Posted on 02/05/2013 9:55:40 AM PST by misanthrope
At the top of the list of changes to gun transaction restrictions the left has bleated on for years is what they have deceptively labelled "Closing The Gunshow Loophole". On it's face, it would seem they are referring to firearms transactions that occur at gunshows between private parties not involving an NICS background check.
When you listen carefully, though, you also hear the Progressive explanations include firearms transactions that occur at other venues such as flea markets. Every now and then, if you listen really closely, the liberal will let slip that the REAL problem is the non NICSed transaction itself, regardless of where it takes place or between whom.
So, it should be understood that when an anti-gun rights activist refers to "Closing The Gunshow Loophole", it is simply code-speak for what is more accurately referred to as "Universal Background Checks".
Assuming that the Federal government, and the various state governments that require some form of licensing to purchase firearms, can be taken at their word that they have not maintained data pertaining to who bought what firearm, most all firearms are literally untraceable despite the data on the form 4473. Within some restrictions, any individual that has purchased a gun from an FFL at a retail establishment throughout history could have sold (or otherwise transferred) that firearm to any anonymous individual with no obligation to retain any data on the transferee's identification whatsoever.
It's safe to assume that there are literally millions, or perhaps tens of millions, of firearms floating around out there that cannot be tracked down to the current owner using the data contained on form 4473.
So, enter the "Universal Background Check" (AKA "Closing The Gunshow Loophole").
Simply put, there is currently NO WAY to enforce the performance of an NICS background check between private, non-FFL individuals. Individuals wishing to trade a firearm privately will simply do so knowing that they preserve their anonymity, the firearm being traded preserves it's non-trackable status, and there are no possible legal ramifications (short of being caught by the authorities in the act of conducting the transaction).
The only way to enforce a "Universal Background Check" (AKA "Closing The Gunshow Loophole"), has to be via connecting firearms owners with firearm's serial numbers.
We call that "Firearms Registration".
Once "Firearms Registration" is accomplished, enforcement of "Universal Background Checks" becomes possible (and trivially easy). Without "Firearms Registration", enforcement of "Universal Background Checks" is impossible.
They know this.
The Anti-Firearms Rights movement is not going to spend the time, money, and political capital in pushing "Closing The Gunshow Loophole" legislation without plans for follow-up legislation to facilitate enforcement.
So, I would suggest that the somewhat innocuous sounding phrase "Closing The Gunshow Loophole" is simply code-speak for "Universal Firearms Registration".
Those familiar with the history of firearms registration during the 20th century know what that means.
Just to play devils-U-know-what for fun, libs would reply that freedom comes from woman's reproductive choices, like employer supplied birth control and contraception. There is no amendment covering those?
Seems in the abstract Universal Background checks are wildly popular, polling ~ 85% even very high with Rs and NRA members.
But once the senate Dems put a bill out it will be easy to tear down as being unenforcible or over-reaching.
Don’t forget that the oppressives like to LIE with numbers.
Consider that your average gun show will have a certain percentage of non-FFL vendors selling accessories like holsters, ammo, gun cases, scopes, reloading supplies, magazines, T-shirts, beef jerky (yum!) And other non-firearm items.
Clearly those transactions shouldn’t fall under Feral purview, but the Lying Leftists will include those sales to boost the number of “private” sales…
The fear of being caught acts as a deterrence to many types of crimes.
If your firearm has a 4473 from a purchase and you sell it to someone privately while violating this law, then you can be found out if the gun is later used in a crime.
Or course, if you have a gun that has no 4473, then you are right that there would be no paper trail to say that you bought it and not the average Joe you sold it to.
I can imagine the gov't running stings on people to try to catch illegal sales. Registration is not the only way to enforce this law.
It is worse than you think:
Grandpa is on this last legs. Grandma calls in the families and hands out his guns to them as Grandpa wanted. Then they go down to the gun shop and have them transfered and registered by a gun dealer.
Universal registration of guns. Next confiscation.
It is worse than you think:
Grandpa is on this last legs. Grandma calls in the families and hands out his guns to them as Grandpa wanted. Then they go down to the gun shop and have them transfered and registered by a gun dealer.
Universal registration of guns. Next confiscation.
The whole argument about tracking stolen guns is specious. When you report stolen guns it is entered in a database at the NCIC. Tracking all guns would be duplication of effort and is not needed.
“Universal Background Check”
My response has always been:
“When you figure out a way to ensure drug lords and gang bangers conduct background checks, before arming new recruits, come talk to me.”
“Until then, leave me alone!”
Correct. And the value of weapons that cannot be traced like stolen weapons that come off of the city, county, state, and/or fed lists that legal gun owners reported the theft to plus the SN is worthless in most states as how many people want to contact the city, county etc. every damn year or whatever? I had a 38 cal.plus P Taurus N65 revolver stolen over 14 years ago. I immediately reported it stolen to incluse model number, stainless, and SN. The pistol was only kept on the stolen weapons list of a major US city for a year. I was shocked. So, the criminals win again. Make no mistake that some con artist will make big money selling weapons like that stolen pistol.
What if you simply lose them?
“This will be a BOON to gun store owners, since we would not be able to sell our weapons any longer.”
