Is the "gun show loophole" real?

[jeff_d_148]

Is the so called "gun show loophole" real or just effective rhetoric? Where I live, in accordance with a county ordinance, you have to have a CWP to buy a firearm at a gun show. I have never purchased a firearm at a gun show so I do not know if sellers are required to do a background check. But wouldn't a CWP be in effect a background check?

According to the "gun show loophole" theory any private seller can sell to any private buyer, theoretically making firearms available to anyone with enough money, including convicted felons. Are there some jurisdictions where this is the case? It seems to me, in my county at least, that there are reasonable measures to prevent that from happening, and that the "gun show loophole" is just an effective propaganda tool used by anti-gun politicians to drum up support for more restrictive firearm laws.

 

[Jorg Nysgerrig]

Right, so here's the deal.

Transactions between two individuals are not regulated in many states, whether they occur at a gun show or not.

Transactions between a FFL holding dealer and an individual are regulated, whether they occur at a gun show or not.

The term "gun show" loophole is a misnomer. Can you buy a gun from another individual at a gun show without filling out a bunch of paperwork or having a background check? Yes. But you can also do the same thing at that person's house, your house, a McDonald's parking lot, or the local park. Gun shows just happen to be a convenient venue because it brings people who want to buy guns to people who want to sell guns.

 

[bluez4u]

Nice answer Jorg.
Most Sheeple blow this up, touting that it's where thugs buy guns.
The reality is, the thugs buy them on the street.
Just about every thug has a crap gun.

 

[WhisperFan]

What concerns me about the politicians that want to end the sale of firearms between individuals at gun shows, is that most of them say that this action will not affect the way you can sell a gun to your brother-in-law, or other private sales between individuals .... only at gun shows. Then they throw around terms like "Unlicense Dealer" to describe a private individual selling a firearm - just to inflame the issue.

No - I think this is one we need to fight. Because if we allow them to regulate how a private individual can sell a firearm to another at a gun show, it is only a matter of time before they dictate how all private individuals sell guns to other private individuals .... gun show or not.

 

[akodo]

It is just effective rhetoric.

The supposed loophole can be found in gunshows, but it can be found right here in THR too.

The true name of the supposed loophole would be 'Private Party Transactions' or 'Face to Face Transactions'

A nondealer with a gun for sale be it at a gunshow, or through a newspaper add, or just two guys who work together, doesn't need to run the buyer through NCIS, he just sells it. His only obligation is to not sell it to anyone underage or from out of state (so check their I.D.) and to not sell it to anyone who is vocalizing the intent to commit a crime (so if the guy says 'my wife won't ever cheat on me again once I get this!' you would legally be obligated to refuse the sale)

 

[SMMAssociates]

Our masters wish to restrict all gun sales to FFL dealers, and to reduce the number of dealers to as close to zero as possible.... The "gun show loophole" mess is just their way of accelerating the process....

 

[Dookie]

Transactions between two individuals are not regulated in many states, whether they occur at a gun show or not.

Transactions between a FFL holding dealer and an individual are regulated, whether they occur at a gun show or not.

So if a person, who happens to have an FFL, sells to their buddy they would have to run a check first? Or would that be considered a FTF?

 

[misANTHrope]

^

It depends on whether they're selling a gun from their FFL's inventory or from their private collection, as I understand it.

 

[Deanimator]

The "loophole" is an excuse for registration where it doesn't exist, since that's the ONLY way to "close" it. Registration is a means to prevent new purchases. If you don't believe me, call the gun registration office in Chicago and ask them what you need to do to LAWFULLY move to Chicago with your handguns.

Case closed.

 

[TexasRifleman]

Funny how if you follow the law now it's a "loophole".

If I drive under the speed limit and still get to work on time did I find a "loophole" in the traffic laws?

Stupidity, DC's primary export product.

