Gun Vote " Shameful Day," Obama Says

[AnotherOneAmerican]

Knives in America are used more often to kill others than guns ... such a stark comparison -- don't you think? But denial is denial for liberals / leftists ... who only think in emotion and not fact and who work so hard to fuzzy up the facts...

Like I say, false equivalence. The root purpose of a knife is to cut though it can be used to kill a living creature. The root purpose of a vehicle is to move goods and people though it can be used to kill a living creature. What is the root purpose of a gun?

To protect yourself from nuts armed with cars and knives?

And one question for you to answer.

If all seven of the killed were carrying guns along with every bystander, how many do you think he would have got?

Great point !

I have long said that we need to provide weapons to our gradeschool children so that the kids have an even chance against the shooter. Maybe if all 30 of those little toddlers were armed then The Sandy Hook shooter would have thought twice.

Ofcourse, we wouldn't start them kids out with something real big. Maybe .22's or a .380---what they would lack in knockdown power would be compensated for by the sheer amount of lead flying around the room.

I am glad to finally see a good common sense argument by "American".

I think it would be more sensible to give the teachers and adult staff the guns.

But don't let that get in your way of making an anti-gun post.

[notmyself]

I think it would be more sensible to give the teachers and adult staff the guns.

But don't let that get in your way of making an anti-gun post.

Because it has been conclusively shown that more guns solve gun problems.

[NeverSure]

-snip-

It's my understanding, if you were to examine the shootings around Thailand (excluding the southern provincial ones) that most of the shootings would be of a domestic nature, business disputes, land disputes, money issues etc. It's a far different cry from people shooting up large groups of people as they gather at school or other social outings. Being gunned down as you take a jog around Kanchanburi township has never really been a problem.

You're kidding right? Geez, don't let the facts get in your way. There have been so many shootings into mass political gatherings, and also random political shootings in Thailand recently there's really no way to answer you. Nothing to do with the South.

[ClutchClark]

-snip-

It's my understanding, if you were to examine the shootings around Thailand (excluding the southern provincial ones) that most of the shootings would be of a domestic nature, business disputes, land disputes, money issues etc. It's a far different cry from people shooting up large groups of people as they gather at school or other social outings. Being gunned down as you take a jog around Kanchanburi township has never really been a problem.

You're kidding right? Geez, don't let the facts get in your way. There have been so many shootings into mass political gatherings, and also random political shootings in Thailand recently there's really no way to answer you. Nothing to do with the South.

You probably would have been better off not answering because your response is what one might think if they live in the US and just have headlines to base opinion on.

Oh wait.

Thats your situation, isn't it?

Yes, there have been a number of shootings at political gatherings in BKK over the past 5-6 months and they do capture the headlines; however, the poster you responded to offers a more wholistic and comprehensive response. Additionally, I have never heard of any type of shooting spree in schools or cinemas here in Thailand like we Americans have become famous for worldwide.

Edited June 4, 2014 by ClutchClark

[NeverSure]

-snip-

It's my understanding, if you were to examine the shootings around Thailand (excluding the southern provincial ones) that most of the shootings would be of a domestic nature, business disputes, land disputes, money issues etc. It's a far different cry from people shooting up large groups of people as they gather at school or other social outings. Being gunned down as you take a jog around Kanchanburi township has never really been a problem.

You're kidding right? Geez, don't let the facts get in your way. There have been so many shootings into mass political gatherings, and also random political shootings in Thailand recently there's really no way to answer you. Nothing to do with the South.

-snip-

Additionally, I have never heard of any type of shooting spree in schools or cinemas here in Thailand like we Americans have become famous for worldwide.

Oh. You don't count Southern Thailand as being part of Thailand then? First people don't want to talk about Thailand's gun murder rate which is 10x that of the US, then they don't want to count political domestic mass killing...

This isn't a US vs Thailand equivalence contest. If you go back to the OP it's about Obama getting his butt kicked by Congress over his proposed gun control measures. The majority of Americans don't want more gun laws and the majority of politicians want to get re-elected.

You get one vote. Go for it.

[ClutchClark]

Oh. You don't count Southern Thailand as being part of Thailand then? First people don't want to talk about Thailand's gun murder rate which is 10x that of the US, then they don't want to count political domestic mass killing...

This isn't a US vs Thailand equivalence contest. If you go back to the OP it's about Obama getting his butt kicked by Congress over his proposed gun control measures. The majority of Americans don't want more gun laws and the majority of politicians want to get re-elected.

