Harris calls for 'assault weapons ban' in wake of mass shootings; Biden arrives in Uvalde

[Yellowtail]

4 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Hows it a fraud? its what it says it is, a loop hole in the law.

 

Gun show in the US and BBC reporter approaching unregistered dealer where he can legally purchase a firearm with no background check if he lived in the same state at meeting at 1:44

 

The seller even admits he could be lied to but he would still sell the gun.

 

If is a fraud because it's pretending a significant number of guns are sold this way.

 

Big show, one guy with one table, and assuming the guy from the BBC was a legal resident of the state and had Maryland driver license, yes he could have bought a rifle. Woo-hoo. 

 

But again, close that loophole, I don't care. 

[Bkk Brian]

2 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

If is a fraud because it's pretending a significant number of guns are sold this way.

 

Big show, one guy with one table, and assuming the guy from the BBC was a legal resident of the state and had Maryland driver license, yes he could have bought a rifle. Woo-hoo. 

 

But again, close that loophole, I don't care. 

Didn't say you did care just adding something to the debate that you were arguing about where its possible to buy guns in the US with no background checks and do this legally. Each and everyone of those guns can kill so had that not been a BBC reporter and somebody who wanted to go out and commit a crime then I personally would not Woo-hoo about it particularly if I or one of my family turned out to be the victim.

 

Background checks at gun shows required for licensed dealers, but not all private sellers

In 2021, President Biden said people could buy firearms at gun shows without background checks. That's true for private sales but not federally licensed dealers.

[Yellowtail]

13 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Didn't say you did care just adding something to the debate that you were arguing about where its possible to buy guns in the US with no background checks and do this legally. Each and everyone of those guns can kill so had that not been a BBC reporter and somebody who wanted to go out and commit a crime then I personally would not Woo-hoo about it particularly if I or one of my family turned out to be the victim.

 

Background checks at gun shows required for licensed dealers, but not all private sellers

In 2021, President Biden said people could buy firearms at gun shows without background checks. That's true for private sales but not federally licensed dealers.

Your link seems to support everything I have been saying, thanks. 

 

I was surprised to see in your link that that President Biden claimed:  “Most people don’t know: If you walk into a store and you buy a gun, you have a background check. But you go to a gun show, you can buy whatever you want and no background check.”

 

It's people making ignorant (at best) comments like this that perpetuate the "Gun-Show Loophole" myth, but by all means, let's get it closed up. 

 

 

[Bkk Brian]

19 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Your link seems to support everything I have been saying, thanks. 

 

I was surprised to see in your link that that President Biden claimed:  “Most people don’t know: If you walk into a store and you buy a gun, you have a background check. But you go to a gun show, you can buy whatever you want and no background check.”

 

It's people making ignorant (at best) comments like this that perpetuate the "Gun-Show Loophole" myth, but by all means, let's get it closed up. 

 

 

I'm not arguing your point of how many have or are sold this way as I have no statistics for that, similar to you as you also have none. My point is it does not matter. This is a legal method to purchase a gun without a background check and carry out gun crime in the US, it has also been linked to the worst ever mass murdering spree in Las Vegas carried out by Stephen Paddock when he killed 60 people and wounded a further 411. While the majority of his guns were purchased legally the police also suspect that some may have been bought through the Gun Show Loop hole:

 

"Federal investigators have traced Las Vegas shooter Stephen Paddock’s rifles and handguns to at least eight gun shops in California and Nevada. But what’s clear so far is that all of the firearms in the two states were purchased legally by Paddock, a person familiar with the investigation said.

Authorities are having more difficulty tracking guns that may have been purchased at gun shows where one private citizen sells a weapon to another person, often without a background check, the source said."

 

Which in itself raises another important issue of current gun laws in the US which needs to be blocked in my view. So long as you provide a background check you can then go onto purchase as many weapons as you want. 

Edited May 31, 2022 by Bkk Brian

[PoodThaiMaiDai]

3 hours ago, coolcarer said:

The laws on background checks are useless to those who don’t want one carried out. They can just visit one of the many gun shows where thousands of weapons are on sale and buy what he wants legally with no background check whatsoever. Known as the “Gun Show Loophole”.

 

Also applies to private sellers. You can buy one with no background check.

Yep, like I said, there are loopholes.

[Yellowtail]

8 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

I'm not arguing your point of how many have or are sold this way as I have no statistics for that, similar to you as you also have none. My point is it does not matter. This is a legal method to carry out gun crime in the US

No, it is an illegal way for a criminal to buy a gun without check. But we agree, I support universal background checks and think they should be free.   

