The "gun show loophole" and national security

[Yukon Silvermoon]

I had a heated debate with a friend last night about the gun show loophole, or so they call it.  In my opinion, the phrase gun show loophole is yet another invented term by the left to scare people into believing that we have less regulation than we really have, much like how they call fancy sporting rifles assault weapons.  The fact that they call it the gun show loophole puts into your mind the idea that a gun show is a giant arms dealing festival where anyone of any ilk can go and buy any and every type of weapon with no background check and no rules.  The real subject is private sales.  Now, personally, I've never engaged in a private sale.  I do realize that most sales that go on are completely legitimate, but I don't know for sure it's a quality firearm I'm buying, or if it's stolen, etc.  Now, here's where most of you guys are going to freak out and spam that downvote button.  Why can't we do a background check on the people with whom we're negotiating a private sale?  I think that in this day and age, you should want to know you're not enabling someone to be armed as they break in on an elderly person and rob them at gun point.  Now, of course, that person has the right to defend them self all the same, but should we really want people to engage in a firefight?  I know that unless I am selling one to a close friend, you're passing a background check before I hand it over in good faith that you aren't going to go do something crazy.  Is that going to stop everyone?  No.  Is that going to put an end to murder?  No.  Does that mean that criminals won't get guns?  No.  Does that mean people wouldn't sell to others without background checks? No.  I just believe that when you have people like ISIS with sleeper cells all over the country, you can't be too careful.  Like I said, the gun show loophole in and of itself is a farce, because of its wording.  However, I see no problem with going down to the gun store with the person I wanna do the sale with, going through a check for a couple of minutes, and then being out the door.  Sure, it's convenient to be able to just buy one, and that's a pretty sweet deal.  Private citizens don't have business hours.  I could buy one at 11:00 at night on my front porch if I wanted to, but it'd also be convenient for me to drive down the wrong side of the road during rush hour because there are less people on that side of the interstate.  The point is that if I sold a guy a gun, then I read in the paper that the same guy had killed a cashier in a robbery gone wrong, I'd feel so horrible.  I'd feel like it was in part my fault.  I know that most people here are absolutely a million percent against any new regulation on firearms, and I get that.  I was completely that way until last night when I did some critical thinking.  Again, I want to make it VERY CLEAR that I am not for banning guns.  I own an AR15.  You guys have probably seen it because I'm a bit of a show off, admittedly.  I have no less than standard 30 round magazines, and I own about 14 of them.  I just simply don't see why it'd be the end of the second amendment if we had to pass background checks for private sales the same way we pass them for in store purchases.  If anything, this would be a great thing for gun shows.  If you're a vendor, not only are you selling your stock, but you can be processing paperwork for people, and charge them 30 or 40 bucks since they aren't buying from you.  That's free money.  I'm on board with that.  However, I'm not on board with any kind of registry, which I'm sure the government already keeps illegally.  

 

BEFORE YOU CLICK THAT NEG BUTTON, READ BELOW

A lot of you guys are already fuming with anger "Oh, Yukon's anti gun.  Yukon's a liberal.  Yukon's anti freedom," when you seriously couldn't be more far from the truth.  I'm not anti gun, and in fact, I'm very pro gun.  The three issues at the forefront of my attention, in order, are gun control, marriage equality, and the decriminalization of marijuana.  I do not believe we should ban any type of firearm, period.  The second amendment is not confusing in the slightest bit.  Shall not be infringed is not a hard concept to understand.  People don't make a big deal about background checks at gun shops, so why would it be a big deal in a private sale.  Answer me that before you press that neg button.  

Edited December 23, 2015 by Yukon Silvermoon

[George Hayduke]

There I gave you a plus for a well thought out argument.  Hopefully no one will take it from you.

 

I'm pretty much with you however, I think there should be a distinction between Private Sales and what I would call 'Stranger Sales'.

 

As we know there are lots of guys who troll fairground gunshows who are there specifically to sell guns - they are in business, regardless if they have a booth, a shop, or a van.  They should have to sell a gun the same way a store front gunshop would.  I don't have a problem with that.

 

I do have a problem with the government telling me or any other citizen they cannot sell or give a gun to a friend or relative without a background check.  I'm not in the business of selling guns for a profit - the government can just stay the **** out of my personal transaction.

 

Besides, if someone really wants to sell guns for profit, there are plenty of online auction sites that provide a larger audience than a fairground parking lot and FFL dealers who will complete the necessary paperwork for the transaction.

 

Easy Peasy, just keep the government out of personal transactions between friends and relatives.  

[divemaster5734]

I have issue with any government controls.

The problem with that is, the government hands out citizenship's like condoms in a elementary school.

Both are equally disgusting, unfortunately, for now, both are unstoppable.

 

The question is, am I willing to sacrifice more of MY personal freedoms, in exchange for a imagined false sense of security.

 

The answer is no.

"Anyone who will trade Freedom for security deserves neither"

 

The answer is NOT more regulation.

