PDA

View Full Version : washington passes background checks for private gun sellers



otisthebat
11-05-2014, 01:16 PM
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/11/05/washington-ballot-initiative-gives-gun-control-activists-a-rare-win


Gun control advocates may have finally found a path to victory in Washington state Tuesday, where voters approved a measure that would expand background checks to include gun shows and private firearm sales. Though similar laws have been passed in Colorado, Connecticut, Maryland, and elsewhere, the success of Washington’s initiative 594 marks the first measure approved by ballot referendum.

“While the NRA may be able to intimidated legislators, it appears that they are unable to intimidate voters,” says John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety.

Success did not come cheaply for the group founded by former New York mayor Michael Bloomberg, who promised to spend $50 million this year on a grassroots gun control network. Since its formation in the spring, Everytown for Gun Safety says it has spent $3.5 million on Initiative 594. Billionaire Microsoft co-founders Paul Allen, Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer and their wives also donated a total of more than $2.5 million, per Washington’s Public Disclosure Commission.

The NRA, by contrast, limited its involvement in the Washington initiative. It spent only a half a million dollars on their committee opposing it.

The gun control measure also had an opposing ballot initiative to face, Initiative 591, which would have prohibited the state from expanding background checks beyond the federal requirements. Gun rights activists put it forward on the suspicion that a gun control measure was coming, and funded it through grassroots contributions, local groups, and the Washington-based Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

The dueling Washington referendums took on a new significance after a shooting at a local high school last month that claimed the lives of four students including the shooter. However, the gun control measure had strong support even before that, polling at 70 percent in July.

The vote also served has an important test case for the gun control movement, which found fresh support and expanded coffers in the wake of the 2012 Sandy Hook shooting in Newtown, Connecticut. Efforts to pass gun control on a federal level, however, failed in the aftermath of the tragedy and the issue did not appear to be a factor in the most closely watched congressional midterm races. Appealing directly to voters, though costly, worked for gun control groups, it appears in Washington, and could work elsewhere.

“Certainly other states will see that a committed, grassroots, citizen movement that has the research and the energy to take on the gun lobby will win,” says Geoff Potter, communications director for the Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility, the state gun control organization that led the initiative.

Bloomberg’s group is already fielding a similar measure in Nevada, which could be considered by the state’s legislature in 2015 and possibly be on ballots in 2016. The NRA would not respond to U.S. News's request for comment, but a local PAC has already formed there to oppose it, and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, after its experience in Washington, might also get involved, according to communications director Dave Workman.

“There is a great deal of concern that this kind of big money can be brought to bear against a whole rather large group of law abiding citizens,” Workman says.

and when the gun crime numbers stay the same, and when school shootings still happen, i wonder what their excuse will be.

whenever these authoritarian butt plugs champion their new gun control bills, they never actually come out and say what the legislation will actually do to prevent gun crime.

RobertoLulongo
11-05-2014, 01:22 PM
oh noes, you can't get around background checks by buying at a gun show anymore.. librulz taking teh gunz..

otisthebat
11-05-2014, 01:26 PM
oh noes, you can't get around background checks by buying at a gun show anymore.. librulz taking teh gunz..

you've obviously never been to a gun show.

vendors are already required to perform background checks there. the gun show loophole is a gun control myth.

otisthebat
11-05-2014, 01:32 PM
please tell me more about what i have and haven't done.

they aren't required to in all states. in many states they aren't required to. most do it anyways even in states that don't require it, but they don't have to, and there's plenty of people that don't.

i dont know what you are smoking, but any vendor that is an FFL is required by federal law to do background checks. every table you see that sells guns is an FFL vendor.

Tekkendo
11-05-2014, 01:34 PM
I am sure criminals will abide by the law.

http://i.imgur.com/Cakn2NZ.gif

LukeLissen
11-05-2014, 01:42 PM
Its not the purely isolated background check that is the main problem for me, although thats enough of a problem by itself.

In order to properly enforce universal background checks, universal registration is also required.

eg. I sell a gun to my Uncle John without doing the background check. Police later ask him when and where he bought the gun. He tells them its none of their business. What can they do at that point? Nothing. Without the additional registration, then how can they enforce whether he did or did not follow law?

So a universal background check with also having registration is useless after the fact of sales.

For tyrants like Bloomberg, its not about the background check. Its that its a stepping stone to universal registration. Theyll say they dont need universal registration, but a few years from now theyll say its not working like this so we gotta add registration.

USAPump
11-05-2014, 02:11 PM
Background checks are the most sought after gun control laws by those who don't know anything about this topic. Every single person out there who is a noguns will say "I think background checks should be mandatory." because it sounds like it works in that ultra simplistic statement. Others say they want mental tests done to take away someone's 2A rights because once more, it sounds like it would work in the simpleton's mind.

This is just politicians try to make the people who voted for them feel safe or making them think something is being done about firearm violence.

BigStronk
11-05-2014, 02:27 PM
Background checks totally stopped Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris. Great idea gun control advocates. 10/10. Lets say that a potential criminal buyer does actually get stopped by this background check. Now he sends his young friend ,who hasn't gone to jail.The friend buys him the gun and gives it to him. Very effective.

Aynom
11-05-2014, 02:33 PM
Background checks totally stopped Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris. Great idea gun control advocates. 10/10. Lets say that a potential criminal buyer does actually get stopped by this background check. Now he sends his young friend ,who hasn't gone to jail.The friend buys him the gun and gives it to him. Very effective.

All systems are flawed.

It's mildly amusing that you fail to see it takes more effort for the potential criminal to get the gun.

BigStronk
11-05-2014, 02:35 PM
All systems are flawed.

It's mildly amusing that you fail to see it takes more effort for the potential criminal to get the gun. I really hope this is a joke.

otisthebat
11-05-2014, 02:41 PM
All systems are flawed.

It's mildly amusing that you fail to see it takes more effort for the potential criminal to get the gun.

it really doesnt.

lets start off with how criminals get their guns.

