I have stated before that the top firearm banning priority of the forcible citizen disarmament lobby will be so-called "assault weapons," with their second favorite target being .50 caliber rifles. I stand by that assessment, but I predict that even before they make a concerted effort to ban any guns, they'll go after gun sales--specifically, private sales at gun shows, and the mythical "loophole" such sales supposedly represent.
This goes beyond the fact that closing the "gun show loophole" is mentioned as an "urban policy" priority on the Obama administration's website, and that closing the "loophole" is a longtime priority of our new attorney general, who has stated that in his opinion, the Supreme Court's Heller decision poses no obstacle to such a measure. The myth of the so-called "gun show loophole" has become so pervasive that in our last presidential election, even the supposedly "pro-gun" (according to the NRA), Republican candidate has long taken a widely publicized stance in favor of banning private sales at gun shows.
"But," you might ask, "is that such a bad thing--aren't gun shows 'arms bazaars for criminals and terrorists'?" Well . . . no, actually.
A Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) report on “Firearms Use by Offenders” found that fewer than 1% of U.S. “crime guns” came from gun shows, with repeat offenders even less likely than first-timers to buy guns from any retail source.
Licensed gun dealers are required by federal law to jump through all the hoops--background checks, sales records, etc.--at gun shows that they do in their shops. The "problem," according to the forcible citizen disarmament lobby, is the private sellers, who can sell guns from their personal collections without all the red tape. According to the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (CSGV), these "unlicensed sellers" constitute 25-50% of the retailers at gun shows. This conveniently ignores the fact that a great many of the retailers at gun shows don't sell guns--they sell t-shirts, books, war memorabilia, etc.
Worse yet, ending private sales at gun shows isn't going to satisfy these people. After all, a private sale at a gun show is no different in principle from a private sale anywhere else. The Brady Campaign, in fact, no longer even bothers to hide the fact that the goal is a ban on all private gun sales, anywhere-"No background check, no sale, no excuses," as they endlessly spout.
They'll undoubtedly argue that they're not trying to ban private sales--they just want to require federal background checks. The problem with that "logic," of course, is that there is nothing private about a sale that can only proceed with government monitoring and approval, just as a phone conversation with one's spouse can hardly be considered private if the NSA is listening to it, in order to make sure that terrorist plots are not being hatched.
No free society can accept that standard of "privacy."
Check out the latest from other Gun Rights Examiners:
Austin: Another Brady hallucination: More guns, more 'gun violence' (Part 1)
Charlotte: Guns and the Constitution: A legislator finally 'gets it'
Cleveland: Taking steps to protect the children
DC: DC City Council enables residents' easy access to mail order handgun carry permits!
Denver: Active compliance......or not
Los Angeles: Gun Control: the very first pig with lipstick on it.
Milwaukee: Time to change our attitude about guns
Minneapolis: Dispelling the myth of the "Wild West"
Comments
Part of the lack of logic in closing the gun show loophole is that private sellers actually don't even have the ability to perform these background checks. Only FFL holders are able to call the NICS system. So there is a catch-22. They want to force private sellers to do something they simply aren't capable of.
The organization that puts on gun shows here in Washington requires you to be a mamber of their organization to purchase a gun at their shows. To become a member, you have to undergo the same background check that you would if you bought one from a gun shop. Private sellers really have no way to background check someone, so the organization does it for them. If I recall correctly, you cannot even enter the show unless you are a member or are accompanied by a member.
I'm not sure I understand, licensed gun dealers must jump through all the background check hoops, correct? But if I buy a gun from a private citizen they have no responsibility to do a back ground check before selling?
As a foreign citizen without any form of documentation outside of a state drivers license I was able to purchase 2 hand guns in Iowa at a gun show.
Are you really sure that this isn't a bit of a problem?
"But if I buy a gun from a private citizen they have no responsibility to do a back ground check before selling?"
Not under federal law, Dan, although some states do require such a check.
"As a foreign citizen without any form of documentation outside of a state drivers license I was able to purchase 2 hand guns in Iowa at a gun show.
