensed business`s? That might be one part of it.

[Bekeart]

Gun Show "Loophole"


There is NO "Gunshow Loop Hole" - It is the right of a citizen to sell his property most anywhere he chooses.
Gun Show Loop Hole

What journalists need to know about guns and gun control

*****



Most of the time when the term "gun show loop hole" is used it is followed by misinformation and/or outright lies.

There is no GUN SHOW loop hole. At a gun show citizens are exercising their rights to buy and sell personal property, subject to the same state and federal laws that would apply to selling at their home.

Any licensed dealer selling at a gun show is required to follow all the same laws and rules that apply in his storefront.
The buyer fills out the same federally required form (4473) detailing the buyers qualifications to purchase.
The dealer then calls the information in ( to NICS ) for an instant background check. NICS is located at the FBI’s Criminal Justice Information Services Division in Clarksburg, West Virginia.

If the buyer is approved the dealer may deliver the firearm to the buyer as allowed under local or state regulations. (Some states have a waiting period before deliver; other states do not have any required waiting period.)

A dealer may NOT deliver any handgun to a nonresident of the dealer's state.
Any handgun purchase would be sent to a licensed dear in the purchaser's state of residence for the purchaser to pick up from that dealer.


The dealer may, under certain conditions, deliver a rifle or shotgun to a nonresident.

ANY individual selling personal firearms is under the same rules whether he be at a gun show, a flea market, or ANY other location in his state of residence.

But we never hear or read any comments about a "yard sale loop hole".

At the gun show a unlicensed individual may sell any firearm to a resident
of his sate, but only if the show is located in his state of residence.

The individual is required to be convinced the buyer is a state resident
and of legal age to purchase the firearm. The seller must also reasonably
believe that the potential buyer is not prohibited by because of felony
conviction or other regulations.

ANY individual selling personal firearms is under the same rules whether he be at a gun show or a yard sale.
But we never hear or read any comments about a "yard sale loop hole".

Submitted for your consideration.

Larry Albert

Murray KY


*******************************

Notice to Dealers and Other Participants at Gun Shows
http://www.atf.gov/publications/firearms/ATF_I_5300 23A.pdf


> FBI — Gun Checks/NICS

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS, is all about saving lives and protecting people from harm—by not letting guns and explosives fall into the wrong hands. It also ensures the timely transfer of firearms to eligible gun buyers.

Mandated by the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 and launched by the FBI on November 30, 1998, NICS is used by Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs) to instantly determine whether a prospective buyer is eligible to buy firearms or explosives. Before ringing up the sale, cashiers call in a check to the FBI or to other designated agencies to ensure that each customer does not have a criminal record or isn’t otherwise ineligible to make a purchase. More than 100 million such checks have been made in the last decade, leading to more than 700,000 denials.

NICS is located at the FBI’s Criminal Justice Information Services Division in Clarksburg, West Virginia. It provides full service to FFLs in 30 states, five U.S. territories, and the District of Columbia. Upon completion of the required Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) Form 4473, FFLs contact the NICS Section via a toll-free telephone number or electronically on the Internet through the NICS E-Check System to request a background check with the descriptive information provided on the ATF Form 4473. NICS is customarily available 17 hours a day, seven days a week, including holidays (except for Christmas).

************************

>ATF Online - Contact - Frequently Asked Questions

Q: How do I register a firearm I bought from a friend?

If it is a firearm that does not fall under the National Firearms Act (NFA) description, there is no federal registration. However, there may be state or local requirements and you should contact your state or local agencies.

(Clarification by Larry - NFA includes machineguns, short barrel shotguns, etc. Not any of the common shotguns, rifles, or handguns.))

Please note:

1. An individual may only sell/transfer a firearm to an unlicensed resident of his or her state.
2. You cannot transfer/sell a weapon to someone if you believe or have reasonable cause to believe the person is prohibited from receiving or possessing firearm under Federal law.
3. If the above requirements are met, ATF recommends the buyer and seller both keep a bill of sale (a document who sold the firearm, a description of the firearm, and who bought the firearm) so that if the firearm is ever traced, the buyer/seller can provide the information.

[keith44spl]

There weren't no "loop holes" before '68........Gees.