1. steal them from law abiding gun owners. (background checks have no effect)
2. steal them from other criminals. (background checks have no effect)
3. buy them from criminals. (background checks have no effect)
4. have a family member do a straw purchase from a gun store. (background checks have no effect).
5. buy them from a friend. why would the friend go to the trouble of doing a background check? hmm lets see, should i do a background check and get told what i already know about him? or should i just make an easy $200? (background checks have no effect).

LukeLissen
11-05-2014, 02:41 PM
All systems are flawed.

It's mildly amusing that you fail to see it takes more effort for the potential criminal to get the gun.

But at what COST?

Rational decisions are made based on both benefits AND costs. You are mentioning a potential benefit, but there are also significant costs to every single gun control measure that harm the whole purpose of the second amendment.

In order to protect the second amendment, we must always keep as many people in firearms ownership and activism as possible. The type of restrictions you support will greatly reduce the numbers of new people getting into firearms ownership among other things. A lot of new people getting into firearms are doing so by gifts and private sales, and much of that will not happen if they have to go through more hoops. Also, as I said, this UBC thing is simply a stepping stone to universal registration and eventual further restrictions.

brighamw
11-05-2014, 03:08 PM
All systems are flawed.

It's mildly amusing that you fail to see it takes more effort for the potential criminal to get the gun.

Not sure if srs or just retart :confused:

brighamw
11-05-2014, 03:10 PM
All systems are flawed.

It's mildly amusing that you fail to see it takes more effort for the potential criminal to get the gun.

Ummmm...

Edit: deleted long thought out response, decided forget it! It's a free country, carry on being a dumbass...

Hola Bola
11-05-2014, 04:04 PM
Worthless feel good legislation. Background checks are unenforceable without creating a firearms registry.

Turbomunkey
11-05-2014, 04:21 PM
Why dont they educate people on mental illness so people can report friends and family who are showing symptoms and get them help. These whack jobs didn't develop their mental status over night

But then again these groups are not really concerned about peoples mental health or gun related deaths are they

ImDangerous
11-05-2014, 04:25 PM
i dont know what you are smoking, but any vendor that is an FFL is required by federal law to do background checks. every table you see that sells guns is an FFL vendor.

isn't the loophole for non-vendors?

otisthebat
11-05-2014, 04:44 PM
isn't the loophole for non-vendors?

there is no loophole. private citizens can sell and buy from other private citizens without background checks ANYWHERE.

Mulyark
11-05-2014, 04:46 PM
I am sure criminals will abide by the law.

http://i.imgur.com/Cakn2NZ.gif

You mean the Democrats? not a chance...

metroins
11-05-2014, 04:54 PM
It's something like 90% of gun deaths are gang or suicide. I made up the 90% but I bet it's close.

Fix drugs/mental illness.

I'm OK with background checks, they aren't a real big deal, but they are not the problem.

GrokTheCube
11-05-2014, 05:03 PM
Meh. Very little cost, very little benefit.

andrew28
11-05-2014, 05:03 PM
i own guns and also don't think this law will really do much. but is it really gonna negatively effect regular, responsible gun owners? i was a lot more pissed off about banning 30 round mags.

jafomofo
11-05-2014, 05:09 PM
you've obviously never been to a gun show.

vendors are already required to perform background checks there. the gun show loophole is a gun control myth.

Its not a myth. Vendors who make a living selling guns have to perform background checks but nothing precludes someone from selling guns for a living at those shows, its up to the promoter to determine if they are in the business or whatever the term is... That said, at gun shows here in PA where you don't have to do background checks on long guns you will see the same guys who are there selling junk as their main table but their second table will be why they are really there and it will be a table of rifles of all sorts and which are considered private sales. People skirt the law by doing this, its up to you to decide if that is right or wrong, im largely indifferent but to say its a myth is just wrong.

ImDangerous
11-05-2014, 06:32 PM
there is no loophole. private citizens can sell and buy from other private citizens without background checks ANYWHERE.

the term loophole is colloquial. the attachment to a convention is where the controversy arises because the whole point of a show is buying, selling, and mirin' firearms. so people (not that i agree with them) think the line is fuzzy - whether a private transaction at such a gathering should be subject to the same regulation that traditional sellers are subject to. the feeling is that it undermines the entire point of having regulation.

otisthebat
11-05-2014, 09:39 PM
Its not a myth. Vendors who make a living selling guns have to perform background checks but nothing precludes someone from selling guns for a living at those shows, its up to the promoter to determine if they are in the business or whatever the term is... That said, at gun shows here in PA where you don't have to do background checks on long guns you will see the same guys who are there selling junk as their main table but their second table will be why they are really there and it will be a table of rifles of all sorts and which are considered private sales. People skirt the law by doing this, its up to you to decide if that is right or wrong, im largely indifferent but to say its a myth is just wrong.

that is incorrect.

if you are not a vendor and you are reserving a table in the gun show, you must list what you are selling. if you are selling firearms then you MUST have an FFL.

LukeLissen
11-05-2014, 09:50 PM
i own guns and also don't think this law will really do much. but is it really gonna negatively effect regular, responsible gun owners?

Some who arent that involved in firearms ownership and sports - maybe not that much early on. Those of us who are - yes, significantly.

I've traded, sold, and gifted and been gifted dozens of guns in my life without involving the government. Most importantly, I've brought many friends and family into firearms ownership and the training/rights/fun/activism that go along with it - a lot of that would not have happened with this law simply because the hassle will be more than the casual person wants at first. Many of the people who Ive introduced to it who werent all that highly enthused about firearms right at first, would not have done it if not for my urging and selling or giving them a gun(yes I have given some away), yet then have gone on to become great firearms advocates later on and then in turn also involve others in it.


If the villains get their way, it will affect everything in huge ways in the long run; that being - universal registation and eventual loss of most or all second amendment rights.

This is not about background checks or stopping crimes or doing anything positive for the prick Bloomberg who is pushing it. Its about a bizarre hatred for the second amendment and those who participate in it as a whole.

Yet another example why direct democracy is a fail - the naive fools who voted for this are naive fools.