 

8 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

and it has also been linked to the worst ever mass murdering spree in Las Vegas carried out by Stephen Paddock when he killed 60 people and wounded a further 411. While the majority of his guns were purchased legally the police also suspect that some may have been bought through the Gun Show Loop hole:

This is neither here nor there. The monster would have had plenty of guns without any purchases from guns shows. 

 

8 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

"Federal investigators have traced Las Vegas shooter Stephen Paddock’s rifles and handguns to at least eight gun shops in California and Nevada. But what’s clear so far is that all of the firearms in the two states were purchased legally by Paddock, a person familiar with the investigation said.

Authorities are having more difficulty tracking guns that may have been purchased at gun shows where one private citizen sells a weapon to another person, often without a background check, the source said."

Again, while a tragedy, clearly the gun show sales were not significant.  

 

8 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Which in itself raises another important issue of current gun laws in the US which needs to be blocked in my view. So long as you provide a background check you can then go onto purchase as many weapons as you want. 

Actually, I think you have to pass a background check for each one, that's why a lot of guy (at least used) to get licenses.

 

Assuming you think people should be allowed to own guns, how many do you think is too many?

 

 

[Bkk Brian]

14 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Assuming you think people should be allowed to own guns, how many do you think is too many?

Why one earth would anyone need more than one unless they are paranoid, even then the controls on purchasing it should include the tougher restrictions as in other developed countries with far less gun crime and gun related deaths. The exception I see to that would be for sporting or genuine game hunters.

 

As in the case of the las vegas murderer he had legally purchased dozens which is a crying shame and evidence of the lax laws in the US. Yes he needed to carry out a backgound check for each one but  what difference does that make.

Edited May 31, 2022 by Bkk Brian

[Chomper Higgot]

Some background data:

 

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/02/03/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/

[Lacessit]

36 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

 

I think it fair to say there are a lot of sensible gun owners in the US. 

I think it's also fair to say America has more than its fair share of gun owners who think having 10 or 20 firearms in their household is quite normal.

[EVENKEEL]

4 hours ago, coolcarer said:

The laws on background checks are useless to those who don’t want one carried out. They can just visit one of the many gun shows where thousands of weapons are on sale and buy what he wants legally with no background check whatsoever. Known as the “Gun Show Loophole”.

 

Also applies to private sellers. You can buy one with no background check.

https://misbar.com/en/factcheck/2021/04/12/background-checks-required-at-some-gun-shows

 

Therefore, if you have a license to sell guns, even at a gun show, you will need to do a background check on the buyer. However, if you are a private citizen without a license selling at a gun show, you do not need to do a background check in many states. But, there are exceptions: thirteen states and the District of Columbia require universal background checks at the point of sale for all sales and transfers of all classes of firearms, whether they are purchased from a licensed dealer or an unlicensed seller.

[richard_smith237]

38 minutes ago, billd766 said:

5 hours ago, digger70 said:

One can see mass murder everyday inLos with cars and motorbikes .

Stop making  excuses that guns kill people. 

Its People that Kill may it be with whatever they use .

There are a lot of vehicle related deaths in Thailand but very little, if any, deliberate murder attempts. To commit murder, you must first have a very good reason and deliberately select the victim.

Its certainly concerning that the argument used by digger70 is used to justify gun ownership... 

 

Those who think this is a solid argument may own guns...  This should concern us all that those who own guns justify their ownership with the most stupid of arguments.

 

Perhaps that is misleading because I don’t believe there is a correlation between ‘gun ownership and stupidity’.... But, there is definitely a correlation between ’arguments justifying gun ownership and stupidity’ !!!! 

 

 

[Lacessit]

7 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

https://misbar.com/en/factcheck/2021/04/12/background-checks-required-at-some-gun-shows

 

Therefore, if you have a license to sell guns, even at a gun show, you will need to do a background check on the buyer. However, if you are a private citizen without a license selling at a gun show, you do not need to do a background check in many states. But, there are exceptions: thirteen states and the District of Columbia require universal background checks at the point of sale for all sales and transfers of all classes of firearms, whether they are purchased from a licensed dealer or an unlicensed seller.

Do the American authorities even have records of guns and their owners? Seems to me with about 390 million firearms in circulation in the US, that's a fairly big ask.

There's a saying in quality circles, if you can't measure it, you can't control it. What with background checks, the fact anyone can own as many guns as they want, and the quantity available to anyone over 18, it seems to me the system has more holes than Swiss cheese.