The federal law-makers drafted and passed the '34 NFA and the GCA of 1968,

Any holes that were left open in those act(s) is the fault of congress, as now and as it was a few years ago,
it's all fair game for the congress to point their fingers at and shout 'loophole'...Gotta close 'em loopholes.

Dang, who left 'em loopholes open? The congress left themselves a toeholt to start back-in.

Hellfire, We all know criminals are gonna have firearms when ever and how ever...It's a fact.
They are 'outlaws' by definition for goodness sake!

Anyone that thinks the mere passage of another addition to the code is gonna fix or
stop anything, is in need of some serious counsel and should follow their doctors orders in taking their meds.
And mabee, lay off all that self diagnosis and treatment.


All this is gonna boil down to....

Sticking us on the reservations with all them federal boys awaiting on their next disciplinary transfer.....


I'm done


.

[LVSteve]

Originally Posted by Rule3

^^^^
This is what "they" are concerned about.

I know several individuals who buy a LOT of guns at the local gun/pawn shops for low prices and then go to every gun show around to sell them.

That's called dealing without an FFL by the BATFE. They busted a couple of guys for that down here and they look hard at the number of "outgoings" in your bound book if you hold a C&R licence.

[cussedemgun]

Before I started this thread, I asked Webster for the definition of "loophole"

On page 850 of my dictionary, it says;

loop-hole - 1) gap in law, a small mistake or omission in a rule or law that allows it to be circumvented.

I fully realize that our leaders think they are "RULERS" so they are trying to pile regulation upon regulation to control us all (read - neuter & neutralize our constitution)

I find it alarming how many people follow the thinking that something is missing or wrong with present laws. Truth is the present laws need to be enforced. Our tax money would be better spent enforcing vigerously the existing laws instead of piling more useless costly red tape on top of a system that is already too complicated for the average to fully understand.

I propose a max. $5000 fine & 5 year penalty for lying either to an individual OR dealer & trying to aquire a gun illegally. Same penalty (manditory without parole) for stealing a gun.

[therevjay]

Originally Posted by cussedemgun

While watching the Senate Judiciary Comm. hearings, I heard several references to "the gunshow loophole".

They are worried that someone already prevented by law will be able to purchase a gun at a gunshow when the background check at a dealer would prevent the sale.

Said prohibited person is already prevented 'by law' from possesing a firearm. Said person breaks the law no matter how he comes into possesion. How is this a loophole in the law?

How will "one more law" fix anything when said person plainly chose to ignore the existing law? If a prohibited person is that bent on illegally possesing, this merely forces the need to steal!

When anyone hears "gunshow loophole" please ask the speaker to stop & explain. The term has been used without challenge so often, lots of people assume there really is a loophole & it is a fact NO LOOPHOLE IN THE LAW EXISTS!

OK, I'll end my rant with "maybe the 'anti-crowd' are trying to make it "againster the law"

HHMMMmmmmmm- -?

Well it's pretty simple really. Passing a law makes people all warm and fuzzy. They can now feel that the problem is solved, because they have passed a law against the bad behavior of criminals and looneys, who will of course obey the law. (after all it would be illegal not to)

[Road Rat]

The "main" reason/excuse/whatever these anti-gun folks want to put in a fix for the "gun show loophole" (which doesn't exist) is to get each and every firearm transfer to have to go through an FFL.
They would then slowly put in a Federal Database!

The mandatory FFL for each transfer is already a "law" in The Peoples DemonKratiK RepubliK of KaliforniStan. The FFL's are raping the peons for filling a form and filing it in a book. Most are charging $75-$100 dollars.

Family members cannot pass a firearm to another family member without going through an FFL.

This is NOT what law abiding gun owners in America deserve as a FREE people.

FIGHT the "gun show loophole".

[mc5aw]

If the anti-gun wingnuts had a clue, they'd realize that private firearms sales go on with far greater frequency in locations other than gun shows. Talk to half a dozen regular customers at any LGS and see how many off the books transactions are made with firearms trading hands amongst a shooting circle of friends. No felon has ever gotten a firearm owned by myself, nor have a I ever obtained an illegal firearm from anyone I've sold/traded with.

