Magox Posted June 26, 2015 Posted June 26, 2015 Yes, but the rest of us would have been deprived of some pretty entertaining reading.
birdog1960 Posted June 26, 2015 Posted June 26, 2015 If dealers are selling firearms without doing background checks, then they need to be arrested and do time. The vast majority of dealers at gun shows comply with the law and do not sell any firearms without running a background check. The only people at gun shows & flea markets not required to perform background checks are private citizens. what does this mean. i ask in all seriousness. i have no idea if the guy that got my gun has an ffl (or was even in the ffa, actually i think the latter is pretty likely). if he isn't an ffl, could he legally do the transaction that i described?
Azalin Posted June 26, 2015 Posted June 26, 2015 (edited) what does this mean. i ask in all seriousness. i have no idea if the guy that got my gun has an ffl (or was even in the ffa, actually i think the latter is pretty likely). if he isn't an ffl, could he legally do the transaction that i described? It depends on where he got the gun. If he purchased it from a dealer, then a background check should have been performed on him, in which case he broke the law by passing it along to you. If he purchased it from a private citizen selling guns, then no background check was required, and the deal was kosher. At least that's how I understand it. To elaborate a bit, here in Texas there are gun dealers - the ones that own the mom & pop firearms stores, and there's a lot of them here. dealers make up the majority of people selling weapons at gun shows. These shows attract a lot of people - hunters, collectors, people interested in home security, etc. They're usually held once a month for one weekend. Besides the dealers present, there are also private citizens like you and me; folks that may have weapons of all kinds for sale - civil war weaponry, hunting rifles, bayonets, etc. These people are far outnumbered by the dealers. Since they don't deal in weapons professionally, they're not required to have a Federal Firearms License, and are not required to perform background checks on buyers. Beyond that, I'd need to do research on the subject, since I'm not a gun enthusiast nor do I own any firearms. Edited June 26, 2015 by Azalin
birdog1960 Posted June 26, 2015 Posted June 26, 2015 (edited) It depends on where he got the gun. If he purchased it from a dealer, then a background check should have been performed on him, in which case he broke the law by passing it along to you. If he purchased it from a private citizen selling guns, then no background check was required, and the deal was kosher. At least that's how I understand it. that's what i thought as well. and there is the loop-hole. although the bigger problem appears to reside with unscrupulous dealers. who woulda thunk it - less than honorable people in arms trade? Edited June 26, 2015 by birdog1960
boyst Posted June 26, 2015 Posted June 26, 2015 that's what i thought as well. and there is the loop-hole. in your opinion - so I won't bash it or worry if you disagree - what can we do to fix this issue? Is there a reason we should close it? Is there a reason to keep it open? Isn't this part of the rights of citizenship? I have a hard time believing that Gangbanger Garry is going to go buy a Gun from gun show Steve.
birdog1960 Posted June 26, 2015 Posted June 26, 2015 in your opinion - so I won't bash it or worry if you disagree - what can we do to fix this issue? Is there a reason we should close it? Is there a reason to keep it open? Isn't this part of the rights of citizenship? I have a hard time believing that Gangbanger Garry is going to go buy a Gun from gun show Steve. the right to sell guns? hmmm, give me a second...nope. close the loophole.
Azalin Posted June 26, 2015 Posted June 26, 2015 that's what i thought as well. and there is the loop-hole. although the bigger problem appears to reside with unscrupulous dealers. who woulda thunk it - less than honorable people in arms trade? From what I understand, the people who operate the gun show itself have pretty strict rules with which sellers need to comply. To be honest, in the 26 years I've lived in Texas, I have never once heard of any crimes being committed by anyone using a gun that was purchased at a gun show. I can guarantee that these events are not host to thugs and gangsters. There are far too many rednecks there to allow that kind of crap to happen.
TakeYouToTasker Posted June 26, 2015 Posted June 26, 2015 the right to sell guns? hmmm, give me a second...nope. close the loophole. The right to own guns is, by a very logical extension the right to sell guns. Else, how is one expected to acquire the guns which it their right to own?
GG Posted June 26, 2015 Posted June 26, 2015 So it's your position that the south invaded the north? How did you get to this conclusion from what I posted?
FireChan Posted June 26, 2015 Posted June 26, 2015 What's funny is that you actually believe what you just wrote. Am I funny to you? Am I some sort of clown? Am I here for your amusement? The points that have been made have been echoed by numerous posters, which first and foremost, the impetus for the war was slavery. No, not really. The war wasn't started because of slavery. Look at the timing of the war vs. the freedom of the slaves, etc. Sure, Lincoln more than anything wanted to preserve the Union, which I've stated multiple times in this thread but you hard-heads want to create your own narrative of how this discussion has devolved. No, you said Lincoln wanted to free the slaves and his whole mission of the war and to protect the Union was for the slaves and the moral high ground of doing what is right against the Constitution. But make no bones about it, if slavery hadn't of been rejected by your ancestral Confederate brethren, then the war would have never have happened. Cept, 1 I'm a Yankee and then my Southern ancestors were far too poor to be slaves. My great, great grandfather and his father were simple farming folks. Granted one of the older families in this area, but, my ancestors and those who I cannot even speak for lived in the Pro-Union Western area of NC. And, that you're stating all of this war-not-happening stuff on your beliefs vs. fact, ya just can't do that funny guy. I'm not going to continue to repeat what I posted just so I can attempt to re explain myself to some dipshit. If you want to try to understand what I wrote, then re read it. Sticks and stones my break my bones but words will never hurt me. Besides, I am a moron not a dipshit. And, you already have been doling labels to everyone, so ease up Nancy. This ain't personal, you're just an idiot. Mostly because, well, the complaint you're making about re-explaining yourself over and over again is exactly what you're doing because you have at least 3 posters arguing successfully against your tired lamenting weak arguments. Further, there are another 2 or 3 that are not even bothering discussing it with you due to your ignorance. I am ignorant on many things, too. But, I seldom attempt to debate them. inb4, "herpderp, yeah you're ignorant alright!" There are plenty of posts, with plenty of explanations that are filled with reasonable explanations backed by facts. Yup, lets thank Tasker, Bobs domicile, GG, TrannyG, Darin, Tom and all of those people for their posts. They did great. You, not so much. The only ones that are rewriting history here are you yahoo's. Yahoo is so last decade. It's all about Bing, yo. And lets not forget, it was you who declared that slavery would have only lasted another 20 to 30 years. It was that moronic comment that brought me into the fold. I made you a moron? I don't understand!? My statement of opinion was no more then 99% of your posts in this thread. You did have a few facts and I will quote them. No shout out to me? !@#$ you Boyst.