You get one vote. Go for it.

Poor fella, you are all about arguing this topic away from the OP until your points are disproven and then you start preaching about how we need to stay on topic. ;-)

I respect your personal responsibility with firearms and I agree with almost everything you have said about your own personal situation. You are very much like the gun owners I know personally and would allow to hunt over my dogs.

Where I differ with you is when you apply yourself and your strong personal responsibility to every Tom, Dick & Mary that wants to CCW. The simple fact is, and I have provided a number of links with examples, that a percentage of those gun owners are careless with their guns and those guns are stolen and used in the commission of a crime (often murder of a LEO) or those same individuals use the firearms in a manner not allowed by law or they do not lock them properly in their homes and children get ahold of them and kill themselves or other other children, etc etc..

That is why we need gun control. Because everyone is not like you or me.

I am wore out on this subject. I am not a true believer when it comes to the US Constitution any more than I am with the Good Book and I am distrustful of anyone that waves them around at every opportunity.

As for denying there is quite alot of gun violence in Thailand...I am the last to make such an argument. I have only stated that they do not have the type of mass shootings that have become so frequent in the US since Columbine or perhaps the original Post Office shooting that resulted in the phrase "going postal". Do I believe there is a risk of being shot in thailand? Yes. Do I feel the need to carry a firearm in either the US or Thailand? No. Because I practice situational awareness.

Caveat: if I am in Bear Country in the US then I carry a firearm at all times.

Isn't it about time for you to ride off into the Sunset? ;-)

Edited June 5, 2014 by ClutchClark

[notmyself]

Gun Violence In America: Facts And Figures

http://o.onionstatic.com/images/26/26484/original/700.jpg?2191

Guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people. Before the invention of the gun people still died but nobody was killed with a gun.

Edited June 12, 2014 by notmyself

[ClutchClark]

Gun Violence In America: Facts And Figures

700.jpg

http://o.onionstatic.com/images/26/26484/original/700.jpg?2191

Guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people. Before the invention of the gun people still died but nobody was killed with a gun.

Yep, I was wondering how long before one of you gun nuts were forced to dig up an old thread since there was no mass murder in the last few days to feed your need to talk about your guns.

I just wish you could come up with some new material instead of falling back on the worn out bumper sticker slogan from the 70's about guns don't kill people, people do.

Don't you have anything fresher? ;-)

[notmyself]

Gun Violence In America: Facts And Figures

700.jpg

http://o.onionstatic.com/images/26/26484/original/700.jpg?2191

Guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people. Before the invention of the gun people still died but nobody was killed with a gun.

Yep, I was wondering how long before one of you gun nuts were forced to dig up an old thread since there was no mass murder in the last few days to feed your need to talk about your guns.

I just wish you could come up with some new material instead of falling back on the worn out bumper sticker slogan from the 70's about guns don't kill people, people do.

Don't you have anything fresher? ;-)

If you read my previous posts on the subject you will find that I am firmly on the side of gun restrictions.

Many years ago, after a gun related mass murder, hand guns were banned in the UK and rifles were tightly regulated. We didn't have serious gun crime before but it was certainly an issue but now we have only very isolated occurrences of gun crime. According to some of the gun nuts on this thread we should see the same level of mass murder as before except swords, pick axe handles and such like would be used. Do we see that? No.

[chuckd]

Gun Violence In America: Facts And Figures

Guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people. Before the invention of the gun people still died but nobody was killed with a gun.

Are you so desperate you are reduced to quoting "The Onion" and a college freshman playing newscaster for your "facts and figures"?

I particularly liked the use of "air quotes" by your expert commentator and his sidekick. The only question remaining is...who is the third "stooge"?

For a good laugh, go here: http://www.theonion.com/?ref=auto

Edit in:

Oops. It seems The Onion is now a paid site, so unless you pay them some small stipend, you cannot read such articles as:

"Obama already knows who he's going to tear apart in memoir"

"Ohio replaces lethal injection with new head-ripping-off machine"

"Bounty launches beginner series for people new to paper towels"

et al

[notmyself]

Still free but you can only read (I think) 5 articles in a 30 day period.

[ClutchClark]

Gun Violence In America: Facts And Figures

700.jpg

http://o.onionstatic.com/images/26/26484/original/700.jpg?2191

Guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people. Before the invention of the gun people still died but nobody was killed with a gun.

Yep, I was wondering how long before one of you gun nuts were forced to dig up an old thread since there was no mass murder in the last few days to feed your need to talk about your guns.