[Walter Rego]

Originally Posted by Road Rat

The "main" reason/excuse/whatever these anti-gun folks want to put in a fix for the "gun show loophole" (which doesn't exist) is to get each and every firearm transfer to have to go through an FFL.
They would then slowly put in a Federal Database!

The mandatory FFL for each transfer is already a "law" in The Peoples DemonKratiK RepubliK of KaliforniStan. The FFL's are raping the peons for filling a form and filing it in a book. Most are charging $75-$100 dollars.

Family members cannot pass a firearm to another family member without going through an FFL.

This is NOT what law abiding gun owners in America deserve as a FREE people.

FIGHT the "gun show loophole".

In California ALL sales must go through an FFL Dealer unless it's a private party sales and one of the guns is a C&R eligible long gun and the buyer holds an 03 C&R FFL.
Dealers are limited to what they can charge to private party transfers. Most charge $35 and of that $25-26 goes the the State. There is no "gun show loophole" here.
A different situation exists regarding a dealer "receiving" a gun for you. For example, you find a gun on one of the online auction sites and it is not banned from importation into CA. Many dealers charge as much as $100 for this service ON TOP OF the transfer fees. I suspect that a Federal law is coming soon requiring all sales to go through a dealer and a background check will be performed.

[2152hq]

The recently enacted law in NYS requires ALL sales/transfers to go thru an FFL.
ANY private transaction of a firearm no matter where it occurs.

The Law closing the 'GunShow Loop Hole' has been in effect since 2000 here, though until recently, widely ignored or even unknown to many.

The only exemption to the new law I know of is the transfer to an immediate family member. They are very specific what kin is just that, must live under the same roof, ect.

For now, the law puts a $10 fee cap on what an FFL can charge for doing the transfer paperwork, NICS check on those private sales..

It shows what the ultimate goal is

[Muley Gil]

Originally Posted by Rule3

^^^^
This is what "they" are concerned about.

I know several individuals who buy a LOT of guns at the local gun/pawn shops for low prices and then go to every gun show around to sell them.

Now I am not here to argue the law with anyone, but they are in effect running a business without being a FFL and all that involves. In Florida all you need to do is say you are a Resident.
I think it is a bit different than me or and individual occasionally selling a gun to a friend or someone at your club or whatever.

No, I do not have the answer, private sales are legal and I have no problem with that but when does it become an unlicensed business???

How many cars are you allowed to buy and sell before you are "running a business"? How many lawn mowers? How many pieces of furniture?

[LVSteve]

Originally Posted by Muley Gil

How many cars are you allowed to buy and sell before you are "running a business"? How many lawn mowers? How many pieces of furniture?

When it's just stuff, that's between you and the city, county or whatever. When it's guns, it becomes a matter for the BATFE to decide. As the knight said in Indiana Jones, "Choose wisely".

[Muley Gil]

Originally Posted by LVSteve

When it's just stuff, that's between you and the city, county or whatever. When it's guns, it becomes a matter for the BATFE to decide. As the knight said in Indiana Jones, "Choose wisely".

It shouldn't be any of the gubmint's business how I sell my guns. If I accumulate over 40 years a collection of guns and then need to sell most of them to pay for medical expenses, why should I be considered a dealer?

[ChattanoogaPhil]

The loophole is a felon can walk into a gunshow and not be able to buy a gun at one table (an FFL) but buy one at the next table (a private sale).

Yes, its illegal. But that is the loophole people are talking about.

Right. This is not a complex issue.

What does get complicated is the logic of supporting background checks at one gun sales table but not the other, or inside Gander Mountain but not in the parking lot of Gander Mountain.

The problem isn't that gun-control advocates are misusing the term "loophole", but rather that there is wide support for NICS, period. Once a person concludes that it makes sense to do background checks at a gun dealer to first determine if a buyer is legally allowed to own a gun or not, it's pretty difficult to make a convincing case why that should not be broadly extended to private sales too. Maybe some exemptions for immediate family where the background is not in question, but much beyond that the argument becomes quite weak. Some complain it will increase costs, create delays, inconvenience, lead to gun registration, criminals will get guns anyway... blah blah blah... Well yeah, I agree, and the same can be said for NICS now, which is widely supported by gun owners and the NRA.