 

[jrfoxx]

^^

Agreed, even more critical than the "gun show loophole" is the dreaded "murder loophole". I have never murdered anyone, thus have never been convicted of murder, so I have found, and exploited, the murder loophole!
thats even worse than the gun show loophole! someone please, think of the children! close the murder loophole! allow people to be charged, arrested, and convicted for murder, even if they havent killed anyone! they are exploiting a loophole in the murder laws! Oh, the children.....

 

[Craig_AR]

The Flea Market Loophole

The so-called "gun show loophole" is just as real as the flea market loophole.
Individual to individual sale transactions do not require collection of state and local sales tax. Nonetheless, community flea markets regularly establish common areas for such face to face sales to occur only and over, and the sales tax is never collected by sellers and turned in to government tax authorities.
Requiring background checks for individual firearm sales at gun shows, as opposed to on a front porch, is the same as requiring flea market sellers to collect sales tax and turn it over to the tax authority.

Gun shows are just big flea markets; big enough that commercial dealers find it profitable to also offer their wares. They do run background checks. They also collect sales tax.


craig

 

[jeff_d_148]

I think I understand now. The more I find out, the less I know.

 

[gc70]

Is the "gun show loophole" real?

ABSOUTELY NOT - there is no gun show "loophole."

A "loophole" exists when there is a creative way to get around the intent of a law. For instance, several states or cities ban smoking in public venues (i.e. bars), but have an exception for theatrical productions; bars that allow their customers to be impromptu 'actors' and smoke are exploiting a loophole to evade the intent of the law.

The federal government regulates the activities of federally-licensed firearms dealers. The federal government does not regulate the sale of firearms at gun shows. Private sales at gun shows do not evade the intent of the law that regulates FFLs. FFLs are subject to the same requirements regardless of where they do business. The anti-gun crowd would like to force all firearms transactions to be done through FFLs, so they scream about a "loophole" where none exists.

There is a huge difference between evading the intent of an existing law (exploiting a "loophole") and legally doing something which some group wishes was against the law (private firearms sales).

 

[SMMAssociates]

gc70:

Exactly....

Calling it a "loophole" is an intentional effort to demonize the activity. They really can't bitch too much about true private sales (i.e., a couple guys in somebody's parking lot) because Joe Sixpack may understand that, but since a gun show is an "evil" activity in their eyes anyway....

First demonize it, and then outlaw it....

Pretty much what has happened with cigarettes and smoking. About the only places you can still smoke are your own home and car, and some employers don't even want that. Public Housing probably will be next....

(I quit smoking about a dozen years ago. My daughter talked me into it. Then she started.... I'm not "religious" about it - I don't believe half the propaganda anyway. I'm not going to change "you", so why make a fight out of it. I don't miss it, most of the time .)

Regards,

 

[gc70]

If the so-called "gun show loophole" is closed, you can bet the next thing the anti-gun crowd whines about is the "unlicensed dealer loophole" (aka private sales).

 

[Hypnogator]

A "loophole" exists when there is a creative way to get around the intent of a law. For instance, several states or cities ban smoking in public venues (i.e. bars), but have an exception for theatrical productions; bars that allow their customers to be impromptu 'actors' and smoke are exploiting a loophole to evade the intent of the law.

(SNIP)

There is a huge difference between evading the intent of an existing law (exploiting a "loophole") and legally doing something which some group wishes was against the law (private firearms sales).

Yes, a FTF transfer between two parties at a gun show isn't a "loophole." HOWEVER, I've been to several gun shows where individuals have had tables holding a dozen or more new guns, sometimes several of the same model, with a sign declaring "Private Collection -- No Background Check Required." It is very apparent that these people fit into the category of "unlicensed dealers." As always, bad laws result from those trying to exploit a "loophole" as gc70 correctly defines it.

Frankly, I'm in favor of requiring background checks for all firearms transactions except between family members, provided that background checks are truly instant, and can be conducted by anyone via the Internet. A record of the background check should also indemnify the seller against any subsequent misuse of the weapon by the buyer, provided that the buyer passed the background check.