I just wish you could come up with some new material instead of falling back on the worn out bumper sticker slogan from the 70's about guns don't kill people, people do.

Don't you have anything fresher? ;-)

If you read my previous posts on the subject you will find that I am firmly on the side of gun restrictions.

Many years ago, after a gun related mass murder, hand guns were banned in the UK and rifles were tightly regulated. We didn't have serious gun crime before but it was certainly an issue but now we have only very isolated occurrences of gun crime. According to some of the gun nuts on this thread we should see the same level of mass murder as before except swords, pick axe handles and such like would be used. Do we see that? No.

My apologies...it was just really nice to have a few days of no bad news of American gun violence in the news and here on TV.

;-)

[notmyself]

Gun Violence In America: Facts And Figures

700.jpg

http://o.onionstatic.com/images/26/26484/original/700.jpg?2191

Guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people. Before the invention of the gun people still died but nobody was killed with a gun.

Yep, I was wondering how long before one of you gun nuts were forced to dig up an old thread since there was no mass murder in the last few days to feed your need to talk about your guns.

I just wish you could come up with some new material instead of falling back on the worn out bumper sticker slogan from the 70's about guns don't kill people, people do.

Don't you have anything fresher? ;-)

If you read my previous posts on the subject you will find that I am firmly on the side of gun restrictions.

Many years ago, after a gun related mass murder, hand guns were banned in the UK and rifles were tightly regulated. We didn't have serious gun crime before but it was certainly an issue but now we have only very isolated occurrences of gun crime. According to some of the gun nuts on this thread we should see the same level of mass murder as before except swords, pick axe handles and such like would be used. Do we see that? No.

My apologies...it was just really nice to have a few days of no bad news of American gun violence in the news and here on TV.

;-)

No worries. I also slightly adjusted 'guns don't kill people, people kill people' to the more accurate 'guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people'

A son of a friend (fellow foodie) in Louisiana get married last year and he took a long video of it for his YT channel. As he was panning around he zoomed in on what he said was the groom's cake, next to the cake and matching in colour was a brand new Glock. I sent him and email asking about the Glock and he said his son loves guns and it was a wedding present. <deleted> is a gun doing next to a wedding cake?

[Jay Sata]

Why worry about the US and guns. If they as a nation are content with regular mass shootings and innocent people being slaughtered who are we to judge them?

I feel a lot happier driving in the UK where I know that some minor incident on the road is not going to end with a redneck reaching for his Glock in the glove compartment.

[Ulysses G.]

I feel a lot happier driving in the UK where I know that some minor incident on the road is not going to end with a redneck reaching for his Glock in the glove compartment.

I take it that you don't live in Thailand. There is a lot higher chance of it happening here.

[Jay Sata]

I feel a lot happier driving in the UK where I know that some minor incident on the road is not going to end with a redneck reaching for his Glock in the glove compartment.

I take it that you don't live in Thailand. There is a lot higher chance of it happening here.

The frequent school gun massacres only happen in the USA on a regular basis.

[ricklev]

I wonder if one of the 2nd amendment nuts could explain to me why there should be no law against selling guns and ammo in supermarkets, bars and 7-11's with no ID or waiting period.

Oh yeah, constitutional law requires that you balance the needs of society against the rights of the individual with all of the Bill of Rights amendments. Or don't you believe in that?

[Scott]

I don't think we have any '2^nd Amendment' nuts here. We have people with different views on the subject.

Let's please use less inflammatory statements when addressing the topic or other posters.

[neverdie]

I don't think we have any '2^nd Amendment' nuts here. We have people with different views on the subject.

Let's please use less inflammatory statements when addressing the topic or other posters.

What 'happy' medication you taking old boy? Need to get me a slice of some of that action 555555

I'm not sure what thread you are reading lol, but I for one respect the call to have thoughts about other posters without sharing those thoughts

I've just been away for a week or more, what's the weekly slaughter figures for nut jobs with guns slaughtering innocent Americans ? I just did the run around in my other home country ( where they have rational firearms laws) and it's a big fat zero back there, so it's just the two mass shootings this week and how many mamed & dead in the USA?

[neverdie]

I wonder what the slaughter rate target is for next week, next month. Also what's the best time of year to holiday in the states in respect of reducing ones risk of being gunned down at the park or shopping centre?

What type of body armour do you recommend for the casual school student to wear daily whilst on campus?

Thank god we've got the right to bear arms !

