Gun Show "loophole"

[jcr]

If the next Congress passes any version of the "Gun Show Loophole" bills, it is certain that either Obama, Hillary, or McCain would sign it into law.

Remember, McCain, in 2000 made a 30sec TV ad for initiatives to pass gun show "loopholes" in Colorado and Oregon.

"Our" only hope is that there are enough Senators (41) to vote against it and keep it from getting out of Congress. I don't have much hope for this outcome -- anything to close something called a "loophole" is exactly the kind of "reasonable regulation", that too many weaselly legislators jump all over to pass.

All the Federal laws impossed on FFLs are based on "commerce clause" authority -- the only way it had been thought to impose such laws. And it was the fact that they were involved in interstate commerce that opened the door.

Since then, the courts have increased "commerce clause" scope -- and surely the courts would uphold the claim that private FTF sales have an effect in interestate commerce.

The only question now seems to be whether "they" will go for all FTF sales immediately, or get to "private sale loophole" after[/ U] the "gun show loophole".

The Ch.5 "investigative" report might be a testing the waters for the "full monty".

A possible alternative for us could be a push for an "OK to possess firearms" indicator on the Federal "Real ID" and a requirement that any FTF transfer to include a check of said ID.

It'd be better than to jave to do all FTFs in the presence of an FFL (along with the attendant fees).

 

[LoginName]

Hell... why wait until next year?

Doubtful anything will become of this (this year), but it's just another example of the unwillingness of the anti RKBA lobby to just STFU and go away...

News Release

Brady Campaign Urges Support
For Bill To Close Gun Show Loophole
For Immediate Release:
01-30-2008

Contact Communications:
(202) 898-0792 Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence

Washington, D.C. – Several families of the Virginia Tech massacre and Brady Campaign President Paul Helmke joined Senators Frank Lautenberg and Jack Reed on Capitol Hill today as the Senators announced the introduction of legislation that would strengthen the Brady background check system by closing the gun show loophole.

“We make it too easy for dangerous people to get dangerous weapons. Closing the gun show loophole is a sensible step to take to strengthen the Brady criminal background check system,” said Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Campaign. “The bottom line should be: ‘No background check. No gun. No excuses.’”

The Brady Law requires criminal background checks of gun buyers from licensed dealers, but there is a loophole at gun shows. Convicted felons, domestic violence abusers, and those who are dangerously mentally ill can walk into gun shows and buy weapons from unlicensed “private sellers” without being questioned.

“I ask that the U.S. Senate and House pass the bill to close the gun show loophole. We saw what happened at Virginia Tech and Columbine High School when dangerous people have easy access to guns,” said Lori Haas, whose daughter, Emily Haas, was wounded at Virginia Tech. “Congress should do all that it can to prevent other American families from suffering the ordeal of gun violence like the Virginia Tech families have had to suffer.” The panel that studied the Virginia Tech tragedy recommended closing the gun show loophole in its report.

The Columbine High School killers, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, used two shotguns, an assault rifle and a TEC-9 assault pistol to shoot 26 students at Columbine, killing 13, on April 20, 1999. All four guns came from gun show sales. Their friend, Robyn Anderson, bought three of the guns for them from unlicensed sellers. After the massacre, Ms. Anderson stated that had she been required to undergo a background check, she would not have purchased the guns.

Legislation to close the gun show has been introduced in the U.S. House by Representative Mike Castle (R-DE).

The proposed legislation follows the recent approval of the “NICS Amendments Improvement Act of 2007,” signed by President Bush on January 8, 2008, which also will help prevent dangerous people from buying guns by giving incentives to the states to get more records into the background check system.

http://www.bradycampaign.org/media/release.php?release=961

Text of bill isn't available yet, but the list of cosponsors is the usual 3 ring circus of gun grabbing clowns...

S.2577
Title: A bill to establish background check procedures for gun shows.
Sponsor: Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. [NJ] (introduced 1/30/2008) Cosponsors (10)
Latest Major Action: 1/30/2008 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. COSPONSORS(10), ALPHABETICAL [followed by Cosponsors withdrawn]: (Sort: by date)


Sen Boxer, Barbara [CA] - 1/30/2008
Sen Feinstein, Dianne [CA] - 1/30/2008
Sen Inouye, Daniel K. [HI] - 1/30/2008
Sen Kennedy, Edward M. [MA] - 1/30/2008
Sen Kerry, John F. [MA] - 1/30/2008
Sen Levin, Carl [MI] - 1/30/2008
Sen Menendez, Robert [NJ] - 1/30/2008
Sen Reed, Jack [RI] - 1/30/2008
Sen Schumer, Charles E. [NY] - 1/30/2008
Sen Whitehouse, Sheldon [RI] - 1/30/2008

 

[drgrant]

I doubt it will pass in the next few years, although if we end up
with Hitlery or McCain, watch out... they might be able to create
enough inertia to pass it.

Part of me says though, that gun control is (temporarily) off the mainstream political burner. Chances are this bill will only get sponsored by the usual dozen or two moonbats and not make it any further than that.

The other part of me says that every time this crap comes up, the NRA (and gun owners in general, as well as other groups like SAF, etc) should be trying to sell the case that, in general, "gun show" origined guns, only amount to a tiny percentage of guns recovered in crimes, so why even bother? The stats that are out there basically say that most crime guns are either strawed or stolen, not bought off the cuff at a gun show.

