Skip to main content

View Diary: NRA fails at suppressing background check research (45 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  There they go, under the bus :) (8+ / 0-)

    Seems ironic that Wintemute thinks more highly of them than you.

    Wintemute said that, although it would mean more paperwork, a majority of vendors support a system where "private purchases would have to be routed through a licensed dealer" for paperwork to be done.

    "The last thing they want is for a gun to go out of their store to be used in killings and suicides," he added.

    Or even Monte Frank, from Newtown.
    "If you go to a gun show," Frank said, "and at one table there's a federally licensed gun dealer who has to comply with federal law, if someone goes to that dealer and fails a background check, they can go to the next table, with no license, and they would not have to conduct a background check."

    Guns don't kill people. It's impossible to be killed by a gun. We are all invincible to bullets, and it's a miracle. -- this message brought to you by the Night Vale chapter of the N.R.A.

    by tytalus on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 02:09:06 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Was my assessment incorrect? (9+ / 0-)

      Or would you prefer not to address that possible motivation and just deflect some more?

      And since you seem to be gung-ho on this 55% support by gun dealers for a sweeping new policy (that is, 55% of the 16% who responded from a sample size of 15% of gun dealers(or less)), does this percentage of support from this sort of sampling apply to how we measure the righteousness of every cause, or does it only count for the ones you are in favor of?

      I mean, if it had been 55% the other way, you would have written a diary opposing more background checks? Right?

      Just checking, because I'm sure you are consistent in your ethical standards and would not want to look like someone who was childishly fishing for numbers after the fact to support a decision he's already made.

      •  Speaking of deflection (8+ / 0-)

        you're trying every derail you can think of to not talk about the support from gun dealers for background checks, including taking potshots at my integrity. The gun lobby appreciates your support. Have a good day.

        Guns don't kill people. It's impossible to be killed by a gun. We are all invincible to bullets, and it's a miracle. -- this message brought to you by the Night Vale chapter of the N.R.A.

        by tytalus on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 03:12:28 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  His entire post was talking about the support (8+ / 0-)

          from gun dealers.

          He simply thinks that their support is because of the financial gain they would receive from it.

          Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

          by FrankRose on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 03:37:24 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Is it just me, or is there some pretending here? (4+ / 0-)

            Are all these Kossacks really going to pretend they didn't notice when a commenter attempts to change the subject, from the topic of the diary, to questioning why the author is writing about the topic of the diary.

            His entire post was talking about the support (8+ / 0-)

            Recommended by:
                KVoimakas, Tom Seaview, Shamash, Mildly Unsuccessful Lurker, ER Doc, gerrilea, PavePusher, 43north

            from gun dealers.

            He simply thinks that their support is because of the financial gain they would receive from it.

            All of your are smart enough to know that everyone is free to address the content of a diary without deflecting attention to an examination WHY the author is writing about the subject.

            "They did not succeed in taking away our voice" - Angelique Kidjo - Opening the Lightning In a Bottle concert at Radio City Music Hall in New York City - 2003

            by LilithGardener on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 05:49:04 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  The motivation of their support is the entire (0+ / 0-)

              premise of this diary.

              Tytalus went off topic in his comment that I responded to......a comment you recommended.

              Strange the founder of RASA v2 would rec such a comment.
              Of course, you learned 'how to shoot straight at ten', so......ya know......there's that.

              Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

              by FrankRose on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 11:50:05 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Amazing, isn't it? nt (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              LilithGardener, Glen The Plumber

              “In keeping silent about evil, in burying it so deep within us that no sign of it appears on the surface, we are implanting it … we are thereby ripping the foundations of justice from beneath new generations.” - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

              by DefendOurConstitution on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 01:44:13 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  Speaking of integrity (6+ / 0-)

          The strong implication of your diary is that "expanded" (i.e. universal & mandatory) background checks are such a good idea that 55% of (some tiny fraction of) gun dealers support them, a notion you flog with all the subtlety of the RNC pushing Marco Rubio (see! He's Hispanic and supports us, so we must be right!). If you are going to imply that 55% support for this thing is evidence contributing towards its moral rightness, then it is entirely reasonable to ask if you hold that same standard for things you disagree with. A question which as it turns out, I did ask, and for which your lack of answer is revealing.

          If you do hold to that standard, then be assured I will bombard you with polls taken at various times in the past several decades and assume you held the majority view on those positions for the ones where you were alive at the time. For instance, if your morality is based on majority polling, we could see that you would have opposed same-sex marriage up to about 2009. Or, more on topic, the Quinnipiac polling shows more people supporting the Republican members of Congress when it comes to gun policy than support the President. Since popular opinion was a big focus of your diary, can we assume you are on board with that opinion too?

