Do You Support The "Gun Show Loophole?"

[bigrebnc1775]

Private sellers still need to ask for an ID and if they are not sure if the person can legally buy a gun they still aren't supposed to sale them one.
However most private sales are conducted between friends and you already know the back ground of your friend.

Do you have any proof to back up your claim that "most private sales are conducted between friends"?

You asked a question I answered your question. Now you want some kind of proof? You really didn't want an answer did you?

 

[Coyote]

And, here is a point that I'd like to know the answer to:

Why are private sellers exempt from the same sort of rules that licensed gun sellers must follow in the first place?

The only reason I can see for this loophole to exist is to put guns in the hands of people that shouldn't have guns.

Private sellers still need to ask for an ID and if they are not sure if the person can legally buy a gun they still aren't supposed to sale them one.
However most private sales are conducted between friends and you already know the back ground of your friend.

I don't think so.

I see firearms offered up for sale in the advertising section of some of our weekly sales bulletins. ID means nothing really.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

And, here is a point that I'd like to know the answer to:

Why are private sellers exempt from the same sort of rules that licensed gun sellers must follow in the first place?

The only reason I can see for this loophole to exist is to put guns in the hands of people that shouldn't have guns.

Private sellers still need to ask for an ID and if they are not sure if the person can legally buy a gun they still aren't supposed to sale them one.
However most private sales are conducted between friends and you already know the back ground of your friend.

I don't think so.

I see firearms offered up for sale in the advertising section of some of our weekly sales bulletins. ID means nothing really.

How do you know the seller didn't require some form of ID before they sold the firearm?
Their is no way of verifying any number because their are no records kept of any transactions. But since I and my family and friends have always been in the gun world no one I know of sales a firearm to someone they don't know.

Oh and I did say most I did not say all.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That study says that gun shows account for less than 10% of all gun sales. It then estimates that 66% of sales at gun shows are made by licensed dealers.

That would mean that 3.4% of guns sold in this country do not go through background checks. That is slightly less than the 40% figure you are attempting to defend.

It then goes on to reference the same 20 year old numbers from the ATF that you insist prove your point.

Based on 20 year old numbers.

It also states that 85% of guns used in crimes were resold through private sales at least once.

That's 85%.

Sigh.

The report starts with the claim that gun shows are an important avenue in gun trafficking, and then reports that only 2% of felons actually in prison had a gun that was in any way tied to a gun show.

That is 2%.

 

[Coyote]

Private sellers still need to ask for an ID and if they are not sure if the person can legally buy a gun they still aren't supposed to sale them one.
However most private sales are conducted between friends and you already know the back ground of your friend.

I don't think so.

I see firearms offered up for sale in the advertising section of some of our weekly sales bulletins. ID means nothing really.

How do you know the seller didn't require some form of ID before they sold the firearm?

They might have - but what does the id tell them about someone's background? Nada. I doubt the average person would recognize a fake id for that matter.

Their is no way of verifying any number because their are no records kept of any transactions.

Precisely - that is why you can't substantiate your claim.

But since I and my family and friends have always been in the gun world no one I know of sales a firearm to someone they don't know.

My husband has long been involved in firearms and privately bought and sold them. There are plenty of people who sell firearms to people they don't know - even if it's a friend of a friend of a friend - there's no guarantee that person is fit and responsible or not former felon. I also know former felons who HAVE been able to purchase guns this way.

Oh and I did say most I did not say all.

I don't think you have the data to support even the claim of "most". At best you have the equivelent of personal testemonials (that applies to my claim also).

 

[Coyote]

Why bother at all, to have a background check if you leave such enormous loopholes such as sales at gunshows? It makes no sense.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Why bother at all, to have a background check if you leave such enormous loopholes such as sales at gunshows? It makes no sense.

An enormous loophole that makes up about 3.4% of gun sales according to the PDF posted by someone on your side of the debate.

 

[Dubya]

That study says that gun shows account for less than 10% of all gun sales. It then estimates that 66% of sales at gun shows are made by licensed dealers.

That would mean that 3.4% of guns sold in this country do not go through background checks. That is slightly less than the 40% figure you are attempting to defend.

It then goes on to reference the same 20 year old numbers from the ATF that you insist prove your point.

Based on 20 year old numbers.

It also states that 85% of guns used in crimes were resold through private sales at least once.

That's 85%.

Sigh.

The report starts with the claim that gun shows are an important avenue in gun trafficking, and then reports that only 2% of felons actually in prison had a gun that was in any way tied to a gun show.

That is 2%.

Shouldn't the stats be about felons with gun related crimes and not just felons?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I don't think so.

I see firearms offered up for sale in the advertising section of some of our weekly sales bulletins. ID means nothing really.

How do you know the seller didn't require some form of ID before they sold the firearm?

They might have - but what does the id tell them about someone's background? Nada. I doubt the average person would recognize a fake id for that matter.



Precisely - that is why you can't substantiate your claim.

But since I and my family and friends have always been in the gun world no one I know of sales a firearm to someone they don't know.

My husband has long been involved in firearms and privately bought and sold them. There are plenty of people who sell firearms to people they don't know - even if it's a friend of a friend of a friend - there's no guarantee that person is fit and responsible or not former felon. I also know former felons who HAVE been able to purchase guns this way.

Oh and I did say most I did not say all.

I don't think you have the data to support even the claim of "most". At best you have the equivelent of personal testemonials (that applies to my claim also).

How involved are you in the gun world?
Do you have any information to back up your opinion about those newspaper sales?

If you don't know your friends why are you selling to them? I call bull shit on this claim of yours.

 

[Coyote]

Why bother at all, to have a background check if you leave such enormous loopholes such as sales at gunshows? It makes no sense.

An enormous loophole that makes up about 3.4% of gun sales according to the PDF posted by someone on your side of the debate.

It's enormous enough when you consider the ramifications of it:

From 2004 to 2006, ATF conducted surveillance and undercover investigations at 195 gun shows (approximately 2% of all shows). Specific targeting of suspected individuals (77%) resulted in 121 individual arrests and 5,345 firearms seizures. Seventy nine of the 121 ATF operation plans were known suspects previously under investigation.[1]

Additionally, ATF Field Offices report that:

Between 2002 and 2005, more than 400 guns legally purchased at gun shows from licensed dealers in the city of Richmond, Virginia, were later recovered in connection with criminal activity. Bouchard notes that, "These figures do not take into account firearms that may have been sold at Richmond area gun shows by unlicensed sellers, as these transactions are more difficult to track."[3] It is noteworthy that the "in connection with criminal activity" category includes stolen guns later recovered from burglaries, but the report does not specify how many guns in the 400 gun figure cited were not guns used in the commission of a crime, but that were rather the fruits of criminal activity.

The Department of Justice reports, "after reviewing hundreds of trace reports associated with guns used in crime recovered in the New Orleans area and interviewing known gang members and other criminals, ATF Special Agents identified area gun shows as a source used by local gang members and other criminals to obtain guns."[1]

In 2003 and 2004, the San Francisco ATF Field Division conducted six general operations at Reno, Nevada, gun shows to investigate interstate firearms trafficking. During these operations, "agents purchased firearms and identified violations related to "off paper" sales, sales to out-of-state residents, and dealing in firearms without a license." The "ATF seized or purchased 400 firearms before making arrests and executing search warrants, which resulted in the seizure of an additional 600 firearms and the recovery of explosives."[1]

ATF's Columbus Field Division conducted its anti-trafficking operations based on intelligence from Cleveland police that "many of the guns recovered in high-crime areas of the city had been purchased at local gun shows." Subsequent gun show sting operations resulted in the seizure of "5 guns, one indictment, and two pending indictments for felony possession of a firearm." The state of Ohio is one of the top ten source states for recovered guns used in crime.[1]

The ATF's Phoenix Field Division reported that "many gun shows attracted large numbers of gang members from Mexico and California. They often bought large quantities of assault weapons and smuggled them into Mexico or transported them to California."[1] Garen Wintemute, a professor at the University of California at Davis, calls Arizona and Texas a "gunrunner's paradise."[26]

Point being, it seems requiring a background check wouldn't be that difficult. If small time sellers can get apps to allow their smart phones to take credit cards - they can surely also access the necessary contact to do a background check.

 

[Coyote]

How do you know the seller didn't require some form of ID before they sold the firearm?

They might have - but what does the id tell them about someone's background? Nada. I doubt the average person would recognize a fake id for that matter.



Precisely - that is why you can't substantiate your claim.



My husband has long been involved in firearms and privately bought and sold them. There are plenty of people who sell firearms to people they don't know - even if it's a friend of a friend of a friend - there's no guarantee that person is fit and responsible or not former felon. I also know former felons who HAVE been able to purchase guns this way.

Oh and I did say most I did not say all.

I don't think you have the data to support even the claim of "most". At best you have the equivelent of personal testemonials (that applies to my claim also).