RobertoLulongo
11-05-2014, 10:39 PM
so many dumb f*cking people itt


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.

“Today, private parties sometimes sell large numbers of new and used firearms while claiming hobbyist status and exemption from the requirements imposed on licensed retailers,” according to Inside Gun Shows: What Goes on When Everybody Thinks Nobody’s Watching, a 2009 report from the Violence Prevention Research Program at University of California Davis.

Some states have opted to go further than federal law by requiring background checks at gun shows for any gun transaction, federal license or not. Five states, most recently Colorado and Connecticut, mandate universal background checks, an even more stringent standard that imposes background checks on almost all gun purchases, including over the Internet.

Even in states that do not require background checks of private vendors, the venue hosting the event may require it as a matter of policy. In other cases, private vendors may opt to have a third-party licensed dealer run a background check even though it may not be required by law.

go **** yourselves.

LukeLissen
11-05-2014, 10:46 PM
so many dumb f*cking people itt



go **** yourselves.

What you've posted is as irrelevant as you are. The so called 'gun show loophole' propaganda that you are regurgitating is not about gun shows or loopholes.

99% of what will be affected by UBC's are private sales and gifts between individuals that dont have anything to do with gun shows, like just friends and family.

Second, it is not about fixing 'loopholes.' It is about pricks like Michael Bloomberg making a war against the second amendment, and his useful fools like you falling for it.

RobertoLulongo
11-05-2014, 10:50 PM
What you've posted is as irrelevant as you are. The so called 'gun show loophole' propaganda that you are regurgitating is not about gun shows or loopholes.

99% of what will be affected by UBC's are private sales between individuals that dont have anything to do with gun shows, like just friends and family, and gifts.

Second, it is not about fixing 'loopholes.' It is about pricks like Michael Bloomberg making a war against the second amendment, and his useful fools like you falling for it.

It's not irrelevant at all you mouthbreathing moron.

I've always right from the start I don't support background checks or transfers or anything for a family member or friend giving a gun to another family member or friend, but you retarded conservatives take even the smallest comment as blasphemy against your holy second amendment. Here's the facts, you and I as criminals can walk into a gun show in a state that doesn't require background checks, find a venue that doesn't require background checks from their sellers, and buy whatever the hell it is that we're looking for and do whatever it is that criminals do with guns.

Well I can anyways, you'll probably be too busy sitting at home posting twitter links.

If you're okay with that, then whatever, might as well get rid of background checks altogether.

GreatOldOne
11-05-2014, 10:53 PM
What is the problem with getting a background check for buying a gun?

GreatOldOne
11-05-2014, 10:56 PM
"Its just a communist ploy to take all our guns and desecrate the Holy Church of the 2nd Amendment"

That's not good enough.

RobertoLulongo
11-05-2014, 10:59 PM
That's not good enough.

It's never good enough. If morons like LukeLissen had their way, background checks wouldn't even exist because they have to be some plot by Michael Bloomberg to disarm the population.

There is nothing wrong with requiring background checks at gun shows.

GreatOldOne
11-05-2014, 11:02 PM
It's never good enough. If morons like LukeLissen had their way, background checks wouldn't even exist because they have to be some plot by Michael Bloomberg to disarm the population.

There is nothing wrong with requiring background checks at gun shows.

I'd rather get rid of federal tax on short barreled rifles and suppressors. We should legislate a requirement FOR suppressors. Guns are loud.

A general background check seems reasonable.

RobertoLulongo
11-05-2014, 11:10 PM
I'd rather get rid of federal tax on short barreled rifles and suppressors. We should legislate a requirement FOR suppressors. Guns are loud.

A general background check seems reasonable.

Agreed.

You should see my userCP though, just a sea of red getting called an uneducated anti gun whatever, yet its the same mouthbreathing homos that don't even know basic gun show laws vary state to state.

LukeLissen
11-05-2014, 11:12 PM
A general background check seems reasonable.

Do you acknowledge that a universal background check will greatly decrease the numbers of new people being brought into firearms ownership and activism over time?

Do you acknowledge that in order to be fully enforced, UBC's will also require universal registration which is a huge no-no for those of us who understand the history of total gun control and growth of tyranny on this planet in various places at various times?

Do you acknowledge that this push is being funded almost exclusively by hundreds of millions of dollars and a massive propaganda campaign from Michael Bloomberg who is waging a one man war against the second amendment?

Do you consider only benefits to a choice, and not the costs also?



I acknowledge both the costs and benefits to firearm rights.

RobertoLulongo
11-05-2014, 11:17 PM
Do you acknowledge that a universal background check will greatly decrease the numbers of new people being brought into firearms ownership and activism over time?

Irrelevant. A background check stops absolutely no law abiding citizen from obtaining a gun.


Do you acknowledge that in order to be fully enforced, UBC's will also require universal registration which is a huge no-no for those of us who understand the history of total gun control and growth of tyranny on this planet in various places at various times?

Background checks have been going on at gun stores and many shows for decades now without any registration. Requiring all gun show sales to undergo background checks will not lead to a registry. You're a paranoid idiot if you think it will.


Do you acknowledge that this push is being funded almost exclusively by hundreds of millions of dollars and a massive propaganda campaign from Michael Bloomberg who is waging a one man war against the second amendment?

Irrelevant.


Do you consider only benefits to a choice, and not the costs also?

Irrelevant.

Those are some horrible arguments about why gun shows shouldn't require checks.

I see you didn't reply to my last post. Probably because you realize you're wrong. Just take the L bro, nothing wrong with admitting it every now and then.

GreatOldOne
11-05-2014, 11:20 PM
Do you acknowledge that a universal background check will greatly decrease the numbers of new people being brought into firearms ownership and activism over time?

No.



Do you acknowledge that in order to be fully enforced, UBC's will also require universal registration which is a huge no-no for those of us who understand the history of total gun control and growth of tyranny on this planet in various places at various times?

No. We were talking about this some time ago (some kind of registration) and I agree that's a bad idea. Hola Bola laid out a simple to understand scenario where that's always bad and I agree. You don't want something that can be tracked back to the owner.

