Can I ask a question - Gun Show Loophole

[FisherDan 0]

All - I have a question that will expose my naïveté. I am a newbie here but I have been a gun owner for a fairly long time. I am a firm believer in my 2nd Amendment rights, and I often wish I lived in a state with more realistic gun laws. But there is one point often raised by the anti-gun lobby that I wonder if it might be legitimate: What is the argument against closing the "gun show loophole"?

 

I believe we all agree that guns should only be available to the right people. I feel that background checks are reasonable steps to try to ensure, to the best degree that we can, that guns stay out of the hands of people who should not have them. So what is the problem with requiring background checks for all gun sales?

 

I am not trying to stir the pot. I am certainly not wavering in my support for the 2nd Amendment. I just have never heard an argument about why the gun show loophole should not be closed.

 

Please, educate me.

[johnp 45]

What gun show doesn't require a NICS check?

[henrym 19]

No gun show loophole exists in NJ. It is a stretch to say that face to face sales are akin to this, but in NJ, in order to be an eligible (read Legal) buyer, the transferee must have a valid Firerams Purchaser Identification Card or Permit to Purchase a Pistol. In order to obtain said doccumentation, one must have passed the requisite background checks.

[Recon Racoon 49]

At every gun show in the US, FFL's that have a table set up, HAVE to go through with a NICS check. The only time you don't get one is when buying Face to Face with someone that isn't a dealer. In a state like Florida, you only have to furnish proof you're a state resident. In NJ, you have to have a CoE, matching Drivers License, and if buying a pistol a P2P. If buying out of state, it has to go through an FFL in NJ.

 

The gun show loop hole they talk about, is just normal procedure for a free state.

[RedRiverII 0]

Troll

[FisherDan 0]

Again please understand that I am showing my ignorance here, not professing support for/against a gun show loophole.

 

This is a more general issue across the country, not just in NJ. I understand and live with our gun laws. It is also my understanding that the FFLs need to do a NICS no matter what, so the "gun show loophole" might better be described as a "private sale loophole." And also from what I read, most states (I found the figure of 33 states on this website: http://civilliberty.about.com/od/guncontrol/a/Gun-Shows.htm) allow private owners to sell guns and have no requirement to do any background check. I think this is the issue, these sales that require no background check at all.

[FisherDan 0]

Troll

 

Sorry, not a troll. I am simply asking an honest question, and I am showing my ignorance and not trying to cause trouble. I apologize if it offends people and if that is the case, lock this thread and I won't post a question like this again.

[EchoMirage 137]

the term 'gun show loophole' came from people selling guns in the parking lot of a gunshow, face-to-face, thereby bypassing a NICS check. its perfectly legal and nothing wrong with it. the antis want to make it seem like its some shady backdoor deal.

[Josh S 0]

I semi understand where it is you are coming from. Closing the so called gun show loophole is another law that would effect the honest American again more than the criminal. Look at it this way, do you want the government telling you that you can't sell your own personal property?

As a good citizen I make sure that what ever I sell is by the law and to what I believe to be good outstanding person. Not just anybody who approaches me and asks to buy. Closing the so called gun show loophole does nothing to keep guns out of the hands of criminals ( straw purchase) it only effects you. More laws is not what we need, just more strict penalties. Nothing will keep a criminal from getting a gun, why? Because criminals don't obey the law.

[vladtepes 1,060]

the term 'gun show loophole' came from people selling guns in the parking lot of a gunshow, face-to-face, thereby bypassing a NICS check. its perfectly legal and nothing wrong with it. the antis want to make it seem like its some shady backdoor deal.

 

There is nothing wrong with it, if the person is not prohibited from owning guns... Unfortunately in face to face sales you have no way to verify that... There needs to be a means to verify a buyer is legal to own guns... This is one change I actually strongly agree with..

 

In PA people can just sell a rifle to anyone face to face... No paperwork... No FID... No nothing... That is probably not a good system

[vladtepes 1,060]

I make sure that what ever I sell is by the law and to what I believe to be good outstanding person. Not just anybody who approaches me and asks to buy.

 

Do you bring a crystal ball with you..

 

I'm sorry but the notion that you can somehow judge the potential buyers intention is comical at best..

[Ray Ray 3,566]

There is nothing wrong with it, if the person is not prohibited from owning guns... Unfortunately in face to face sales you have no way to verify that... There needs to be a means to verify a buyer is legal to own guns... This is one change I actually strongly agree with..

 

In PA people can just sell a rifle to anyone face to face... No paperwork... No FID... No nothing... That is probably not a good system

 

Bro, the guns aren't used in crimes. You think the person selling the gun wants to see it used in a crime? That crap comes back to him. Trust your buyer, and if he looks shady move on. And I already told you, it's the guns that are stolen that are used in crimes. Not the ones sold at gunshows. By you keep bringing it up, it puts more light on it and the media goes banana's. Enough already.

[vladtepes 1,060]

 

 

Bro, the guns aren't used in crimes. You think the person selling the gun wants to see it used in a crime? That crap comes back to him. Trust your buyer, and if he looks shady move on. And I already told you, it's the guns that are stolen that are used in crimes. Not the ones sold at gunshows. By you keep bringing it up, it puts more light on it and the media goes banana's. Enough already.

 

I am simply applying logic...

 

If I am a criminal... An want a gun...

 

I can not go to the store because of my record... So what do I do?

 

Troll forums.. Gun shows... Etc... Where I can buy a gun hassle free... To use however I want...

 

 

 

Common sense tells me that is not a good system...

