- Joined
- Jan 28, 2006
- Messages
- 51,123
- Reaction score
- 15,259
- Location
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
You linked to an undercover investigator. This is exactly like police departments who use highschool kids to try and buy cigarettes so they can catch the vendors who are braking the law. That's how you enforce these things.
In post #17 you said it wouldn't help prevent gun crime.
Background checks are about registration, why can't you just be up front about that?
Its about keeping guns out of the hands of mentally unstable and felons. How is that not common sense legislation?
Which is why the hell they can't talk about it.I think most gungrabbers know that they would never be able to get any useful public support if they were open and honest about their motives and intentions.
Then gun-grabbers underestimate the power of the low information voter.I think most gungrabbers know that they would never be able to get any useful public support if they were open and honest about their motives and intentions.
Then gun-grabbers underestimate the power of the low information voter.
Gun grabbers don't understand how low information voters work. It has nothing at all to do with the content or substance of your actions. By definition, low information voters neither know nor care about facts and substance.
They care about appearance and feel.
'Register guns just like we register cars so we can fund law enforcement the way we fund road maintenance'; BAM I just sold it in a soundbite. Clear, concise, logical.
I bought a gun online. It had to be shipped to an FFL. The FFL performed NICS when I went to pick it up. That's existing federal law.4 mins ago -
Pat Toomey, R-Pennsylvania - "The bottom line for me is this: If expanding background checks to include gun shows and Internet sales can reduce the likelihood of criminals and mentally ill people from getting guns and we can do it in a fashion that does not infringe on the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens, then we should do it, and in this amendment I think we do," Toomey told reporters on Wednesday.
Manchin noted that the proposal meant that firearms buyers at gun shows would face the same background check currently required in sales by federally licensed gun dealers. In addition, it would close a loophole that exempts intrastate gun sales on the Internet from requiring a background check, he said."
Compromise sets up likely Senate debate on gun laws - CNN.com
I bought a gun online. It had to be shipped to an FFL. The FFL performed NICS when I went to pick it up. That's existing federal law.
No one goes to e-bay and then UPS delivers a gun to their home the next day. That doesn't happen. Not between different states, not within the same state, not anywhere.
"Easy firearm sales over the Internet, through classified sites like Craigslist, may be to blame for a significant amount of the nation’s gun crime, thanks to a loophole in federal firearm regulations that some private arms sellers are taking advantage of, according to a new investigation released Wednesday.
In a probe of illegal online firearm sales conducted by the City of New York, undercover investigators found that 62% of private gun sellers they interacted with were willing to sell guns to a buyer who said he could not pass a background check."
Read more: Investigation: Illegal Gun Buyers Have an Easy Time Online | TIME.com
And you think any legislation would change this? Good luck with that...
Craigslist isn't a dealer. It's a classifieds, identical to newspapers. No one is going to Cregslist and then UPS delivers a gun to their house. That's what an online transaction is. That doesn't happen with firearms."Easy firearm sales over the Internet, through classified sites like Craigslist, may be to blame for a significant amount of the nation’s gun crime, thanks to a loophole in federal firearm regulations that some private arms sellers are taking advantage of, according to a new investigation released Wednesday.
In a probe of illegal online firearm sales conducted by the City of New York, undercover investigators found that 62% of private gun sellers they interacted with were willing to sell guns to a buyer who said he could not pass a background check."
Read more: Investigation: Illegal Gun Buyers Have an Easy Time Online | TIME.com
Craigslist isn't a dealer.............
Craigslist isn't a dealer. It's a classifieds, identical to newspapers. No one is going to Cregslist and then UPS delivers a gun to their house. That's what an online transaction is. That doesn't happen with firearms.
If you see a gun you want to buy on Craigslist, the buyer and seller still have to meet in person to do the transaction if they're in the same state. Congress does not have the authority to regulate intrastate commerce.
If the buyer and seller are in different states, the seller has to go to an FFL and ship the gun to another FFL, who will conduct NICS when the buyer comes in to pick it up. Congress does have the authority to regulate this.
And if the buyer has an exempt permit, there is no NICS ran at all even if they use an FFL for the transfer.
Background checks don't combat illegal ownership.
The transaction itself has to cross a state line, otherwise it's not interstate commerce regardless of where the adds appear.I have seen no limitation just to dealers on the internet in any of the news articles I've read about the proposed legislation. And the difference between advertising on in the local paper and advertising on the internet is one is local and the other is across state lines which puts it in the federal area of regulation.
The transaction itself has to cross a state line, otherwise it's not interstate commerce regardless of where the adds appear.
If a dealer in Utah has a gun I want, and I buy it through their website while I'm in SD and I want it sent to me, that's interstate commerce they have to send it to an FFL in my state. That FFL will run NICS on me when I pick it up.
If I while in SD I buy a gun from a Utah dealer and then travel to Utah to pick it up, that is interstate commerce because the buyer and seller were in different states when money changed hands. I have a Utah permit which is NICS exempt, no NICS will be run at all and I can have that gun loaded and on my hip as I drive back home.
However, if I travel to Utah, and pay for the gun while in Utah, that is not interstate commerce. Then since I have a Utah permit which is NICS exempt, no NICS will be run at all and I can have that gun loaded and on my hip as I drive back home.
If you want to educate yourself on what a loophole really is, become a gun owner and travel armed. You have no idea what a loophole is. As a resident of SD I can have no paperwork or permits at all and still legally posses a handgun in Chicago despite their bans. If you color inside the lines you can do a lot.
If you need to believe that I was speculating instead of going on actual information I received through formal training by the respective states, I guess you have the right to do that just as you have the right to believe in the Easter Bunny also.I'll wait to see how the legislation is written before I speculate wildly, but thank you for doing so!
I'll wait to see how the legislation is written before I speculate wildly, but thank you for doing so!
I guess that is another way of saying you don't care if the legislation has any chance of stopping crime-as long as more laws are passed its fine with you
Thanks for the view of those who profit from gun sales.
I'll go with the investigation by the police, as referenced above:
"In a probe of illegal online firearm sales conducted by the City of New York, undercover investigators found that 62% of private gun sellers they interacted with were willing to sell guns to a buyer who said he could not pass a background check."
Arrest them, make an example out of them.Thanks for the view of those who profit from gun sales.
I'll go with the investigation by the police, as referenced above:
"In a probe of illegal online firearm sales conducted by the City of New York, undercover investigators found that 62% of private gun sellers they interacted with were willing to sell guns to a buyer who said he could not pass a background check."
What's in the deal for pro-gun? What are we getting that we didn't have before? Anti-gun gets background checks, and pro-gun gets... assault rifles?....national reciprocity for CCW permits?....elimination of some gun-free zones?....silencers without any paperwork? What?
What did we get in the last decade? And why should we ever give up anything, ever, anyway?Your reaction is very understandable. The gun lobby and gun culture have gotten things so much their way over the last decade that giving in a small amount on something they previously supported seems like a bad deal for them.
if the gun lobby had its way as you claim there would be no federal gun control laws since none of them have any proper constitutional support. the anti gun haters of the constitution are the ones who have gotten their wayYour reaction is very understandable. The gun lobby and gun culture have gotten things so much their way over the last decade that giving in a small amount on something they previously supported seems like a bad deal for them.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?