I'm not making the background check ~ registration connection. I'd prefer to get rid of registration for handguns as well (I dunno if that's everywhere...it is in NC).

We have voter ID and registration laws. I don't connect that to something nefarious.



Do you acknowledge that this push is being funded almost exclusively by hundreds of millions of dollars and a massive propaganda campaign from Michael Bloomberg who is waging a one man war against the second amendment?


I don't give a chit about Bloomberg, how or why this issue is being discussed. It seems pretty reasonable.


Do you consider only benefits to a choice, and not the costs also?

No.

otisthebat
11-05-2014, 11:22 PM
What is the problem with getting a background check for buying a gun?

A. background checks are already required to buy a gun. this law was passed to require private citizens who are selling or giving a firearm to a friend/family member/other citizen, to do a background check.

B. background checks for private purchases does not work without universal gun registration. even then, it will not work well, because we all know that criminals dont give a chit about the law.

C. it is "feel good" legislation that does nothing to stop gun crime. the only thing it does is make it more of a hassle for law abiding citizens to purchase firearms.

GreatOldOne
11-05-2014, 11:24 PM
Agreed.

You should see my userCP though, just a sea of red getting called an uneducated anti gun whatever, yet its the same mouthbreathing homos that don't even know basic gun show laws vary state to state.

Well if it makes you feel better you're already red so that doesn't make a difference.

RobertoLulongo
11-05-2014, 11:26 PM
A. background checks are already required to buy a gun. this law was passed to require private citizens who are selling or giving a firearm to a friend/family member/other citizen, to do a background check.

B. background checks for private purchases does not work without universal gun registration. even then, it will not work well, because we all know that criminals dont give a chit about the law.

C. it is "feel good" legislation that does nothing to stop gun crime. the only thing it does is make it more of a hassle for law abiding citizens to purchase firearms.

Incorrect and you know this to be false. Background checks at shows absolutely reduce gun crime.


Well if it makes you feel better you're already red so that doesn't make a difference.

Lol I was green before posting here. Got negged by Bola something and a bunch of other retards who can't put forth a decent argument other than calling me an idiot because I support common sense legislation.

GreatOldOne
11-05-2014, 11:28 PM
A. background checks are already required to buy a gun. this law was passed to require private citizens who are selling or giving a firearm to a friend/family member/other citizen, to do a background check.

What's the problem with A)?



B. background checks for private purchases does not work without universal gun registration. even then, it will not work well, because we all know that criminals dont give a chit about the law.


Criminals can avoid laws. That doesn't mean we shouldn't have laws. I don't understand the universal gun registration connection, though. I agree that would be a bad idea. I'm against handgun registration...but I'm ok with a background check and possibly some small/reasonable waiting period (keep a crazy from rushing out to buy a gun and shoot somebody on the spur of the moment).

But I'm against the extra tax stamp you have to get for a suppressor or short barrel rifles/shotguns and fingerprinting and paperwork and nonsense...I think guns should just be made with suppressors. You have to go out to the sheriff and talk to them...and they can say no for whatever reason they want.

To me that seems like a real barrier which is a deterrant...even though it seems reasonable if you wanted to shoot a gun in your house at an intruder you might not want it to be as loud as possible and make you stunned. Something like a background check doesn't seem like a legit barrier.



C. it is "feel good" legislation that does nothing to stop gun crime. the only thing it does is make it more of a hassle for law abiding citizens to purchase firearms.

I feel the same way about having a drivers licence and voter ID laws. Too bad. That's life.

LukeLissen
11-05-2014, 11:29 PM
Irrelevant. A background check stops absolutely no law abiding citizen from obtaining a gun.
False, and it shows your ignorance about the issue. It stops all law abiding citizens from buying a gun who would choose to do so through family and friends, and for whom the hassle of doing one would make them decide not to. This is especially important with the new young gun owner being gifted or sold a gun from family and friends which is how most new young gun owners get into it. No it wont stop all new gun owners cause some will go through the background check BS, but it will greatly reduce firearms ownership and participation over time and thus cause overall harm to the strength of the second amendment.




Background checks have been going on at gun stores and many shows for decades now without any registration. Requiring all gun show sales to undergo background checks will not lead to a registry. You're a paranoid idiot if you think it will.
Again, its not about gun shows. Its about the private sales between friends and family which constitutes the bulk of new firearm owners in this country.

Second, you claim it will not require registration. If there is no registration, then it is not enforceable after the fact. I can sell my cousin a gun without a BC and there is nothing the police can do after the fact to prosecute us unless a universal registration and/or licensing system is also created.








Irrelevant.
So you dont think it important to weigh both the costs and benefits of all important decisions? If so that makes you an irrational person.

GreatOldOne
11-05-2014, 11:30 PM
Lol I was green before posting here. Got negged...

Well now you know...

LukeLissen
11-05-2014, 11:32 PM
No.


Then there is a whole lot more you need to understand about the issue before supporting it. It gets very deep and is no where near as simple and cut and dry as Bloomberg and his trolls would have you believe.

RobertoLulongo
11-05-2014, 11:32 PM
False, and it shows your ignorance about the issue. It stops all law abiding citizens from buying a gun who would choose to do so through family and friends, and for whom the hassle of doing one would make them decide not to. This is especially important with the new young gun owner being gifted or sold a gun from family and friends which is how most new young gun owners get into it. No it wont stop all new gun owners cause some will go through the background check BS, but it will greatly reduce firearms ownership and participation over time and thus cause overall harm to the strength of the second amendment.

How many times do I have to say I don't support background checks between family and friends? The only thing I said on the first page was about gun shows, and I got negged to all hell for that because apparently I'm the uneducated one even though I'm the only person on that page that apparently understands gun show laws. I don't give a shiit about requiring background checks between friends, that's just what the resident conservatives that read at a 3rd grade level inferred for whatever reason because apparently anything slightly gun control automatically = registration in feeble minds.


Again, its not about gun shows. Its about the private sales between friends and family which consitutes the bulk of new firearm owners in this country.

