• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Senate rejects Universal Background Checks

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
People selling guns at gun shows are dealers and are required by federal law to run a background check.

There is no loophole. It's the same as a classified ad, if you want to sell your personal gun face to face to somebody else in your state you can. That's why universal background checks are to be met with great resistance.

Ever been to a gun show or purchased a gun at a gun show? You'll fill out a 4473, and a background check will be performed.
 
As for this bill, I guess that really shows the power of the gun lobby. Background checks are probably one of the most popular things ever to be voted down by the Senate.
 
spidey07 said:
People selling guns at gun shows are dealers and are required by federal law to run a background check.

There is no loophole.
Click to expand...
Except when they're not. The wiki page I quoted above says small dealers that only sell a few weapons are not required to be licensed, or keep any records whatsoever.

This may be complete bullshit. The info might be completely wrong, and from the entry and references, they seem to be supported by the anti-gun brady bill quoting fearmongers.

But it has a lot more veracity than some guy making a youtube clip.
 
Anarchist420 said:
It's worth noting that Harry Reid voted against it.
Click to expand...

Once Reid knew it was going down he voted with the prevailing side. This is a tactic in case he sees an opportunity to bring the bill up for reconsideration. Only a senator voting on the winning side can request reconsideration of a bill, the losing side cannot.

Dole used to routinely do this in order to preserve his party's options. Then his primary opponents would later hammer him on these votes.
 
Last edited:
uclaLabrat said:
Except when they're not. The wiki page I quoted above says small dealers that only sell a few weapons are not required to be licensed, or keep any records whatsoever.

This may be complete bullshit. The info might be completely wrong, and from the entry and references, they seem to be supported by the anti-gun brady bill quoting fearmongers.

But it has a lot more veracity than some guy making a youtube clip.
Click to expand...

Any DEALER is required to have a FFL license by law. Period. Anyone with a license by law must do a NICS background check to sell a gun. Period. There are no exceptions to this. Records must be maintained and are inspected by the ATF. When inventory and records do not match, the dealer goes to jail. Simple as that.

Gunshows are nothing but a collection of dealers trying to draw in a crowd based upon a "festive" air to get more consumers than they would otherwise draw. Some of these dealers are people who do this as a side business and don't have a storefront. They applied for a license and follow the rules like the big box sports stores. The difference is it's a side gig for people to sell this way. They pay for a spot a "gun show" and sell their wares there as if it was a store.

The gunshow loophole is a lie and a myth.
 
uclaLabrat said:
Hey, that was a nice, concise, informative link. Oh wait, no it wasn't, it was a bunch of speculative, hand waving bullshit. Nice job! Way to prove me wrong!

If only I didn't have google and 3 minutes of free time, I wouldn't have been able to find a WIKIPEDIA page! Which says, and I quote:

Presently, 18 states regulate private firearm sales at gun shows. Seven states require background checks on all gun sales at gun shows (California, Colorado (§12-26.1-101 and § 24-33.5-424, CRS), Rhode Island, Connecticut, Oregon, New York, and Illinois). Four states (Hawaii, Maryland, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania) require background checks on all handgun, but not long gun, purchasers at gun shows. Seven states require individuals to obtain a permit to purchase handguns that involves a background check (Massachusetts, Michigan, North Carolina, Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota). Certain counties in Florida require background checks on all private sales of handguns at gun shows. The remaining 33 states do not restrict private, intrastate sales of firearms at gun shows in any manner.

I put it in bold since I know you're scared of big words and apparently can't do any research of your own.
Click to expand...

Private. Do you understand what that word means? One owner of a gun selling to another owner of a gun. That it happens at a gun show is immaterial. Does your make believe "gun show loophole solution" fix private sales out of someone's home as well?
 
How the fuck is a universal background check taking away your 2nd amendment rights? Do all the pro-gun people here want mentally unstable citizens owning guns? It's a fucking background check. Lighten up Francis. 🙄
 
eskimospy said:
popular by scientific survey.
Click to expand...

You mean the one where the survey asked, "Would you be in favor of laws enacted that prevented the deaths of young school children like what happened at Sandy Hook?"

That survey? The one that you look like a monster if you answer no, and if you answer yes the tabulation is that you are in favor of universal background checks and gun bans?

I call bullshit on that one.
 
