|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
April 3, 2018, 10:02 AM | #51 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 22, 2016
Posts: 2,192
|
Quote:
|
|
April 3, 2018, 10:51 AM | #52 | |
member
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 8,462
|
Quote:
|
|
April 3, 2018, 11:13 AM | #53 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,450
|
Quote:
There is no firearms sales loophole for gun shows. Not one. Quote:
Quote:
The issue raised by UBCs isn't whether the private transaction is regulated; it's whether the state is directly involved is every single transfer, everywhere, every time. It effectively turns all of us into federal licensees and ends private sales. Quote:
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
||||
April 3, 2018, 11:19 AM | #54 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,458
|
Quote:
First, despite isolated incidents of mass shootings, they don't happen every day, or even every week. On the other hand, crooks commit robberies with guns multiple times every day, somewhere in the country. In general, those crooks don't buy their guns at gun shops or at gun shows. They buy them from other crooks on street corners in the ghetto, late at night. And they're not going to call in for a background check, so what's the point of further burdening law-abiding people? Then -- look at recent "mass shooting" incidents? The guns were all sold with successful background checks. Cruz passed a background check. The Sutherland Springs church shooter passed a background check. (I know -- don't start.) The Las Vegas shooter passed multiple background checks. The Pulse Club shooter passed background checks. The San Bernardino shooter passed background checks. The guns used at Sandy Hook were bought legally, subject to background checks -- but the shooter murdered his own mother to take them. In short -- looking at all the infamous mass shootings for the last however many years -- how many of them could/would have been prevented by a law requiring background checks for private sales? |
|
April 3, 2018, 11:38 AM | #55 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 14, 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 668
|
Several reasons. But I can go down a list of issues. 1) Not enforceable. 2) If private sales are legal...then how does a private individual run one? 3) What proof do you have if so? 4) How much will it cost/will the government increase the price to “keep up with demand” so that they price private sale out of existence? 5) Can you run one and get someone’s criminal record without their knowledge? 6) Fails to address the actual issues that we have. Straw purchasers don’t purchasers don’t care about background checks. The same way of looping the system will be in place regardless of what happens. It is a fundamental waste of time meant to put more restrictions on sales, rather than on put pressure on the failures of governments to handle out of control crime rates in the 5% of counties that make up the overwhelming majority of murder in the country. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
April 3, 2018, 11:39 AM | #56 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 22, 2016
Posts: 2,192
|
Aguila has hit on my point.
When pressed to close the "gun hole loophole" we should discuss if requiring background checks would actually matter. As is pointed out in recent mass shootings it would not have. We could also discuss if the transfer of private property between private individuals should be subject to such regulation especially when said property is specifically discussed in the Constitution. Personally I think the later is ultimately a failed argument. I'm sure that is not the popular opinion. The former is a solid argument. |
April 3, 2018, 11:40 AM | #57 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 14, 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 668
|
Quote:
I wonder if Democrats learned the strategy from their union days? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
April 3, 2018, 11:55 AM | #58 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 2, 2013
Posts: 975
|
Quote:
Good point. Regardless of the laws on the books, there will always be a certain level of crime. The background checks are just one aspect of gun control to make private gun ownership more difficult. Even if draconian gun control measures were inflicted on U.S. citizens where private ownership of guns was prohibited, generally criminals would still keep their guns and the law abiding would be disarmed. Undoubtedly, cutting out private ownership of guns would make it more difficult for criminals to obtain guns but they still would (like anything else that is illegal) and I don't think completely obliterating parts of the U.S. Constitution is the right answer to any problem. |
|
April 3, 2018, 11:59 AM | #59 | |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
Quote:
If, in conversation, you can get your opponenant to admit the above, then we can move on to admit that there are some people that seem to be at every (or most) gunshows that setup a table to sell their "collection". This is the point where the BATF&E falls down on, as I'm sure that these people are reported by some or even many of the licensed dealers (FFL's) that are at that show. Do all FFL's report such people? Don't know. What I do know is that when a report is made, the BATF&E, in most cases, does nothing. Enforce the existing law, and this abuse of private sales goes away. Problem solved. However, as long as we buy into this "Loophole" terminology, the debate is already lost. |
|
April 3, 2018, 01:13 PM | #60 | |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,812
|
Quote:
DO make the distinction between enthusiasts who set up a table at a show, (and may do it on a regular basis) to sell or trade items from their collections (which is entirely legal) with the guy who sells his "private collection" of 15 Lorcin .380s, and the next show has another private collection of 15 different Lorcin .380s... One is ethical and obeying the laws, the other isn't. There is no gunshow loophole. ALL gun laws apply at guns shows exactly the same way they apply at every other location in the state. Period. The only thing about a gun show is that you have a concentration of like minded people together in the same place at the same time.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
|
April 3, 2018, 02:25 PM | #61 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 23, 2005
Location: US
Posts: 3,652
|
Quote:
__________________
Support the NRA-ILA Auction, ends 03/09/2018 https://thefiringline.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=593946 |
|
April 3, 2018, 02:29 PM | #62 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 21, 2016
Posts: 629
|
The key thing about private sales, gun shows, or anywhere is its happening within a state border between state residents. Anything else is illegal. Its not a federal problem. States can make their own laws if they want, allowing it or not.