birdog1960 Posted June 26, 2015 Posted June 26, 2015 (edited) From what I understand, the people who operate the gun show itself have pretty strict rules with which sellers need to comply. To be honest, in the 26 years I've lived in Texas, I have never once heard of any crimes being committed by anyone using a gun that was purchased at a gun show. I can guarantee that these events are not host to thugs and gangsters. There are far too many rednecks there to allow that kind of crap to happen. here's the thing: i have a difficult time believing that alaska dimwit and 3rd eye didn't realize that this was the loophole i was referencing then there's this from my link (appropriately referenced) June of 2000, ATF published a study of 1,530 firearms trafficking investigations conducted during the period July 1996 – December 1998. That study, Following the Gun: Enforcing Federal Laws Against Firearm Traffickers,6 found that straw purchasing was the most common channel of illegal gun trafficking, accounting for almost one-half (46%) of all investigations, and associated with nearly 26,000 illegally trafficked firearms Edited June 26, 2015 by birdog1960
FireChan Posted June 26, 2015 Posted June 26, 2015 Nice to see our resident neo-Confederates continue to spin history by channelling their inner Lerone Bennetts and Thomas DiLorenzos. Like them, I find your tilted arguments intellectually lazy, if not outright dishonest. But hey, there has never been a shortage of audiences all too willing to glom onto completely ommitted or twisted facts in order to achieve a history to feel better about. I personally could not give a damn about South.
birdog1960 Posted June 26, 2015 Posted June 26, 2015 The right to own guns is, by a very logical extension the right to sell guns. Else, how is one expected to acquire the guns which it their right to own? i think he was talking about private individuals as sellers. try to keep up.
Azalin Posted June 26, 2015 Posted June 26, 2015 here's the thing: i have a difficult time believing that alaska dimwit and 3rd eye didn't realize that this was the loophole i was referencing then there's this from my link (appropriately referenced) June of 2000, ATF published a study of 1,530 firearms trafficking investigations conducted during the period July 1996 – December 1998. That study, Following the Gun: Enforcing Federal Laws Against Firearm Traffickers,6 found that straw purchasing was the most common channel of illegal gun trafficking, accounting for almost one-half (46%) of all investigations, and associated with nearly 26,000 illegally trafficked firearms I think they understood perfectly. I believe they were asking you how you could square obtaining a gun from your friend in the manner you did while simultaneously calling for a ban on the 'gun show loophole', since they are essentially the exact same thing. With regard to the ATF study you reference, does it say anywhere in there that the focus of their investigation was either legitimate gun dealers and gun shows? It's fair to make a comparison between legal & illegal gun dealers and pharmacies & drug dealers. In each case, one is a legitimate business, the other a criminal enterprise.
birdog1960 Posted June 26, 2015 Posted June 26, 2015 (edited) I think they understood perfectly. I believe they were asking you how you could square obtaining a gun from your friend in the manner you did while simultaneously calling for a ban on the 'gun show loophole', since they are essentially the exact same thing. With regard to the ATF study you reference, does it say anywhere in there that the focus of their investigation was either legitimate gun dealers and gun shows? It's fair to make a comparison between legal & illegal gun dealers and pharmacies & drug dealers. In each case, one is a legitimate business, the other a criminal enterprise. i explained how i could square it. if everyone using the mechanism were buying only shotguns for the uses i described, closing the loophole would be unnecessary. unfortunately, it's not. but they understood that also. it was about silly pimping. as i've said before, when in rome... back on topic: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/26/opinion/david-brooks-the-robert-e-lee-problem.html?action=click&contentCollection=Your%20Money&module=MostEmailed&version=Full®ion=Marginalia&src=me&pgtype=article. an excellent op ed by david brooks. he treats the flag question as a no brainer. he saves the analysis for gen lee. That culture is transmitted through the generations by the things we honor or don’t honor, by the symbols and names we celebrate and don’t celebrate. If we want to reduce racism we have to elevate the symbols that signify the struggle against racism and devalue the symbols that signify its acceptance. Lowering the Confederate flag from public properties is thus an easy call. There are plenty of ways to celebrate Southern heritage and Southern life without choosing one so enmeshed in the fight to preserve slavery. Edited June 26, 2015 by birdog1960
Rob's House Posted June 26, 2015 Posted June 26, 2015 I personally could not give a damn about South. Eh, !@#$ you too, buddy.
Max Fischer Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 Deep thoughts. When correct and supportable, the brevity of a post is irrelevant.
Rob's House Posted June 27, 2015 Posted June 27, 2015 When correct and supportable, the brevity of a post is irrelevant. It wasn't the brevity, but rather the irrelevance of your post that stood out. I could just as easily say no 9/11 = no Iraq war. Does that mean the Iraq war was fought over 9/11?
Recommended Posts