How involved are you in the gun world?
Do you have any information to back up your opinion about those newspaper sales?

Do you have information to back up your claim that most such sales are between "friends"?

If you don't know your friends why are you selling to them? I call bull shit on this claim of yours.

I'm not selling. I'm just talking about people I know. And yes, you can call bullshit on it, as I can on your claims - thus far, in both our cases, they are all unsupported personal testemonials and unproveable. Which is what I said in the first place.

 

[martybegan]

You need to register the deed with the local government when you buy a house regardless whether you pay cash or take out a mortgage. There are also state and local fees required on closing.

Most states require proof of car insurance simply to register the car. You can be fined for not having a car registered even if it sitting unused on your own property. I know this because a tenant of mine received such a fine in PA.

Home ownership and car ownership are not rights but the Constitution guarantees my right to drink alcohol and that is regulated and carries limitations. My right to vote is guaranteed at age 18 but I still need to register with the local government in order to do so. If Republicans had their way, my right to vote would be even more regulated. Amendments are not untouchable. Rights may be guaranteed but stipulations can and will be imposed.

The registration is for tax purposes, not to determine if you own one or not. Also the "registrstration" is not limited in any way. Anyone can own a house. If you were to treat gun ownership like house ownership in some states only the police and government officals would be able to own houses without a waiting period or onerous requirements.

For the cars, if you have enough property you dont need to register a car. The cases you talk about are probably when parked in a driveway with ACESSS ONLY to public roads. There is a difference.

The purpose of registration is irrelevant. The fact is, you must register houses, cars and guns with the government in some fashion for different reasons. Since they are different objects used for different purposes, it stands to reason the purpose for registration would be different as well.

Who buys a car to drive around ONLY on all their acreage? A tractor maybe or a 4-wheel drive to wrangle cattle or something but regardless of all that, you still have to take a written test and a driving test to obtain a license to operate a vehicle whether you drive on your property or on the roads. And don't tell me that tractor or cattle-wrangling 4-wheel isn't going to drive down a public road at some point.

No comment on alcohol or voting requirements even though they are guaranteed by the Constitution? That's the real argument here.

A liscense is only required for public roads, just like a CCW permit can be required for public use of a firearm.

And I have never heard of "registration" for a house. All you need to do is give the address and your name so the property tax can be paid.

Alcohol is NOT guaranteed by the consitution. It leaves regulation of alchol specifically to the states and localities. Read the amendment. Voting rights are also left to the states, with floor limits set that say you cannot deny voting rights based on race sex, or age after the age of 18.


Arms are left to the PEOPLE.

 

[Dubya]

So now for a second time I am going to ask why you won't answer the question I asked you....

Just how many people, private sellers, do you think show up to sell guns at a gun show versus the number of Licensed Dealers?

Do you think the ratio is 1:1? 10:1? 1:10? 1:20? Something different? You are throwing all kinds of numbers out there, making all kinds of proclaimations.. Demanding answers to your questions.. So how about answering one for a change?

This is the third time that I have asked the question. Are you going to ignore it again?

You don't know, so what's the difference. Gun shows aren't all the same. The real point is people who oppose universal or gun show background checks aren't interested in solving the problems of our open gun market.

The potential exists to resell a weapon at a gun show to someone who can't pass a background check and just because it's illegal doesn't mean there is a way of catching someone doing it or that a gun show doesn't promote doing it.

Sensible gun control laws would require registration of all firearms from the time of manufacturing and sales involving transfer of registration, which would always require a background check. Let me explain it in simple terms! Every gun from the time of manufacture is registered with an ID. The registration can be transferred to an organization or individual, but the organization has to be something like the military or law enforcement. Every gun is registered and checked each year to determine the same person owns it. The rifled firearms are periodically ballistics tested with the bullets being sent to FBI for scanning and the data is put in a data base. The FBI can work out a quick scan process. People would think twice before using a gun in a crime and the reason to possess a gun on the streets of our cities would fade away.

It's the nature of criminals to draw heat, so possessing an illegal firearm should be dealt with severely, when they've drawn heat. Let's say the cops find a firearm in the residence of someone suspected for a crime. I doubt a criminal wipes down his weapon everytime he touches it, so fingerprints can be lifted connecting a person to the weapon. A weapon could be associated with any type of crime the police would get a search warrant for and listed on the warrant.

I haven't been advocating these piecemeal, feelgood changes in the law, but have advocated a comprehensive approach that reduces gun violence and discourages illegal ownership of guns. Closing the gun show loophole is just a small part of what should be done.

