Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Gun Show Loophole, here we go AGAIN

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

    Gun Show Loophole, here we go AGAIN

    Representative Bobby Scott (D-VA3rd District) will host a Close the Gun Show Loophole Forum tomorrow using his position as the chairman of the judiciary subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security.

    This will not be a fair and balanced hearing of the evidence It is a sham press conference where Rep Carolyn McCarthy and Rep Mike Castle will promote H.R. 2324 the Gun Show Closing Act of 2009.

    We really need to crush the Brady Bunch on this.

    I have tried to get Rep Forbes involved. I asked him to show support to gun owners and our constitution, or just wear a pro gun button even. No dice Congressman Forbes is AWOL.

    Here is a link to my efforts: http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ot-legislation

    Maybe somebody else can convince their representative to stand up to this unconstitutional infringement.

    Here is a link to the Brady Bunch announcement (vomit warning): http://www.bradycampaign.org/legisla...unshowloophole

    Live Free or Die,
    Thundar
    Last edited by Thundar; 07-13-2010 at 10:32 AM. Reason: Post links
    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

    Remember this IS about fundamental rights for 18-20 year olds

    Why would somebody PM me about this not being OC related?

    Remember 18-20 year olds cannot buy from a dealer. They need to obtain their handguns from private sellers.

    Yeah, this legislation makes it hard as hell for an 18-20 year old to buy a handgun, but hey it isn't like owning a handgun is a fundamental right or anything!
    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 ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069
    This pisses me off to no end.

    THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS "A GUN SHOW LOOPHOLE!"

    Dealers do background checks no differently than in their stores. Private Citizens don't. This is not a 'loophole.'

    This is the same ploy as the so-called 'assault weapons' ban. Lie about what is going on, pretend to make a law to solve it, but in reality, make a completely different law using the support for a made-up problem that doesn't exist.

    Of course I would support a ban on using toxic waste as baby food! Who wouldn't? But since there is no baby food made of toxic waste, what would that law really be doing?

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Thundar View Post
    Representative Bobby Scott (D-VA3rd District) will host a Close the Gun Show Loophole Forum...
    Er, that would be the "Close the Private Sales Ban Forum Thinly Disguised (but effectively so for leftists, moronic idealists, and others who would readily part with their hard-won Constitutional rights) as a 'Gun Show' Loophole Issue."
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    SMITHFIELD, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    270
    I can hardly equate "loophole" with following the gun laws. If the law says it is legal, then it isn't a "loophole". Straw purchasers and dealers who don't do BG checka are "loopholes." Obeying the law isn't a loophole. A loophole is something you do to circumvent the law.

    Is driving 54 MPH in a 55 zone a "loophole" if the observer thinks you are driving too fast?
    Last edited by Anthony_I_Am; 07-14-2010 at 04:04 AM.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,128
    Is there a difference between this "forum" on the bill and a subcommittee "hearing" on the bill?

    Is it possible that Bobby Scott cannot get the bill referred by the judiciary committee to his subcommittee, and has decided to host a one-sided forum as the next best thing?

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    1,128
    Quote Originally Posted by Thundar View Post
    Why would somebody PM me about this not being OC related?

    Remember 18-20 year olds cannot buy from a dealer. They need to obtain their handguns from private sellers.

    Yeah, this legislation makes it hard as hell for an 18-20 year old to buy a handgun, but hey it isn't like owning a handgun is a fundamental right or anything!
    You know, this is the best argument I have heard so far for getting worked up about the "Gun Show Loophole" issue, which has otherwise struck me as somewhat innocuous.

    I wonder though, whether the 21-year-old limit in the Brady regs may be low hanging fruit for a Heller challenge. 18-20 year olds certainly should have the right to defend their households with firearms under Heller. And they probably should not be dependent on an exception to the Brady law to do it.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    Quote Originally Posted by cabbitone View Post
    I've always been a believer in, if they can drive, own property, serve and/or be drafted in the armed services they should be able to have all the rights afforded to them as an "adult" who is 21+.
    Personally, I don't like it that children are discriminated against at all. "Age of majority"? Sounds like a mixture of ageism and mob-rule to me.

    Would color of majority be acceptable? Religion of majority? Sex of majority?
    Last edited by Jack House; 07-14-2010 at 01:18 PM.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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