Second, you claim it will not require registration. If there is no registration, then it is not enforceable after the fact. I can sell my cousin a gun without a BC and there is nothing the police can do after the fact to prosecute us unless a universal registration and/or licensing system is also created.

Read above. I do not support a gun registry. I do not support background checks between family and friends.


So you dont think it important to weigh both the costs and benefits of all important decisions? If so that makes you an irrational person.

It's irrelevant to the bill and particularly in relation to anything regarding gun shows is what I meant.

otisthebat
11-05-2014, 11:39 PM
Incorrect and you know this to be false. Background checks at shows absolutely reduce gun crime.





proof?

LukeLissen
11-05-2014, 11:41 PM
I'm not making the background check ~ registration connection. I'd prefer to get rid of registration for handguns as well (I dunno if that's everywhere...it is in NC).



No registration for handguns or longguns is required in NC, although some local jurisdictions may.


As far as not making the BC - registration connection: without registration there is no way to enforce it after the fact of the sale; and we all know they will be saying 'it aint working like this folks we gotta add a little extra to it.'

Right now as it stands, background checks are only enforceable *upon FFL's* by the goverment through the licensing and regulations required of all FFL's. They are required to keep records and be audited at any time and go through the fed for all gun sales or they lose their license. That same enforcement cannot be applied to affect private sales, nor will it be able to be applied with a UBC system .... unless there is ALSO a registration/licensing system on private ownership also in addition to just the background check.

GreatOldOne
11-05-2014, 11:42 PM
Then there is a whole lot more you need to understand about the issue before supporting it. It gets very deep and is no where near as simple and cut and dry as Bloomberg and his trolls would have you believe.

Do you have any suggested reading?

GreatOldOne
11-05-2014, 11:44 PM
No registration for handguns or longguns is required in NC, although some local jurisdictions may.


As far as not making the BC - registration connection: without registration there is no way to enforce it after the fact of the sale; and we all know they will be saying 'it aint working like this folks we gotta add a little extra to it.'

Right now as it stands here in NC, background checks are only enforceable by the goverment upon FFL's through the licensing and regulations required of all FFL's. They are required to keep reqcords and be audited at any time and go through the fed for all gun sales or they lose their license. That same enforcement cannot be applied to affect private sales, nor will it be able to be applied with a UBC system .... unless there is ALSO a registration/licensing system on private ownership also in addition to just the background check.

You're wrong about that. No registration for long guns. You can walk out of the store with one.

But you have to get a permit from the sherriff for a handgun...it was only 5 bucks but it can be revoked (maybe it's a county thing. like you said..I'm in wake county).

Even if it's a county thing I doubt you could go to another county and buy a handgun and bring it back without getting a permit. I dunno if that 'counts' as registration but I consider that registration.

Seeing what you read...private sales would then what...have to go through an FFL? You'd have to go to a gun store and pay them for a transfer to sell the gun?

That would suck. I wonder if gun stores love this idea. You could only sell to them.

RobertoLulongo
11-05-2014, 11:46 PM
proof?

Seriously? Seems logical one would think.

What next, NICS background checks at gun stores don't reduce crime either? It's the same thing. Both prevent criminals from buying guns at the two most common places to buy a gun. If you have a problem with gun show background checks, logically you should be against background checks of any sort, which is just stupid.

13donniedarko
11-05-2014, 11:49 PM
Its not a myth. Vendors who make a living selling guns have to perform background checks but nothing precludes someone from selling guns for a living at those shows, its up to the promoter to determine if they are in the business or whatever the term is... That said, at gun shows here in PA where you don't have to do background checks on long guns you will see the same guys who are there selling junk as their main table but their second table will be why they are really there and it will be a table of rifles of all sorts and which are considered private sales. People skirt the law by doing this, its up to you to decide if that is right or wrong, im largely indifferent but to say its a myth is just wrong.

They are not skirting the law and its not a loophole. Selling guns for profit would have to be there main source of income for them to be skirting the law by not having a license. That is why c and r holders can order 10 guns at a time only to pick out the best for there collection. When they sell the others they are not dealers.

LukeLissen
11-05-2014, 11:56 PM
You're wrong about that. No registration for long guns. You can walk out of the store with one.

But you have to get a permit from the sherriff for a handgun...it was only 5 bucks but it can be revoked (maybe it's a county thing. like you said..I'm in wake county).

Even if it's a county thing I doubt you could go to another county and buy a handgun and bring it back without getting a permit. I dunno if that 'counts' as registration but I consider that registration.

Nope not wrong. Its not registration. There is no registered information about date of sale, seller, purchaser, or firearm - ie. there is no registered information about private firearm transactions or who owns what in regards to private sales. The only reqistered information is that person A received 5 pistol permits from Wake County on X date, and the form is kept on file. Nor is it enforceable after the fact. No handgun or longgun registration is required by NC or most other states in the nation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_United_States_by_state#North_Carol ina

Also, it is not illegal to own a handgun without having received pistol permits:

http://www.ncrpa.org/faq/ownership.shtml

13donniedarko
11-05-2014, 11:58 PM
Seriously? Seems logical one would think.

What next, NICS background checks at gun stores don't reduce crime either? It's the same thing. Both prevent criminals from buying guns at the two most common places to buy a gun. If you have a problem with gun show background checks, logically you should be against background checks of any sort, which is just stupid.

Can you please show proof of this like statistics.

Can you also show statistics of criminals who attempted to buy a gun, were turned down and prosecuted for it? Bet you won't find much but hey lets keep making more laws that criminals wont break.

RobertoLulongo
11-06-2014, 12:00 AM
Can you please show proof of this like statistics.

Can you also show statistics of criminals who attempted to buy a gun, were turned down and prosecuted for it? Bet you won't find much but hey lets keep making more laws that criminals wont break.

Prosecuted? Who said anything about being prosecuted?

Here's a thought. Do you support background checks at the point of purchase at gun shops?

13donniedarko
11-06-2014, 12:02 AM
Prosecuted? Who said anything about being prosecuted?