IMO, background checks are the mother of all gun control evil. I say do away with all background checks. Anyone else?

[keith44spl]

Originally Posted by ChattanoogaPhil

Right. This is not a complex issue.

What does get complicated is the logic of supporting background checks at one gun sales table but not the other, or inside Gander Mountain but not in the parking lot of Gander Mountain.

The problem isn't that gun-control advocates are misusing the term "loophole", but rather that there is wide support for NICS, period. Once a person concludes that it makes sense to do background checks at a gun dealer to first determine if a buyer is legally allowed to own a gun or not, it's pretty difficult to explain why that should not be broadly extended to private sales too. Maybe some exemptions for immediate family where the background is not in question, but much beyond that the argument becomes quite weak. Some complain it will increase costs, create delays, inconvenience, lead to gun registration, criminals will get guns anyway... blah blah blah... Well yeah, I agree, and the same can be said for NICS now, which is widely supported by gun owners and the NRA.

IMO, background checks are the mother of all gun control evil. I say do away with all background checks. Anyone else?

Right thar it is!!!! Clear as pea soup! And just as bland

Firearms are personal property, period.

When the Federal Gov't (Congress) passed the GCA of 1968 and required business and or person(s) dealing in firearms,
ammunition and reloading components to be licensed by fee as a Federal Firearm Licensee and record in a bound book all transaction(s) and
acquisitions and dispositions of same. And forthwith to record all sales of ammunitions for use in handguns, and or etc...

And was the Federal means of licensing for a fee and regulation of interstate commerce of same.

In-placing terms, such as the occasional sale or trade...Leaving the gate open to revisit the
"Loophole Argument" again and again, at every needed and convenient opportunity.


Background checks through NCIC is not a fail safe......More like a sift.

Intrastate sales between person(s) have been regulated by the state statutes in relation the firearm disposition between said parties.

Most here are not old enough to remember how it was before '68..........When you could buy a firearm like buying any other piece of hardware.

The Congress has brought us to this place in history....And we, the people, shall as one to another bear the burden placed before us all.

It is futile to tax the poor....Place the burden on the most fittest, of the able and willing to bear the burden of all.


I am afraid for all the young folks coming on........






.

[ChattanoogaPhil]

Originally Posted by keith44spl

Firearms are personal property, period.


Most here are not old enough to remember how it was before '68..........When you could buy a firearm like buying any other piece of hardware.

I agree. Unfortunately, I believe that most gun owners today scoff at such notions.

[jgh4445]

Do they do a background check on the seller to make sure he/she is legal to own/sell the gun? Do they run the guns serial number to insure it isn't a stolen one? If not, then whats the point?

[2hawk]

Originally Posted by Old TexMex

Actually, the government DOES understand that laws control behavior of law abiding citizens. When hypocrites write law, law favors hypocrisy. When criminals write law, laws favor criminals.
It's a simple test: "Who comes out ahead if this law is passed?"
...

Sage words, sir. That puts things in perfect perspective. Sums up my feelings about the whole notion of "gun control" pretty well.

[keith44spl]

Originally Posted by ChattanoogaPhil

I agree. Unfortunately, I believe that most gun owners today scoff at such notions.

.
Ah yes.......Most have become accustomed to their shackles and
bonds....And are more than willing to increase their burdens on all, for the sake of a few.

Oh, let us now succumb to the will of the few...That they may rule over all, without hindrance or impedance.

Those that have never known the liberty of free reign, nor care for it's responsibilities, hath not ever wished to be free?


.
Here's a loophole story for ya'll........

A very dear friend of mine was a POW late in the Second World War,
he told me of his capture and how those that had been held at this camp for sometime had survived.

He said, "David, would not believe it, but those poor fellows had been boiling their
shoe soles to eat.....It was awful!"

He also told me of the day that the camp was liberated and of their release,

He said, "When I got somewheres that they (allieds) had found some clean dungarees for us...I got washed up and was getting dressed.
When I pulled my britches on, I found someone had placed this little Mauser pistol in the pocket.