Sheik Yerbouti said:
How the fuck is a universal background check taking away your 2nd amendment rights? Do all the pro-gun people here want mentally unstable citizens owning guns? It's a fucking background check. Lighten up Francis. 🙄
Click to expand...

Who defines what is mentally unstable?

I'm sure several people on this forum would tell you that wanting to own a gun is a form of mental illness.
 
Sheik Yerbouti said:
How the fuck is a universal background check taking away your 2nd amendment rights? Do all the pro-gun people here want mentally unstable citizens owning guns? It's a fucking background check. Lighten up Francis. 🙄
Click to expand...

Shall not be infringed. It's really very clear.

Selling my private property to somebody else is infringement. And the only way universal background checks could work is eventual registration. No registration, EVER. Period.

Got it?
 
Sheik Yerbouti said:
How the fuck is a universal background check taking away your 2nd amendment rights? Do all the pro-gun people here want mentally unstable citizens owning guns? It's a fucking background check. Lighten up Francis. 🙄
Click to expand...

You know what I would be in favor of for "background checks" in private sales?

Enact a law that anyone selling a gun to someone not a family member must do so with a bill of sale that also checks the person's state issued ID or drivers license. State issued ID's or driver licenses of people convicted of felonies are forever RED. Anyone selling to someone with a red license knowingly or without a bill of sale is to be busted.

Simple, and easy. No need for people to have access to NICS. No additional cost incurred upon people. No universal firearm registration that tracks what law abiding citizens have in the privacy of their own homes.
 
HumblePie said:
You mean the one where the survey asked, "Would you be in favor of laws enacted that prevented the deaths of young school children like what happened at Sandy Hook?"

That survey? The one that you look like a monster if you answer no, and if you answer yes the tabulation is that you are in favor of universal background checks and gun bans?

I call bullshit on that one.
Click to expand...

Lol nice try. They have been many surveys that directly ask simply if the party is in favour of all gun sales requiring a background check.

Here, read them yourself.

http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm
 
Now for the vote on banning high capacity magazines. I'm confident, but still holding my breath on this one. I love how during the 2 minutes of debate the Dem in favor expoused emotional pleas, but the Rep in opposition quoted Department of Justice studies.

Facts vs faith. Let's hope the facts win.
 
HumblePie said:
Any DEALER is required to have a FFL license by law. Period. Anyone with a license by law must do a NICS background check to sell a gun. Period. There are no exceptions to this. Records must be maintained and are inspected by the ATF. When inventory and records do not match, the dealer goes to jail. Simple as that.

Gunshows are nothing but a collection of dealers trying to draw in a crowd based upon a "festive" air to get more consumers than they would otherwise draw. Some of these dealers are people who do this as a side business and don't have a storefront. They applied for a license and follow the rules like the big box sports stores. The difference is it's a side gig for people to sell this way. They pay for a spot a "gun show" and sell their wares there as if it was a store.

The gunshow loophole is a lie and a myth.
Click to expand...

This. I am so god damned tired of hearing about this "loophole" from the uneducated left. There is NO loophole. If you are purchasing a gun through a private sale (citizen to citizen) then there simply is no background check required. It doesn't matter if this happens at a gun show, the Wal-Mart parking lot, or the liquor store.

Dealers are required to carry a FFL and must conduct a background check for ALL firearm sales. These sales (just like private) can be carried out any place. So if I am buying from a dealer at a gun show, he will process the background check as soon as I fill out Form 4473 right at the show. Or, if I am sitting in a church parking lot purchasing a gun then he will process the check there...

The location doesn't matter. It has to do with private/dealer firearms sales.
 
Last edited:
Sheik Yerbouti said:
How the fuck is a universal background check taking away your 2nd amendment rights? Do all the pro-gun people here want mentally unstable citizens owning guns? It's a fucking background check. Lighten up Francis. 🙄
Click to expand...

Beyond flowery, meaningless "liberal"-speak, what exactly does universal background checks mean? How is it accomplished.

The devil is always in the details.

Oh, and cry more.
 
irishScott said:
Now for the vote on banning high capacity magazines. I'm confident, but still holding my breath on this one. I love how during the 2 minutes of debate the Dem in favor expoused emotional pleas, but the Rep in opposition quoted Department of Justice studies.

Facts vs faith. Let's hope the facts win.
Click to expand...

Lies. Democrats are the party of science, Republicans believe in sky fairies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top