Background checks at gun shows?

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: OCguy

What if we assume that 1 person protects his property or family each year with a gun purchased from a gunshow with no background check?

Why couldn't he submit to a background check?

Why couldnt your person that murdered with a gun from a private seller at a gunshow not have obtained a gun somewhere else?

You are assuming that person would be alive if we closed that loophole. You can go to downtown LA and get a piece rather easily if you talk to a couple people.

 

[Jschmuck2]

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: OCguy

What if we assume that 1 person protects his property or family each year with a gun purchased from a gunshow with no background check?

Why couldn't he submit to a background check?

Why couldnt your person that murdered with a gun from a private seller at a gunshow not have obtained a gun somewhere else?

You are assuming that person would be alive if we closed that loophole. You can go to downtown LA and get a piece rather easily if you talk to a couple people.

Alright, if that's true, what's the harm in closing the loophole then?

EDIT: It was a crime of passion. He has a felony arrest record for domestic violence and he didn't like the way his wife made his coffee. He shot her with the gun he bought at a gun show for home defense.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: OCguy

What if we assume that 1 person protects his property or family each year with a gun purchased from a gunshow with no background check?

Why couldn't he submit to a background check?

Why couldnt your person that murdered with a gun from a private seller at a gunshow not have obtained a gun somewhere else?

You are assuming that person would be alive if we closed that loophole. You can go to downtown LA and get a piece rather easily if you talk to a couple people.

Alright, if that's true, what's the harm in closing the loophole then?

EDIT: It was a crime of passion. He has a felony arrest record for domestic violence and he didn't like the way his wife made his coffee. He shot her with the gun he bought at a gun show for home defense.

Because it would be useless legislation. It wouldnt effectively do ANYTHING. Private gun sellers can meet anywhere. Hell...they could post a billboard and rent space somewhere and have a city-wide private show.

Oh wait. That would be a gun show....

edit: Let me put it this way. A guy sees a gun for sale (craigslist, paper, whatever.). He calls the seller and arranges to meet at Denny's parking lot for the sale. He shows up and buys. Now, there are some who would say the seller should be required to do a background check first...but realistically that isnt going to happen so lets deal with what IS.

Now. Put up a tent and invite 100 private sellers to all get together at the same place. There you have a gun show. Why should it be any different than meeting in a Denny's parking lot?

 

[Fear No Evil]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
First, explain what you think this means.. because I have a sincere doubt you truly understand what the "loophole" is.

I don't - that's why I'm asking. There's a loophole?

Well, educate yourself then. Its 100% illegal for firearms dealers to sell people guns at gunshows without background checks etc. Now, if you go and do a little research you will find out what the 'loophole' is, and how it doesn't really apply to gunshows specifically but ALL private sales of firearms. Why would I argue with you why it should be allowed when you don't even know what it is?

Okay, now he knows. So let's hear your argument?

BTW-I think it's absolutely ridiculous that you can sell guns privately and at a gun show without doing a background check. WTF is the point of having background checks if you can just go buy a gun at a gun show and avoid that all together?

Its not my argument. The OP should provide his reasons why the loophole should not be allowed. And I will rebutt what he says if I disagree with it. And again, you don't understand what the loophole is if you think you can just go to a gunshow and buy one.. you can go ANYWHERE and just buy one in a private sale. It has nothing to do with gunshows.

 

[palehorse]

One thing to keep in mind -- in some states, any private seller of a gun may be liable for any crimes that gun is later involved in if there wasn't a proper trail of paperwork covering the sale. That is why it's always smarter to sell your guns through a local FFL holder, even if it involves a small fee to cover the background check and paperwork.

That said, you could buy a gun anywhere in this country if you have the street smarts to pull it off, regardless of any "loopholes" or laws created to prevent you from doing so -- which is why so many people think that it's pointless to close the "loophole."

Personally, if they close the private sales "loophole," I couldn't care less. I buy all of my guns through shops and/or FFL-holding brokers who always do the background checks.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
First, explain what you think this means.. because I have a sincere doubt you truly understand what the "loophole" is.

I don't - that's why I'm asking. There's a loophole?

Well, educate yourself then. Its 100% illegal for firearms dealers to sell people guns at gunshows without background checks etc. Now, if you go and do a little research you will find out what the 'loophole' is, and how it doesn't really apply to gunshows specifically but ALL private sales of firearms. Why would I argue with you why it should be allowed when you don't even know what it is?

Okay, now he knows. So let's hear your argument?

BTW-I think it's absolutely ridiculous that you can sell guns privately and at a gun show without doing a background check. WTF is the point of having background checks if you can just go buy a gun at a gun show and avoid that all together?

Its not my argument. The OP should provide his reasons why the loophole should not be allowed. And I will rebutt what he says if I disagree with it. And again, you don't understand what the loophole is if you think you can just go to a gunshow and buy one.. you can go ANYWHERE and just buy one in a private sale. It has nothing to do with gunshows.

Except gunshows brings lots of gun buyers together. Require all sellers at gunshows to be licensed, thus requiring background checks. Sure, private sellers will go elsewhere but the number of sales would go down dramatically due to the additional time, effort, etc required to procure each sale.

 

[misle]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
First, explain what you think this means.. because I have a sincere doubt you truly understand what the "loophole" is.

I don't - that's why I'm asking. There's a loophole?

Well, educate yourself then. Its 100% illegal for firearms dealers to sell people guns at gunshows without background checks etc. Now, if you go and do a little research you will find out what the 'loophole' is, and how it doesn't really apply to gunshows specifically but ALL private sales of firearms. Why would I argue with you why it should be allowed when you don't even know what it is?

Okay, now he knows. So let's hear your argument?

BTW-I think it's absolutely ridiculous that you can sell guns privately and at a gun show without doing a background check. WTF is the point of having background checks if you can just go buy a gun at a gun show and avoid that all together?

Its not my argument. The OP should provide his reasons why the loophole should not be allowed. And I will rebutt what he says if I disagree with it. And again, you don't understand what the loophole is if you think you can just go to a gunshow and buy one.. you can go ANYWHERE and just buy one in a private sale. It has nothing to do with gunshows.

Except gunshows brings lots of gun buyers together. Require all sellers at gunshows to be licensed, thus requiring background checks. Sure, private sellers will go elsewhere but the number of sales would go down dramatically due to the additional time, effort, etc required to procure each sale.

The problem with requiring all sellers to be licensed is that Average Joe #1 bring a shotgun to trade/sell to the dealers. Now, let's say the dealers don't buy it, but Average Joe #2 in the parking lot does buy it.

In my experience, this is how most gun shows are. Almost all dealers/sellers who have tables with stuff to sell are licensed. It's the individuals bringing in firearms to sell or trade that end up selling to other individuals outside of the dealer circle. Making it a private sale that could have happened anywhere.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Except gunshows brings lots of gun buyers together. Require all sellers at gunshows to be licensed, thus requiring background checks. Sure, private sellers will go elsewhere but the number of sales would go down dramatically due to the additional time, effort, etc required to procure each sale.

Odd, because lefties tend to make the argument that legalizing drugs and making them easier to obtain (In a store, just like beer, for example) would not mean that more people would use.

But now you are saying that if guns were harder to get, people wouldnt bother to get them on the black market.

 

[Brutus04]

No one should be able to own a gun w/out a background check. I own several.
Fearnoevil sounds like an asshole.

 

[fisheerman]

Originally posted by: Jschmuck2
Can one of you...enthusiasts...explain to me why requiring a background check before you buy a gun at a gun show is bad? It's not required in some (all?) places as it stands now. Why is that?

Probably want to ban dem dare scary "ASSAULT RIFLES" as well huh?

"gunshow loophole" is a term used to make it look like it is a crime that someone found a loop hole around. Saying what it really is. A sale of private property from one party to another just doesn't entice the urgency or tug at the heart strings does it?

Same as "Assault Rifles" and "Cop Killer Bullets" these terms were designed to get shock value and paint something other than what it truly is to the misinformed.

Any semi auto rifle (including my browning hunting rifle) with a different stock is considered an Assault Rifle.

Copy killer bullets....errr? well I guess that narrows it down a bit?

people here these terms and without any education begin to form laws and opinions.

bad business.

"Hate speech" anyone?