          On the other hand, if you do not hold to a "majority standard" for morality and admit the percentage support by gun dealers is an arbitrary number that does not change your preconceived views in the least, then why the hell did you even write a diary focused almost entirely on that aspect of that polling result?

          P.S. Saying I'm supporting the gun lobby in the sentence after you criticize me for "taking potshots" at you? Classy.

    •  Hate to break it to you... (7+ / 0-)

      That's now how the law works.  If you are in the business of buying/selling guns you must have an FFL.  The only dealers without FFLs are trying to liquidate a collection and that has largely moved online.  You will probably get as good or a better price selling your Zündnadelgewehr online.  

      I was at the Chantilly show today.  There were a few people selling old hunting rifles and I think one guy trying to unload a AR15 in .50 Beowulf (a cartridge whose uses are primary for hunting and has ballistics similar to the old .45-70 of the 19th century).  

      If you want to buy anything made before 1898, you can without a background check as per federal law (may be different in  your state).  However, the vast majority of guns offered for sale were made after 1898.  And every FFL dealer required a 4473 to be filled out.  

      The antiques were also priced out of reach of most people at the show.  A good condition rifle or pistol from the 19th century costs easily over $1000 and are bought to be part of collections, not shot.  

      I'm a 4 Freedoms Democrat.

      by DavidMS on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 06:26:35 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I doubt you hate to, really (6+ / 0-)

        but that's ok, because you seem to be wrong.

           The Gun Control Act of 1968 provides that persons "engaged in the business" of dealing in firearms must be licensed. Although Congress did not originally define the term "engaged in the business," it did so in 1986 as part of the McClure-Volkmer Act (also known as the "Firearms Owners' Protection Act"). That Act defined the term "engaged in the business," as applied to a firearms dealer, as "a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms."

            Significantly, however, the term was defined to exclude a person who "makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms."

            Consequently, unlicensed sellers may sell firearms without conducting background checks or documenting the transaction in any way. In addition, because federal law does not require private sellers to inspect a buyer's driver's license or any other identification, there is no obligation for such sellers to confirm that a buyer is of legal age to purchase a firearm. As a result, convicted felons, minors and other prohibited purchasers can easily buy guns from unlicensed sellers.

            According to a 1999 report issued by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), the current definition of "engaged in the business" often frustrates the prosecution of "unlicensed dealers masquerading as collectors or hobbyists but who are really trafficking firearms to felons or other prohibited persons." A June 2000 ATF report found that unlicensed sellers were involved in about a fifth of the trafficking investigations and associated with nearly 23,000 diverted guns.  A national survey of firearm ownership conducted in 1994 determined that 60 percent of all firearm sales in the U.S. involved federally licensed dealers, while the remaining 40 percent of firearms were acquired from unlicensed sellers. [Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, accessed 4/11/13]

        That 40% figure is attacked frequently by gun enthusiasts as inaccurate or outdated, but of course it's the NRA to blame for killing off most research into guns and gun violence, which plays nicely into today's instance of attempted research suppression.

        Guns don't kill people. It's impossible to be killed by a gun. We are all invincible to bullets, and it's a miracle. -- this message brought to you by the Night Vale chapter of the N.R.A.

        by tytalus on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 06:45:03 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Its not what I observed (5+ / 0-)

          There were a few tables with collectors trading World War I-era rifles and the two that I spoke with and got their business cards have FFL licenses.  

          pre98.com and Collectors Corner (battlebargains.com) both are FFL holders.  

          Next time I go there to get a good deal on hard to find magazines or buy out of someone else's parts bin, I will collect business cards and determine who has a FFL.  

          Keep in mind, many of the vendors at this show do not sell firearms but parts, cleaning supplies, pocket knives, books, etc.  

          Most non-FFL transactions that I am aware of are between people who know each other socially.  

          I know that this only relates to one major gun show and I am sure that others who have actually been to gun shows can add their experiences with the number of non-FFL sellers of firearms.  

          I'm a 4 Freedoms Democrat.

          by DavidMS on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 07:52:17 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  The 40% figure is not attacked; its routine (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          FrankRose, KVoimakas

          misinterpretation by gun-controllers is attacked.

          Further study shows that the overewhelming majority of that 40% "acquired from unlicensed sellers" is through acquaintances and family.

          Not, as you are trying to imply, seedy figures at gun shows.

          Non enim propter gloriam, diuicias aut honores pugnamus set propter libertatem solummodo quam Nemo bonus nisi simul cum vita amittit. -Declaration of Arbroath

          by Robobagpiper on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 01:40:29 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site