 

if the "justice" system were not corrupt, if the state and federal governments did not intentionally entrap innocent humans, if they did not violate rights, if they did not lock people up for no other reason than to steal their property, if the US tax system was fair, if prosecutors went to jail for lying, if judges didn't make big money locking up citizens, then fine.

 

But as it is, a guy caught with a roach in Texas could get up to 10 years in prison, millions of humans are at this moment in prison just so some prosecutor could pad his conviction numbers.

 

Before you go running around like chicken little remember, the sky is only falling because our own freaking government forced it to.

 

While you may, by accident, stop one terrorist, you will in fact keep hundreds, or thousands of Americans from being able to protect themselves.

 

And that may be the person who would have saved your, or your families life, by stooping a madman that already had a gun they stole, or bought on the black market.

 

No, and HELL NO.

 

If today is my last day on earth, so be it. I will defend my freedom to my last breath.

[okane]

plus for you ... now let's talk about that weed

 

just kidding

 

Merry Christmas from Lebanon, TN

[Hooter]

Colorado beat you to it.

 

http://smartgunlaws.org/private-sales-in-colorado/

 

I'm not a fan of the law because you shouldn't have to ask permission to exercise your constitutional rights. A bunch of Sheriff's sued to block the law when it came out, but failed. 

 

BTW, have you heard about weed in Colorado 

[dog53]

What you say makes sense Yukon IF we had a GOVT that the minuet they get their foot in the door would move on to something else.

Anything that they are involved in goes to hell. I have regularly gone to gun shows more then 40 years and I have never witnessed anything being sold out in the parking lot.

If I even buy a shotgun here at any gun show my name is ran before the purchase. The gun laws that already exists work just fine. We dont need more gun laws.

The loophole BS is just the left making up problems that dont really exist. If a bad guy wants a gun he will find a way to get one no matter what this GOVT does. 

As far as me selling a gun to my son grandson nephew . Its none of the GOVT`s damm business.

You give them way to much credit for being able to actually maintain any type of proper system of back ground checks. This GOVT couldnt find its own tracks in the snow.

Now I certainly would not call you names you seem like a real nice guy who enjoys firearms just as much as I do. But I think you may be barking up the wrong tree as far as more gun laws. Just my opinion though . You have yours I have mine.  

[markb57]

If the Colorado law were passed nationwide, the next step, in order to truly regulate it, would be registration. And then it would be......

[Yukon Silvermoon]

Colorado beat you to it.

 

http://smartgunlaws.org/private-sales-in-colorado/

 

I'm not a fan of the law because you shouldn't have to ask permission to exercise your constitutional rights. A bunch of Sheriff's sued to block the law when it came out, but failed. 

 

BTW, have you heard about weed in Colorado 

Can I get some statistics from Colorado to see if it's actually had an impact on firearms related deaths?  

[Hooter]

Can I get some statistics from Colorado to see if it's actually had an impact on firearms related deaths?  

 

Should that include "gun free zones" , where guns are technically illegal ?

[dog53]

[divemaster5734]

 

 

BEFORE YOU CLICK THAT NEG BUTTON, READ BELOW

A lot of you guys are already fuming with anger "Oh, Yukon's anti gun.  Yukon's a liberal.  Yukon's anti freedom," when you seriously couldn't be more far from the truth.  I'm not anti gun, and in fact, I'm very pro gun.  The three issues at the forefront of my attention, in order, are gun control, marriage equality, and the decriminalization of marijuana.  I do not believe we should ban any type of firearm, period.  The second amendment is not confusing in the slightest bit.  Shall not be infringed is not a hard concept to understand.  People don't make a big deal about background checks at gun shops, so why would it be a big deal in a private sale.  Answer me that before you press that neg button.  

 

I would never neg a man for openly expressing his opinion, and applaud all that are wise enough to seek council.

Ciphering truth is  my incurable, ineradicable, and permanent enigma.

I am forever researching. Not just looking for "landmark" decisions, but also researching the life, and history of the individuals, trying to understand the underlying perspective that shaped their agenda, in combination with the historic events of the era, which when all combined, will often present a far more insightful logic, irregardless of the "commonly accepted" history.

Even now, historic "truths" are being rewritten, in school books, by "teachers", and more alarmingly, Google has declared itself the "keepers of history and truth", they have altered search algorithms, and have for the last few months, begun directing every google search user to the truth they have decided is real. Their new policy can in fact force elections to whatever outcome they desire.

 

 

Please understand, I am not criticizing you.

When I read your post, I was struck by the irony of your conflicting perspectives, and understood your dilemma is shared by many Americans.

I started to write out a thoughtful response, but was carried away by my own emotion, based on a singular principal, which I believe to be the one ideal paramount to America.

I own a small business, and rather than address the pressing issues first, I penned a quick response, and did not convey the full message planned.

 

All three of your important topics are centered on individual freedom.

I'll keep this very short.

 

Our declaration of independence, and every single individual states constitutions, have reference to either "Providence", "The Creator", "Creator of the Universe", or "The God of Nature", (when rights are described as a law of nature, or as true as the sun rises in the morning, and sets in the evening).

The framers were careful to not list any singular religion, but they openly admitted they used biblical reference as their justification.

The Bible itself is not about any religion.

Multiple man made religions used various portions of the bible for their own purposes, as it suits them, in order to control other men.

 

The problem is Christians and other religions have tried to ignore parts that don't follow the particular agenda they are trying to enforce on others when it suits them, while using other parts to justify whatever it is they are trying to do.

I think a lot have become confused, forgetting a certain religion they may ascribe to that doesn't "allow" for certain actions, but have lost the ability to discern between their religious doctrine, and actual biblical intent.

While I do not agree with anything same sex, and the bible does indeed condemn it, in a free society, individuals can pursue whatever they want, as long as they do not infringe on my rights.

If a person is engaged in homosexuality, that is a sin they will have to answer to God for.

Likewise, if a person uses drugs, but doesn't harm anyone else, and doesn't endanger anyone else' life, they have only God to answer to if what they are doing is wrong.

America was not founded in order to legislate morality.

It was legislating morality that led to the tyranny and oppression that forced the colonists to leave their homeland in the first place.

While it was definitely frowned on, homosexuality was very common. It wasn't allowed to be displayed in the open, because that is an assault on the individual freedom of others.

But they were free to do whatever they wanted to do behind closed doors, and they did.

Cocaine and Heroine were over the counter, like aspirin is today.

 Coca Cola started putting it in the soft drink that made it widely available, and post civil war streets were "littered" with coca cola addicts, initially they were mostly war veterans with missing limbs.

Back then, a person with a Minnie shot had a 50/50 chance of just getting their arm or leg cut off as having a competent surgeon remove and stitch, especially if there was any hint of infection.

LSD was legal into the 60's.

Even now, the US government makes a fortune selling illegal drugs in America, using proceeds to fund secret wars.

Naturopathic  medicine, especially healing herbs, have been getting criminalized, deemed "illegal", by our government that serves their corporate sponsors.

 

 

Also, I have to point out here, I live in Washington State.

I built a greenhouse, and grew some pot.

I stopped after the first crop, only realizing then I couldn't sell it legally.

After a few months of looking at the jars of pot in the corner of the garage that I spent months growing, and doing some research, I discovered a way to use the healing properties of pot without the getting high side effect.

Actually, it's a recipe in the bible, but the ingredients were "mistranslated". I'll make another post if anyone is interested, with references, to prove my point.

I now make a topical cream that cant get anyone high, but wipes out pain in minutes.

Everyone I have given a jar to has benefited, and I have since helped build several greenhouses for friends.

 

My point is, the definition of "legal", and "moral", has been bastardized, as it suits, by the exact same oppressive government that is now declaring they want to add more restrictions on gun ownership, because they care so much about You.

 

So, those issues are really just  facets of the same question, are we free, or are we not.

I don't understand how the right to protect yourself is any different.

Are we free, or are we not?

 

Just like drugs, sexual preference, gun ownership, and every other issue we face as Americans, our own government has been the instigator, manipulator, and oppressor, enforcing "laws" to promote their own agenda.

 

If we reign in our own government, a good majority of our international problems will disappear as well....JMHO...DM

[Yukon Silvermoon]

Should that include "gun free zones" , where guns are technically illegal ?

You mean mass shooting zones? Gun free zones are friggin scary.  Here's a tip though.  As long as it isn't a government building, you can still legally carry in there.  It's just that if they see you doing so, they can ask you to leave, then if you don't, they can get you with trespassing.  

[Yukon Silvermoon]

 

Trust me, dog.  I understand the slippery slope mentality the government has.  I'm not really calling for restrictions on guns.  I'm just saying that it wouldn't be a bad idea to background check people who are buying them from you.  Friends, family, and such really don't fall into that category because you pretty well know their intentions and stuff.  I'm the last person to judge someone, but I'd have to really profile someone if I were selling a gun to them and they were a stranger.  You brought up strangers and friends, and that would make things way too complicated for the government to handle.  I am a Libertarian, and part of the philosophy is that the government isn't really necessary to keep everything running.  It's called voluntaryism.  I think maybe in this day and age, we should take it upon ourselves as individuals to really make sure we know who we're selling firearms to.  Personally, I'm a self proclaimed gun hoarder so I'm probably never going to sell one, so it's really irrelevant to me. 

[nstoolman1]

In California a Face to Face sale is called a PPT(Private Party Transfer). PPT's need a FFL to do the deal. After the 

10 day wait period and a background check and you pass you can take the gun. There is no GUN SHOW LOOP HOLE. Any gun sold at a California Gun Show

(Few exceptions aside) must be finished at a dealers building and a 10 day wait/background check. Now if two people meet at a gun show parking lot

and conduct a deal then they are breaking the law not the gun show. I think I got the info right. 

I will be happy to walk in a store and purchase/walk out the same day once I get out of this state.

[George Hayduke]

plus for you ... now let's talk about that weed

 

just kidding

 

Merry Christmas from Lebanon, TN

Lebanon, TN... hmmm... I passed through there, or thereabouts in my yoot... got lost on Copperhead Road for a day or two...kain't remember much...