Gun show loop hole

[GMtoblat]

You want the Gov't telling you how things have to be done? It's just going to lead to even more restrictions and possibly taxes.

It's already illegal for a Felon to posses a firearm. You should just ask to see a LTCH and call it good. If they don't have a license to Carry they either should get one or can't own a gun.

but not everyone would do this they DGAF. Isnt that the point of a govt. tell you you cant do certain things so people dont get away with murder(figure of speech) is it any different here? freedom of speech, but you cant yell FIRE in a crowd to cause panic

 

[Vince49]

there are a lot of laws that mandate common sense...its illegal to rob a bank, steal someones identity. theres alot people out there who dont use common sense, people are stupid, i.e. Costas you could go on and on, point is people dont use common sense

True. And common sense also makes it clear that it is impossible to legislate common sense.

 

[shibumiseeker]

but not everyone would do this they DGAF. Isnt that the point of a govt. tell you you cant do certain things so people dont get away with murder(figure of speech) is it any different here? freedom of speech, but you cant yell FIRE in a crowd to cause panic

I'll reiterate (to help you get to those 50 posts...):
Much gun control has been done through regulation and legislation, and much posturing on both sides of the political spectrum has been about it, but there has not been much enforcement of existing gun laws and regulations, so why on earth would one believe that MORE will make a difference?

 

[OneBadV8]

there are a lot of laws that mandate common sense...its illegal to rob a bank, steal someones identity. theres alot people out there who dont use common sense, people are stupid, i.e. Costas you could go on and on, point is people dont use common sense

You give an inch and the Gov't takes a mile. More laws will lead to more restrictions. And they won't be in our favor.

Take Income tax for example. It was a temporary tax to fund the American Civil war. Funny how after everyone started paying it they just made it a permanent thing.

 

[OneBadV8]

but not everyone would do this they DGAF. Isnt that the point of a govt. tell you you cant do certain things so people dont get away with murder(figure of speech) is it any different here? freedom of speech, but you cant yell FIRE in a crowd to cause panic

That is NOT the point of Govt. It is not supposed to think for the people. That would be a nanny state more like Socialism and/or Communism. In a FREE Country (I hope we get back to there some day), the People think for themselves and tell the Gov't what the Gov't can and can't do.

 

[T.Lex]

thats what im trying to get at, its already being done to a point so would it be so bad to make it a law that even private sellers have to make sure that they arent selling to "the bad guys"

For grins, let's play your scenario out. Let's say you want to buy a .22 rifle for your teen son, and a neighbor has one he wants to sell you. Your neighbor goes to whatever website set up by the ATF and neighbor runs a free (because otherwise people won't use it anyway) service to find out you got popped for marijuana possession in college (for example - I don't know if it would or not), or that an ex-girlfriend once got a restraining order against you.

Or, with the recent pressure to include mental health history, that you received counseling for depression after the death of your parents?

As others have said, this "loophole" straw man is really an effort to prohibit private sales.

Let's turn it around a bit, is there any empirical evidence that private sale firearms with legal sellers but "improper" buyers are involved in any more crimes than gun store sales? (There isn't, as long as you take out 1 felon/gangbanger selling a gat to another felon/gangbanger.)

 

[gregkl]

ETA:
Who says the private seller might not still be liable for selling a firearm to a felon? That's why in many private sale transactions in Indiana, the seller will ask to see the buyer's LTCH. If the buyer has that, it is strong evidence that they are not a felon.

thats what im trying to get at, its already being done to a point so would it be so bad to make it a law that even private sellers have to make sure that they arent selling to "the bad guys"[/QUOTE]

Yes, it would be bad. Just another law to add to the books which would be mostly unenforceable. Who is going to "police" private firearm sales to make sure everyone is in compliance with the law?

We need less government intrusion into our lives. So many laws are set because of stupidity, lack of common sense, etc.. I mean look at the law prohibiting texting while driving. Mostly unenforceable( police can't demand to check phone to see if you were texting). It is just another example of creating a law because people are stupid.

I think we should have laws against gun shows charging so much for admission, parking, popcorn and high prices that the vendors sell at.