 

[Schadenfroh]

I consider myself pro-gun, but I believe that back-ground checks and mandatory waiting periods are critical to prevent gun owners from getting a bad name. Although, I do not like the idea of registration.

The main concern of background checks is that it could be use to create a list of people who have purchased a firearm.

 

[fisheerman]

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
I consider myself pro-gun, but I believe that back-ground checks and mandatory waiting periods are critical to prevent gun owners from getting a bad name. Although, I do not like the idea of registration.

How do you propose that we "regulate" private sale of firearms without creating a nation registery of all firearms in america and who owns them with access to the system by everyone?

See were that goes? Nobody's business what i own and how much I own of it.

The starts the end around of the 2nd Amendment don't ya think.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

So basically, if i am a convicted felon, even one that is sought by the police, i can get a gun there, file the number off of it to make it an "illegal weapon" and then no one can trace it after i shoot three police officer, all they can say is that "this is an illegal weapon, it is not proof that there is anything wrong with the private trading business"?

Yeah, that sounds like a real fucking smart plan you yanks got there. I'm just wondering, how many of those "illegal guns" were purchased legally and had the serial number filed off so they couldn't be traced making them the "illegal guns" you scream about being the culprit? 99% is probably extremely close, probably needs some decimals too.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: fisheerman

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
I consider myself pro-gun, but I believe that back-ground checks and mandatory waiting periods are critical to prevent gun owners from getting a bad name. Although, I do not like the idea of registration.

How do you propose that we "regulate" private sale of firearms without creating a nation registery of all firearms in america and who owns them with access to the system by everyone?

See were that goes? Nobody's business what i own and how much I own of it.

The starts the end around of the 2nd Amendment don't ya think.

Why would you NEED to own an unregistered firearm? And please, the 2'nd amendment is just bullshit, what would your plink gun do to choppers, jets and tanks? The only reason it was instituted was because AT THE TIME it was a state of the art weapon, today you wouldn't stand a chance against a government wanting complete power if they had control over the military forces, if they didn't, then your plinking guns wouldn't make any difference anyway.

Truth is that you'd accept it if you were to be probed up your arse ever single day by the government as long as you could keep your gun, you've become a nation of wimps, mostly and the most vocal on keeping gun rights are the biggest wimps of this forum i know of.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Originally posted by: fisheerman

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
I consider myself pro-gun, but I believe that back-ground checks and mandatory waiting periods are critical to prevent gun owners from getting a bad name. Although, I do not like the idea of registration.

How do you propose that we "regulate" private sale of firearms without creating a nation registery of all firearms in america and who owns them with access to the system by everyone?

See were that goes? Nobody's business what i own and how much I own of it.

The starts the end around of the 2nd Amendment don't ya think.

How is a registry BAD? It seems that any attempt to gain transparency at any issue is met by "OMG this is the end." I mean the same could be said about other things we need to register like cars. But even simple things that we subscribe to like services like cell phone services, and what not are essentially a "registry" because really the government can access all this also. We're more worried about these things because we're not just telling the government we have a cell phone. They can use it to track where we are, what calls we make, monitor our calls, etc.

A gun registry on the other hand tells the government that you HAVE a gun. You have a gun. Not where you go shoot it, not whom you point it at, not that you use it in domestic violence, etc etc. It's just traceability if you look at it from a professional standpoint. And even if it could be used as a tool to end the second amendment, how's this any different than having the government ban guns all together tomorrow? Nothing. So what's wrong with traceability?

 

[Fear No Evil]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
So basically, if i am a convicted felon, even one that is sought by the police, i can get a gun there, file the number off of it to make it an "illegal weapon" and then no one can trace it after i shoot three police officer, all they can say is that "this is an illegal weapon, it is not proof that there is anything wrong with the private trading business"?

Yeah, that sounds like a real fucking smart plan you yanks got there. I'm just wondering, how many of those "illegal guns" were purchased legally and had the serial number filed off so they couldn't be traced making them the "illegal guns" you scream about being the culprit? 99% is probably extremely close, probably needs some decimals too.

