Do You Support The "Gun Show Loophole?"

[Quantum Windbag]

You point out a country that has 35 homicides by gun when we have over 11,000 that year. You use a vague description of what a gun crime is in the UK and compare it to a country with more than that many homicides by guns. What about the people who were shot in America and didn't die?

Your day is done, so deal with it! We don't buy your crap.

One more time.

Gun violence increased even though they had exactly the system you described. The mere fact that the UK has less gun violence than the US is irrelevant. It had less gun violence than the US before they passed the laws you are so fond of.

Stop trying to deflect. Or, f you think you actually have a point, learn that you don't.

Those incidents were not gun violence, so read it again!

I did, before I posted the link. Since you, quite obviously, skipped right over my link, I will post it again.

The Government's latest crime figures were condemned as "truly terrible" by the Tories today as it emerged that gun crime in England and Wales soared by 35% last year.
Criminals used handguns in 46% more offences, Home Office statistics revealed.
Firearms were used in 9,974 recorded crimes in the 12 months to last April, up from 7,362.
It was the fourth consecutive year to see a rise and there were more than 2,200 more gun crimes last year than the previous peak in 1993.

Gun crime soars by 35% | Mail Online

Please, tell me again how requiring everyone to register guns will magically make us safe, even though it failed every place it has been tried.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I've shot things with military rounds and the bullet didn't deform. I told you the quivering was what they told us about the bullets back then and it was generally accepted information.

Did you read my post? I explained quite clearly that the Vietnam ere rounds were designed to deform, and that modern rounds are not.

Whoever told you that bullets quiver was either dumber than dog shit, or pulling your leg because you are dumber than dog shit.

Notice how, no matter which explanation applies, you are dumber than dog shit?

Have you read my posts? I've used hugh amounts of those rounds that didn't deform.

Yet you sill insist that a Vietnam era M-16 round quivers, thus making you dumber than dog shit.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Cut off the dope dealers supply at the source and see how fast the dope is off the streets.

Can't you idiots figure out America will not listen to you anymore? Your day is done, so deal with it! Don't come crying to me, so bend over like the man you are and take it! Think of it as just overtime in your bathhouse job.

That was funny what the **** do you think the war on drugs has been doing for the last 50 years?

Sure they were!

By 1985, Morales was elected general secretary in a union of coca farmers and by 1988 was elected executive secretary of the Tropics Federation.[30] He retains this position to this day, even while serving as president of Bolivia. Around this time the Bolivian government, encouraged by the US, began a program to eradicate most coca production. By 1996 Morales was made president of the Coordinating Committee of the Six Federations of the Tropics of Cochabamba.[30] Morales was among those opposing the government's position on coca and lobbied for a different policy. This opposition often resulted in him being jailed and in an incident in 1989, beaten near to death by UMOPAR forces (who, assuming he had been slain, dumped his unconscious body in the bushes where it was discovered by his colleagues).[30]

First presidential term: 2006–2009

Source: Evo Morales - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Tell that to the cop!

I don't have to.

The Supreme Court has ruled that a registration of legal weapons cannot be used to convict criminals because it violates their right to remain silent.

I mentioned that earlier, but you ignored it, so I thought I would throw it out again to see if it sinks in.

You don't know how to read a Supreme Court decision.

Which decision did I read, and how did I get it wrong?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That's what they claimed and my guess would be a sonic quiver.

Bullets do not quiver, sonic or otherwise.

...and jets don't either, right?

Flutter due to the formation of shock waves on curved surfaces was another major problem,

Source: Sound barrier - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Which, quite obviously, they solved. I don't even need the article you cited to tell me that, but since you posted it, let's find out what else it says.

Flutter due to the formation of shock waves on curved surfaces was another major problem, which led most famously to the breakup of de Havilland Swallow and death of its pilot, Geoffrey de Havilland, Jr. in 1946. A similar problem is thought to be the cause of the 1943 crash of the BI-1 rocket aircraft in the Soviet Union. All of these effects, although unrelated in most ways, led to the concept of a "barrier" that makes it difficult for an aircraft to break the speed of sound.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_barrier#cite_note-8

Look at that, people used to believe it was impossible to fly faster than the speed of sound. I wonder, did we ever break the sound barrier?

Do you want to give me another opportunity to prove you are dumber than dog shit by arguing that the "quivering" caused by objects approaching the sound barrier still prevents us from going faster than Mach 1?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

They have different intents. I image a homemade rifle wouldn't get heat, but it would be rather dangerous to shoot.

What different intents? I thought all guns were desinged to kill people.

Try a dictionary and look up the law definition on intent! Try educating yourself, too!

You are the one claiming they have a different intent, I am asking you to defend your position. If you can't, feel free to retract it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

A spin off of the other thread where I have asked numerous times and not a single right winger has answered, is if you support the gun show loophole.

For those that may not know, under current federal law if you wish to purchases a firearm, you have to be run in a background check to make sure you are not a felon, been convicted of a violent crime, been in a mental institution, etc,..before they give the go ahead to sell that person a weapon. However under the "gun show loophole", there are not background checks at all.

That's right, absoutly nothing. A violent thug fresh out of the penitentiary, a terrorist, or a nutcases ready to commit the next sandy hook could go down to their local gun show, or find a classified ad selling a firearm and they could purchase deadly weapons, with no questions asked.

Selling a firearm to a felon is already illegal, even if you are NOT a federal firearms dealer.

and what is the difference between a craiglist ad and some guy arranging a street buy for you?

More restrictions on legal gunowners, and no effect on the illegal gun trade.

I'd have to check the statute, but I highly doubt it's a strict liability offense. Meaning selling to a felon is fine as long as you don't know they're a felon.

No, selling to a felon is OK as long as you have no reason to believe he is a felon.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Selling a firearm to a felon is already illegal, even if you are NOT a federal firearms dealer.

and what is the difference between a craiglist ad and some guy arranging a street buy for you?

More restrictions on legal gunowners, and no effect on the illegal gun trade.

I'd have to check the statute, but I highly doubt it's a strict liability offense. Meaning selling to a felon is fine as long as you don't know they're a felon.

It's only illegal to knowingly sell to someone who shouldn't have a gun. That's why these occasional sellers at gun shows advertise: No paperwork, no ID required, no waiting period, no background check, and no questions asked.

Provide an actual example. not a story about someone who knows someone who saw it once.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Logically you should be able to own anything and only be punished for what you do with it. However - the problem with that kind of reactive policy is that a lot of innocent people can be hurt or killed in the process before there is a need to react.

We don't restrict the exercise of a right - any right -because someone -might- do something illegal.
The right to arms should be treated the same as any other right.
So... there's no basis for restricting simple ownership/posession.

Then nothing should be restricted right? Nothing.

What if one's religious practice required ownership of some part of an endangered species of animal that was not legal to kill? (there is one that does)?

SCOTUS already said that the Endangered Species Act cannot be used to prevent Native Americans from trapping eagles for their feathers as part of their religious practices.

Next question.

 

[Vast LWC]

It's only illegal to knowingly sell to someone who shouldn't have a gun. That's why these occasional sellers at gun shows advertise: No paperwork, no ID required, no waiting period, no background check, and no questions asked.

Provide an actual example. not a story about someone who knows someone who saw it once.

Yeah, Dubya, gonna have to go with QW on this one. The other parts may be true, but surely there is always an ID required.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

That is the biggest pile of circular drivel you have posted so far. Voting requires registration simply because they have to know how many people are voting, and who votes where. Owning a gun you keep in your home requires none of that. States may require a CCW that shows you are capable of concealed carry, and that is mostly for your own protection so a police officer knows you are allowed to carry.

IF you didnt have voter rolls, you couldnt know who could vote, where the vote came from, and how many representatives a given area gets. Guns require no such information to own.

The Constitution didn't give you the right to vote. It prohibited denying the rights of a citizen, because of race and later gender. The right to vote comes from the states giving those voting rights to it's citizens. The right to vote had conditions which infringed the right of certain citizens until the Constitution changed that.

Voter registration rolls have nothing to do with how many representatives a given area gets and that is done by the census.

The Constitution only prohibits the disarming of the populace and the states and federal government do have a right to deny certain types of weapons, as long as it isn't the whole category, such as pistols. That decision is only based on case law. An assault weapons ban is constitutional and so are bans on magazine sizes.

FOR THE 100,000 TIME
In order for a firearm to be protected by the second amendment it must have some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, and the kind in common use at the time.
Miller vs. U.S.

Some people keep saying assault weapons ban are constitutional, but they never address this, but keep saying AWB are constitutional

If you can't defend your position you should stop saying AWB's are constitutional

 

[The Rabbi]

It's only illegal to knowingly sell to someone who shouldn't have a gun. That's why these occasional sellers at gun shows advertise: No paperwork, no ID required, no waiting period, no background check, and no questions asked.

Provide an actual example. not a story about someone who knows someone who saw it once.

Yeah, Dubya, gonna have to go with QW on this one. The other parts may be true, but surely there is always an ID required.

No. It's good practice and many people I know will only sell to someone with a carry permit. But Dumya scored here: no paperwork or ID required for a sale between two private individuals.

 

[Vast LWC]

No. It's good practice and many people I know will only sell to someone with a carry permit. But Dumya scored here: no paperwork or ID required for a sale between two private individuals.

Wow, really, not even ID?

I stand corrected.

Apologies to Dubya.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Selling a firearm to a felon is already illegal, even if you are NOT a federal firearms dealer.

and what is the difference between a craiglist ad and some guy arranging a street buy for you?

More restrictions on legal gunowners, and no effect on the illegal gun trade.

I'd have to check the statute, but I highly doubt it's a strict liability offense. Meaning selling to a felon is fine as long as you don't know they're a felon.

It's only illegal to knowingly sell to someone who shouldn't have a gun. That's why these occasional sellers at gun shows advertise: No paperwork, no ID required, no waiting period, no background check, and no questions asked.

of all the gun shows I have been too I have never seen anyone with those kind of signs.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Provide an actual example. not a story about someone who knows someone who saw it once.

Yeah, Dubya, gonna have to go with QW on this one. The other parts may be true, but surely there is always an ID required.

No. It's good practice and many people I know will only sell to someone with a carry permit. But Dumya scored here: no paperwork or ID required for a sale between two private individuals.

That is not what he said though, he is claiming that people go to gun shows and advertise openly that they don't require ID, and that no questions are asked.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Yeah, Dubya, gonna have to go with QW on this one. The other parts may be true, but surely there is always an ID required.

No. It's good practice and many people I know will only sell to someone with a carry permit. But Dumya scored here: no paperwork or ID required for a sale between two private individuals.

That is not what he said though, he is claiming that people go to gun shows and advertise openly that they don't require ID, and that no questions are asked.

No they don't advertise that

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I'd have to check the statute, but I highly doubt it's a strict liability offense. Meaning selling to a felon is fine as long as you don't know they're a felon.

It's only illegal to knowingly sell to someone who shouldn't have a gun. That's why these occasional sellers at gun shows advertise: No paperwork, no ID required, no waiting period, no background check, and no questions asked.

of all the gun shows I have been too I have never seen anyone with those kind of signs.

If there are people with those signs they are probably cops trying to trap people.

 

[jtpr312]

Then there should be no problem for you gun nutters when we close it!

It never happened, right?

Exactly how do you close something that doesn't exist. There is no such thing as a gun show loop hole. Dealers at gun shows MUST perform the same exact background checks at a gun show as they do at their shops. Some private sales between individuals are not covered by the same laws as sales by licensed dealers, but that has absolutely nothing to do with gun shows, that applies to sales between individuals anywhere at any time so it's not any gun show "loophole", it's state laws.

In other words, children like to play games claiming something doesn't exist, if they ignore the obvious description of something that does exist.

One third of the guns sold at a gun show are from people called occasional sellers who are not licensed gun dealers running background checks. Signs at gun shows advertise no background checks, no forms, no waiting periods and no ID required. The NRA gun nutters want that to continue and 92% of Americans don't. Those Americans want universal background checks, which means background checks on private purchases or anyone calling themselves an occasional seller at a gun show. Your numbers are bs.

Seventeen states regulate at least some sales by private parties.

More than 85% of recovered crime guns have gone through at least one private party transaction following their initial sale by a licensed retailer.

Perhaps two-thirds of sales at gun shows are made by licensed retailers.

Current evidence suggests that gun shows account for 4% to 9% of all gun sales.

The best available data on gun shows as a source of crime guns come from investigations of illegal gun trafficking by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). Of 1,530 such investigations during the late 1990s, 212 (13.9%) involved gun shows and flea markets. These cases accounted for 25,862 guns—30.7% of all the guns in the study.

Results of trafficking investigations suggest that two thirds of crime guns obtained at gun shows are sold by licensed retailers. Among gun dealers, those who sell at gun shows are more likely to have crime guns traced to them than are those who do not.

Gun shows are studded with “Private Sale” signs that convey to all this message: No paperwork, no background check, no waiting period, no recordkeeping.

Neo-Confederacy groups rent table space and recruit new members. Ku Klux Klan merchandise was observed several times. New Nazi materials (as distinct from memorabilia) are very common; one regular seller at shows in Arizona is a nationally-recognized promoter of neo-Nazism. The Turner Diaries is everywhere, and Mein Kampf can be found next to More Guns, Less Crime.

In 2008, 83% of self-reported gun owners and 87% of the general public supported a requirement that all gun sales, not just those at gun shows, be subject to background checks.

Source: http://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/vprp/pdf/IGS/IGScoverprefweb.pdf

Now 92% of the American people in a recent poll want universal background checks and the increase is because of the recent public awareness about gun violence. You see it doesn't make a difference what you want to call something at a gun show and what you want doesn't make a difference to the American people. You've had your chance to go on the internet and claim things like Sandy Hook didn't involve an assault weapon, but what you don't realize is that song only sounds good to you Ted Nugent, NRA gun nutter types, who don't need convincing. People like you and Ted are just going to have to put up or shut up, because the people of America don't give a shit about your threats and again, they don't give a shit what you want.

Lol. Not ONE number or percentage you listed is accurate or truthful. Take your leftist/communist propoganda and place it in your vertical file right beside your head.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

It's only illegal to knowingly sell to someone who shouldn't have a gun. That's why these occasional sellers at gun shows advertise: No paperwork, no ID required, no waiting period, no background check, and no questions asked.

of all the gun shows I have been too I have never seen anyone with those kind of signs.

If there are people with those signs they are probably cops trying to trap people.

I took one of my rifles to a gun show a few years ago this guy walked up too me and asked how much I wanted for it. I told him it wasn't for sale. He said I'll give you a thousand for it, I told him again it wasn't for sale. He gave one last offer of 1200.00. I told him no that it wasn't for sale plus I didn't know who he was, even if I thought about selling it I wouldn't sale it too him

 

[M14 Shooter]

What different intents? I thought all guns were desinged to kill people.

Try a dictionary and look up the law definition on intent! Try educating yourself, too!

You are the one claiming they have a different intent, I am asking you to defend your position. If you can't, feel free to retract it.

You're arguing with a pre-pubescent lunatic.
Why?