Here's a thought. Do you support background checks at the point of purchase at gun shops?

If they won't be prosecuted, what's the point of having that requirement?

Of course not, if they have done their time all their rights should be restored. If they can't be trusted why was a danger to society let out?

RobertoLulongo
11-06-2014, 12:05 AM
If they won't be prosecuted, what's the point of having that requirement?

The point of background checks is not to prosecute people attempting to buy guns that may be on a Brady denial list, but to prevent such people from buying one.

You aren't prosecuted for failing the NICS background check either, shall we scrap that entirely?

13donniedarko
11-06-2014, 12:11 AM
You aren't prosecuted for failing the NICS background check either, shall we scrap that entirely?

Of course, if the person can't legally buy a gun but is trying to illegally buy one anyways he will find a way. They had mail order guns from magazines shipped to your door. With no background check but yet they still traced the gun back to ozwald.

GreatOldOne
11-06-2014, 12:12 AM
Nope not wrong. Its not registration. There is no registered information about date of sale, seller, purchaser, or firearm - ie. there is no registered information about private firearm transactions or who owns what in regards to private sales. The only reqistered information is that person A received 5 pistol permits from Wake County on X date, and the form is kept on file. Nor is it enforceable after the fact. No handgun or longgun registration is required by NC or most other states in the nation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_United_States_by_state#North_Carol ina

But I'm person A.

I think that means they know something interesting about me.

RobertoLulongo
11-06-2014, 12:13 AM
Of course, if the person can't legally buy a gun but is trying to illegally buy one anyways he will find a way. They had mail order guns from magazines shipped to your door. With no background check but yet they still traced the gun back to ozwald.

We shall agree to disagree then.

GreatOldOne
11-06-2014, 12:20 AM
Only that you got pistol permits. On an interesting note, it is not illegal to own a handgun without having received pistol permits:

http://www.ncrpa.org/faq/ownership.shtml

and hopefully it stays that way. It is a lot of trouble to go through. Ive done it twice in Wake County and its a little bit of a bitch going downtown twice for each set of permits, to apply, and then to pick up. Now that I have my concealed handgun permit, I dont have to get pistol purchase permits anymore - the CHP replaces the pistol purchase permit requirement for those who have it in NC.

No surprise. Fukin Durham lol.


One county in NC requires its residents to register handguns - Durham County

How the hell did they ever get that through the state legislature? I can picture the debate people getting shot everywhere. Make it stop.

Interesting info brah. Thanks. I don't have a concealed permit...not sure yet if I want one.

13donniedarko
11-06-2014, 12:44 AM
We shall agree to disagree then.

Well why should law abiding citizens have to deal with it when government agencies allowed people who wouldn't have passed the background check to buy multiple ak 47s ect in the fast and furious scandal watching them smuggle them back into Mexico. Many of these guns were involved in shootings and deaths in the us and Mexico. Seems like a slap in the face doesn't it?

Oh then when a agency sets up a sting operation to buy stolen guns and is paying so much people were just buying new guns and reselling them. They had a full auto rifle and other stuff stolen from their truck that hasn't been recovered.

Seems like people expect one side to give and get nothing in return does that seem fair to you?

AndYUKnowThis
11-06-2014, 12:50 AM
Its scary what's going on in America

-Daily school shootings. What's gonna happen when more and more schools are shot up?
-Illegal immigrants who can barely speak English and don't understand American ways, can vote in anti-gun politicians
-Liberals seem more and more out and about. SRS. Dudes are now wearing skinny jeans, Mohawks, and scarves
-More and more feminists supposedly

Kiknskreem
11-06-2014, 06:40 AM
How many times do I have to say I don't support background checks between family and friends?

Well, that's the thing about universal background checks...

RobertoLulongo
11-06-2014, 08:29 AM
Well why should law abiding citizens have to deal with it when government agencies allowed people who wouldn't have passed the background check to buy multiple ak 47s ect in the fast and furious scandal watching them smuggle them back into Mexico. Many of these guns were involved in shootings and deaths in the us and Mexico. Seems like a slap in the face doesn't it?

They shouldn't. It is hypocritical of the government to demand that after doing what they have done. Thus we should be voting out these corrupt politicians. Also remember this was a citizen initiative, not the WA state government forcing them to do this.


Oh then when a agency sets up a sting operation to buy stolen guns and is paying so much people were just buying new guns and reselling them. They had a full auto rifle and other stuff stolen from their truck that hasn't been recovered.

Seems like people expect one side to give and get nothing in return does that seem fair to you?

Perhaps, you're probably right on some parts, but I do think there's more of a benefit to background checks than there are negatives. 5 minute process to deal with at a store or show isn't too much to ask I would hope of most people. People always say a criminal is going to obtain a gun anyways, maybe that's true, but if they can't buy a gun at the two major places, I'd figure there'd be at least a couple that say '**** it' and go commit whatever crime with a knife or something rather than a gat instead of trying to convince a family member to buy one for them or something.


Well, that's the thing about universal background checks...

From my first post onwards, the only thing I had ever mentioned was supporting gun show background checks. I do not support background checks between family and friends. That's impossible to enforce.

Tuksonrider
11-06-2014, 08:48 AM
States and local laws are different, but in AZ, as a citizen, you can buy and sell guns at gun shows without a FFL and do not have to do background checks. Only authorized gun dealers need to have an FFL and are required to do a background check.

Thing in AZ, you don't even have to wait for gun shows to buy from private citizens without a background check. I buy and sell all the time on backpage.com
http://arizona.backpage.com/SportsEquipForSale/

Great selection, no background checks, but prices are a bit high because no paper hassle.

Anyway, to require a background check for every private transaction does need a firearm registry. How else could you prove that you bought a gun from so and so if there is no record of the original owner owning a gun. It is unenforceable without a firearm registry.

Even if the law-passed to require a background check, I buy a gun without one. How is it going to be enforced once I have the gun in my possession? I have a gun. There is no record of me owning a gun, there is no record of the previous owner owning a gun. I have a gun. Where did it come from? Who cares because there is no record of it.