Most criminals would not even bother going to a gun show.. they would just buy a stolen gun from their fellow criminals. Would probably be a lot cheaper than someone asking close to MSRP for a glock at a gunshow. Besides, its quite easy to recover a stamped serial # from a gun thats had it removed.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
So basically, if i am a convicted felon, even one that is sought by the police, i can get a gun there, file the number off of it to make it an "illegal weapon" and then no one can trace it after i shoot three police officer, all they can say is that "this is an illegal weapon, it is not proof that there is anything wrong with the private trading business"?

Yeah, that sounds like a real fucking smart plan you yanks got there. I'm just wondering, how many of those "illegal guns" were purchased legally and had the serial number filed off so they couldn't be traced making them the "illegal guns" you scream about being the culprit? 99% is probably extremely close, probably needs some decimals too.

Most criminals would not even bother going to a gun show.. they would just buy a stolen gun from their fellow criminals. Would probably be a lot cheaper than someone asking close to MSRP for a glock at a gunshow. Besides, its quite easy to recover a stamped serial # from a gun thats had it removed.

Sure they would, now those stolen guns are mostly legally purchased guns stolen from homes or legally bought at gun conventions.

There are no regulations about locking them up so....

That is what most people don't seem to get, that illegal guns are just legally purchased guns with the serial number filed off of them.

It's pretty impossible to get a stamped serial number from a gun that has had it removed, i could remove it in four minutes with a hammer and a nail, permanently.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: fisheerman

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
I consider myself pro-gun, but I believe that back-ground checks and mandatory waiting periods are critical to prevent gun owners from getting a bad name. Although, I do not like the idea of registration.

How do you propose that we "regulate" private sale of firearms without creating a nation registery of all firearms in america and who owns them with access to the system by everyone?

See were that goes? Nobody's business what i own and how much I own of it.

The starts the end around of the 2nd Amendment don't ya think.

Why would you NEED to own an unregistered firearm? And please, the 2'nd amendment is just bullshit, what would your plink gun do to choppers, jets and tanks? The only reason it was instituted was because AT THE TIME it was a state of the art weapon, today you wouldn't stand a chance against a government wanting complete power if they had control over the military forces, if they didn't, then your plinking guns wouldn't make any difference anyway.

Truth is that you'd accept it if you were to be probed up your arse ever single day by the government as long as you could keep your gun, you've become a nation of wimps, mostly and the most vocal on keeping gun rights are the biggest wimps of this forum i know of.

Can you POSSIBLY make a point without insulting people?

We don't NEED unregistered firearms, but the governement does not NEED registered firearms either. What good does a registry do if the guns just end up getting stolen and sold on the black market? Or imported from somewhere where they are not registered and sold? If people want to commit a crime with a gun and not have it traced to them its quite easy to do.

Also, if it government does happen to break down to the point where its fighting its own citizens, I doubt there will be a lot of tanks/planes/and choppers. If there are, it will be a slaughter.. but then whats the point of being an oppressive government if you have no citizens to control?

But, the main reason I own a gun is that people like YOU are not going to protect me with someone comes into my house looking to harm me or my family. The police, the military, etc are not designed to prevent something like that from happening. I guess if wanting to have a gun and not have to depend on my government to protect me makes me a 'wimp' then so be it.

I define a wimp as someone who refuses to accept responsibility for themselves. If you Brits want the government to hold your dick while you piss, so be it.. I'd prefer to hold it myself thank you very much.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
So basically, if i am a convicted felon, even one that is sought by the police, i can get a gun there, file the number off of it to make it an "illegal weapon" and then no one can trace it after i shoot three police officer, all they can say is that "this is an illegal weapon, it is not proof that there is anything wrong with the private trading business"?

Yeah, that sounds like a real fucking smart plan you yanks got there. I'm just wondering, how many of those "illegal guns" were purchased legally and had the serial number filed off so they couldn't be traced making them the "illegal guns" you scream about being the culprit? 99% is probably extremely close, probably needs some decimals too.

Most criminals would not even bother going to a gun show.. they would just buy a stolen gun from their fellow criminals. Would probably be a lot cheaper than someone asking close to MSRP for a glock at a gunshow. Besides, its quite easy to recover a stamped serial # from a gun thats had it removed.

Sure they would, now those stolen guns are mostly legally purchased guns stolen from homes or legally bought at gun conventions.