Are you really sure that this isn't a bit of a problem?"
Well, do you have plans to do anything evil with those firearms, Jeff? If not, no problem.
If you do, you would find a way to commit evil without a gun show.
Dan, correct. However, the burden would be on the seller if the gun was sold to someone that was not eligible. Anyone selling a firearm face to face in the private sector would be ill advised to sell a firearm to someone without a valid concealed carry permit or some other proof of eligibility.
I don't really understand what's the big deal. If you aren't going to do anything bad with the guns, what does it matter if the gov't does a background check to confirm that you are a suitable person to be purchasing aforementioned weapons?
Use less "quotes." It makes you look like a bitter and angry gun fanat... oh wait.
Amy, the problem with the background check is that they can only be performed by FFL holders. So any time I want to sell my buddy a gun, we have to go to a gun shop, and pay the store money to do the paperwork.
In our eyes it's the same as requiring anyone selling things at a garage sale to take each item to the police department as it's sold to verify it isn't stolen property. It's an unnecessary hassle, and a waste of my money, my time, and everyone's tax dollars (since the NICS would need more staff).
Guns don't kill people.
People kill people.
a total nutjob.
sigh your argue there is no loop-hole and then go on to explain what the loop-hole is.
I don't see the big deal. If you're selling a Gun, shouldn't you want to make sure the guy you're selling it to has a proper license? I hardley think this an assult on the 2nd amendment.
Thanks. and God bless.
Guns in the hands of people kill people
@Chris
The problem with your own logic is that a gun is not a typical 'garage sale' item. They can be used/abused to actually kill people.
I don't see the problem with putting a few roadblocks, monetary or otherwise, in front of potential abusers. It's like getting scanned at the airport. Is it a nuissance? Sure, but what other choice do you have if you need to keep abusers off the plane?
I think there is a middle ground where gun owners should be capable of buying/selling, but there have to be controls there one way or another.
If illegal guns are often used in violent crime then we need to reduce the number of ways illegal guns are aquired. It seems that individuals can purchase guns without background checks. All it would take is one "wholesaler" to purchase a significant number of guns with intent to resale to people who are intent on using guns for illegal activities. So the argument that "many of the retailers at gun shows don't sell guns" is irrelevant.
I'd be interested in a well thought out reason why we should not do background checks for all gun sales. I don't see the parallell with gun sales and private conversations.
Scenario 1
Gangsters get into a fight with another. No one has guns.
Scenario 2
Gangsters get into a fight with another. everyone has guns.
In which scenario would you expect to see more people critically injured including bystanders?
I'm a gun advocate, private sales are counter productive and rediculous.
I can't sell my car to just anyone without providing a paper trail for the government, why should I be allowed to sell a Gun without any proof of sale or transferal of ownership.
You can't even junk a car without filing paper work. It seems to me there should be more OVERSIGHT not control.
P.S. the "private" in private sales refers to the buyers/sellers status as a private citizen and not to the implied privacy of the sale.
The gun show loophole is not a myth it's a reality, I can go any buy limitless guns with my license and approved background checks and then sell them to whoever for whatever purpose with no accountability.
That is a loophole, and it should be closed. The more controlled ALL gun sales become the safer it is for law abiding gun owners as well as the rest of the population.
I agree that the 'loophole' is a myth. I will disagree that private gun purchases should not be monitored in any way.
Now, I think having to get certification to sell the gun is a bit 'overkill'. It would just be unnecessary red tape that would harm law abiding citizens rather than the criminals they are trying to stop.
I think a better solution would be to have a deed to each gun and require the deed be transferred through a recorded channel. This way if a gun you sold was traced back to you they knew the chain of ownership. No different than legal road worthy cars.
Though even my idea can be 'loopholed' around, the truth of the matter you couldn't truly stop a determined enough person from getting something they wanted if they wanted it that badly.
@Annoyed
Obviously even if this loophole was closed there will be illegal gun sales. the point is to make it an order more difficult to do so, contributing to the reduction of violent crime.
