Are we making a rational argument?

[David Armstrong]

What do you mean by "true gun show loophole"?

As stated before, the fact that a person can set up a booth at a gunshow and sell firearms without requiring a background check.

[David Armstrong]

...for criminals.

Laws only hinder those inclined to abide by them. (Otherwise, we could just hang a "No Shootin'" sign on POTUS and save a bundle by eliminating the Secret Service.)

As Todd says, that is sort of a given. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't have laws. That beside the point, as LoknLod got, is that while we make an argument that "X" doesn't matter in the one context we then fail to make a valid argument that it might matter in another context.

[David Armstrong]

We are having this discussion because of mass murders, most recently Sandy Hook. "Closing the GSL" wouldn't have made a difference in Newtown or in any of the other mass murders, and won't stop someone from doing it again. At the same time, there are valid reasons to prevent the government from maintaining a registry (which is the end result after the intermediate step of beginning to prohibit private transactions free of government involvement).

OK. Not sure what that has to do with anything I have said, but OK.

The 10 round issue has been addressed far more eloquently than I could ( http://gunnuts.net/2013/01/11/who-ne...han-10-rounds/ ) but suffice it to say that the statements that a.) restricting magazines to 10 rounds won't make any difference and b.) it is very important for us to have them are not contradictory.

Again, I don't necessarily disagree, but that doesn't address the problem, which is that many if not most non-gun folks do consider them to be contradictory and we don't do a good job explaining our position.

[Chris Rhines]

As stated before, the fact that a person can set up a booth at a gunshow and sell firearms without requiring a background check.

Um, if a person is in the business of selling firearms, they have to have an FFL, and are as such bound by the NCIS or equivalent state system. What you are describing seems to be covered by existing federal law already.

Then again, I'm opposed to FFLs and background checks at all, anywhere, so there's that...

[TR675]

If I want to liquidate my gun collection, I can get a table at a gun show and sell my firearms to the general public with no background check. I'm not in the business of selling guns if it is a one-time event. This is the "gun show loophole."

I think there are some real differences between me selling a gun to a friend and me going to a brick and mortar location open to the public for the purpose of selling guns and selling them to whomever walks by with cash in hand. I think a background check for gun show purchases is reasonable. I have been personally told by LEO working security at a show in East Texas that known felons were walking around looking at guns, although they didn't try to purchase anything...that is worrisome to me.

I don't know that a background check for any gun purchase is necessarily unreasonable in and of itself.

[ezthumper]

Has any one had experience with running aback ground check when selling a weapon?

I used to work for big five sporting good some eons ago, and I had to do the back ground check, did not seem all to complicated, just a little patience.

[David Armstrong]

Um, if a person is in the business of selling firearms, they have to have an FFL, and are as such bound by the NCIS or equivalent state system. What you are describing seems to be covered by existing federal law already.

Then again, I'm opposed to FFLs and background checks at all, anywhere, so there's that...

TriumphRat675 seems to have pretty well covered the response.

[Chris Rhines]

If I want to liquidate my gun collection, I can get a table at a gun show and sell my firearms to the general public with no background check. I'm not in the business of selling guns if it is a one-time event. This is the "gun show loophole."

I think there are some real differences between me selling a gun to a friend and me going to a brick and mortar location open to the public for the purpose of selling guns and selling them to whomever walks by with cash in hand. I think a background check for gun show purchases is reasonable. I have been personally told by LEO working security at a show in East Texas that known felons were walking around looking at guns, although they didn't try to purchase anything...that is worrisome to me.

I don't know that a background check for any gun purchase is necessarily unreasonable in and of itself.

I understand, although I think it a distinction without a difference. BATFE does not seem to have a clear, objective definition of, “Being in the business of selling firearms," so I can certainly envision someone being successfully prosecuted in just the situation you describe.

FFL sales are one thing, and private sales are another, and whether they take place at a gun show or in my basement is a distinction that is totally lost on me.

Hence, my opinion that the “gun show loophole" is a buzzword, created by the anti-gun movement, intended to muddy the water enough to pass legislation to either ban private sales altogether, or ban gun shows entirely.

[Drang]

This year the "gun show loophole", next year the "Little Nickle loophole", the year after that the "water cooler and break room loophole", then the "back fence loophole" and the "brother-in-law loophole"...

The FBI admits that gun shows are an insignificant source of crime guns. But, hey, inconveniencing an insignificant percentage of the US population is an easy, simple, and visible way to prove that we are DOING SOMETHING, FOR THE CHILDREN!

[Tamara]

As Todd says, that is sort of a given. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't have laws. That beside the point, as LoknLod got, is that while we make an argument that "X" doesn't matter in the one context we then fail to make a valid argument that it might matter in another context.

This doesn't even parse, and I know how to diagram a sentence.