-Mike

 

[strangenh]

Legislation to close the gun show has been introduced in the U.S. House by Representative Mike Castle (R-DE).

Now there's a Freudian slip.

My gut is that if we do get a Dem President and no change in the composition of Congress, we will see the rapid passage of a wide number of anti-RKBA dream bills, as many as can be pounded through before the next election cycle. The issue is off the radar publicly, but the candidates that - last election and this - have refused to discuss the issue are almost all very much antis. Hodes is being interviewed on NHPR Monday... I wonder if any callers asking about his (still undisclosed) RKBA stance will be let through. He has voted 97.9% along party lines.

Hodes's 2004 positions on the issues (he refused to answer in 2006):
http://www.vote-smart.org/npat.php?can_id=42473#826
(Mixed bag: for background checks on private party sales at gun shows, not for easing any current law, for a national ballistics database; but against renewing AWB, for CCW)

 

[Scrivener]

Now there's a Freudian slip.

OK: I'll bite: What "Freudian slip" is that?

 

[OnTheRoad]

"Mike Castle". Say the name slowly and draw out the syllables a bit. Mike..Cass...hole...

 

[strangenh]

OK: I'll bite: What "Freudian slip" is that?

He or the editor left out the word "loophole" in the line I quoted, so it says "close the gun show." Not the "gun show loophole." Closing the gun show is more in line with the Brady campaign's ultimate goal, don't you think? A little slip of the tongue or keyboard that - I just checked - remains up on their website.

 

[CmbtEngineer]

anytime i read the name kennedy or hear it i vomit a little in my mouth

 

[hminsky]

Well, is there or isn't there a loophole? I still don't understand. Can you go to a gun show and purchase a gun without the seller doing any kind of a background check or verification of identity? If so, what stops a person who is prohibited from doing that?

In MA, I know they need to phone in a NICS check. Do they not have to do that elsewhere? Seems like a big loophole to me.

 

[Garys]

In MA, I know they need to phone in a NICS check. Do they not have to do that elsewhere? Seems like a big loophole to me.

The loophole seems to be with FTF sales in some states. In MA, if I sell a gun I have to see the buyer's LTC or FID and do a FA-10. In other states, there doesn't seem to be such a requirement. It really has nothing to do with gun shows as you can do the same thing in your kitchen.

What the Brady folks seem to want is the elimination of FTF sales nationwide.

The problem that the anti gun people have is that many of the Democrats elected to Congress last time around are "Blue Dog Democrats". Many of them ran as being MORE conservative than the incumbent Republicans and seem to be pro 2A.

The Democrats also have a razor thin margin in the Senate and might have a problem getting such a bill to the floor.

Just as Social Security reform has become a "third rail" issue for Republicans, it seems that gun control is the same for the Democrats.

We can hope so, anyway.

Gary

 

[jcr]

Well, is there or isn't there a loophole? I still don't understand. Can you go to a gun show and purchase a gun without the seller doing any kind of a background check or verification of identity?

The Federal goverment regulates dealers (it assumes that they are involved in interstate commerce). The Fed do not generaly regulate private individuals or their transactions (other than require that you verify that buyer is from your own state, and that that you don't knowingly sell to a prohibited person/felon).

Both of the previous sentences are true and without exception regardless of the dealer or the private individual being at a Gun Show or not.

If you are a private individual (that is, don't have a dealer licence with all its attendant laws such as NICS checks) but you are acting like a dealer, then the BATFE will arrest you and you will do time in a federal prison. There is no bright-line defined for us to know just exactly when one is acting like a dealer and therefore in need of obtaining a Federal Firearm Licence (FFL).

 

[Scrivener]

He or the editor left out the word "loophole" in the line I quoted, so it says "close the gun show." Not the "gun show loophole." Closing the gun show is more in line with the Brady campaign's ultimate goal, don't you think? A little slip of the tongue or keyboard that - I just checked - remains up on their website.

That may well qualify as a "Freudian slip" - as opposed to a mere syllabic coincidence.

 

[drgrant]

Well, is there or isn't there a loophole? I still don't understand. Can you go to a gun show and purchase a gun without the seller doing any kind of a background check or verification of identity? If so, what stops a person who is prohibited from doing that?

In MA, I know they need to phone in a NICS check. Do they not have to do that elsewhere? Seems like a big loophole to me.

I wouldn't call it a loophole as much as it is an intentional omission. Federal law can't require a NICS check on a
process it's excluded from regulating.

The way federal gun laws are set now, it is the decision of the individual states as to whether or not, or how to, regulate gun sales between private citizens who are both residents of that state. BATFE has no authority over that, likely because of limitations delineated somewhere in the commerce clause. There's this bogosity about "affects interstate commerce" but that term is often vague and ambiguous.

If it was really a big problem, wouldn't more of the free states already have written a law that essentially bans any gun sale or transfer not occurring through a federally licensed dealer?

Some parts of the country still wish to have the central government as far out of their business/hair as humanly possible... to them, even what the ATF does now, is stepping way over the line... A large portion of the gun owners in these states, believe that even background checks are a solution to a problem which doesn't exist. Criminals who buy guns generally don't obey the law anyways.... so what purpose does the law serve, other than to harass and inconvenience the law abiding?

-Mike

 

[greycar]

There are no loopholes.

We are free citizens. We can buy and sell guns. It is our right.

They are trying to condition us, so we accept it when they tell us we can not buy/sell guns without the gubmint granting us permission.

Get it ?
GC