@Nonov Urbizniz,
Perfectly said. I can never understand ridiculous zealots who don't rally and cry about the need to get a Driver's license, or to register their motor vehicle, but they feel like the world is out to get them if they require any regulation of guns.
No one wants to take your car away from you. But a car can cause serious damage, and therefore you need to demonstrate that you know how to control one before you can use one.
That's fair, and rational, which is why no one complains. The same argument holds true for guns. No one wants to take your gun away, but just like a car, a gun can cause serious damage if abused. Licensing and registration only affects criminals, so get over it already.
Wow, just gotta love loop holes.
RT
www.anonymity.eu.tc
I know here in PA(semi-gun dealer/gun shower) that there are regulations in effect for a gunshow.
pistols: have to be sold person to person through a gun shop with a federal firearms license. What they do is run a federal background check, register the pistol, get information from both parties.
long guns: it can be person to person as long as you are both residents of PA.
now, if someone wants to go all sickhouse and buy a gun to cause some violence, a gun show isn't the place to get one. It is far easier to go to walmart and pick something up then it would be to go to a gun show, wander around the place, pay to get in, dicker with dealers, and make a purchase, wander out and go about your day.
Cars and guns are not the same. Oh, and one CAN buy a car and NOT register it. You only have to register it if you wish to operate the car on public roadways.
At one time we all lived in a constitutional republic, called the United States of America. A place where peoples rights were respected. What happened?
I think this country needs a reboot.
No one should have guns. Srsly.
Why do you need a gun only the rednecks want guns so they can go shoot squirrels in their backyard. Put the cheeseburger down, you don't need a gun. The 2nd amendment is archaic and old - you're not protecting yourself and you're sure as hell not making yourself look smarter by saying that it's your right -
we haven't had a civil war or any war on american soil in a long time. so just stop clammering about how gun control is an affront to your rights.
I've bought a lot of guns face to face and at shows, both from dealers and unlicensed people that just happened to be at the same show.
I don't believe in gun registration, which includes the mandatory 4473 you fill out with every firearms transaction. I've filled out plenty of them in my lifetime. If there was a confiscation movement they'd know about SOME of the guns I own, but not ALL of them.
If you ban people from conducting off paper private sales at gun shows they'll just do it somewhere else for the exact same reasons.
If so many ignorant popsuckers didn't keep suggesting confiscating all private arms in the world then we might not mind all our arms being on paper.
Every firearm I own was legally purchased under the laws at time of purchase but not every one of them has a federal form pointing to my house.
I'm not a wackjob, I'm prudent.
Look how well registration (to the point of having to go account for any ammunition you expended each month at the police station and why, no joke, go to the range and shoot a box of .45 you have to prove you went to the range or they take your firearms permit away) worked for the citizens of Mumbai.
Stuart, put the bong down and stop trolling. The last large scale civil war was the Civil Rights Movement and Dr. King may have preached non-violence but he was protected by armed men as were many churches, businesses and schools. During the LA Riots the Korean grocers who stood on the roofs of their businesses with semi-auto rifles were the ones that didn't get burned out while the police were quarantining the area and hiding outside the cordons from where the violence and looting was.
Go buy a copy of the history of The Deacons For Defense and Justice. Go call one of those southern black veterans of what WAS a civil war they're redneck peckerwoods and they'll likely hand you your arse with 70+ year old fists. Pay attention to the world around you.
People like you preach what you do much longer, you'll see more war.
Probably pointless arguing with a person who wrote as you did, being as you obviously have no proper reading of the history of the United States because you were watching American Idol or something. Go to a library and learn something and come back when you have something intelligent to say.
Sounds like a way to stop 1% of gun crime. 1% less gun crime sounds pretty appealing. I'm not against people having their guns, but loopholes that criminals can use need to be closed - it's too small a loophole to worry about is not a very good argument - because if there was one wide gaping reason why anything is a problem, these problems would be solved much easier.