[Credo]

Neverdie, the US doesn't really care much whether or not you visit and if you need to go, you can probably pick up a used flak jacket if you need one. In general, though, it's best to stay out of the slum areas and certain sections of large cities. You might want to do a little research before you go.

I personally know more people who were killed by lightening than I do from guns.

It's a big, big country and plenty of areas are safe.

[Scott]

I don't think we have any '2^nd Amendment' nuts here. We have people with different views on the subject.

Let's please use less inflammatory statements when addressing the topic or other posters.

What 'happy' medication you taking old boy? Need to get me a slice of some of that action 555555

I'm not sure what thread you are reading lol, but I for one respect the call to have thoughts about other posters without sharing those thoughts

I've just been away for a week or more, what's the weekly slaughter figures for nut jobs with guns slaughtering innocent Americans ? I just did the run around in my other home country ( where they have rational firearms laws) and it's a big fat zero back there, so it's just the two mass shootings this week and how many mamed & dead in the USA?

I would tell you what medication I am taking, but then I'd have to shoot you!!

[stiggy]

I grew up with guns in the house in the UK, my Dad was at international level in competition shooting.

The loops he had to go through was unreal even back in the 80s, secure windows and doors, registered with police for spot checks, background checks, patrols that regular checked to see if even a window was left open and house unattended.The guns and Ammo kept separately and locked down to name a few.As for transporting his weapons en masse for competition more checks and permits required.

It was obvious even to me as a young teenager that guns where not a toy, and something to be taken seriously.

I fail to understand how easy it is to get these in the states.You can kill with many items, knife etc, but guns kill at a range require little training to use and are perfect for the job.So why are they not more stringent in who is allowed them.

All pro gun Americans are simply nuts about there right to bear arms,surely it the right of others to not have to face there neighbour, having a bad day and easy access to firearms.

The statistics on gun crime in the US speaks for itself.

[NeverSure]

I wonder if one of the 2nd amendment nuts could explain to me why there should be no law against selling guns and ammo in supermarkets, bars and 7-11's with no ID or waiting period.

Oh yeah, constitutional law requires that you balance the needs of society against the rights of the individual with all of the Bill of Rights amendments. Or don't you believe in that?

The only businesses that can sell guns are federally licensed firearms dealers.

Those dealers must do paperwork, run background checks through a national criminal database, keep records and there is a waiting period.

Most gun crimes are committed by people who weren't allowed to have a gun in the first place. That would include anyone with a single conviction for a crime, a minor, anyone with a restraining order against them and the list goes on. Many of those people are prohibited by law from even living in a house where there is a gun - a law which puts the restriction on all residents in the home.

You are entitled to your opinion on the subject, but it would be nice to keep the facts straight.

Edited June 14, 2014 by NeverSure

[ricklev]

I wonder if one of the 2nd amendment nuts could explain to me why there should be no law against selling guns and ammo in supermarkets, bars and 7-11's with no ID or waiting period.

Oh yeah, constitutional law requires that you balance the needs of society against the rights of the individual with all of the Bill of Rights amendments. Or don't you believe in that?

The only businesses that can sell guns are federally licensed firearms dealers.

Those dealers must do paperwork, run background checks through a national criminal database, keep records and there is a waiting period.

Most gun crimes are committed by people who weren't allowed to have a gun in the first place. That would include anyone with a single conviction for a crime, a minor, anyone with a restraining order against them and the list goes on. Many of those people are prohibited by law from even living in a house where there is a gun - a law which puts the restriction on all residents in the home.

You are entitled to your opinion on the subject, but it would be nice to keep the facts straight.

My opinion is that constitutional law principles applied to the second amendment allows reasonable restrictions on gun purchase and ownership. We seem to be in complete agreement. Maybe what I posted was confusing. There are many people arguing that the second amendment means there can be no restrictions on their right to purchase and own a gun.

The argument should be about what are reasonable restrictions and the criteria is the proper balance between the rights of the individual and the needs of society. Should a person be able to go to a gun show and buy a gun with no background check? Should there be a registry of gun owners? Should a parent of a child be allowed to openly carry an assault weapon into an elementary school...? etc. Reasonable people can differ, but there is no reason in simply saying the constitution grants an irrevocable right to gun ownership. Hence my pejorative "second amendment nuts".

Edited June 14, 2014 by ricklev

[notmyself]

I wonder if one of the 2nd amendment nuts could explain to me why there should be no law against selling guns and ammo in supermarkets, bars and 7-11's with no ID or waiting period.