(He reached into his pocket and withdrew that worn little pistol)

I pray that not any of you boys ever have to go through an experience like that,"

After a long thoughtful pause, he said,
"But, it sure felt good to have this gun in my pocket that day , back then."


This was back in the mid-sixities....He carried that pistol until his death.

He was a man among men......I miss him.




.

[ChattanoogaPhil]

Originally Posted by keith44spl

.
Ah yes.......Most have become accustomed to their shackles and
bonds....And are more than willing to increase their burdens on all, for the sake of a few.

Oh, let us now succumb to the will of the few...That they may rule over all, without hindrance or impedance.

Right. And when we veer away from freedom and the 2A, this is the type of discussion we end up in.

Wayne LaPierre, NRA, Opposes Expanded Background Checks. Senate Hearing. Patrick Leahy - YouTube

[keith44spl]

Phil,

I believe that the code(s) are written and re-written as to purposefully create crevasses (loopholes) within the law(s) that did not exist prior to.

i.e. The change in regulation on ammunition sales and the sales of hand-loading components.
To eliminate the requirement(s) of an FFL to order ammunition and or reloading supplies and or
rescind the requirement(s) to keep records of sales of the above.


.
A Little side story of the loophole plugging' type, the last straw..........

Sometime shortly after the '68 law went in to effect...My Sister-In-Law was going into town one Saturday afternoon.
I asked her to pick-up a carton of high speed .22 Long Rifle HP cartridges, if'n she would and gave her the five dollars.

When she got back to the ranch that evening, she handed me the box of twenty-twos and said, "I damn near had to sign my life away, to get them damn things!

That man at the hardware had to see my driver's license, to see if I was old enough to be buyin' em.

Then I had to sign for 'em too boot. Just be glad I put up with all that rig-a-rore

and don't ask me to do that again! Next thing ya know, they'll be wantin to know a girl's measurements"



.
Needless to say if one has always been saddle with the idea of FFLs, record keeping and background checks...

All of this ain't nothin' new....

Jest more of the same, and worse.


Boys,

I'm a telling you all this 'New America' thing ain't gonna be all it's cracked up to be!

BTW, I did watch the video clip of Wayne LaPierre...
I hope that nice feller never has to defend his ownself in court......


Su Amigo,
Dave


.

[cussedemgun]

Originally Posted by ChattanoogaPhil

Right. And when we veer away from freedom and the 2A, this is the type of discussion we end up in.

Wayne LaPierre, NRA, Opposes Expanded Background Checks. Senate Hearing. Patrick Leahy - YouTube

Mr. Leahy uses the term "loophole" & is actually describing "an illegal purchase". I do not believe he is stupid or nieve enough not to realize this. One more law will not control criminals, only hinder legal transactions. The whole hearing was a setup to bully & only allow their agenda which seems to be the repeal of the 2A.

I say enough time trying to reason with IDIOTS. They will only beat you with experience.

Time for court & the voter's revenge. I HOPE & PRAY you all remember & vote the IDIOTS out.

[Fishslayer]

What chaps my hide is Feinstein et al are still trumpeting the need to "close the loophole."

Ummmm... we haven't had FFL-les PPT in Kalifornistan for years, except for C&R, antiques, whatnot. But to listen to them I can waltz on down to Ranger Doug's and walk out with a paperless high powered deadly military style assault machine gun with high capacity assault clips and a shoulder thing that goes up.

Most of the sheeple have no idea what's involved in buying a gun in this state.

[Old TexMex]

Here's the "loophole loophole" that some in power would fix: "All things not prohibited will, henceforth, be compulsory." there, fixed it.

[rwsmith]

If a criminal steals a gun and sells it to a 'friend', will their transaction require that they go through an FFL?

[ChattanoogaPhil]

Originally Posted by cussedemgun

The whole hearing was a setup to bully & only allow their agenda which seems to be the repeal of the 2A.

Yes, it was a setup. However, when you take a position of supporting background checks in the first place, you set yourself up for exactly that. That video is a perfect example.

[7Iron]

I have no problem w/ gun show background checks or a reasonable equivalent. Implementing that would mean that a purchaser who should not posess a firearm cannnot, whether they lie or not.

