In my neck of the woods, all the Democratic candidates for federal office talked about how they would “stand up to the NRA”. Looking at stories like this, I can’t help but wonder why they think this is a winning strategy. In February 2016, 2.6M people voted with their wallets against further restrictions on firearms sales. In December 2015, 3.3M people voted the same way.
The gun manufacturers and sellers are happy but it sure has driven up prices. I remember in 2008 inventory was low and prices skyrocketed. Ammo was really hard to find too.
Some still is, like .22LR.
It seems all this talk of increasing gun restrictions is having the opposite effect of what gun control advocates want. Rather than getting guns off the streets, they’re increasing the number of guns in circulation, thus, by their logic, making mass shootings more likely. Counter intuitively, they’d probably have more success in their stated goals, reducing the number of firearms in circulation, and by extension, mass shootings, by shutting up about increasing gun control.
I don’t support increased gun control.
I wasn’t implying you do. I was just making a general observation regarding gun control advocates, not singling out any one in particular.
When are we ever going to get it thru our heads that law biding gun owners do not engage in “mass” killings. Your going after the wrong people. Let’s get the illegal gun owners and uses out of circulation and also do more to help the mentally ill, while coming up with better ways to screen terrorist and their activity in our country. Stopping them, before they can kill our citizens. Leave the lawful people alone!! God Bless, Memaw
Personally, I am all for background checks on all gun purchases. The only problem is that not all gun purchases are purchased legally. Sometimes people go through illegal dealers that don’t do background checks and then guns can fall into the hands of people that shouldn’t have them.
Even so, there are lots of other regulations that people go around, but at least having the regulation makes people have to work harder to do the wrong thing.
For the life of me I have never understood what is unreasonable about universal background checks. Would I NOT want to know of a potential buyer’s penchant for violence before hearing about it on the evening news?! I don’t see how that level of responsible citizenship could be construed as being an affront to anyone’s constitutional rights.
The ironic thing is that the people I personally encounter, who are standing the loudest against even the most reasonable gun restrictions (including background checks), are the same ones who are most passionate in attempting to control the behavior of their fellow citizens in other realms. Go figure!
Give an inch, gun control advocates take a mile. Every time.
I prefer to do my own gun background checks.
13) Most Gun Owners Understand Gun Laws A Lot Better Than Gun Controllers Do
While I don’t doubt the desire of many gun controllers to reduce gun violence in the country, I do doubt their understanding of federal, state, and local gun laws in the U.S. A person who carries a weapon every day is far more likely to know the particulars of his or her state’s gun laws, because that person is in legal jeopardy in the event that he or she gets the law wrong. People who get paid to talk on TV for a living will not pay any real penalty if they completely screw up a state’s gun laws. An individual with a gun, however, can pay a very severe price if they don’t follow every gun law to the letter. Just ask this man, who faces a decade in prison for possessing an antique 18th-century flintlock pistol.
The controversy around the so-called “gun show loophole” is a perfect example of basic ignorance about the nation’s gun laws and their effects.
[quote]@scott_stephen 90% of Americans favor ending the gun show loophole but NRA owns enough Dems and GOPs to block even having a vote.
John Fugelsang (@JohnFugelsang) December 27, 2014
There is no gun show loophole, period. The vast majority of gun show sales are conducted by federal firearms licensees, or FFLs, and FFL sales are strictly regulated by the federal government. Every FFL sale must be accompanied by a background check. No ifs, ands, or buts. Every sale of a firearm across state lines — for example, a resident of State A buying a gun in State B — must be processed by an FFL in the purchaser’s state. And what did we just learn about FFL sales? You can’t buy a gun from an FFL without undergoing a background check.
At the federal level (this is a key distinction), the only type of purchase that doesn’t require a background check is a private transaction between two individuals who reside in the same state. Gun shows have absolutely nothing to do with it. And if you think a federal universal background check is going to keep criminals from buying guns from each other, then I’d like to know why it hasn’t prevented them from buying drugs from each other.
14) “Universal Background Checks” Are Already The Law In Many States
What gun controllers won’t tell you is that “universal background checks” are the norm in a large number of states, notwithstanding the lack of a federal law requiring universal background checks. The gun controllers know this, but they’d rather force a one-size-fits-all federal policy one time than take the time and effort required to convince each state that it’s a good policy for that state.
