Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

What is this gun show loophole I keep hearing about?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
 
aldian159 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-11-04 12:38 AM
Original message
What is this gun show loophole I keep hearing about?
What is it and what does it mean to my safety? I don't have a gun, but I don't mind if you do. What is the loophole and why should I care?

Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
FatSlob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-11-04 12:58 AM
Response to Original message
1. The loophole doesn't exist.
The rhetoric is merely in furtherance of an attempt by those against firearm freedoms to ban the private transfer of firearms. I wouldn't pay much attention to the Authoritarians if I were you, unless you want some chuckles.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-11-04 05:44 AM
Response to Reply #1
6. and FatSlob doesn't hunt out gun related threads on DU to post in
with an agenda to propagate his opinions on how guns are harmless.

http://www.vpc.org/studies/gunloop.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-11-04 08:55 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. One of the VPC's better-written pieces but still flawed
Edited on Sat Sep-11-04 09:00 AM by slackmaster
Good explanation of the historical background, but it fails to address the elephant in the room:

"Legislation must extend to all gun shows. The definition of gun show must cover all gun-related events and all sales at gun shows.

In order to be effective, the legislation must apply to all events at which guns are sold in any volume, such as gun shows, flea markets, or swap meets. The Lautenberg amendment contained compromise language that defined gun shows as events where "50 or more firearms are offered for sale, transfer, or exchange." A definition which allows the unregulated sale of more than 50 guns will open a loophole that could allow smaller gun shows to flourish and remain unregulated...."


I encourage people to go to http://thomas.loc.gov/ and search for the phrase "gun show". S.1807 is typical of the proposed legislation. In order to justify control over private transactions, any federal regulation that address gun show sales by unlicensed individuals needs a Constitutional basis otherwise it would not stand up to court challenges. Senator Lautenberg understands that fact, and the VPC has chosen to ignore the obvious need for a Constitutional basis. The VPC says 50 guns is too loose of a limit, but they don't say what their ideal limit would be. Ten guns? Two? One? At some point the legislation would become untenable. You can't define one person offering one gun for sale through a newspaper classified ad as a gun show. There has to be a reasonable floor limit, as Senator Lautenberg and others have proposed.

"...In addition, it is imperative that the definition of gun show ensure that transactions initiated at a gun show cannot be consummated off-premises with no background check required. The Lautenberg amendment mandated a background check if any part of a firearm transaction (including the offer for sale, transfer, or exchange) took place at a gun show. Criminals are sure to exploit a "let's step outside" loophole that would allow unscrupulous gun sellers to use gun shows as venues for arranging sales and then finalizing them off-site to avoid background checks."

Give me a big "DUH!" on that one. Of course the VPC offers no suggestion for dealing with that obvious flaw in the "close the gun show loophole" strategy for making society safer. What do they want to do, have police follow everyone who attends a gun show to make sure they don't meet someone for coffee and a surreptitious gun sale on the way home? It's absurd.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FatSlob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-11-04 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. Duh.
Brilliant!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UpsideDownFlag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-11-04 11:07 PM
Response to Reply #6
13. lol, nicely done.
they RKBAers have a way of flooding the JPS forum with an NRA-esque ambience
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FatSlob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-04 08:16 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. The authoritarians have a way...
of flooding the JPS forum with an anti-freedom ambience.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ewagner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-11-04 12:58 AM
Response to Original message
2. If I understand it correctly
If you purchase a gun from a dealership you have to have a background check done and wait three days. However, if you purchase a gun from a private individual at a gun show none of the above applies....same as if you purchased a gun from your neighbor....no background check, no 3-day waiting period.

I will yield to anybody with direct knowledge.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mosin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-11-04 07:39 AM
Response to Reply #2
7. No federally-imposed waiting period...
There is no federally-imposed waiting period on ordinary gun purchases. The original five-day waiting period of the Brady Bill went away when the national instant check came online. Now you simply have to pass the "instant" background check. Technically, the background check can take up to three days, but the vast majority of the time, it is "instantaneous." Mine have always gone straight through.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ewagner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-11-04 09:33 AM
Response to Reply #7
10. Thanks
didn't know that.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jack99 Donating Member (20 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-11-04 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #2
12. You are correct
the wait varies by state though.

Jack
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jack99 Donating Member (20 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-11-04 12:59 AM
Response to Original message
3. It is basically
selling or buying a gun from an individual, and not going Though a FFL/dealer.

This is basically selling private property.

When you go to a gun show you have vendors(gun sellers/dealers).

For them to sell you a gun they must call in to get a background check before they can legally sell you a gun.

To explain the loophole is:

I carry a gun into the show and I sell it to you without a background check. You could be a rapist/murderer/felon or whatever, but as long as I get my cash I may sell you the gun.

Some think this is a big deal, but it isn't as you could still buy a gun from me or whoever without attending a gun show.

Most felons will stick to the black market rather than be seen at a gun show.
Jack
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aldian159 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-11-04 12:59 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Okay, makes sense
Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
library_max Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-04 05:16 PM
Response to Reply #3
17. The "black market" is the gun shows.
What other "black market" is there?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack_DeLeon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-11-04 01:42 AM
Response to Original message
5. pretty much...
when someone says they are against the "gunshow loophole," they are saying that they dont think private citizens should not be able to sell guns to each other.

I'm against closing the "gunshow loophole," individuals should be allowed to sell thier private property.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-11-04 08:42 AM
Response to Original message
8. It's both a false issue and a dysphemism
The only real "loopholes" in current federal gun laws are lack of enforcement, and the fact that the federal government has no Constitutional authority to regulate non-commercial, intrastate transfers of used personal property among individuals.

Anyone who deals in firearms as a business is required by the Gun Control Act of 1968 to have a Federal Firearms License. All sales by licensees have to be done the same way regardless of where they occur. Under the permanent provisions of the Brady Act, every sale by a gun dealer requires paperwork and a background check on the buyer. It makes no difference whether the transaction happens at a gun show or the sporting goods counter at Wal-Mart.

The so-called "gun show loophole" refers to sales of used guns by private indivuduals at gun shows. Any federal regulation of those transactions would require some leveraging of the federal government's power to regulate interstate commerce, which is the basis for all existing federal gun laws. Gun show loophole legislation would necessarily include some objective definition of "gun show" - e.g. a minimum number of vendors and/or guns offered for sale - which will in turn create two predictable unintended consequences: 1) A proliferation of events that fall short of the threshold to be classified as gun shows, and 2) Greater use of newspaper classified ads, Internet hookups, and other sales venues that would be even more difficult to monitor for criminal activity than a large gun show where everyone is all in the same place.

It's a non-issue for me. I live in California, where private sales of guns have to be done through licensed dealers. Gun shows still thrive here. I've bought a few guns at shows including one of my AR-15 rifles. I think federal "gun show" legislation would be a waste of time because it would fail to address the real issue: Lack of a way for private individuals to check the backgrounds of prospective gun buyers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
library_max Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-04 05:18 PM
Response to Reply #8
18. "California, where private sales of guns have to be done through
licensed dealers."

Now that seems like an excellent common-sense solution to the problem. Licensed dealers have the wherewithal to conduct background checks, problem solved.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lefty48197 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-04 10:28 AM
Response to Original message
15. There is no gun show loophole
and there are no assault weapons either, and the 2nd amendment protects our rights to own tanks and shoulder fired rockets.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FeebMaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-04 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Very soon there won't be any assault weapons
only semi-automatic rifles, pistols, and shotguns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 02:58 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC