Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 28

Thread: Gun Show Loophole Tactics

  1. #1
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    Post imported post

    A nice message from Commisar Kaine,delivered by theVirginia Pravda:

    http://content.hamptonroads.com/stor...7&ran=1034

    Kaine wants gun show sales to require background checks

    By WARREN FISKE, The Virginian-Pilot
    © November 28, 2007 |
    Last updated 9:53 PM Nov. 27

    RICHMOND

    Gov. Timothy M. Kaine called Tuesday for new restrictions on firearm sales at gun shows but stopped short of declaring passage of the legislation as a high priority for the 2008 General Assembly session.

    Under current law, background checks on buyers are not required by unlicensed dealers who privately sell and trade firearms at the shows.

    Kaine endorsed closing the loophole, saying it provides an opening for felons and mentally ill people to buy weapons they are otherwise forbidden to purchase.






    setTimeout('document.getElementById("adl_S_23942") .src="http://mi.adinterax.com/customer/pilot/atlanticbay_bestof1007_VonT.js?adxq=1192109908"',1 )

    "You either want felons to have guns or you don't,"

    Kaine said on a morning radio show. "You want people who are mentally adjudicated to be dangerous to have guns or you don't. If you don't want them to, then you ought to close that gun show loophole."

    In the wake of the April 16 shootings at Virginia Tech, the General Assembly this winter is expected to vigorously debate gun control. Seung-Hui Cho, an emotionally troubled Tech senior, fatally shot 32 students and professors before killing himself.

    In August, an eight-member task force appointed by Kaine to investigate the killings recommended in its final report that the gun show loophole be closed.

    Former state police Superintendent Gerald Massengill, whom Kaine appointed to head the task force, has been calling for the end of the loophole in a series of speeches and interviews. Massengill has said the only exemption to background checks should be for gun sales and trades among family members.

    Kaine criticized the gun show exemption when he ran for governor in 2005 and in the days after the Tech shooting. He repeated his concern Tuesday in response to a listener's question during the governor's monthly call-in show on WTOP radio in Washington.

    Later in the day, Gordon Hickey, Kaine's press secretary, said the governor has not decided whether he will spend political capital to expand background checks.

    "Just because he said it doesn't make it the highest priority," Hickey said. "He hasn't gotten anywhere near making that kind of decision yet."

    The legislation will travel an uphill road in the General

    Assembly. Bills to close the gun show loophole have been defeated three years in a row in the state Senate. The House of Delegates, which has not taken up the measure recently, strongly backs gun rights.

    Gun advocates note that Cho legally purchased his guns, even though he was held overnight in a mental hospital in 2005 and judged an "imminent danger" to himself. Because his hospitalization was brief, it was not reported to law enforcement officials and not detected on background checks when Cho bought firearms.

    After the Tech shootings, Kaine issued more rigorous guidelines for reporting dangerous mental health problems to law enforcement officials.

    House Majority Leader Morgan Griffith, R-Salem, said if the General Assembly "wants to make sure there's no repeat of Cho," it should focus on mental health reform, not gun control. "That's a much better long-term solution than taking away rights from law-abiding citizens," he said.

    Warren Fiske, (804) 697-1565, warren.fiske@pilotonline.com



    What ou do not see in the aiticle is the Virginia Pilot (Pravda) synopsis, which was at the bottom of the article on local page 1. Here it is:

    govenor speaks out

    Under current law, background checks on buyers are not required of unlicensed dealers who privately sell and trade firearms at gun shows. Kaine endorsed closing the loophole.


    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  2. #2
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    Post imported post

    You can comment on theVirginia Pilot article and you can e-mail the writer, Mr. Fiskeby following the link.
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member Tess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Alexandria, Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,765

    Post imported post

    I sent the following. Please feel free to submit or modify for the governor yourself:

    Sir, I reference the story cited at http://content.hamptonroads.com/stor...7&ran=1034.