Just my $.02 worth (after inflation).

 

[Art Eatman]

The language aspect stems from the belief of the anti-gun crowd that any unregulated sale of a firearm is a "loophole".

The closest to reality of which I know comes from BATF testimoney before Congress in the run-up to the 1994 assault weapon ban. It was stated under oath that some 2% or less of crime guns were acquired from gun shows.

Some 85% were stolen, or purchased illegally "on the street". Most of the remainder had been bought by a lawful buyer and either that person later shot his wife/her husband, or a legal gun was loaned to a person who misused it (as with Sirhan Sirhan and Robert F. Kennedy).

IOW, gunshows are a statistically insignificant source of crime guns.

Art

 

[SMMAssociates]

Art:

There's an old story about "why let truth intrude on a good story?"....

Seems that the criminal and terrorist friendly folks have exactly the same tactic in their playbook....

Regards,

 

[green country shooter]

There is no gun show loophole. The easiest way I have found to say this to people who don't understand is this:

"The federal laws governing gun sales are same regardless of where the sale occurs. You can sell your own guns, but a person who is buying guns to resell for a profit is acting as a dealer and needs a federal license."

 

[Archie]

It gets worse...

(Please note moderate to extensive use of satire in this post.)

In point of fact, I'm very upset with the car sales loophole.

Did you all know that a private person can simply sell their automobile to someone else without even checking to see if that person has a driver's license or automobile insurance? Or even if they can drive or legally see? All they have to do is take the money and send a notice to the state saying they have sold to the car and provide a name and address. Like that's worth anything.

(For that matter, I've bought new cars from dealers and never had to show a driver's license. But that's beside the point.)

It's just scary how a person can dispose of his or her own property without clearing with a government official first. And that's what those who wail about the 'gunshow loophole' want to change.

 

[JR47]

Well, none of you live in the People's Republic of maryland. There, ALL sales of handguns, and restricted weapons (pretty much any long rifle affected by the 1994 AWB) requires that the seller fill out with the buyer, the Maryland Handgun Forms. This is then sent to the Md. State Police, who "process it" and make the NICS check, for $10.00. After seven days, you can legally transfer the gun to the buyer with the "Not Disapproved" paperwork.

But wait, Maryland also has a list of approved handguns. Then, depending on when the handgun was made, it may require an integral lock, or a fired shell-casing, or both.

Yet, the PC people are shrieking as loud about the Gun Show Loophole in Maryland as anywhere else. Go figure.

I retired from that fiasco several years ago.

 

[gripper]

What it comes down to is a way to prohibit any private transaction...even when no crime has actually occurred.
Crime???Knowinglyreceiving stolen prperty or transferring to a prohibited person/or one who has just articulated the intent to commit a crime with said weapon.
Real crime?What has already been articulated here;that our "betters" seek a moe manageable/governable herd of subjects.

 

[tinygnat219]

jeff_d_148,

It's not real clear where you live. Laws are different from state to state, or even county to county to give you any "what's legal for me" advice.

As for the "gunshow loophole" overall it's a myth, a common falacy that's used by the Brady campaign to drum up fear and try to get more restrictive gun laws passed. They claim that in states where a background check is not mandatory for "unlicensed dealers" namely those without an FFL, it's easier for criminals to get guns. The ATF released some statistics that showed criminals obtained fewer than 1% of their firearms from face to face sales. Instead, they were usually stolen from a home or had straw purchasers buy them from legitimate stores.

It's a myth. Pure and simple.

 

[anarchris]

the so called "loophole" is a propaganda tool.
Antis want an end to gun shows, not because of criminal misuse of firearms but because gunshows are peaceful assemblies of folks that are generally opposed to giving up their rights for imaginary security.

I joined the NRA at a gun show, stuff like that is what really scares them.
Freedom terrifies the anti.