There are no regulations about locking them up so....

That is what most people don't seem to get, that illegal guns are just legally purchased guns with the serial number filed off of them.

It's pretty impossible to get a stamped serial number from a gun that has had it removed, i could remove it in four minutes with a hammer and a nail, permanently.

You got any proof of your claim or are you spouting claims you have no way of backing up? You may know military issues but I seriously doubt you are are expert in crime in the United States.

Here's a quote from wikipedia:

A 1997 Department of Justice survey of 3,959 prison inmates found that only 2% stated that they had bought a gun used in a crime from a gun show.[10] The remaining 98% were obtained from other sources, in which the criminal had no direct connection with a gun show. The most common sources (35%) were family or friends.

Besides, how exactly would a registry prevent guns from being stolen or sold as you described? It doesn't.

 

[fisheerman]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
So basically, if i am a convicted felon, even one that is sought by the police, i can get a gun there, file the number off of it to make it an "illegal weapon" and then no one can trace it after i shoot three police officer, all they can say is that "this is an illegal weapon, it is not proof that there is anything wrong with the private trading business"?

Yeah, that sounds like a real fucking smart plan you yanks got there. I'm just wondering, how many of those "illegal guns" were purchased legally and had the serial number filed off so they couldn't be traced making them the "illegal guns" you scream about being the culprit? 99% is probably extremely close, probably needs some decimals too.

Here we "try" and place the blame were it should go which is on the person committing the crime not the device used.

I have yet to see a gun get up and shot somebody although I heard there was this magician once that had a gun that could do this...............although I am a bit skeptical.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: fisheerman

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
I consider myself pro-gun, but I believe that back-ground checks and mandatory waiting periods are critical to prevent gun owners from getting a bad name. Although, I do not like the idea of registration.

How do you propose that we "regulate" private sale of firearms without creating a nation registery of all firearms in america and who owns them with access to the system by everyone?

See were that goes? Nobody's business what i own and how much I own of it.

The starts the end around of the 2nd Amendment don't ya think.

Why would you NEED to own an unregistered firearm? And please, the 2'nd amendment is just bullshit, what would your plink gun do to choppers, jets and tanks? The only reason it was instituted was because AT THE TIME it was a state of the art weapon, today you wouldn't stand a chance against a government wanting complete power if they had control over the military forces, if they didn't, then your plinking guns wouldn't make any difference anyway.

Truth is that you'd accept it if you were to be probed up your arse ever single day by the government as long as you could keep your gun, you've become a nation of wimps, mostly and the most vocal on keeping gun rights are the biggest wimps of this forum i know of.

Can you POSSIBLY make a point without insulting people?

We don't NEED unregistered firearms, but the governement does not NEED registered firearms either. What good does a registry do if the guns just end up getting stolen and sold on the black market? Or imported from somewhere where they are not registered and sold? If people want to commit a crime with a gun and not have it traced to them its quite easy to do.

Also, if it government does happen to break down to the point where its fighting its own citizens, I doubt there will be a lot of tanks/planes/and choppers. If there are, it will be a slaughter.. but then whats the point of being an oppressive government if you have no citizens to control?

But, the main reason I own a gun is that people like YOU are not going to protect me with someone comes into my house looking to harm me or my family. The police, the military, etc are not designed to prevent something like that from happening. I guess if wanting to have a gun and not have to depend on my government to protect me makes me a 'wimp' then so be it.

I define a wimp as someone who refuses to accept responsibility for themselves. If you Brits want the government to hold your dick while you piss, so be it.. I'd prefer to hold it myself thank you very much.

If i needed a firearm to protect my family i'd get out of Kabul or wherever you live real fast.

I am not shitting you, if i needed a firearm to keep my family safe, i would move, i don't even remember to lock my car nor my front door in Sheffield and i've not ONCE walked through the streets of downtown London at night with my kids feeling like i need a firearm.

Perhaps you are just grown up with that kind of thinking and i'm not?

I've already gone over the 2'nd and what it really means... Truth is that with tanks on the streets you'd lift your arms in the air and do absolutely nothing, that is true for 99% of all people on this earth, in a situation where you are faced with supreme firepower that is the most intelligent thing you could do anyway. Me? I'd bide my time and firearms isn't what i'd use anyway, they would be completely useless against anything but soft targets.