    Please do not let feel-gooders convince you to propose, support, or sign do-nothing legislation that "solves" non-problems.

    I submit to you that the idea of a gun show "loophole" is one perpetrated by those who would ensure registration of every firearm. It is not a part of the philosophy of those who understand one of the phrases in the Bill of Rights is "shall not be infringed." The effort to "close" this nonexistent "loophole" is registration, pure and simple, for there is no way to ensure that records are destroyed within a reasonable period after the background check.

    I am perfectly within my rights to sit at my kitchen table with a person, known or unknown to me, and sell him my .38 revolver. Now, as a law-abiding citizen who has bought most of my firearms through dealers, I have passed dozens of checks. Being this type of person, I am careful who I sell to. The point, however, is that I am doing nothing at my kitchen table I couldn't do at a gun show while I hawked my beef jerky, custom jewelry, or homemade fudge. Nor is any other private seller at a gun show doing anything different.

    Those who sell guns from their private collection are not out to skirt any regulations. Nor are they selling to the earth's scum - the scum buys $100 handguns on the street, not $400+ guns from a private seller after paying to enter a gun show.

    You might have realized that gun control is a non-player politically as well. The elections in Virginia this month proved that.

    Please do not let feel-gooders convince you to propose, support, or sign do-nothing legislation that "solves" non-problems.

    Respectfully
    Laws alone can not secure freedom of expression; in order that every man present his views without penalty there must be spirit of tolerance in the entire population. -Albert Einstein

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    If we are going to push the issue of Bill of Rights is "shall not be infringed."

    When are we going to push to allow convicted felons to be allowed to possess guns again?

  5. #5
    Regular Member Neplusultra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Christiansburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,228

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    If we are going to push the issue of Bill of Rights is "shall not be infringed."

    When are we going to push to allow convicted felons to be allowed to possess guns again?
    If non-violent of course. But as you know if you abuse your rights they can be taken away. I would say if someone uses a gun in a crime he would loose his right to that gun. God did not give us the right to keep and bear arms so we could commit crimes.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    God did not give us the right to keep and bear arms so we could commit crimes.
    If we allow a man to be disarmed under color of law then the bar will be further lowered until we all are 'felon' and lagally disarmed. Compromise is subjugation on the installment plan.

    Safety is a good tool for tyrants since no one can be against safety.

    If you can't be safe with ex-felons armed then they should be in or interred under the jail.

    Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. LAB/NRA/GOP *******

  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    , Virginia, USA
    Posts
    114

    Post imported post

    LEO229, I don't think you meant what you said seriously, but that is still a good point. If someone is really so much of a threat to society that he shouldn't have a gun, than he belongs in jail. If we are talking about someone who did somethign whong then paid his debt, I fail to see why that person shouldn't be able to defend himself or his family.

    Curently in our society someone who is a convicted felon spends the rest of his life in some meta-state between imprisionmetn and freedom. He can no longer vote, own a gun, run for office, or even get a decent job. Perhaps this is one of the reason for repeat offenders. We never fully allow said people fully back into society but yet we expect them to be on their best behavior. Or perhaps I am just a softie.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    I am willing to bet that is they made it a rule that anyone caught speeding could never possess a firearm... would cause most gun lovers to obey the speed limit!!

    You always have a few people that are just dumb and would risk it and get caught.

    So the idea that if you commit a felony or assault a family member you WILL lose your gun rights can and will cause people to not try it.

    But.... You always have those that will do it anyway and risk losing their right to own a gun and even vote. Some things are not that important to people.

    Do felons still go out and get a gun to use in a crime? We all know that some do. Many are going to use it for another crime so what do they care.

    There is no once hot fix for everything. Not being able to vote of have a gun is just one of many that will attempt to keep people honest.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    If we are going to push the issue of Bill of Rights is "shall not be infringed."

    When are we going to push to allow convicted felons to be allowed to possess guns again?
    Boy did you swallow the pogey bait!