[Lacessit]

15 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

. But, there is definitely a correlation between ’arguments justifying gun ownership and stupidity’ !!!! 

 

 

There is only one argument justifying gun ownership, and as Jim Jefferies said, it's not a very good one. Gun owners like guns.

Any other argument is specious BS that can be demolished by the simple application of facts, statistics and logic.

[Bkk Brian]

57 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

I think it's also fair to say America has more than its fair share of gun owners who think having 10 or 20 firearms in their household is quite normal.

Thats one of the largest problems along with all the others in the US gun laws. As you mentioned in a separate post, with 390 million fire arms in circulation in the US the distribution of those is contained within a minority of gun fanatics.

 

Three-in-ten American adults say they currently own a gun, however out of those, two-thirds say they own more than one gun, including 29% who own five or more guns.

 

Just to add that the gun culture starts from an early age about two-thirds of current gun owners (67%) say there were guns in their household growing up.

 

Taken from Pew Research

https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2017/06/22/the-demographics-of-gun-ownership/

[Yellowtail]

3 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Thats one of the largest problems along with all the others in the US gun laws. As you mentioned in a separate post, with 390 million fire arms in circulation in the US the distribution of those is contained within a minority of gun fanatics.

 

Three-in-ten American adults say they currently own a gun, however out of those, two-thirds say they own more than one gun, including 29% who own five or more guns.

 

Just to add that the gun culture starts from an early age about two-thirds of current gun owners (67%) say there were guns in their household growing up.

 

Taken from Pew Research

https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2017/06/22/the-demographics-of-gun-ownership/

Five guns is not many at all for hunter, and it's not a lot for anyone that serious about target shooting. 

 

Long gun and pistol each in small and large caliber plus a shotgun is five.

 

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

Five guns is not many at all for hunter, and it's not a lot for anyone that serious about target shooting. 

 

Long gun and pistol each in small and large caliber plus a shotgun is five.

 

"five or more guns"

 

"protection tops the list, with 67% of current gun owners saying this is a major reason"

[Yellowtail]

50 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

There is only one argument justifying gun ownership, and as Jim Jefferies said, it's not a very good one. Gun owners like guns.

Any other argument is specious BS that can be demolished by the simple application of facts, statistics and logic.

Are people in Australia not allowed to own guns? I'm sure someone here told me they were. 

[Yellowtail]

4 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

"five or more guns"

 

"protection tops the list, with 67% of current gun owners saying this is a major reason"

Well that would fit with your statistics yes? People that want guns for protection would generally only have one to three. 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

3 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Are people in Australia not allowed to own guns? I'm sure someone here told me they were. 

A person must have a firearm licence to possess or use a firearm. Licence holders must demonstrate a "genuine reason" (which does not include self-defence) for holding a firearm licence^[2] and must not be a "prohibited person". All firearms must be registered by serial number to the owner, who must also hold a firearms licence.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_of_Australia

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, Yellowtail said:

Well that would fit with your statistics yes? People that want guns for protection would generally only have one to three. 

 

Do the maths again. Where does that fit in with the statistics from Pew Research? Show me?

[moogradod]

56 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

There is only one argument justifying gun ownership, and as Jim Jefferies said, it's not a very good one. Gun owners like guns......................

This argument is not so far off to explain the vast accumulations of arms in one household as you seem to suggest ("...not a very good one"). I try here to delve down in a gun owners mind.....

 

I do not own guns, I play guitar and I can assure you that every serious guitar player on this planet owns more than one single guitar. More likely near to 10, maybe very much more.

 

Well the difference is of course that guns kill and guitars makes music, but the pride and interest of ownership for something you like is the same. Assume now there is something like a not violent collector, then it does not surprize me to find large arsenals in the hands of a few. OK - maybe my argument is not really strong....there might be potentially violent collectors as well and the guns they posess may cause more harm than a collection of guitars. Sorry, just appeared in my mind, trying to find the reasons for their fanatism.

[Yellowtail]

5 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Do the maths again. Where does that fit in with the statistics from Pew Research? Show me?

You posted Pew dated claiming that:

 

Three-in-ten American adults say they currently own a gun, however out of those, two-thirds say they own more than one gun, including 29% who own five or more guns."  

 

Correct? So if 67% want guns only for protection, that includes the one third that that has only one gun and the one third that has more than one, which would leave the third that owns more than five as hunters and collectors. 