Sure. If this passes, any and all private sales and transfers of ownership such as gifts and inheritance’s will have to be processed through a FFL owner. It won’t take these people to figure out that there’s lot s of easy money to be made out of this. Example; if someone owns ten guns of various types and the transfer process fee is lets say $100 per gun that would cost whoever should inherit them $1,000 to transfer ownership. Failure to o this would mean that these guns would have to be relinquished to the government of course. It would take a couple of generations to cycle all of the guns in private hands through this processs but it would eventually mean that every gun would be listed in the government data base.
First of all, I own guns. Secondly, I am against gun registration. But, I was recently at a large gun show (where I actually bought an AR-15 from a private seller) and saw something that made me start to reconsider my thinking on background checks: there were two young gang-member-type thugs looking seriously at a 50-cal rifle.
Of course, I don't think many of us would object to universal background checks if we knew 100% for sure that would be the extent of the controls. But, unfortunately, this administration has demonstrated that they cannot be trusted, and that they would like to take all guns away from everyone, except, of course, those they deem worthy. And, I have it on good authority that those background checks do go into a database, which is what we were all afraid would occur. But, the idea of gang members owning a 50-cal rifle also concerns me.
Here is my conclusion: Thugs and criminals will always be able to get guns - gun control really only affects law-abiding citizens. Starting down the slippery slope of universal background checks and gun registration can never, based on our experience, be undone. So I'm willing to sacrifice the ability of thugs to buy 50-cal rifles at a gun show for my right to legally own firearms.
I have not been to a gun show since 1991, but; it was as you stated. A full check was run on anyone who bought from any dealer with a booth/setup. We had background checks that took up to 15 days then.I would not buy a weapon unless it was a long time friend or a FFL dealer.
They may not have been looking to buy it, but to follow the owner home and steal it later.
....like employer supplied birth control and contraception....”
They certainly have a right to not get pregnant in the first place - that’s real easy to accomplish. But they DON’T have any right whatsoever to demand that someone else pay for the poor choices they make.
As for background checks, IF - and that’s a BIG IF - the Rs do a good job of blocking it and explaining it to the country, it’s dead on arrival.
Like I said before - I have zero faith in anything these assclowns do anymore. They cower and cave in like scared little girls. And the Dems just sit there grinning.
Neither are used car sales between private parties, but that doesn't stop private individuals from buying or selling used cars, even though 55,000 are killed annually in car accidents each year, and several hundred thousands (perhaps more) are injured to one extent or the other. So using the libturd logic, let's ban all used car sales unless you go to an authorized car dealer, and have the car dealer call into a universal background check, before the used car can be sold.
BTW, 55,000 killed annually in car accidents, many of them being the result of drinking & driving. According to liberal logic, it sounds like liberals should be lobbying to ban automobiles & drinking, or cut the speeds down to 10 mph or less. See how well that would sit with the libturds!
I watch an Hispanic speaking man walking around in the show with another man who was translating for him. The Hispanic speaking guy was buying rifles and pistols (no revolvers that I saw) from individuals and they would walk those purchases out to a van where another man sat in the back and oiled them up. Then they would go back in and mill around, looking for more to purchase. NOTHING illegal was occurring in these transactions, as far as I know. At the very least, ANY sale done inside the event confines or deemed due to the show attraction/gathering event should have to be run through a competent FFL dealer (for a nominal fee as is already collected) so a background is done on the purchasers.Caveat: the requirement for the checks should terminate outside of event connections, period. The government should not have the right to regulate the private transfer (with or without money involved) of properties. BUT a publicly advertised gunshow is a public event and can be regulated in some fashion, addressed via votes over legislation/legislators. And we are long past due to revolve many of the scum calling themselves 'elected representatives'.
***since we would not be able to sell our weapons any longer.***
Wanna bet? You have a firearm and a neighbor wants to trade a firearm and cash for it.
You make the trade.
You can do the same with knives, cattle, garage sales, trucks, tractors, lawn mowers, snow blowers, weed eaters.
It is your property and you can give it away if you want to as the FEDS have no list of what you own, if you have been smart about how to buy.
I've read the way the govn. bill in the senate and house reads, and to make a private gun sale, you would have to go to a gun dealer to do the background check and paperwork and pay the gun dealer for doing that. If you didn't do that, the sale would be illegal, however, right now, no one could trace the gun so you would probably be safe in doing a private sale.
However, when they get the serial numbers of our guns by whatever means resulting in registration, they could trace your gun and find out you illegally sold it - then, they have you and it's a big fine and jail.
The second amendment reads, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
It is definitely infringement when they screw with your buying or selling guns or limiting magazines or limiting the amount of ammo you buy and certainly cutting off web purchases of guns or ammo is infringement. Plus, British pos Piers Morgan needs to go to any country where people can't have guns - then he would be happy. He doesn't like our having guns, so why doesn't he get the hell out of here and go to a “safe” country where no one can have them.
THIS MORNING, CHEAPER THAN DIRT HAS 22 LR CCI HOLLOW POINTS - BOXES OF 100. IF YOU NEED THOSE, GO RIGHT NOW AND SEE IF THEY STILL HAVE SOME. I WOULD BET THEY WILL BE OUT SOMETIME TODAY. IT'S THE FIRST TIME THEY HAVE HAD THEM IN AT LEAST TWO MONTHS - THEY ARE IN STOCK.
SOOO.Buy any weapons you might want in the coming months and then have a boating accident just in case the pubbies cave on background checks( which they probably will do) using ID numbers.
I remember when applying for an FFL was as easy as getting an M1 Garand from CMP.
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.