The last concern of privacy invasion is probably the government. Just ask yourself the question - if your wanting to conduct a private gunsale - is your desire for it to be private so that the government doesn't know? Or is it something else...I suspect if you are first and foremost afraid of the government knowing - your probably fearing its authority and for good reason - because your probably engaged it something questionable.
Guns in the hands of people kill people
Aside from any argument or stance on Gun Control I have to say this is the more poorly written, and nearly pointless article I've read today. You seem not to have a point, but only a smattering shambles of an argument. You did nothing to sell this argument. Give people a reason to read this.
sigswat:
Is wanting to exercise one's legal second amendment rights in full in the face of confiscatory government agents as a law abiding citizen making me questionable? The fact that every time I fill out a 4473 and NICS runs a check on me I've been approved to have firearms and the fact I have a Concealed Handgun License after stringent background checks might point you in the direction of correcting your wrong assumptions.
We may soon enter a time where it will be legislated that private ownership of firearms is "questionable". Ask an Australian or a Brit.
I believe, you, sigswat, are a person who is of questionable intelligence when engaged in internet discourse. Can I take your keyboard away?
Ha-Ha... "most poorly written." Well that is a kick in the rear.
Stuart,Are you kidding????? You are a sheep being led to the cliff's edge. "We haven't had a civil war or any war on american soil in a long time. so just stop clammering about how gun control is an affront to your rights. " You trust your government that much? Baaaaaaaaaaa
Most gun shows require membership to purchase firearms. To get a membership you have to go through the same background check you would if you purchased a firearm at a gun shop so where is the "loophole?"
"Aside from any argument or stance on Gun Control I have to say this is the more poorly written, and nearly pointless article I've read today. You seem not to have a point, but only a smattering shambles of an argument. You did nothing to sell this argument. Give people a reason to read this."
Well, I guess you told me, Mike. The thing is, I seem to be getting rather a lot of readers, so it would seem that I HAVE given "people a reason to read this." Thanks for the constructive criticism, though.
I don't see why private citizens can't sell their guns via consignment at their local gun shops. I was on the jury for a man accused of purchasing stolen guns. If he had to buy them from an actual seller and not from some bozo in a parking lot (at night, no less). So, YES, I DO have an issue with private gun sales. I live next to a listed sex-offender. He's packing...FanFREAKIN'tastic. You think I'm happy about that? I'm mystified that anyone would be okay with gun(s) being sold to Joe-anybody BY Joe-anybody. If someone steals your guns, wouldn't you like it to be harder to sell them and easier to get them back? And let's face it- a GUN isn't a playstation and it isn't a power drill. You know and we know that it is a tool that just happens to be really effective at killing people. I know there's a faction of Gun lovin' people have an overriding fear of the Government, but guess what- I'm scared of you! Maybe not all of you...but "you" who have anger issues and a gun. You who've decided to not take your Xanax anymore, and have a gun. You who've lost your job and are pretty angry at the world...and have a gun. I think it sucks that I'm going to have to start packing to save myself from the Gun fanatics. Ironically, I'm not anti-gun. But I AM pro education and pro regulation. I wish more people were.
"I know there's a faction of Gun lovin' people have an overriding fear of the Government, but guess what- I'm scared of you! Maybe not all of you...but "you" who have anger issues and a gun. You who've decided to not take your Xanax anymore, and have a gun. You who've lost your job and are pretty angry at the world...and have a gun."
What about these people... that have a car? A car isn't a playstation and it isn't a powerdrill it is also a tool that just happens to be really effective at killing people. You don't see the government chomping at the bit to take cars away from people that have a license but honestly should not be on the roads. I'm more scared of these people than I am of those with guns and not taking their medication. At least if I meet one of these people and they want to kill me I can give them the option of ceasing their actions before I have to protect myself. Cars on the other hand will plow into you without any warning.
