Educate every chance you get

Well, private sales do exist at some gun show's so in that context, he's right.

Map of state laws on background checks at gun shows.
http://www.governing.com/gov-data/s...irearms-bankground-checks-state-laws-map.html

My head dispatcher at work, a firearms enthusiast himself, told me the other day that a female friend was telling him that "AR", in rifle context, stands for "Automatic Rifle." He seemed proud to tell me he educated her in that it really means "Assault Rifle."

He's even more "educated" now.

The same laws exist at a gun show as outside the gun show. There is NO gun show loophole.

MedWheeler said:

My head dispatcher at work, a firearms enthusiast himself, told me the other day that a female friend was telling him that "AR", in rifle context, stands for "Automatic Rifle." He seemed proud to tell me he educated her in that it really means "Assault Rifle."

Click to expand...

That's just appalling. And these are supposedly "pro-gun" people.

Sniper66 said:

Recently an acquaintance of my nephew's told him that anyone can buy any gun at gun shows with no background check. So, my nephew asked me if that was true since he knows I attend a lot of shows. The guy who made that claim is a long time hunter and gun owner, as is my nephew, so I was surprised. I was glad to have the opportunity to educate a couple of people and encourage all of you guys out there to do the same.

Click to expand...

abajaj11 said:

The same laws exist at a gun show as outside the gun show. There is NO gun show loophole.

Click to expand...

Gun shows facilitate buyers and sellers getting together. That's their purpose. It's also true that some private, unlicensed individuals set up tables and sell guns at gun shows. Their thoroughness in vetting their buyers varies. Some merely ask if the buyer is a resident of the same state, and seal the deal with a handshake (not even asking for ID). Others ask for ID, copy down license numbers, etc. Still others run the transaction through an FFL dealer at the show. Let's be honest. I've witnessed examples of each of these.

Private sales is what Hillary called the gun show loophole.
A shameless half truth attempt to push her agenda.
And the usefully idiots take it as gospel and repeat it.
Geobels would be proud.

bikerdoc said:

Private sales is what Hillary called the gun show loophole.
A shameless half truth attempt to push her agenda.
And the usefully idiots take it as gospel and repeat it.
Geobels would be proud.

Click to expand...

(Not sure how this hread fits in Legal section)

To your point, ALL firearm sales in CA have to go thru an FFL but the politicians here STILL talk about the gun show loop hole and internet sales loophole.

That is my point.
What is legal here in VA is different from CA. Laws not opinions or half truths count.

AlexanderA said:

Gun shows facilitate buyers and sellers getting together. That's their purpose. It's also true that some private, unlicensed individuals set up tables and sell guns at gun shows. Their thoroughness in vetting their buyers varies. Some merely ask if the buyer is a resident of the same state, and seal the deal with a handshake (not even asking for ID). Others ask for ID, copy down license numbers, etc. Still others run the transaction through an FFL dealer at the show. Let's be honest. I've witnessed examples of each of these.

Click to expand...

Depends on State Law. If someone breaks the law and sells to a resident of another state, knowingly, then making more laws will not solve the problem.

Seems like some republicans may be looking to cave on the "gun show loophole" and may be OK with requiring federally mandated NIC checks for ALL sales, even those private FTF sales in states.

Here IMHO is why this is a really bad idea:

1. There is no Gun show loophole. The exact same state and federal laws hold IN a gun show as outside it. Closing the "gun show loophole" means basically mandating at the federal level that all sales of firearms HAVE to go through NIC checks (Form 4473). The Federal government should have no jurisdiction to regulate commerce within a state, so this may be a hard one to pass constitutional muster. However, it may be the Dems are hoping they can say that "if a firearm was used once in interstate commerce then we can regulate it forever". This argument has already been upheld by the US Supreme court in the GunFree School Zones Act (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun-Free_School_Zones_Act_of_1990)

2. Think about how a federally mandated background check on ALL firearms will be implemented. Right now, only firearms sold through FFL dealers have to pass a NICs (Form 4473) test in all states, and in some states the state laws mandate that all transfers have to be through an FFL dealer. The feds regulate the FFL dealers and do not keep records of transactions, but the FFL dealers have to. If an FFL dealer goes out of business, those records go to ATF for storage, and are never lost. Now imagine extending this requirement to ALL buyers and sellers of firearms. Well this is impossible.

