FBI Dispells Gun Show Loophole Myth

"Close the Gun Show Loophole! Close the Gun Show Loophole!"

This is the perennial cry of those that want to restrict private sales of firearms between two adults.

"If we just close the loophole, criminals and crazies won't get guns!"

Um, no. This is their "reasoning" behind this restriction, but, its been dis-proven. Alphecca has the basic information:

The study involved a pool of more than 800 incidents from which researchers selected 40, involving 43 offenders (13 of them admitted gangbangers/drug traffickers) and 50 police officers.

What researchers found was that handguns were used in the assaults on officers and all but one were obtained illegally. None of the firearms in the study was obtained from gun shows. None of the offenders pick a particular type of gun to use because he/she felt it would do the most damage.

[…]

In conclusion, none of the criminals studied was hindered by any law, federal, state or local, established to prevent gun ownership. They just laughed at gun laws. Police officers faced with an armed criminal who hesitates while he/she decides to shoot or don’t shoot will likely find himself/herself a potentially deadly split second or more behind the criminal who has no hesitation whatsoever about pulling the trigger.

The rest can be found here: Shoot or Don't Shoot

Gerry Connolly wants to close gun shows.

Or is this ANOTHER bill that Congressmen aren't reading.......

111th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 2324
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
May 7, 2009

Mr. CASTLE (for himself, Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York, Mr. ISRAEL, Mr. KIRK, Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia, and Mr. SMITH of New Jersey) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

This Act may be cited as the `Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2009'.

#1) Gerry Connolly has NO clue as to what he is sponsoring.

Or

#2) Gerry Connolly wants to close all gun shows.

Or

#3) Gerry Connolly wants to deprive Virginians of the freedom of buying and selling certain types of private property without interference from the Federal Government.

Which is it?

Governor DNC Chairman Kaine and the Democrats keep insisting that laws requiring background checks on guns sold by private citizens at gun shows are not for the purpose of harming gun shows.

Well let's take a look at that. Congressman Gerry Connolly (D- 11th District) is a sponsor of H.R.2324 - Gun Show Loophole Closing Act of 2009.

It will force gun show organizers to identify all vendors no later than 30 days IN ADVANCE OF THE SHOW.

(b) Responsibilities of Gun Show Operators-

`(1) IN GENERAL- It shall be unlawful for a person to operate a gun show, unless the person--

`(A) not later than 30 days before the commencement of the gun show, notifies the Attorney General, in writing, of the date, time, duration, and location of the gun show, and the identity of each person who will be a gun show vendor at the gun show;

`(B) before commencement of the gun show--

`(i) verifies the identity of each individual who will be a gun show vendor at the gun show by examining a valid identification document (as defined in section 1028(d)(3)) of the individual containing a photograph of the individual; and

`(ii) requires each such individual to sign--

`(I) a ledger, and enter into the ledger identifying information concerning the individual; and

`(II) a notice which sets forth the obligations of a gun show vendor under this chapter; and

`(C) notifies each person who attends the gun show of the requirements of this chapter, in accordance with such regulations as the Attorney General shall prescribe.

Now, who are the "vendors"?

This means YOU, the Private citizen. So the gun show operator is supposed to look into the future and see that you will come by the show on a sudden whim when you decide to try and sell Grandpa's .45 pistol. And your identification will be recorded that you are there to sell a gun, along with identifying information about the firearms. So, even if you don't sell it, your possession of said firearm will be entered into a database.

(b) Definitions- Section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(37) Gun Show Vendor- The term `gun show vendor' means a person who is not licensed under section 923 and who exhibits, sells, offers for sale, transfers, or exchanges a firearm at a gun show, regardless of whether or not the person arranges with the gun show operator for a fixed location from which to exhibit, sell, offer for sale, transfer, or exchange the firearm.'.

And to you FFL's out there. Your paper work required by the BATFE is so simple and they are so forgiving. You're not held responsible for honest mistakes, are you? How about the idea that firearms transferred between PRIVATE citizens are now YOUR liability:

`(d) Recordkeeping Requirements-

`(1) IN GENERAL- A licensee who provides a notice pursuant to subsection (c)(2) with
respect to the transfer of a firearm shall--

`(A) not later than 10 days after the date of the transfer, submit to the Attorney General a report of the transfer, which report shall specify the make, model, and serial number of the firearm, and contain such other information and be on such form, as the Attorney General shall require by regulation, except that the report shall not include the name of or other identifying information relating to any person involved in the transfer who is not licensed under this chapter; and

`(B) retain a record of the transfer, including the same information as would be required if the transfer were from the inventory of the licensee, as part of the permanent business records of the licensee.

And you firearms dealers have so much free time to do the reporting on guns that YOU ARE NOT MAKING A PROFIT FROM.....

O f course, nothing prevents "vendors" from arranging the sale off the premises. They could just go across the street.....

So, apparently Connolly falls under #1 or #2. Either way he is a fool or a lying piece of ....

Why doesn't someone go ask him.....


h/t Captain of a Crew of One and We Are Change New Jersey

Compromise to close non-existent loophole passes committee

Gun Show Loophole Compromise passes Senate committee and heads to Senate Floor

From the Star City Harbinger

(This is cross posted from their comment section. )

There are so many incorrect things in this.

One - There is NO gun show loophole. VENDORS, by law, are arms dealers and are regulated. This law will regulate private transactions between private citizens and only within the gun show. This is only a precedent to then restrict sales anywhere between citizens. Two - It was protested by any and every citizen tired of the government trying to restrict 2nd Amendment rights, not just “Republicans with loyalties to the NRA.” Three - The Virginia Tech shootings are a straw argument since the shooter followed all laws and his background WAS CHECKED. Four - This isn’t a country/city split. This a fight of 2nd Amendment supporters vs gun controllers. Many urban citizens utilize their right to buy and sell private property.

This “compromise” is nothing of the sort. Weapons of all sorts are still being bought and sold by private citizens. Instead of beating a dead horse about a non-existent loophole, why don’t these politician state what they really mean? They want all private sales to be held through a dealer, thereby increasing the cost and inconvenience of the transaction. Who pays for the background check? Why should a dealer subject himself to liability by putting out a background check on guns that he himself will not be selling? Will it be mandatory that dealers do the background checks when requested? What if there are no nearby FFL’s? What if you want to sell or give a firearm to a friend or family member? Or receive one in a will?

And how would a law enforcement agency find out about these transfers unless the firearms were registered?

For all of the Brady Campaign’s statistics on how many gun sales have been stopped by background checks, only 7 have resulted in arrests. How soon will it be, since this state appears to be turning “blue”, before gun or ammo registration is mentioned to ensure that “keeping firearms out of the hands of convicted felons and the mentally ill ” is necessary.

The whole point of the 2nd Amendment was to ensure an armed populace. A weapon is an inanimate object. If used in a criminal act, hammer that person and throw him in prison for a long time. If a person is mentally unstable enough to be restricted from having a weapon, institutionalize that person for their own and our safety. If the court system had decided that about Cho, no background check would have been necessary. He would have been safely in the hospital.

How far do we go to ensure “safety?” According to the Brady Campaign, all weapons should be restricted. Some want to repeal the 2nd Amendment. If you look at Australia and England, one will see that crime rates have skyrocketed.

2nd Amendment supporters are tired of the incremental attacks on our liberty. As the saying goes, “If you give them an inch, they’ll take a mile.”

Its only a minor inconvenience.......

Recent attempts have been made to remove one of your rights. As usual the perpetrators tried an incremental approach.

Senator Marsh; John Marshall, Secretary of Public Safety; former Superintendent Colonel Massengill, chair of the Va Tech Review panel, and Governor Kaine, usually against a backdrop of grieving parents and relatives, spouted platitudes about feeling safe and removing guns from criminals. They say that they only wanted to affect the very few "unlicensed" gun dealers at gun shows, all the while knowing that they were using a straw man argument, since private sales at gun shows are not by "unlicensed dealers" and very few firearms from private gun show sales are found in criminal hands.

The only way to close this "loophole" is to restrict ALL transfers of firearms.

And here is the proof that THIS is their intention.

From the Violence Policy Center:

In order to be effective, the legislation must apply to all events at which guns are sold in any volume, such as gun shows, flea markets, or swap meets.
In addition, it is imperative that the definition of gun show ensure that transactions initiated at a gun show cannot be consummated off-premises with no background check required.

Over at Red's Trading Post, a business that is being unfairly targeted by their local ATF office, is this gem in speaking about the current candidate for ATF Director, Michael J. Sullivan:

"...at the largest gathering of Anti-Gun organizations, in which Sullivan was the key note speaker, they clearly laid out their plans:"

9. Congress, as well as state, local and tribal governments, should enact laws requiring that all gun sales and transfers proceed through a Federal Firearms License (FFL), thus ensuring that a mandatory background check will be conducted on the transferee.

It goes on to describe the "Unregulated Secondary Market":

This unregulated secondary market includes private sales, classified ads, flea markets, Internet sales and gun shows.

" They state that they are trying to get all guns sales through Federal Firearms License Dealers, while their fellow Anti-Gun Acting ATF Director Michael J. Sullivan and the BATFE is closing down these dealers."



And how do they know if a firearm is PRIVATELY transferred, either by gift OR sale? They would have to know the CURRENT owner.....it would have to be REGISTERED, wouldn't it?