Take Illinois, for example. Illinois requires universal background checks on all firearms purchases. Until recently, the city of Chicago virtually banned gun possession. Did those laws do anything to curb violent crime in the state? Of course not. Other states that require universal background checks on all firearms purchases include California and New York. How’s violent crime in those states, other than really high?
Some states require universal background checks only on handguns. North Carolina is one of those states. It requires either a concealed carry permit or a government-issued purchase permit, both of which require background checks, before an individual can purchase a handgun. In this case, two background checks are completed if you purchase a handgun from an FFL in North Carolina: once by the county that issues your purchase permit, and once by the FFL that sells you your handgun. Why do I single out North Carolina? Because it was in North Carolina that a crazed leftist armed with a handgun allegedly murdered three young Muslims over what appears to be a parking dispute. He passed his background check with flying colors.
The takeaway? No amount of gun laws or do-goodery is going to keep guns out of the hands of evil people. But those laws can keep guns out of the hands of careful, safe, law-abiding citizens who just want to protect themselves and their families. And that should be a crime.
This is including the private gun sales too, craigslist and other classified ad sales, Id imagine QUITE a few guns are trading hands this way, maybe even more than new gun sales, but there is never any attempt to stop this.
My friend who recently had medical problems had to sell his guns a few months ago, put them on the classifieds and they sold within 3 days, and they were sold very cheap, no receipts, no records, cash transaction and out the door. If that buyer wanted to commit an attack, there would be no record of where or when he purchased the guns. My friend acquired the guns from a guy wanting to trade them for sound equipment 10 yrs ago, again, no records or receipts, just even trade between 2 people.
There is just no way to regulate sales like this, if you look on any classified ads, there are always many people trading and selling guns, or willing to trade guns for cars, bikes, boats, etc.
I think sales are increasing because people are scared we may reach a point one day when some kind of major attack happens and they decide to suspend gun sales or start going door to door for a ‘gun census’, I guess people want to be armed and ready if that ever happens.
Private sale is legal, as long as you aren’t doing it in volume. You also can’t knowingly sell to someone prohibited from owning a gun.
I’m not a gun control advocate. I’m just observing that gun control advocacy is, at least in part, driving gun sales, which by their logic (not mine) increases the risk of mass shootings. So, by so aggressively advocating for additional gun regulations, they are having the opposite of their intended effects.
We do have “universal background checks”. If you buy a firearm from a licensed gun dealer, you have to go through a federal background check. There are no exceptions. The only way to buy a firearm without a background check is to buy it from a private party, though even at that, it is illegal to sell a firearm to someone not legally allowed to own one. I guess you could argue that we need a law to make sure private sales go through a background check too, but I don’t see how that is realistic, given that there is no way for the government to track the several hundred million firearms already in private hands. Passing a law without a reasonable mechanism for enforcement seems like a waste of time.
You mean the NRA wants to force nuns to provide birth control and bakers to bake cakes for same-sex weddings? The things you learn on the interwebs.
I understood Obama’s recent Executive Order throws doubt on your first statement.
Thats easy to see if its true…check a few classified ads…from the 3-4 local ones around here, still see plenty of private sales/ willing to trades.
Even if an executive order was signed to stop this, how could it even be enforced, and by whom? The people are private citizens posting as such, they are not collecting sales tax and reporting the sale of these items, there is no registration or papers that go along with most of these either, so no names can really be tied to any one gun.
The ads don’t prove anything since the the EO hasn’t been seen yet in enforcement.
There are plenty of articles with conjecture on how it might be implemented in an aggressive fashion. We have to wait and see how the DOJ implements the EO, which I found to be a bit vague on key specifics.
There would be no way possible to enforce such a thing on private sales, that would be like saying, its now illegal to sell used washers and dryers privately, or any other appliance, toy, personal item, etc. Classified ads all over the place are filled with people selling such items, cash is normally the payment and rarely is a receipt provided, the purchase is the receipt.
I bought a used bakers rack from a local classified ad awhile back, I found the price acceptable and set up a time to meet, I paid cash and that was that, we parted ways and I was the new owner, trying to impose new restrictions on this kind of selling, no matter what the item is, would not be practical or enforceable.