I'm not the one claiming that so many guns are sold at gunshows without background checks by private citizens.

You are.

You should have the data to back up your claim for without any supporting data that either shows that you are:

1 - merely repeating what others have said without verifing it for yourself,

2 - trying to blow smoke up everyone's ass,

3 - making things up,

4 - lying,

5 - and / or just being a typical left wing gun grabber who dances around with the blood of dead children on your hands, happy that you finally have something to use to advance your Un-Constituitonal agenda.


Personally, I think it is a combination of all 5, not because I know you, but because I have known people just like you since the mid-80 to late 80's when I first started discussing politics on-line.

Of course, if you post back that you are not a comibination of all 5, but are just one of them, I will give you the benefit of the doubt as I have not caught you in a lie about yourself yet. Spreading false information, yes, You have been doing a lot of that... But if you honestly believe it, than all I can say is that you are wrong and present you with the evidence to support my position, but I won't say you are a liar.

Bullshit! You can't even state what my claim is. Tell us what the claim is and post a quote of me making the claim!

From the first time I've seen you post, you claimed to have just got back from a gun show and claim you have knowledge about gun shows. I pointed out the laws are different in many states, because you were claiming a 3 day waiting period without counting weekends applies. You were asked if it applies to all states and you didn't answer. My post from the beginning was pointing out that this thread isn't even about universal background checks and I asked why would someone oppose universal checks at gun shows. I've said all along I wanted much more than universal background checks and I don't care how much of a problem gun shows contribute to criminals having firearms.

Why don't you prove you were at this gun show and didn't just make it up? You should be able to give us a link about it and we'll check to see if what you said about the gun show is true.

 

[Gadawg73]

You claim to have recently went to a gun show and now you act like you know it all. Here are some of the things you have said that are dishonest. You claim there is a waiting period, so be specific about your state, it's laws and whether other states have waiting periods! Be specific whether it involves all guns or certain types of guns! Let's start with just a few specific points and not hide behind the generalities. Is there a federal law about gun shows and what they can and can't do, or are those you mention state laws that vary greatly from place to place?

You can have a major city near many different states and many different laws. For the situation to change in that major city, it has to change in those nearby areas.

So now for a second time I am going to ask why you won't answer the question I asked you....

Just how many people, private sellers, do you think show up to sell guns at a gun show versus the number of Licensed Dealers?

Do you think the ratio is 1:1? 10:1? 1:10? 1:20? Something different? You are throwing all kinds of numbers out there, making all kinds of proclaimations.. Demanding answers to your questions.. So how about answering one for a change?

This is the third time that I have asked the question. Are you going to ignore it again?

You don't know, so what's the difference. Gun shows aren't all the same. The real point is people who oppose universal or gun show background checks aren't interested in solving the problems of our open gun market.

The potential exists to resell a weapon at a gun show to someone who can't pass a background check and just because it's illegal doesn't mean there is a way of catching someone doing it or that a gun show doesn't promote doing it.

Sensible gun control laws would require registration of all firearms from the time of manufacturing and sales involving transfer of registration, which would always require a background check. Let me explain it in simple terms! Every gun from the time of manufacture is registered with an ID. The registration can be transferred to an organization or individual, but the organization has to be something like the military or law enforcement. Every gun is registered and checked each year to determine the same person owns it. The rifled firearms are periodically ballistics tested with the bullets being sent to FBI for scanning and the data is put in a data base. The FBI can work out a quick scan process. People would think twice before using a gun in a crime and the reason to possess a gun on the streets of our cities would fade away.

It's the nature of criminals to draw heat, so possessing an illegal firearm should be dealt with severely, when they've drawn heat. Let's say the cops find a firearm in the residence of someone suspected for a crime. I doubt a criminal wipes down his weapon everytime he touches it, so fingerprints can be lifted connecting a person to the weapon. A weapon could be associated with any type of crime the police would get a search warrant for and listed on the warrant.

I haven't been advocating these piecemeal, feelgood changes in the law, but have advocated a comprehensive approach that reduces gun violence and discourages illegal ownership of guns. Closing the gun show loophole is just a small part of what should be done.

And criminals will obey all of that.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

They might have - but what does the id tell them about someone's background? Nada. I doubt the average person would recognize a fake id for that matter.



Precisely - that is why you can't substantiate your claim.