Kiknskreem
11-06-2014, 08:58 AM
From my first post onwards, the only thing I had ever mentioned was supporting gun show background checks. I do not support background checks between family and friends. That's impossible to enforce.

Well the legislation this thread is about, the legislation which you sarcastically said "oh noez" about, indeed requires background checks for transfers between friends.

chevy72blu
11-06-2014, 09:10 AM
They shouldn't. It is hypocritical of the government to demand that after doing what they have done. Thus we should be voting out these corrupt politicians. Also remember this was a citizen initiative, not the WA state government forcing them to do this.


It was authored and pimped by Everytown for Gun Safety, a Bloomberg funded gun control group.

13donniedarko
11-06-2014, 09:10 AM
They shouldn't. It is hypocritical of the government to demand that after doing what they have done. Thus we should be voting out these corrupt politicians. Also remember this was a citizen initiative, not the WA state government forcing them to do this.



Perhaps, you're probably right on some parts, but I do think there's more of a benefit to background checks than there are negatives. 5 minute process to deal with at a store or show isn't too much to ask I would hope of most people. People always say a criminal is going to obtain a gun anyways, maybe that's true, but if they can't buy a gun at the two major places, I'd figure there'd be at least a couple that say '**** it' and go commit whatever crime with a knife or something rather than a gat instead of trying to convince a family member to buy one for them or something.



From my first post onwards, the only thing I had ever mentioned was supporting gun show background checks. I do not support background checks between family and friends. That's impossible to enforce.

So you agree that it doesn't stop them from breaking the law and they will still find a way to do it? Since you said they could go and buy a knife would you support being id and filling out a form for cutlery?

RobertoLulongo
11-06-2014, 12:37 PM
Well the legislation this thread is about, the legislation which you sarcastically said "oh noez" about, indeed requires background checks for transfers between friends.

Then that part is stupid.


It was authored and pimped by Everytown for Gun Safety, a Bloomberg funded gun control group.

Eh, Bloomberg didn't force anyone to vote for it. I'd have a problem with legislators randomly passing it, but the citizens support it, so I have no care.


So you agree that it doesn't stop them from breaking the law and they will still find a way to do it? Since you said they could go and buy a knife would you support being id and filling out a form for cutlery?

It doesn't stop them from breaking the law. It stops them from having easy access to something they'll use to break the law. Sure they can probably beg a family member to buy them a gun (dunno about you, but I'd tell a family member with a record to f*ck off if they asked me to buy them a gun), buy it online, or break into a house to steal a gun, but that takes time. Lots of people won't wait for 2 weeks for a gun to come in online to rob a joint or whatever.

A license doesn't prevent anyone from driving either, doesn't mean we should get rid of them.

Lol went from 68 green to -100 red to green to -30 red. You guys sure do get mad whenever someone disagrees with you.

Tekkendo
11-06-2014, 12:52 PM
so many dumb f*cking people itt



go **** yourselves.

and then cry about being redded

Kiknskreem
11-06-2014, 01:05 PM
Then that part is stupid.

If you haven't grasped by now, the same "gun show loophole" you want outlawed is the very same private sales that allow friends to sell or gift guns to friends without a background check.

RobertoLulongo
11-06-2014, 01:06 PM
If you haven't grasped by now, the same "gun show loophole" you want outlawed is the very same private sales that allow friends to sell or gift guns to friends without a background check.

Not the same thing and you know it. Gun show =/= random sale to your neighbour

Kiknskreem
11-06-2014, 01:09 PM
It doesn't stop them from breaking the law. It stops them from having easy access to something they'll use to break the law. Sure they can probably beg a family member to buy them a gun (dunno about you, but I'd tell a family member with a record to f*ck off if they asked me to buy them a gun), buy it online, or break into a house to steal a gun, but that takes time.

Lol wut.

I guess you aren't aware, but when you order a firearm online, it has to be sent to an FFL for the background check/transfer.

RobertoLulongo
11-06-2014, 01:10 PM
Lol wut.

I guess you aren't aware, but when you order a firearm online, it has to be sent to an FFL for the background check/transfer.

I'm aware. I mean through other avenues. Think craigslist or something.

Kiknskreem
11-06-2014, 01:10 PM
Not the same thing and you know it.

Yes, actually, they are the same thing.

That's why closing the "gun show loophole" will prevent friends from being able to do that.

Because they are private sales.

Kiknskreem
11-06-2014, 01:11 PM
I'm aware. I mean through other avenues. Think craigslist or something.

Again, that's just a private sale. And private sales being legal is what allows friends to sell to other friends without an FFL transfer.

RobertoLulongo
11-06-2014, 01:15 PM
Again, that's just a private sale. And private sales being legal is what allows friends to sell to other friends without an FFL transfer.

I was going to type up a response but I can't think of anything that flows logically.

If I was to put it into a horrible argument, private sales are cool by me, gun shows involve private sales, but I don't think having background checks at a gun show is a big deal.

Other than that, I agree with you on everything.

Kiknskreem
11-06-2014, 01:18 PM
private sales are cool by me....

What, I thought this whole thread you were arguing in support of closing the "gun show loophole".

The gun show loophole simply means private sales.

RobertoLulongo
11-06-2014, 01:21 PM
What, I thought this whole thread you were arguing in support of closing the "gun show loophole".

The gun show loophole simply means private sales.

I didn't even know what the gun show loophole was until others mentioned it.

Like I said I don't think someone selling a gun to their family or whatever should have to go through a background check, afaik it's already illegal to sell a gun to someone you know has a criminal record. Gun shows a bit different because it draws so many random people that may have criminal records that wouldn't be background checked.

Kiknskreem
11-06-2014, 01:23 PM
I didn't even know what the gun show loophole was until others mentioned it.

Like I said I don't think someone selling a gun to their family or whatever should have to go through a background check, afaik it's already illegal to sell a gun to someone you know has a criminal record. Gun shows a bit different because it draws so many random people that may have criminal records that wouldn't be background checked.