Oh yeah, constitutional law requires that you balance the needs of society against the rights of the individual with all of the Bill of Rights amendments. Or don't you believe in that?

The only businesses that can sell guns are federally licensed firearms dealers.

Those dealers must do paperwork, run background checks through a national criminal database, keep records and there is a waiting period.

Most gun crimes are committed by people who weren't allowed to have a gun in the first place. That would include anyone with a single conviction for a crime, a minor, anyone with a restraining order against them and the list goes on. Many of those people are prohibited by law from even living in a house where there is a gun - a law which puts the restriction on all residents in the home.

You are entitled to your opinion on the subject, but it would be nice to keep the facts straight.

My opinion is that constitutional law principles applied to the second amendment allows reasonable restrictions on gun purchase and ownership. We seem to be in complete agreement. Maybe what I posted was confusing. There are many people arguing that the second amendment means there can be no restrictions on their right to purchase and own a gun.

The argument should be about what are reasonable restrictions and the criteria is the proper balance between the rights of the individual and the needs of society. Should a person be able to go to a gun show and buy a gun with no background check. Should there be a registry of gun owners, etc. Reasonable people can differ, but there is no reason in simply saying the constitution grants an irrevocable right to gun ownership. Hence my pejorative "second amendment nuts".

Gun Show Background Checks State Laws

Known as the "gun show loophole," most states do not require background checks for firearms purchased at gun shows from private individuals -- federal law only requires licensed dealers to conduct checks.

Under the Gun Control Act of 1968, federal law clearly defined private sellers as anyone who sold no more than four firearms per year. But the 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act lifted that restriction and loosely defined private sellers as people who do not rely on gun sales as the principal way of obtaining their livelihood.

http://www.governing.com/gov-data/safety-justice/gun-show-firearms-bankground-checks-state-laws-map.html

Check the map out in the link.

[ClutchClark]

I wonder if one of the 2nd amendment nuts could explain to me why there should be no law against selling guns and ammo in supermarkets, bars and 7-11's with no ID or waiting period.

Oh yeah, constitutional law requires that you balance the needs of society against the rights of the individual with all of the Bill of Rights amendments. Or don't you believe in that?

The only businesses that can sell guns are federally licensed firearms dealers.

Those dealers must do paperwork, run background checks through a national criminal database, keep records and there is a waiting period.

Most gun crimes are committed by people who weren't allowed to have a gun in the first place. That would include anyone with a single conviction for a crime, a minor, anyone with a restraining order against them and the list goes on. Many of those people are prohibited by law from even living in a house where there is a gun - a law which puts the restriction on all residents in the home.

You are entitled to your opinion on the subject, but it would be nice to keep the facts straight.

My opinion is that constitutional law principles applied to the second amendment allows reasonable restrictions on gun purchase and ownership. We seem to be in complete agreement. Maybe what I posted was confusing. There are many people arguing that the second amendment means there can be no restrictions on their right to purchase and own a gun.

The argument should be about what are reasonable restrictions and the criteria is the proper balance between the rights of the individual and the needs of society. Should a person be able to go to a gun show and buy a gun with no background check. Should there be a registry of gun owners, etc. Reasonable people can differ, but there is no reason in simply saying the constitution grants an irrevocable right to gun ownership. Hence my pejorative "second amendment nuts".

Gun Show Background Checks State Laws

Known as the "gun show loophole," most states do not require background checks for firearms purchased at gun shows from private individuals -- federal law only requires licensed dealers to conduct checks.

Under the Gun Control Act of 1968, federal law clearly defined private sellers as anyone who sold no more than four firearms per year. But the 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act lifted that restriction and loosely defined private sellers as people who do not rely on gun sales as the principal way of obtaining their livelihood.

http://www.governing.com/gov-data/safety-justice/gun-show-firearms-bankground-checks-state-laws-map.html

Check the map out in the link.

As a lifetime gun-owner, I am 100% in favor of closing this loophole yet most gunowners are afraid that even one small bit of legislation will snowball into the army storming into their homes and taking their guns. The NRA started this propaganda and fear mongering back in the 1970's when it started to become radicalized. I remember it happening.

To this day, I know reasonable men who are completely unreasonable in this single area of their lives.

[NeverSure]

Other than criminal gun running, a gun can't make it into the supply chain without first being bought and sold from a manufacturer or licensed importer to a federally licensed dealer. The next buyer will be well identified, vetted, and the gun will forever be registered to him with both the state and the feds.