So the feds will say, well let us just require all states to do what california, for example, does already. All transfers must go through an FFL. But what to do about the millions of unregistered guns in the USA? How do the feds know who owns them? If they don't know who owns them, how will they verify that ALL guns are being sold after a NICS check? Well, the FEDs will come back and say: "We cannot implement your new law unless you allow us to register all firearms". So the inevitable next step to mandating background check on ALL firearm sales will be a demand to Congress that all firearms be registered, without which the law will be impossible to enforce.

Registration is a VERY bad idea. Registration will not prevent a crime since a legal gun may be stolen and used by a criminal (like in the Newtown case) and of course a criminal will never register an illegitimate gun they may already own.
So, the only reason for registration is keeping tabs on legal gun owners, and if needed, confiscation of firearms.

Since the 2A was written to provide a well regulated (trained) populace that could be stronger than any standing army that a tyrant could raise, the LAST thing the armed populace wants is for potential tyrants to know who has what firearm. That is why this insidious "background checks for all sales" bill MUST be resisted. it will open the door to registration in a year or two.
Just my 2 cents.

abajaj11 said:

So the feds will say, well let us just require all states to do what california, for example, does already. All transfers must go through an FFL. But what to do about the millions of unregistered guns in the USA? How do the feds know who owns them? If they don't know who owns them, how will they verify that ALL guns are being sold after a NICS check? Well, the FEDs will come back and say: "We cannot implement your new law unless you allow us to register all firearms". So the inevitable next step to mandating background check on ALL firearm sales will be a demand to Congress that all firearms be registered, without which the law will be impossible to enforce.

Click to expand...

Actually, that's IS how CA is registering all of the unregistered guns.... by requiring all guns sales be done thru FFL and CA DOJ.

If you don't want to risk going to jail, you follow the law which then registers the gun.

To a point, I educate. If I get to the point in a discussion where I consider tearing down a brick wall with my face to be more fruitful, I stop.

''Recently an acquaintance of my nephew's told him that anyone can buy any gun at gun shows with no background check. So, my nephew asked me if that was true...''

ITS TOO SIMPLE

Talking points when / if the topic comes up...

At any gun show I've ever been at the following actions occur;
1-There is a check at the door from a Staffer, are you a member, $ & handstamp. A 2nd person LEO is there 95% of the time, also usually in uniform but always shield/ID exposed and visibly armed, physically takes any guns (for sale), looks at them briefly, and zip ties. Note: the other 5% of time might be a restroom break, or in process of being relieved etc
2- Both 'plain clothes', uniformed local LEOs, or 'plain clothes' yet shield & I.D. showing , usually Dept. Sheriffs, are walking around the show randomly for Security. No one suspects the 'plain clothes' lady officer(s).
3- Both involvments of LEOs are generally not only condoned by the grounds owners, but mandated by the gunshow board of directors. Also a plan for quick access to medical services. In an ever increasing 'sue everyone' society, this is something that is just toooo large a liability NOT to do
4- Lots of times at LEAST one (1) Fed Officer is there 'plain clothes' (at least very routinely).
5- Said LEOs are on duty; that means ''watch for Joe he has a warrant'' ''who is that fellow from out of state''... ''be on the lookout for that certain *** firearm(s) that was recently stolen'', etc.
6-As a professional for over 30 years having talked to perhaps 1000s felons, NO ONE wanted to be under that level of scrutiny. I mean, come on...they're not stupid, just criminals, they KNOW what I just posted above, just the type of environment that want to be in NOT.
7- Fed studies and interviews of convicted felons 'where did you get your guns' echos they do not get their guns from gunshows, or VERY low like -5%. The vast majority is straw purchase, family member, STEAL IT
8- Now no where did I even begin to mention various state laws whereas it is mandated a 'background check ' on purchases; this is all private sector ''common sense thinking'' that has evolved through the decades ITS WORKING JUST FINE FOLKS!!