Chattanooga, TN Marine Shooter
- Thread starter Babagounj
- Start date
Overpaid Union Thug
Well-Known Member
It's not a loophole. You want to falsley classify it as such by assuming everyone will violate the GCA in the process. And.....as I've stated repeatively..... the ability to purchase from an individual at a gun show doesnt constitute a loophole either when its also permitted outside the show and through inheritance.
Where is the law that states that a private sale of a weapon is required to have a background check as part of the process?
There is not one, therefore this isn't skirting any law.
Either way, though, this A-hole in Chattanooga killed 5 people because he's a radical muslim member, not because (as much as TOS would like to believe) he got the weapons at a gunshow exploiting this MASSIVE loophole
UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)
Well-Known Member
Close the loophole and perhaps those 5 people would be alive today.
upschuck
Well-Known Member
Marriam-Webster says a loophole is
a means of escape; especially : an ambiguity or omission in the text through which the intent of a statute, contract, or obligation may be evaded.
The statute they are evading is the federal law requiring a check for eligibility to possess a firearm, so it meets the definition of a loophole.
What is your definition of loophole?
post 161
here's a link from the ATF....
What record-keeping procedures should be followed when two private individuals want to engage in a firearms transaction?
When a transaction takes place between private (unlicensed) persons who reside in the same State, the Gun Control Act (GCA) does not require any record keeping. A private person may sell a firearm to another private individual in his or her State of residence and, similarly, a private individual may buy a firearm from another private person who resides in the same State. It is not necessary under Federal law for a Federal firearms licensee (FFL) to assist in the sale or transfer when the buyer and seller are “same-State” residents. Of course, the transferor/seller may not knowingly transfer a firearm to someone who falls within any of the categories of prohibited persons contained in the GCA. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g) and (n). However, as stated above, there are no GCA-required records to be completed by either party to the transfer.
There may be State or local laws or regulations that govern this type of transaction. Contact State Police units or the office of your State Attorney General for information on any such requirements.
Please note that if a private person wants to obtain a firearm from a private person who resides in another State, the firearm will have to be shipped to an FFL in the buyer’s State. The FFL will be responsible for record keeping. See also Question B3.
Q&A Category:
Unlicensed Persons
Updated June 18th, 2015
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/wha...be-followed-when-two-private-individuals-want
A.) IT'S NOT A LOOPHOLE!!!
B.) They would not be alive. This sadistic MUSLIM dick was hell bent on murdering servicemen.
C.) They all would be alive if our service men and women were allowed to be ARMED regardless of where they are.
Criminals and thugs walk around armed all day and night, yet people who are TRAINED to protect us and put their lives on the line for this country can't? THAT'S the only thing that could have prevented this tragic event
upschuck
Well-Known Member
Certainly you see the problems with that law which is a way(loophole) for the unsavory to obtain firearms, who are prohibited to have them. We know all criminals are honest people and should be on the honor system of firearm buying.
so punish the law abiding buyers???
upschuck
Well-Known Member
Why have the check law at all then?
Hmm, since it is NOT a law when you're talking about Private sales, the "loophole" argument becomes moot. The first bold point, says it's the intent of a statute may be evaded, this statute is being followed precisely to the letter of the law.
You can keep screaming loophole, but it's not a valid argument, and as such I won't respond to that angle anymore.
And if you really think criminals are getting all of their guns from gun shows, then you're kidding yourself.
If I go to a gun show to buy one, it's going to be to pay less for a gun, as my background check would come up perfectly clean.
upschuck
Well-Known Member
A short little check is punishing them? give me a break.
Are you saying that any private citizen should call the FBI and have a background check donejust to sell their personal property?
The next time I sell a car of mine, I'll call the other persons insurance carrier and check their policy to make sure it's valid.
Same argument, different scenario.
upschuck
Well-Known Member
The statute aims to keep the unsavory away from the firearms, that is one way for them to get them, call it whatever you want, doesn't change the fact. Say if as many times as you like, doesn't change a thing.
Over exaggerate much? Nobody said all, but I am sure some do.
So what is the big deal?
Take your own advice on this one. LOOPHOLE, LOOPHOLE, LOOPHOLE.
Hmm, it's still not any kind of loophole.
-Drops the mic
upschuck
Well-Known Member
Not the same argument at all. A gun's primary use is to shoot things, a car's primary use is to transport things.
Again why have the check law, if there are so many holes that makes anyone be able to obtain a firearm with little effort?
Sure it is. They're both personal property that require more legal work for the first person who buys it, and it's simpler as the second owner.
Their designated purpose doesn't make your argument any different.
Y O U h a v e t h e l a w s o t h a t d e a l e r s m a k e s u r e t h a t y o u a r e n 't a p s y c h o p a t h.
We can argue it back and forth, doesn't change anything , and doesn't make this a loophole
carfax is not a law... lol
Not til the democrats get their way, that is
Overpaid Union Thug
Well-Known Member
I love how this has drifted from laughably inaccurate claims of gun show loop holes to the standard sale of guns between two individuals. What'll be next? Going after the rights of senior citizens and veterans to own guns? LOL! Oh wait....that's in the works right now.
https://www.nraila.org/articles/201...mericans-of-their-right-to-keep-and-bear-arms
http://www.wnd.com/2015/07/lawyer-threat-widens-in-federal-gun-grab/
https://www.nraila.org/articles/201...mericans-of-their-right-to-keep-and-bear-arms
http://www.wnd.com/2015/07/lawyer-threat-widens-in-federal-gun-grab/
