• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Virginia Gun Show "Loophole:" Interesting Story on NY Local News

The Donkey

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2006
Messages
1,114
Location
Northern Virginia
The kind of story linked to below -- and not President Barack Obama or AG Eric Holder or Sen. Dick Saslaw -- is what really threatens our 2nd Amendment rights:

http://notlarrysabato.typepad.com/d...n-new-york-city-covers-virginia-gun-laws.html

Unfair, you say? Camel's nose under the tent, perhaps?

Check out the comments section.

My favorite so far:

I'm about as pro-gun as anyone could ever expect to be. I own a variety of semi-automatic pistols and rifles and have a valid Virginia and Florida concealed carry permit. While working in the General Assembly as a legislative staffer I carried concealed in the Capitol regularly, which is a right afforded to valid CCP permit holders.

However, the private sales laws are a bridge too far. As a gun owner, I want everyone who purchases a gun to pass a background check. I have never spent more than 2 hours waiting for a background check to run through, but that's beside the point. When criminals commit crimes with guns, liberals use it as an excuse to restrict the rights of law abiding citizens. Make sure everyone who buys a gun passes a background check. Peroid.

Posted by: Ricky J. | December 14, 2010 at 08:46 PM

twiddle.gif
 

jmelvin

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
2,195
Location
Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
Although I don't agree that the actions of President Obama, Sen. Saslaw or AG Holder don't threaten the inherent rights protected by the 2nd Amendment in some way, I absolutely do agree that it is the beliefs and thoughts of our fellow citizens who don't understand the importance of our right to bear arms free from encumberance that is a major threat to the protection of the right. When I hear some of my co-workers and friends talk and complain about actions by office-holders that they don't agree with I remind them that the office-holders are only the symptom of the true problem: The true problem being that the votes and conscious decisions of fellow citizens are what allowed this person to hold office to begin with. Thus it is necessary to not just complain about the office-holders and politicians, but to thoughtfully and convincingly share their thoughts and beliefs with others and convince them that the ideals in which they believe, including protections to the right to keep and bear arms, are valid and correct.

The kind of story linked to below -- and not President Barack Obama or AG Eric Holder or Sen. Dick Saslaw -- is what really threatens our 2nd Amendment rights:

http://notlarrysabato.typepad.com/d...n-new-york-city-covers-virginia-gun-laws.html

Unfair, you say? Camel's nose under the tent, perhaps?

Check out the comments section.

My favorite so far:



twiddle.gif
 

wylde007

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
3,035
Location
Va Beach, Occupied VA
I'm about as pro-gun as anyone could ever expect to be. I own a variety of semi-automatic pistols and rifles and have a valid Virginia and Florida concealed carry permit. While working in the General Assembly as a legislative staffer I carried concealed in the Capitol regularly, which is a [strike]right[/strike] PRIVILEGE afforded to valid CCP permit holders.

However, the private sales laws are a bridge too far. As a gun owner, I want everyone who purchases a gun to pass a background check. I have never spent more than 2 hours waiting for a background check to run through, but that's beside the point. [tmf: I have. Sometimes over 24 hours.] When criminals commit crimes with guns, liberals use it as an excuse to restrict the rights of law abiding citizens. [tmf: and when they don't commit crimes, people like you do?] Make sure everyone who buys a gun passes a background check. Period.

Posted by: Ricky J. | December 14, 2010 at 08:46 PM
Fixed it for him.
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
Typical.

Not a squeak about all those criminals in NYC, just about the tools they use, and obtain illegally.

No mention of the fact that it is already against the law for a non-Virginia resident to purchase face-to-face, even in private sales!

TFred
 

MR Redenck

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2010
Messages
596
Location
West Texas
How many violent crims are committed in New York per year?
77,000 or so?
385 guns from Virginia, big deal. Where did the other 76,615 weapons come from?
Oh wait, could any of them have come from Chicago? :lol:
 

Coolman

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2007
Messages
52
Location
, ,
Most of the illegal guns in Conn. come from [ Would you beleive New York].

How could that be Mr Bloomburg.
 

thnycav

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
305
Location
Windsor VA, ,
I think what would be a good solution would be to have the local law enforcement agency to setup a booth at the event and run background checks. You could then take the check to any of the venders and purchase a firearm using that. If you are a private seller you could also ask for it just to be sure. I know most felons do not go to gun shows to buy but this would quite down the critics.

Charles Felthousen 11B/19D G C2
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
I think what would be a good solution would be to have the local law enforcement agency to setup a booth at the event and run background checks. You could then take the check to any of the venders and purchase a firearm using that. If you are a private seller you could also ask for it just to be sure. I know most felons do not go to gun shows to buy but this would quite down the critics.

Charles Felthousen 11B/19D G C2

It might quiet down some, but it's still going to open up the tent for more of the camel to make his way in along with his family. Give 'em an inch, move a little in their direction and you can bet they won't call it quits and walk away happy and content. The next Cho who decides to shoot up a school, church, shopping center, or public building is going to bring down their wrath once again with calls of more restrictions and intrusions upon our rights.
 

wylde007

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
3,035
Location
Va Beach, Occupied VA
Thirty deaths by drop-side crib in the past decade and now we have a full-on federal ban of drop-side cribs coming in June.

They claim lives will be saved, just like by banning guns.

One need only look at the facts to see that people are going to die when they behave negligently or recklessly. Banning "objects" only serves to create a culture of fear surrounding those objects instead of objectivity.

I am reminded of the story of Sleeping Beauty. The king had all of the Spindles in the kingdom destroyed. That did not stop someone with evil intent and blackness in their heart from harming the princess.

While a fanciful comparison, it is valid and accurate in its correlation.
 

nova

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2007
Messages
3,149
Location
US
I think what would be a good solution would be to have the local law enforcement agency to setup a booth at the event and run background checks. You could then take the check to any of the venders and purchase a firearm using that. If you are a private seller you could also ask for it just to be sure. I know most felons do not go to gun shows to buy but this would quite down the critics.

Charles Felthousen 11B/19D G C2

How about just quit letting violent felons out of jail then it doesn't matter who buys a gun.
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
I think what would be a good solution would be to have the local law enforcement agency to setup a booth at the event and run background checks. You could then take the check to any of the venders and purchase a firearm using that. If you are a private seller you could also ask for it just to be sure. I know most felons do not go to gun shows to buy but this would quite down the critics.

Charles Felthousen 11B/19D G C2

The problem I see with doing this - besides the question of who is going to fund the time and a half pay for the cops to run the place, the fact that cops are not allowed to call in instant checks or NCIC checks for gun purchases, and that offering the service via the cops would a) deprive the FFLs of the measley fee they are currently allowed to charge as compensation for all the record-keeping they have to do and b) impose record-keeping on the cops that they have no legal authority to have (gun registry, anyone?) - is that because there is no proof that private sales at gun shows are a major source of criminals obtaining guns and because it does not effect private sales that take place away from gun shows.

It seems that Soldier Felthousen, along with all the other proponents of everybody-gets-a-background-check forget that the proof of having been approved for the transfer is recorded nowhere but on the 4733 form, which by law is ONLY retained by the FFL. Even in states where one must first get cleared by the local LEOs and take a permission slip to the FFL, the FFL still has to make the call and record the approval confirmation data on the 4733.

All this idea will do is create more bureaucracy , a gun registry, and additional taxpayer expense that provides nothing of value in return.

stay safe.
 

longwatch

Founder's Club Member - Moderator
Joined
May 14, 2006
Messages
4,327
Location
Virginia, USA
We shouldn't be arguing about whether or not all gun sales should have background checks. I think we should be looking at whether such checks even have a significant impact on crime rates. I am skeptical that they do. Anyone know any studies on the subject?
 

Repeater

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
2,498
Location
Richmond, Virginia, USA
Check with the GAO

We shouldn't be arguing about whether or not all gun sales should have background checks. I think we should be looking at whether such checks even have a significant impact on crime rates. I am skeptical that they do. Anyone know any studies on the subject?

The GAO has done studies years ago, back when Clinton was President. The NRA even discussed one of them here:

Results of a recently released General Accounting Office (GAO) investigation into the FBI`s implementation and operation of the National Instant Check System (NICS)--the national database containing records of persons who are disqualified from receiving firearms--indicate that several significant failures of the Clinton-Gore Administration have prevented the system from performing as Congress intended.

GAO performed the study at the request of U.S. Sen. Craig Thomas (R-Wyo.). In a March 8, 2000, press release, Sen. Thomas said: "The report paints a sobering picture of a failure by federal agencies to enforce existing gun laws as Congress intended. The result is that the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens are being infringed upon while too often criminals seep through without consequence."

The GAO report shows that the system failed to provide "instant" checks 28% of the time, adversely affecting the rights of nearly 1.2 million law-abiding citizens. Nearly one-quarter of the citizens who appealed had their denials reversed. Those wrongful denials, GAO reports, were caused by FBI examiner error in 42% of the cases.

In preparing their report, GAO investigators visited U.S. Attorneys Offices in four cities--Atlanta, Dallas, Denver and Seattle--during the Fall of 1999 to examine prosecutions of Brady Act-related cases. In Atlanta, they found the U.S. Attorney had received three cases and "declined them because of lack of jury appeal." In Denver, two cases had been received and declined. The U.S. Attorney in Seattle had received not one Brady case for prosecution." In Dallas, 14 Brady cases were received by the U.S. Attorney, who accepted 13 for prosecution. The Clinton-Gore Administration continues to hold up the Brady Act as an effective crime-fighting tool, but it can`t explain why the felons, drug dealers, stalkers and fugitives who committed multiple felonies in attempting to buy guns from federally licensed dealers simply are not being sent to prison.
 

johnfenter

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
209
Location
, ,
Maybe...

"...the transfer is recorded nowhere but on the 4733 form, which by law is ONLY retained by the FFL. Even in states where one must first get cleared by the local LEOs and take a permission slip to the FFL, the FFL still has to make the call and record the approval confirmation data on the 4733."

I'm of the cynical opinion that the FBI and/or the State Police maintain a record of the purchase on a server somewhere, despite laws to the contrary. (Look at how the PA State Police do it.) At least, I feel that it is a rational assumption to make given past government performance.

I'm quite certain that when the ATF takes the 4473's from a closed down dealer, they enter the information into a database as well. And even though an FFL can destroy records older than 20 years, how many take the time to do so?

The only thing they cannot track is person-to-person sales in the states that have not required a record of such transactions, and that is what they are after.
 

nova

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2007
Messages
3,149
Location
US
"...the transfer is recorded nowhere but on the 4733 form, which by law is ONLY retained by the FFL. Even in states where one must first get cleared by the local LEOs and take a permission slip to the FFL, the FFL still has to make the call and record the approval confirmation data on the 4733."

I'm of the cynical opinion that the FBI and/or the State Police maintain a record of the purchase on a server somewhere, despite laws to the contrary. (Look at how the PA State Police do it.) At least, I feel that it is a rational assumption to make given past government performance.

I'm quite certain that when the ATF takes the 4473's from a closed down dealer, they enter the information into a database as well. And even though an FFL can destroy records older than 20 years, how many take the time to do so?

The only thing they cannot track is person-to-person sales in the states that have not required a record of such transactions, and that is what they are after.

The thing about that is, even if the ATF puts 4473s into a database, all that does is tell them that person A bought gun B at time C. Not that person A has gun B.
 

JoeSparky

Centurion
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,621
Location
Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
The thing about that is, even if the ATF puts 4473s into a database, all that does is tell them that person A bought gun B at time C. Not that person A has gun B.

And I STILL object to giving ANY information to an UNCONSTITUTIONAL FEDERAL AGENCY whose main purpose IS TO MAKE THE OWNERSHIP AND POSSESSION OF FIREARMS MORE DIFFICULT!
 
Last edited:

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
We shouldn't be arguing about whether or not all gun sales should have background checks. I think we should be looking at whether such checks even have a significant impact on crime rates. I am skeptical that they do. Anyone know any studies on the subject?

Longwatch -

Agree completely. But it never hurts to address the fiscal side of the issue as well. If the taxpayrts know how badly it will hurt them they might sit up and take notice regardless of how they otherwise feel about the issue.

stay safe.
 
Top