Some of the logic above is really childish. Since people are already prohibited by law from carrying firearms on commercial aircraft, so there really is no need for scanners or security of any kind at airports. It doesn't make sense, does it. The background check is intended to block people who are either unaware they are prohibited or who know they are and decide to break the law anyway.

As gun owners, we do share some responsibility, and part of that should be to take simple steps to or endure a mild inconveneince to make sure we don't place our guns in the hands of neer-do-wells and whackos.

I place no stock in the counter argument that it is critical to your privacy that the government not know you have purchased a firearm. The black helicopters are not really expected for another 15 years or so.

[ChattanoogaPhil]

Originally Posted by Fishslayer

What chaps my hide is Feinstein et al are still trumpeting the need to "close the loophole."

Ummmm... we haven't had FFL-les PPT in Kalifornistan for years, except for C&R, antiques, whatnot. But to listen to them I can waltz on down to Ranger Doug's and walk out with a paperless high powered deadly military style assault machine gun with high capacity assault clips and a shoulder thing that goes up.

Most of the sheeple have no idea what's involved in buying a gun in this state.

There are some of us out here that aren't quite as advanced as California. The Senator's proposed legislation is aimed more at us, to help us get our minds right.

[keith44spl]

to help us get our minds right.

Right there it is folks.....Nail on the head!

I'll be back in a minute!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y28pFJqDkkU



We's all gonna wind up on the chain gang....I'm afraid



.

[Titan]

Unfortunately, the simple fact is that a person denied a purchase at a dealer, can PROBABLY go to a gun show or private sale, and buy a gun.

The general public (who gave us a second Obama term) will want to close that perceived 'loophole' - they're easily BSed.

[cussedemgun]

Originally Posted by 7Iron

As gun owners, we do share some responsibility, and part of that should be to take simple steps to or endure a mild inconveneince to make sure we don't place our guns in the hands of neer-do-wells and whackos.

I place no stock in the counter argument that it is critical to your privacy that the government not know you have purchased a firearm. The black helicopters are not really expected for another 15 years or so.

Anyone with a half open mind can see our elected elite are not concerned with mental illness. The main problem behind the major rash of random mass shootings has been caused by mental health problems & today's society ignoring same.

But lets face facts, mental health treatment will cost money. If we blame the gun & control all private sales + gun show dealings, we can collect money. Any bureaucrat worth his salt can see that!

Some time back, Gov. felt the need to register cars. "It's to control theft" we were told. In truth, most jurisdictions won't look for a stolen car, they figure with vigorous trafic patrol (while collecting un-levied taxes in the form of fines), it's only a matter of time & the guilty will show up & in the mean time insurance will pay off the rightful owner. LET'S FACE FACTS, it's all about the money.

You bet yer boots, I don't trust my GOV. My hearing is impaired, but my eyesight is 20-20.

I see more taxes & user fees coming, if that's what you want, jump on the "background check" band wagon.

[ChattanoogaPhil]

Originally Posted by keith44spl

We's all gonna wind up on the chain gang....I'm afraid

Yup... and with overwhelming support for expanding NICS to private sales... we're putting the shackles on ourselves.

Take a look at some of the results of Fox News national polling.

Requiring criminal background checks on all
gun buyers, including those buying at gun
shows and private sales
91% favor

Requiring mental health checks on all gun
buyers
83% Favor

Requiring criminal background checks on
anyone buying bullets and ammunition
80% Favor

[keith44spl]

With regards to all this control of the commerce of domestic goods (firearms) it's a sad day boys.

When I was a boy of twelve or thirteen, why, I go down to the hardware store and by cartridges and shotgun shell....

The clerk would sell ya two, three or a half dozen at a time, never had a enough money to by a whole box.

The hardware man knew my Dad, and would ask me if it was OK with him for me to buy what ever it was that I was procuring.

I wouldn't have lied to neither....A kid could get away with alot of mis-deeds, but lying and stealin weren't on the forgiving list.

I never went on no rampage or killin spree, nor did anyone I ever knew.

I remember what it was like to be a free man...To walk this earth and do my business as I pleased. Honest and up-right.

Seems folks now in days want the gubermit to lead 'em by the hand.

Well, I don't like the looks of that box canyon where tollin us toward....


.