|
April 3, 2018, 03:15 PM | #63 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 20,064
|
The loophole language was used as a false narrative at first to indicate that all gun show sales avoided NICS. We know that is not true.
There were folks who sold a great deal of firearms at shows as 'private' collections at each show. In some cases, that volume was close to being a dealer and around here those folks were shut down at the major shows. There was one guy who would have two rifles slung and three handguns in his belt. When those sold, he would go get more. Now private sales are OK but was he pushing it? The show seemed to think so and he was gone. Another tack was that the gun show and gun show parking lot was a public nuisance as it provided a locale for illegal sales to occur between individuals who were not allowed to have guns. Not that they had tables but the location made it easy for that illegality to occur. Some cities closed gun shows in their jurisdictions on those grounds. There were folks who would patrol the gun show waiting line and ask folks who were selling guns to sell to them at a somewhat better price than a FFL inside. Were the purchases good bargain hunters or bad guys? Interesting question. Just info on the issue.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens |
April 3, 2018, 04:12 PM | #64 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 2, 2015
Location: Cottleville, Missouri
Posts: 1,115
|
Quote:
__________________
Vegetarian... primitive word for lousy hunter! |
|
April 3, 2018, 07:01 PM | #65 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 19, 2016
Posts: 186
|
What 44 AMP said about operating on a business model selling guns without a Federal License is currently in the news in California, where the majority of handguns available in most states are forbidden to residents other than Law Enforcement. For the most part those officers may resell their off roster guns to plain old residents. Occasional sales are not a problem, but some have gotten greedy and have turned the buying and selling of off roster handguns into a business, which has netted them being charged with doing so without a Federal License.
|
April 4, 2018, 06:59 AM | #66 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,112
|
Quote:
|
|
April 4, 2018, 10:09 AM | #67 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2008
Posts: 11,132
|
Quote:
|
|
April 4, 2018, 11:12 AM | #68 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 9, 2007
Posts: 180
|
Quote:
__________________
José |
|
April 4, 2018, 11:57 AM | #69 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2008
Posts: 11,132
|
Quote:
|
|
April 4, 2018, 12:20 PM | #70 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 2, 2013
Posts: 975
|
Quote:
|
|
April 4, 2018, 12:59 PM | #71 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 22, 2016
Posts: 2,192
|
Define intent. It is my intent, someday, to leave my firearms to my daughter and thus her boyfriend. Running an NCIS check before adjusting my will only seems prudent.
|
April 4, 2018, 01:45 PM | #72 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,450
|
Quote:
Legal transfer will be your executor's problem.
__________________
http://www.npboards.com/index.php |
|
April 4, 2018, 03:14 PM | #73 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 7,523
|
Quote:
This has been discussed at length in L&CR previously, with legally knowledgeable folks advising that for the provisions to be effective, the bequest must be specific—i.e. the will must specifically address the firearms and their intended recipients; they can't just be part of the miscellaneous unspecified "stuff" in the estate (I forget the legal term for this). Of course, if the intended recipient is a prohibited person, the bequest does NOT change the fact that he or she cannot lawfully take possession of the firearm(s)! Quote:
__________________
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak |
||
April 4, 2018, 03:35 PM | #74 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,112
|
IMO: Some doth worry too much about selling personal firearms. If the guy has prison tattoos then don't sell him the gun.
Tomorrow or Friday i will sell my Luger collection to a guy with a C&R permit. |
April 4, 2018, 04:50 PM | #75 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,458
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|