    We are being told that our property rights will be taken away from us to make us safer. The further infringement upon the rights of free men will not make us safer or more free.

    Fear the felon? No. I take the advice of Thomas Jefferson. My Sig 229 is my constant companion.

    Fear autocratic government? Yes. The tyranny of democracy will make slaves of us all.

    I do think that federal prohibitions against gun ownership for felony, or misdemeanor convictions are unconstitutional.
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    Bravo. Well said. Democracy is the rule of fools by fools. Let us not be any greater fool than needs be.

    Thundar wrote:
    The tyranny of democracy will make slaves of us all.

  11. #11
    Newbie W.E.G.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    all over VA, ,
    Posts
    503

    Post imported post

    Convicted felons have been denied various privileges granted to other citizens since well before the signing of the Constitution, and going all the way back to ancient Rome and Greece. This practice is laced throughout the common law that serves as the basis for U.S. law.

    The problem is that the law defining what is a "felony" has changed so much since the days of common law. In Virginia, trace cocaine residue in a pocket is a felony, as is running across the Metro tracks in your PF Flyers. I think we have gone too far on our definition of "felony" as it pertains to automatic loss of civil rights.

    But, most importantly in the context of the topic of this thread, where is there any evidence that felons are buying guns by private sale at gun shows? Further, where is there any evidence that felons who might buy a gun at a gun show are then using that gun to commit further violent crime? There is no evidence. Surely we would have seen it in the headlines if there were such evidence. Yet, the gun-haters dance a little dance of joy at the idea of imposing more useless feel-good legislation that deeply offends and handicaps gun owners.

    The gas station owner does not run a background check when a stranger buys fifty gallons of gasoline. The buyer could be an arsonist. The car salesman does not check for a valid drivers license when he sells a car. The buyer could be a notorious drunk driver.

    There has to be a limit on the point at which government imposes itself on the citizen. In the absence of any evidence that felons are buying private-sale guns at gun shows, any legislation on this issue can only be gratuitous pandering to the gun haters. I hope we elected legislators smart enough to see the reality.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Neplusultra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Christiansburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,228

    Post imported post

    Remember too, ProtestEasyGuns says that 400 guns were recovered from crimes in Richmond last year/some recent year. The DOJ Bureau of Justice Statistics website says the national average for recovered guns coming from gun shows is only 0.7%. Which if you divide that into 400 means you would expect over 57,000 crime guns to have been recovered in Richmond in a single year!

    Now either Richmond is WAY over the average or PEG's numbers are just plain wrong. Guess which one I say :^).

    Not only that, but nether PEG nor the DOJ breaks down their gun show statistics into dealer sales with BGC and private sales without BGC. So the quoted statistic is really worthless as far as support for private BGCs since for all we know all of the recovered guns were bought through a dealer with BGC!!!



  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    As I said....

    "There is no once hot fix for everything."

    You have to fix things where you can. 1% here.... 25% there....

    The only true fix is to ban all guns and wait about 50 years for allguns be eventually discovered and destroyed.

    So even THAT fix is not a sure thing....


    Note: I am not advocating a total ban..... I love my guns too.

  14. #14
    Regular Member Neplusultra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Christiansburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,228

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    As I said....

    "There is no once hot fix for everything."

    You have to fix things where you can. 1% here.... 25% there....

    The only true fix is to ban all guns and wait about 50 years for allguns be eventually discovered and destroyed.

    So even THAT fix is not a sure thing....


    Note: I am not advocating a total ban..... I love my guns too.
    Just ban all ammo. That way you can love your guns and be safe at the same time :^).

  15. #15
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    , Virginia, USA
    Posts
    114

    Post imported post

    Neplusultra wrote:
    LEO 229 wrote:
    As I said....

    "There is no once hot fix for everything."

    You have to fix things where you can. 1% here.... 25% there....

    The only true fix is to ban all guns and wait about 50 years for allguns be eventually discovered and destroyed.