My husband has long been involved in firearms and privately bought and sold them. There are plenty of people who sell firearms to people they don't know - even if it's a friend of a friend of a friend - there's no guarantee that person is fit and responsible or not former felon. I also know former felons who HAVE been able to purchase guns this way.



I don't think you have the data to support even the claim of "most". At best you have the equivelent of personal testemonials (that applies to my claim also).

How involved are you in the gun world?
Do you have any information to back up your opinion about those newspaper sales?

Do you have information to back up your claim that most such sales are between "friends"?

If you don't know your friends why are you selling to them? I call bull shit on this claim of yours.

I'm not selling. I'm just talking about people I know. And yes, you can call bullshit on it, as I can on your claims - thus far, in both our cases, they are all unsupported personal testemonials and unproveable. Which is what I said in the first place.

Again their is no data for friend too friend private sales, because it's private.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Why bother at all, to have a background check if you leave such enormous loopholes such as sales at gunshows? It makes no sense.

An enormous loophole that makes up about 3.4% of gun sales according to the PDF posted by someone on your side of the debate.

Ever get the feeling you are trying to debate a spambot?

 

[Oddball]

That study says that gun shows account for less than 10% of all gun sales. It then estimates that 66% of sales at gun shows are made by licensed dealers.

That would mean that 3.4% of guns sold in this country do not go through background checks. That is slightly less than the 40% figure you are attempting to defend.

It then goes on to reference the same 20 year old numbers from the ATF that you insist prove your point.

It also states that 85% of guns used in crimes were resold through private sales at least once.

That's 85%.

Talk about a meaningless stat...A weapon coud've been bought and sold numerous times by dealers, but it's the one time that it's sold privately that gives you that ridiculously, ergo meaninglessly, high number.

 

[Oddball]

And, here is a point that I'd like to know the answer to:

Why are private sellers exempt from the same sort of rules that licensed gun sellers must follow in the first place?

Better question: Why are dealers and law abiding citizens put through the whole background check Kabuki dance, when it's demonstrably ineffective at keeping firearms out of the hands of criminals?

The only reason I can see for this loophole to exist is to put guns in the hands of people that shouldn't have guns.

Then I would suggest that you have a severe, quite possibly debilitating, case of myopia.

 

[The Rabbi]

I can sell any article of personal possession without the buyer going through some kind of criminal check. Why should guns be any different?
And does anyone think that a law mandating universal background checks will cut crime even one iota?

 

[Dubya]

So now for a second time I am going to ask why you won't answer the question I asked you....

Just how many people, private sellers, do you think show up to sell guns at a gun show versus the number of Licensed Dealers?

Do you think the ratio is 1:1? 10:1? 1:10? 1:20? Something different? You are throwing all kinds of numbers out there, making all kinds of proclaimations.. Demanding answers to your questions.. So how about answering one for a change?

This is the third time that I have asked the question. Are you going to ignore it again?

You don't know, so what's the difference. Gun shows aren't all the same. The real point is people who oppose universal or gun show background checks aren't interested in solving the problems of our open gun market.

The potential exists to resell a weapon at a gun show to someone who can't pass a background check and just because it's illegal doesn't mean there is a way of catching someone doing it or that a gun show doesn't promote doing it.

Sensible gun control laws would require registration of all firearms from the time of manufacturing and sales involving transfer of registration, which would always require a background check. Let me explain it in simple terms! Every gun from the time of manufacture is registered with an ID. The registration can be transferred to an organization or individual, but the organization has to be something like the military or law enforcement. Every gun is registered and checked each year to determine the same person owns it. The rifled firearms are periodically ballistics tested with the bullets being sent to FBI for scanning and the data is put in a data base. The FBI can work out a quick scan process. People would think twice before using a gun in a crime and the reason to possess a gun on the streets of our cities would fade away.

It's the nature of criminals to draw heat, so possessing an illegal firearm should be dealt with severely, when they've drawn heat. Let's say the cops find a firearm in the residence of someone suspected for a crime. I doubt a criminal wipes down his weapon everytime he touches it, so fingerprints can be lifted connecting a person to the weapon. A weapon could be associated with any type of crime the police would get a search warrant for and listed on the warrant.

I haven't been advocating these piecemeal, feelgood changes in the law, but have advocated a comprehensive approach that reduces gun violence and discourages illegal ownership of guns. Closing the gun show loophole is just a small part of what should be done.

And criminals will obey all of that.

Criminals aren't given much choice when using the gun allows it to be traced to them. When possessing an unregistered gun has it's own punishment, it isn't worth having around.