[BlueLineFish 615]

Again it's not much of an issue here in NJ because of our system but selling guns in a parking lot with no required documentation is a bit ridiculous. Sorry but I have to agree with Vlad

[TK421 2]

There is nothing wrong with it, if the person is not prohibited from owning guns... Unfortunately in face to face sales you have no way to verify that... There needs to be a means to verify a buyer is legal to own guns... This is one change I actually strongly agree with..

 

In PA people can just sell a rifle to anyone face to face... No paperwork... No FID... No nothing... That is probably not a good system

 

If they were serious all they would have to do is open up the NICS system so private individuals could call in and verify people. What they really want is to criminalize person to person sales and force everyone to go through an FFL so they can increase the cost to purchase and track firearms by their serial numbers.

[bulpup 98]

Yea. Vlad has been saying this a lot and really do have to agree.

 

If our goals as gun owners is to protect ourselves and families then it should also include not allowing criminals access. The latter accomplished the former without firing a shot.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[vladtepes 1,060]

 

 

If they were serious all they would have to do is open up the NICS system so private individuals could call in and verify people. What they really want is to criminalize person to person sales and force everyone to go through an FFL so they can increase the cost to purchase and track firearms by their serial numbers.

 

NICS does not have to be expensive... In PA I think I paid like ten bucks to transfer a gun? It's definitely not expensive...

[TK421 2]

NICS does not have to be expensive... In PA I think I paid like ten bucks to transfer a gun? It's definitely not expensive...

 

Federal law requires the FBI provide the service free of charge. It is the point of contact states that elect to manage the service for their states that charge fees. I was referencing the fact that an FFL generally charges in the order of about $50 to handle a transfer.

[Ray Ray 3,566]

If they were serious all they would have to do is open up the NICS system so private individuals could call in and verify people. What they really want is to criminalize person to person sales and force everyone to go through an FFL so they can increase the cost to purchase and track firearms by their serial numbers.

 

ding ding ding

 

give'em an inch...........

[Josh S 0]

 

 

Do you bring a crystal ball with you..

 

I'm sorry but the notion that you can somehow judge the potential buyers intention is comical at best..

I do have a magical crystal ball........ And it forsee's the average law abiding gun owner being screwed by more laws from the people who are being brainwashed by main stream media and their lies.

[Ray Ray 3,566]

BTW, i love how this whole thread is started by a newbie who's only contribution is to this thread. Seems we are already infected with anti's.

[panteramatt 27]

Oh boy, its started already, haha.

[BlueLineFish 615]

I think NICS being open to everybody for face to face sales is a great idea. It doesn't have to be ffl only

[PeteF 1,044]

BTW, i love how this whole thread is started by a newbie who's only contribution is to this thread. Seems we are already infected with anti's.

 

He asked a question, got his answer. What more does he need to contribute. Others spun this off into another dimension.

[71ragtopgoat 23]

I dont know how I feel about it really. I believe the Govt should know as little as possible about its citizens private hobbies.

I dont trust Govt. I dont hate Govt but I've seen it screw up enough things to know enough not to trust it.

On the other hand FTF background checks to further clamp down on nunuts case receiving weapons does not sound too bad.

I also think gun safes should be mandatory. But thats a perfect example of the slippery slope now isiisn't.

[AverageJoe 95]

the term 'gun show loophole' came from people selling guns in the parking lot of a gunshow, face-to-face, thereby bypassing a NICS check. its perfectly legal and nothing wrong with it. the antis want to make it seem like its some shady backdoor deal.

Didn't read thru the whole thread so not sure if it was already mentioned...but it also came from the dealers with tables set up. They can claim that the firearm is from their "personal" collection, turn it into a face to face and bypass NICS.

[FisherDan 0]

BTW, i love how this whole thread is started by a newbie who's only contribution is to this thread. Seems we are already infected with anti's.

 

Ray Ray, I apologize if I offended you. I didn't intend to. I was only asking a question, and I admitted my ignorance (which is why I asked the question).

[BlueLineFish 615]

No reason to apologize. You just asked a question. That's what we are here for. For somebody to give a new member an attitude over that is ridiculous.

[mipafox 438]

All - I have a question that will expose my naïveté. I am a newbie here but I have been a gun owner for a fairly long time. I am a firm believer in my 2nd Amendment rights

 

No, you aren't.

 

and I often wish I lived in a state with more realistic gun laws.

 

Please stay where you are. You can do a lot of good there.

 

But there is one point often raised by the anti-gun lobby that I wonder if it might be legitimate: What is the argument against closing the "gun show loophole"?

 

There is no such thing as a "gun show loophole." Laws are not different at gun shows than they are anywhere else.

 

I believe we all agree that guns should only be available to the right people. I feel that background checks are reasonable steps to try to ensure, to the best degree that we can, that guns stay out of the hands of people who should not have them. So what is the problem with requiring background checks for all gun sales?

 

Background checks are rather new, and they infringe on The Right of The People To Keep and Bear Arms.

 

I am not trying to stir the pot. I am certainly not wavering in my support for the 2nd Amendment.

 

You do not support The Second Amendment. If you did, you would not allow the federal government to infringe the right to keep and bear arms.

 

Please, educate me.

 

Go to www.bradycampaign.org to learn all you need to know.

[Lunicy 4]

I also think gun safes should be mandatory.

 

So when I do need a gun now, I put on clothes, boots... what the hell, brew a pot of coffee, walk to the garage, open the safe, than defend myself.

 

A good idea to keep my stuff organized.. yes

Mandatory.... NO

Would I be breaking a law if my .45 stayed in my headboard instead of in the safe?