A private sale is a private sale whether it takes place in your living room, a walmart parking lot after making arrangements online, or at a gun show.

RobertoLulongo
11-06-2014, 01:25 PM
A private sale is a private sale whether it takes place in your living room, a walmart parking lot after making arrangements online, or at a gun show.

That it is.

This just requires background checks on a small part of private sales. Nothing wrong with that imo, don't think many if any at all liberals would support extending that over to private sales in general (although people are stupid as hell, so who knows..)

Kiknskreem
11-06-2014, 01:33 PM
That it is.

This just requires background checks on a small part of private sales.

Private sale means no FFL, and thus no background check required.

If it has to go through an FFL, its not a private sale.

You've apparently failed to grasp the difference between a private sale and an FFL transfer.

RobertoLulongo
11-06-2014, 01:34 PM
Private sale means no FFL, and thus background check, required.

If it has to go through an FFL, its not a private sale.

You've apparently failed to grasp the difference between a private sale and an FFL transfer.

I know the difference.

I just support background checks at gun shows regardless of private or FFL.

Kiknskreem
11-06-2014, 01:36 PM
I know the difference.

I just support background checks at gun shows regardless of private or FFL.

Then... its... not... private.

There is no "private sale with background check."

That's just an FFL transfer.

RobertoLulongo
11-06-2014, 01:38 PM
Then... its... not... private.

So be it then.

Tuksonrider
11-06-2014, 01:38 PM
I know the difference.

I just support background checks at gun shows regardless of private or FFL.

*facepalm*

It's the SAME damn thing.

What would stop a bunch of private sellers to sit across the street of a gun show and make their sales there without a background check? After all, that are not at the gun show.

RobertoLulongo
11-06-2014, 01:39 PM
*facepalm*

It's the SAME damn thing.

What would stop a bunch of private sellers to sit across the street of a gun show and make their sales there without a background check? After all, that are not at the gun show.

Nothing. They can do that if they want now.

Tuksonrider
11-06-2014, 01:43 PM
Nothing. They can do that if they want now.

So if passed requiring background checks at gun shows (closing the so-called gun show loop-hole) would do NOTHING since private sellers are allowed to organize their own gun show without background checks... just not call it a "gun show"? Call it, "private sales of guns Gun Show" and they are golden?

Does this compute?

RobertoLulongo
11-06-2014, 01:44 PM
So if passed requiring background checks at gun shows (closing the so-called gun show loop-hole) would do NOTHING since private sellers are allowed to organize their own gun show without background checks... just not call it a "gun show"? Call it, "private sales of guns Gun Show" and they are golden?

Does this compute?

Sure. Why not?

They can do that. We all know they won't. Unrealistic hypothetical situations don't really have any value.

Tuksonrider
11-06-2014, 01:47 PM
Sure. Why not?

They can do that. We all know they won't.

I'm just asking, what does closing the "gun show loop hole" do if all you have to do is hold a gun show without any authorized FFL dealers? Just have it full of private sellers?

BigStronk
11-06-2014, 01:48 PM
Nothing. They can do that if they want now. Sounds like such a good resolution. Now after I agree to buy the gun from Joe Schmo we can just leave the gun show and do the transfer outside.

ImDangerous
11-06-2014, 01:50 PM
So you agree that it doesn't stop them from breaking the law and they will still find a way to do it? Since you said they could go and buy a knife would you support being id and filling out a form for cutlery?

we could say this about anything. people break the law all the time. it doesn't mean laws shouldn't exist. laws do have preventative qualities for the general population. ideally they are seamless and unobtrusive. sometimes that is difficult to do.

there is a spectrum of attention that aligns with a spectrum of severity. while most people don't buy handguns to shoot people, plenty of people buy them in case they need to shoot someone. people don't buy cutlery just in case they need to stab someone. it's an ancillary benefit.

gixxer0.6g
11-06-2014, 01:50 PM
you've obviously never been to a gun show.

vendors are already required to perform background checks there. the gun show loophole is a gun control myth.

Depends on who is selling the firearm. The little guys don't need anything but some cash here.

RobertoLulongo
11-06-2014, 01:52 PM
I'm just asking, what does closing the "gun show loop hole" do if all you have to do is hold a gun show without any authorized FFL dealers? Just have it full of private sellers?

Nothing. They can do that if they want. Don't think they'd get much business though, or even have enough money to rent out a venue.


Sounds like such a good resolution. Now after I agree to buy the gun from Joe Schmo we can just leave the gun show and do the transfer outside.

Yeah, why not? Doubt he agrees to that though. Just a little bit shady no?


we could say this about anything. people break the law all the time. it doesn't mean laws shouldn't exist. laws do have preventative qualities for the general population. ideally they are seamless and unobtrusive. sometimes that is difficult to do.

there is a spectrum of attention that aligns with a spectrum of severity. while most people don't buy handguns to shoot people, plenty of people buy them in case they need to shoot someone. people don't buy cutlery just in case they need to stab someone. it's an ancillary benefit.

Worded that much better than I could have.

Tuksonrider
11-06-2014, 01:58 PM
Nothing. They can do that if they want. Don't think they'd get much business though, or even have enough money to rent out a venue.



Yeah, why not? Doubt he agrees to that though. Just a little bit shady no?



Worded that much better than I could have.

Obviously, you never been to Arizona. We have private buyers and sellers stand right across the street whenever there is a gov't sponsored "gun buy back program".

We have a gun show a month, and it's a lot of private sellers. But like I said, most people don't even wait for that. We have a legal craigslist for guns. backpage.com

RobertoLulongo
11-06-2014, 01:59 PM
Obviously, you never been to Arizona. We have private buyers and sellers stand right across the street whenever there is a gov't sponsored "gun buy back program".

We have a gun show a month, and it's a lot of private sellers. But like I said, most people don't even wait for that. We have a legal craigslist for guns. backpage.com

Nope, never been there. Would love to visit one day, I hear it's a beautiful place. I know it's different from state to state, that's fine, never said it should be like that federally. States should be able to decide as WA did.