The problem with a lot of folks hammering this "cars VS. guns" business,is a fundamental misunderstanding of "Rights" vs. "Privilege". You see the automobile was establised as a privilege and of course a monstrous cash cow for the government.The government holding that it may rescind that privilege with little to no reason. The constitution states quite clearly that firearms are a right that should not be infringed apon by anyone,most especially the government. You must hold onto your rights jealously and protect them with your lives as that is all that stands between us(the people as mentioned in the preamble) and totalitarianism.
Study the history of the world and stop trying to impress your desire for the government to settle your problem sand take some responsibility for your own life.We the people are responsible for the life and property of ourselves and must not relinquish that to any one or institution.
I must also add that Americans should read the works of persons such as Thomas Jefferson and others of his time and ilk. You will gain a greater understanding of the importance of our rights and why they ARE rights and enumerated as such.
I'm a very strong advocate of gun ownership, AND I have issue with private firearm sales. Here in Michigan, you have to be 21 to purchase a handgun from an FFL dealer. However, you only have to be 18 to purchase from a private individual. This leads to private individuals purchasing handguns from FFL dealers and reselling them for greater profit to those who could not normally purchase them. This may be a portion of the loophole they aim to close.
Parrish,
What you're talking about is straw-purchasing, and is already a crime. So.. how do you propose they make it more illegal to already do?
Hell, even selling a gun to a known convicted felon, or person from outside your state is a crime... so... how do you propose they make it more illegal?
Next thing you know, they're going to make it illegal for one person to sell their prescription medication to another! Oh, wait...
I've sold a number of guns at gun shows. There's always some characters hanging around outside who'll pay your price... no dickering. You get a lot more money out of these characters than you will from a dealer. If I wanted to buy an untraceable gun, that's the way I'd go.
So the gun-show loophole isn't a myth, is it? It's just that the loophole is even bigger. This is why all firearms should be registered. You sell the gun, the new buyer registers it. Just like cars.
Erich:
Actually? The government DOES take cars away from people. They impound them if you're found to driving under the influence or if you're driving on a suspended license. You HAVE to take a test to qualify for a license you are periodically re-tested to prove you still understand the rules of the road. Sometimes you have to take an actual driving test. And last time I checked, there's quite a bit of paperwork involved when a CAR changes hands. Furthermore, you have to have insurance to cover the damage that your vehicle can cause.
Therefore, Car as Gun Analogy= Fail.
So, am I to assume that you LIKE the concept of selling your guns to someone who hasn't passed a basic safety course? You like that other people can do that? Oh, and it may be illegal for my felonious neighbor to own a gun, but why wasn't it criminal for somebody to make a profit off of selling it to him. He SURELY couldn't have bought it at a gunshop. (And don't tell me I've got to turn him in- I'm already scared of him and I'm the only one who knows he's on the Watchdog website!) He told me about the gun, because he's acting like he's going to PROTECT ME. UGH!
BTW, Jefferson is a really fun read after he gains the presidency. Yeah, he wasn't such a staunch supporter of state's rights then. Read about the New England embargo...See if he's your hero still. (I need to read Jefferson? No, YOU need to REALLY read Jefferson and not just stop at the "good" parts.)
it's cute. you've never been to a gun show.
Circe:
While the government does take cars away, that's only if they catch you doing somethign illegal with them. I could sell a car to someone without a license if I chose, there's nothing stopping that. That person could then use the car all they wanted. Only when they get stopped for doing something illegal is it ever discovered that the government controls that are supposedly protecting us didn't work.
How is that different from a private sale of a gun? The buyer of the gun is only found with the gun purchased privately if they are caught using it illegally, just like the car. In both cases there's no paper trail showing how the car/gun arrived in the hands of the person that has it. I have no objection to private sales in either case.
"it's cute. you've never been to a gun show."
WHO has never been to a gun show, Bill?
I am a gun owner and a member of the NRA but I see no issue with making people who buy a gun go through a background check. No registration, no waiting period, just a background check. If it's not a big deal then what's the big deal.
Why is it that it seems like only politicians want to get rid of guns for the citizens? Maybe if they would do their jobs more responsibly or honestly, they wouldnt have anything to fear.
Pages
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!