If a private owner sells the gun, he commits a federal crime if he sells it to someone who isn't a resident of his state. He probably also commits a state crime. So does the buyer.

How many people who have a good enough background to buy a gun from a dealer would sell it to someone without vetting him? The seller is criminally and civilly liable if he makes a mistake. There are forms that anyone can download and print, that both the buyer and seller should fill out and sign, listing ID and gun ID, each keeping a copy to CYA. Imagine if I bought gun from an unknown person and that gun was wanted in a murder case. I'd be very happy that I took down the license number on his car.

A bullet and the brass casing and the primer, after having been fired, can be absolutely proven to have been fired from just one gun. That gun will have unique machining marks on the firing pin, the chamber, and the riflings in the barrel that will imprint upon firing. When any of those components are found at a crime scene, they are photographed under a microscope with a good digital camera and those photos are placed into a data base. National computers can quickly scan and compare, and if there is a match pop it to the surface.

Due to liability, I would sell a gun to a private party I didn't know only if he's willing to meet me at a licensed gun dealership and have the dealer make the transfer, running a background check and registering the gun to the new owner.

I've never been to a gun show where there weren't dealers willing to do that. The only people I can imagine selling a gun to a stranger at night in a supermarket parking lot or even at a gun show are criminals. Criminals don't obey the law. They don't need a gun show to commit that gun crime, and the term "gun show loophole" is just hype promulgated by the anti-gun NUTS. (Tired of being called a nut here.)

[NeverSure]

The only businesses that can sell guns are federally licensed firearms dealers.

Those dealers must do paperwork, run background checks through a national criminal database, keep records and there is a waiting period.

Most gun crimes are committed by people who weren't allowed to have a gun in the first place. That would include anyone with a single conviction for a crime, a minor, anyone with a restraining order against them and the list goes on. Many of those people are prohibited by law from even living in a house where there is a gun - a law which puts the restriction on all residents in the home.

You are entitled to your opinion on the subject, but it would be nice to keep the facts straight.

My opinion is that constitutional law principles applied to the second amendment allows reasonable restrictions on gun purchase and ownership. We seem to be in complete agreement. Maybe what I posted was confusing. There are many people arguing that the second amendment means there can be no restrictions on their right to purchase and own a gun.

The argument should be about what are reasonable restrictions and the criteria is the proper balance between the rights of the individual and the needs of society. Should a person be able to go to a gun show and buy a gun with no background check. Should there be a registry of gun owners, etc. Reasonable people can differ, but there is no reason in simply saying the constitution grants an irrevocable right to gun ownership. Hence my pejorative "second amendment nuts".

Gun Show Background Checks State Laws

Known as the "gun show loophole," most states do not require background checks for firearms purchased at gun shows from private individuals -- federal law only requires licensed dealers to conduct checks.

Under the Gun Control Act of 1968, federal law clearly defined private sellers as anyone who sold no more than four firearms per year. But the 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act lifted that restriction and loosely defined private sellers as people who do not rely on gun sales as the principal way of obtaining their livelihood.

http://www.governing.com/gov-data/safety-justice/gun-show-firearms-bankground-checks-state-laws-map.html

Check the map out in the link.

As a lifetime gun-owner, I am 100% in favor of closing this loophole yet most gunowners are afraid that even one small bit of legislation will snowball into the army storming into their homes and taking their guns. The NRA started this propaganda and fear mongering back in the 1970's when it started to become radicalized. I remember it happening.

To this day, I know reasonable men who are completely unreasonable in this single area of their lives.

There is nothing unique about any "gun show loophole." It is a red flag talking point repeated by nuts who are anti-gun in general.

The idea is that guns can be bought and sold at gun shows with no paperwork - just exchange money and gun.

I just made a long post above stating that private parties can buy and sell guns anywhere without going through formalities. They don't need a Gun Show. They can advertise the gun online, on the local Nickle Ads, or in the local paper.

I also explained what responsible, law abiding citizens do when they transfer firearms.

You are talking about people committing crimes at a gun show unless they get ID and assure that the buyer and seller each live in the same state. They'd better keep a record of who they sold that gun to, in case it's later used in a crime.

Criminals don't obey laws and they don't need "loopholes" to do what they do.

Edit: I guess if we're going to use the term "nuts" to describe each other here, I might as well get in on it. I'm debating anti-gun nuts,

Edited June 14, 2014 by NeverSure

[notmyself]

Issue is getting too wide.

Does the US have a gun problem?