First on the ground, son, not Americans who dared not go first in either Afghanistan nor Iraq, all Brits.

So fuck off.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: fisheerman

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
So basically, if i am a convicted felon, even one that is sought by the police, i can get a gun there, file the number off of it to make it an "illegal weapon" and then no one can trace it after i shoot three police officer, all they can say is that "this is an illegal weapon, it is not proof that there is anything wrong with the private trading business"?

Yeah, that sounds like a real fucking smart plan you yanks got there. I'm just wondering, how many of those "illegal guns" were purchased legally and had the serial number filed off so they couldn't be traced making them the "illegal guns" you scream about being the culprit? 99% is probably extremely close, probably needs some decimals too.

Here we "try" and place the blame were it should go which is on the person committing the crime not the device used.

I have yet to see a gun get up and shot somebody although I heard there was this magician once that had a gun that could do this...............although I am a bit skeptical.

Exactly, so if Iran develops and sells a nuke to a terrorist group, we can't blame Iran for that, right?

I have yet to see a human shoot someone without a gun.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
60 Minutes had a segment on how the brother of one of the killed in the VT massacre was able to go to a gun show and buy $5k worth of guns(assault rifles, pistols, etc) and ammo within a hour without a single verification/background check. He was even able to buy in the parking lot. Only one person asked for a drivers license and when he told the seller he didn't want to show it to him, the seller asked for an additional $100 and sold it to him.

This segment occurred in VA where I guess folks from all over the eastern seaboard (based on the license plates in the parking lot) come b/c the ease to purchase guns.

I thought all that was proven to be a lie? Yeah, that 60 minutes segment was full of bullshit and misinformation.

How?

I'll have to look it up but it turns out the VT brother DID get background checks for what he bought and he lied about all of it (as far as I recall, not totally sure). As far as the misinformation it was the whole "You mean I can buy a SEMI-AUTOMATIC firearm!" As if there is something special about a semi-automatic firearm when almost all are semi-automatic, there's few that aren't.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

*snip*

I've already gone over the 2'nd and what it really means... Truth is that with tanks on the streets you'd lift your arms in the air and do absolutely nothing, that is true for 99% of all people on this earth, in a situation where you are faced with supreme firepower that is the most intelligent thing you could do anyway. Me? I'd bide my time and firearms isn't what i'd use anyway, they would be completely useless against anything but soft targets.

First on the ground, son, not Americans who dared not go first in either Afghanistan nor Iraq, all Brits.

So fuck off.

Wow, not only are you a huge tool, you have no idea what you are talking about either.

You dont really need to debate American rights. We already told the redcoats to fuckoff a while back.

And degrading American troops with your UK brainwashed garbage is getting old.

Add in the insults in every post, you are just a polished turd of a troll.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
60 Minutes had a segment on how the brother of one of the killed in the VT massacre was able to go to a gun show and buy $5k worth of guns(assault rifles, pistols, etc) and ammo within a hour without a single verification/background check. He was even able to buy in the parking lot. Only one person asked for a drivers license and when he told the seller he didn't want to show it to him, the seller asked for an additional $100 and sold it to him.

This segment occurred in VA where I guess folks from all over the eastern seaboard (based on the license plates in the parking lot) come b/c the ease to purchase guns.

I thought all that was proven to be a lie? Yeah, that 60 minutes segment was full of bullshit and misinformation.

How?

I'll have to look it up but it turns out the VT brother DID get background checks for what he bought and he lied about all of it. As far as the misinformation it was the whole "You mean I can buy a SEMI-AUTOMATIC firearm!" As if there is something special about a semi-automatic firearm when almost all are semi-automatic, there's few that aren't.

Any decent hunting rifle or target shooting rifle that i know of is bolt action. Of course, i have a very selective taste when it comes to rifles. On hand guns i agree, all of my one single favourite is a semi automatic.

Only difference is the rate of fire, and it takes about as long to reload a bolt action rifle as it takes to target a semi again so it doesn't matter really, it's just that semis are usually much lower quality rifles made for those who care more about semi-automatic loading than accuracy.