 

[GMtoblat]

I'll reiterate (to help you get to those 50 posts...):
Much gun control has been done through regulation and legislation, and much posturing on both sides of the political spectrum has been about it, but there has not been much enforcement of existing gun laws and regulations, so why on earth would one believe that MORE will make a difference?

1. not exactly what i'm doing this for, just trying to be active an have a civilized disscussion
2. so the solution is anarchy im ok with that

 

[SEIndSAM]

Look, the problem is that we don't need the government to tell us what we can and can not do in every facet of life. That's called freedom.

So, if your gonna sell your car to someone, are you gonna run a background check on him? How do you know the buyer doesn't have 3 DWI's and is going to run into a busload on Nuns. Should the Gas Station run a background check to sell him gas? He might be an arsonist? Walgreens sells small bags of fertilizer. Background check? You might be a terrorist trying to build a bomb?

Just use common sense. You don't need a law to cover everything that might happen that you don't like. Life has some risks, get used to it.

 

[shibumiseeker]

I think we should have laws against gun shows charging so much for admission, parking, popcorn and high prices that the vendors sell at.

Screw that, there should be a law that attendees should have to shower and put on fresh clothes within 4 hours of entering the building.

 

[OneBadV8]

Screw that, there should be a law that attendees should have to shower and put on fresh clothes within 4 hours of entering the building.

Its funny because its true

 

[gregkl]

Screw that, there should be a law that attendees should have to shower and put on fresh clothes within 4 hours of entering the building.

 

[shibumiseeker]

1. not exactly what i'm doing this for, just trying to be active an have a civilized disscussion
2. so the solution is anarchy im ok with that

As for 1, I don't really care if you are or not, this is one of the less obnoxious ways to do it.

As for 2: that's called building a strawman. You dismiss the argument to attack one that wasn't made, thus redirecting it to one that suits you. Please try again. Explain to me how more regulation will effect a positive change when existing regulations have very little enforcement and have not.

 

[GMtoblat]

in this world none i agree, in a perfect world that wasnt corrupt eh wouldnt even be haveing this discussion lol

 

[GMtoblat]

As for 1, I don't really care if you are or not, this is one of the less obnoxious ways to do it.

As for 2: that's called building a strawman. You dismiss the argument to attack one that wasn't made, thus redirecting it to one that suits you. Please try again. Explain to me how more regulation will effect a positive change when existing regulations have very little enforcement and have not.

also couldnt think of anything clever to say so went with the anarchy bit

 

[shibumiseeker]

also couldnt think of anything clever to say so went with the anarchy bit

lolz! repped for being honest

 

[rockhopper46038]

Laws aren't supposed to be passed to make people "comfortable". In my opinion, laws are supposed to prohibit and provide penalty for behavior that has a definitive, measureable, deleterious effect on a society that agrees to be bound by such laws. We have far too many laws currently on the books that do not meet this standard, and we do not need more of the same.

 

[actaeon277]

there are a lot of laws that mandate common sense...its illegal to rob a bank, steal someones identity. theres alot people out there who dont use common sense, people are stupid, i.e. Costas you could go on and on, point is people dont use common sense

There are no laws that mandate common sense.
Repeat as necessary.

There are laws because an act is wrong. Murder, robbery, rape, etc.
Then there are laws to attempt to prevent an illegal act. Sort of a "future crimes division". Can't carry a gun in Illinois. Carrying the gun, by itself is not harmful. Threatening people with it, using it to kill, rape, rob; is harmful.

Cars kill/injure many more people costing billions of dollars. Let's ban a car. Its a lot more harmful than a 147 grain bullet.

Selling a gun to a felon is already a crime.
Why do we need another law.
If you know the guy, you should know if you could sell it.
If you don't know the person, some check the LTCH.
How is another law changing that???

 

[GMtoblat]

Laws aren't supposed to be passed to make people "comfortable". In my opinion, laws are supposed to prohibit and provide penalty for behavior that has a definitive, measureable, deleterious effect on a society that agrees to be bound by such laws. We have far too many laws currently on the books that do not meet this standard, and we do not need more of the same.

IMO best point, cant have laws to prevent potential wrong doing or something like that

 

[GMtoblat]

well i have no more points against this discussion well played sirs