 

Does that make sense or no? And if a gun married owner has guns for protection, they could well have guns for their spouse as well.

 

 

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, Yellowtail said:

You posted Pew dated claiming that:

 

Three-in-ten American adults say they currently own a gun, however out of those, two-thirds say they own more than one gun, including 29% who own five or more guns."  

 

Correct? So if 67% want guns only for protection, that includes the one third that that has only one gun and the one third that has more than one, which would leave the third that owns more than five as hunters and collectors. 

 

Does that make sense or no? And if a gun married owner has guns for protection, they could well have guns for their spouse as well.

 

 

No not correct at all. Two-thirds of gun owners say they own more than one gun, including 29% who own five or more guns. 

 

Did you notice there is no upper limit to the 5 or more guns? How can you work out stats from that with no upper limit data?

 

The gun ownership stats I quoted are also per person, not per household so wrong again. There are separate stats for households.

[Slip]

Gun control should start with the lunatic magas and groomers who post their toxic <deleted> all over social media.  The NRA also needs sorting out.  After that some sanity could at least possibly prevail.

[coolcarer]

1 hour ago, EVENKEEL said:

https://misbar.com/en/factcheck/2021/04/12/background-checks-required-at-some-gun-shows

 

Therefore, if you have a license to sell guns, even at a gun show, you will need to do a background check on the buyer. However, if you are a private citizen without a license selling at a gun show, you do not need to do a background check in many states. But, there are exceptions: thirteen states and the District of Columbia require universal background checks at the point of sale for all sales and transfers of all classes of firearms, whether they are purchased from a licensed dealer or an unlicensed seller.

So in 13 states even at a gun show with a private seller you need to have a background check, great, just another 37 states where you can.

[richard_smith237]

1 hour ago, Lacessit said:

There is only one argument justifying gun ownership, and as Jim Jefferies said, it's not a very good one. Gun owners like guns.

Any other argument is specious BS that can be demolished by the simple application of facts, statistics and logic.

Absolutely agree....  I’ve fired plenty of guns... and I have really enjoyed doing so.

But I don’t own a gun, I don’t want one and I don’t feel the need to have one. 

I don’t think any civilian should own or carry a gun. 

 

Why would I want to carry a gun??? I can’t think of any reason other than it makes me feel more powerful and thats not a bad feeling, I just don’t feel the need to feel more powerful, thats all. 

 

Why would I want a gun in my house??? I can’t think of any reason, if I did, I’m living in the wrong area, but that would be because ‘others have guns’ and therein exists the issue with that argument.

 

Firing a gun is pretty cool... Driving a fast car is pretty cool... But one is designed specifically for killing the other isn’t...   there is no social responsible reason for owning or wanting to own a gun, there is only the simple reason... ‘cos I want to....  and those ‘who want to own guns’ really haven’t stood back and looked at the far greater issues of gun ownership on society.

 

 

 

[Yellowtail]

1 hour ago, Bkk Brian said:

No not correct at all. Two-thirds of gun owners say they own more than one gun, including 29% who own five or more guns. 

Is this not what I said? 

 

1 hour ago, Bkk Brian said:

Did you notice there is no upper limit to the 5 or more guns? How can you work out stats from that with no upper limit data?

I did not notice, but I think it generally assumed that more than five does not have an upper limit. 

 

1 hour ago, Bkk Brian said:

The gun ownership stats I quoted are also per person, not per household so wrong again. There are separate stats for households.

The stats you presented that I was referring to I included in my post. I said nothing of households, but only pointed out that an individual may have more guns because that individual may also arm a significant other. 

 

You can claim that I am wrong, but I think I am right when I say that the 67%of individuals that you've claimed  want guns for protection are generally the  people with five or less guns, while the 33% that have guns for some other reason, hunting, shooting and collecting etc. typically have five or more guns, and will often have very many more than five, 

 

Edited May 31, 2022 by onthedarkside
unsourced claims removed

[BangkokReady]

Love the fact that the anti-gun nuts seem just as unhinged as the pro-gun nuts.

 

It's never really about what people say it's about.

[Sparktrader]

Legal age for guns should be 21yo plus background check.

 

Plus no assault gear. Only basic guns.

[Slip]

1 minute ago, BangkokReady said:

Love the fact that the anti-gun nuts seem just as unhinged as the pro-gun nuts.

 

It's never really about what people say it's about.

Your point would be valid if it weren't for all the innocent kids being slaughtered in American schools.   As it is, it falls a bit short of the mark for decent thinking folk.