    So even THAT fix is not a sure thing....


    Note: I am not advocating a total ban..... I love my guns too.
    Just ban all ammo. That way you can love your guns and be safe at the same time :^).
    I think flintlocks would regain polularity then. All you need is to melt down some wheel weights and mine saltpeter and get some charcole.

  16. #16
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    , Virginia, USA
    Posts
    114

    Post imported post

    Oh, also you will need to cut up some old t-shirts.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    Chris Rock said it once.... Charge $50 a bullet!!

    People will not be so willing to just shoot their guns at people since it will cost so much.

  18. #18
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,606

    Post imported post

    Tess wrote:
    I sent the following. Please feel free to submit or modify for the governor yourself:

    Sir, I reference the story cited at http://content.hamptonroads.com/stor...&ran=1034.

    Please do not let feel-gooders convince you to propose, support, or sign do-nothing legislation that "solves" non-problems.

    I submit to you that the idea of a gun show "loophole" is one perpetrated by those who would ensure registration of every firearm. It is not a part of the philosophy of those who understand one of the phrases in the Bill of Rights is "shall not be infringed." The effort to "close" this nonexistent "loophole" is registration, pure and simple, for there is no way to ensure that records are destroyed within a reasonable period after the background check.

    I am perfectly within my rights to sit at my kitchen table with a person, known or unknown to me, and sell him my .38 revolver. Now, as a law-abiding citizen who has bought most of my firearms through dealers, I have passed dozens of checks. Being this type of person, I am careful who I sell to. The point, however, is that I am doing nothing at my kitchen table I couldn't do at a gun show while I hawked my beef jerky, custom jewelry, or homemade fudge. Nor is any other private seller at a gun show doing anything different.

    Those who sell guns from their private collection are not out to skirt any regulations. Nor are they selling to the earth's scum - the scum buys $100 handguns on the street, not $400+ guns from a private seller after paying to enter a gun show.

    You might have realized that gun control is a non-player politically as well. The elections in Virginia this month proved that.

    Please do not let feel-gooders convince you to propose, support, or sign do-nothing legislation that "solves" non-problems.

    Respectfully
    Really liked how you worded this Tess -- Good Job!

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Fairfax, VA, ,
    Posts
    1,244

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    If we are going to push the issue of Bill of Rights is "shall not be infringed."

    When are we going to push to allow convicted felons to be allowed to possess guns again?
    First, a person who's paid his debt should have his rights restored. However, we all admit that when serving a sentence for a crime, you lose alot of rights...in fact, you lose almost all of them. No right to peacably assemble in jail (isn't that the point, after all)

    Taking guns (and most of the rest of the bill of rights) away from felons is not necessarily harmful to "shall not be infringed."

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Fairfax, VA, ,
    Posts
    1,244

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    I am willing to bet that is they made it a rule that anyone caught speeding could never possess a firearm... would cause most gun lovers to obey the speed limit!!
    Castration would probably be even more effective. How about death of the person's first born. Why don't you push for that, LEO 229?

    There is a point where the punishment of the state becomes more harmful than the "crime" - whatever it may be - that the state is trying to prevent. If I gave examples, I'd be typing all day.


  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Yorktown, VA, ,
    Posts
    270

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    If we are going to push the issue of Bill of Rights is "shall not be infringed."

    When are we going to push to allow convicted felons to be allowed to possess guns again?
    Let's cut to the quick - it is easy for a convicted felon to get a gun. Their stores are a phone call away, open 24/7, and require no background check, waiting period, etc.

    The way I see it - if the guy has served his time - he has paid his debt.

    And does anyone here actually believe that if a felon wanted a gun he would refrain from purchasing one because it is against the law?!?

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    ama-gi wrote:
    LEO 229 wrote:
    I am willing to bet that is they made it a rule that anyone caught speeding could never possess a firearm... would cause most gun lovers to obey the speed limit!!
    Castration would probably be even more effective. How about death of the person's first born. Why don't you push for that, LEO 229?

    There is a point where the punishment of the state becomes more harmful than the "crime" - whatever it may be - that the state is trying to prevent. If I gave examples, I'd be typing all day.
    I would like to see people in jail stay in the cell for 24 hours a day....

    No TV.. No leather craft workshop... No Weight lifting.....

    You STAY behind bars the entire time!!

    You get punished because we all know that jail does not stop criminals from committing more crimes when they get out. All jail does is take them off the streets for a while.

    Closing the"loophole"..... is a small way to help keep guns out of their hands. We all know that nothing is 100% effective but you have to do what you can.

  23. #23
    Regular Member Neplusultra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Christiansburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,228

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    I would like to see people in jail stay in the cell for 24 hours a day....

    No TV.. No leather craft workshop... No Weight lifting.....

    You STAY behind bars the entire time!!

    You get punished because we all know that jail does not stop criminals from committing more crimes when they get out. All jail does is take them off the streets for a while.

    Closing the"loophole"..... is a small way to help keep guns out of their hands. We all know that nothing is 100% effective but you have to do what you can.
    There is one factor I do believe you're not considering LEO. I believe you are making the mistake of keeping guns out of the hands of criminals "above all else". What is the colateral cost of your attempt to keep guns out of their hands? At what point does keeping guns out of their hands become "too" expensive, financially and freedomly (is that a word?)?



  24. #24
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Alabama, USA
    Posts
    935

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    I would like to see people in jail stay in the cell for 24 hours a day....

    No TV.. No leather craft workshop... No Weight lifting.....

    You STAY behind bars the entire time!!

    You get punished because we all know that jail does not stop criminals from committing more crimes when they get out. All jail does is take them off the streets for a while.

    You make sense to me in the above LEO......I think that is part of the problem as well.
    We should increase terms for serious crime and make them serve the entire sentence...no plea deals, you do the crime, you do the time...HARD TIME, not some vacation in a fenced resort.

    Closing the"loophole"..... is a small way to help keep guns out of their hands. We all know that nothing is 100% effective but you have to do what you can.

    As for closing the "loophole", does anyone REALLY believe that felons are buying guns at gunshows (through private sales)?
    Just how stupid would a felon have to be to make a gun purchase in a place where there is just slightly fewer LEO than at a Presidential appearance?.....c'mon, this is "anti" sentiment AT BEST if you really think about it.




  25. #25
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    , Virginia, USA
    Posts
    114

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    ama-gi wrote:
    LEO 229 wrote:
    I am willing to bet that is they made it a rule that anyone caught speeding could never possess a firearm... would cause most gun lovers to obey the speed limit!!
    Castration would probably be even more effective. How about death of the person's first born. Why don't you push for that, LEO 229?

    There is a point where the punishment of the state becomes more harmful than the "crime" - whatever it may be - that the state is trying to prevent. If I gave examples, I'd be typing all day.
    I would like to see people in jail stay in the cell for 24 hours a day....

    No TV.. No leather craft workshop... No Weight lifting.....

    You STAY behind bars the entire time!!

    You get punished because we all know that jail does not stop criminals from committing more crimes when they get out. All jail does is take them off the streets for a while.

    Closing the"loophole"..... is a small way to help keep guns out of their hands. We all know that nothing is 100% effective but you have to do what you can.
    For the record, LEO229, are you suggesting requiring background checks at all sales which happen at gun shows, or all private sales in general?

    I can understand, thought disagree, with the idea that sales at gun shows where someone can go in and buy a gun from a stranger without a background check. I cannot, however, understand why private sales in general should require a background check. Many of us on this board have sold guns to friends or given them as gifts to people who we know not to be a threat to society.

    This is extrememly impotant to address. Those who are proposing to pass laws to ban certain sales at gun shows are all too often forbidding the private sales of firearms in general, not just at gun shows.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •