Posted on 10/10/2014 9:19:29 AM PDT by rktman
On Tuesday, five weeks before voters in Washington State will decide whether to require “universal” background checks on firearm transfers, gun control advocate Mark Kelly lied on national television about how many such transactions occur without a background check. Asked by CNN, Kelly said (at 3:30 in the video), “right now 60 percent of all gun sales go–occur–with a background check. Why do we allow the 40 percent, the other 40 percent, to happen?”
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
Forty %? I thought it was 115%. Well, if you're gonna fudge dammit, fudge.
Like the criminals will get background checks before they buy guns on the black market.
This must be the sleaziest ex-astronaut around, making a living off his wife’s attempted assassination. What a low-life.
One would think that with all the money taxpayers have sunk into his training, he could come up with something better than lying for a living. There are countless Democrats with far less education able to do that. Rev. Al and Jesse come to mind.
Well yeah. It’s the law. Or not. Hopefully NOT.
Because the 2nd Amendment doesn't say, "Shall not be infringed, as long as you have a background check"
Free men don't ask permission.
And finally, this is not Gifford's problem. It is not James Brady's problems. It's not a Moms Demand Action problem. This is a problem that is purely the fault of gun owners, period. We have CONSENTED to the destruction of the 2nd Amendment by constantly consenting to these checks whenever we purchase a firearm. Worse yet, the big ones to blame are the FFL dealers. These animals MAKE GOOD MONEY off the destruction of the 2nd Amendment.
The loss of our 2nd Amendment rights is to fall squarely on our shoulders, not the left. It's high time we realize it, and do something about it, before it's far too late.
Today’s astronauts are a politically correct coddled bunch, nothing like the heroic pioneers of 50 years ago.
Allow? There's yer trouble.
You are absolutely correct:
"...governments derive their just powers from the CONSENT of the governed."
A Tucson gun store owner has decided to rescind the sale of a military-style rifle to Mark Kelly, the husband of former U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, after Kelly said he had intended the purchase to make a political point about how easy it is to obtain the kind of firearms he’s lobbying Congress to ban.
Kelly’s March 5 purchase of an AR-15-style rifle and a 45.-caliber handgun at Diamondback Police Supply sparked a frenzy of reaction from both sides of the debate after he posted to Facebook a photo of himself shopping.
A background check took only a matter of minutes to complete, Kelly said in the Facebook post, adding that it’s scary to think people can buy similar guns without background checks at gun shows or on the Internet.
But Kelly couldn’t immediately take possession of the rifle because the shop had bought it from a customer. As a result, the store is required by a Tucson ordinance to hold the gun for 20 days to give the city enough time to make sure the weapon wasn’t used in a crime.
Store owner Doug MacKinlay said Monday in a Facebook post of his own that he “determined that was in my company’s best interest to terminate this transaction prior to his returning to my store.”
“While I support and respect Mark Kelly’s 2nd Amendment rights to purchase, possess, and use firearms in a safe and responsible manner, his recent statements to the media made it clear that his intent in purchasing the Sig Sauer M400 5.56mm rifle from us was for reasons other then for his personal use,” MacKinlay said in the statement.
"(21) The term 'engaged in the business' means - (C) as applied to a dealer in firearms, as defined in section 921(a)(11)(A), a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms, but such term shall not include a person who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms"
A loophole is an inadvertent omission when crafting a law. The specific exemption above is what the liberals try to pass off as a "loophole".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.