Follow Me On Twitter!

Wednesday, March 13, 2013

The Truth About The Gun Show Loophole

I am so sick of hearing about the "gun show loophole". The belief by many anti-gun people is that you can go to a gun show and buy a rifle, shotgun or handgun, and are not subject to a federal background check that is mandatory in a gun dealer's store or shop. Now here is the truth:

If you buy a rifle, shotgun, or a handgun from a dealer that holds a Federal Firearm License (commonly referred to as a FFL), then you will be submitted to a federal background check (NICS, The National Instant Criminal Background Check System) regardless of the location. That means EVEN AT A GUN SHOW!!

That's right folks, buying guns at a gun show is no different than buying a gun at a gun shop or retailer. You will have to fill out the NICS form and have the background check run before you can have the weapon transferred to you. Period.

Just to be clear, let me repeat that: If you buy a gun from a FFL dealer, you will be subject to the NICS background check regardless of location! Doesn't matter if you buy it in their store, their home, their Prius, or even a gun show.

So what is the "gun show loophole"? First and foremost it is bad misnomer. Secondly, it is the right as private gun owner to transfer your firearm to another individual without the burden of having to figure out how to submit the person to the NICS background check.

So why does this "loophole" exist? Because not being a gun dealer, a private individual has no way of running a NICS background check against their husband, wife, son, daughter, dad, mom, uncle, aunt, cousin, friend, or person that answered a want ad. Without this loophole it would be extremely difficult for a family member or friend to be gifted a firearm, or to even inherit the firearm. It is ridiculous to contemplate the burden of trying to figure out how to subject individuals to such a process.

This would be analogous to telling a private seller of a vehicle that they have to run a DMV check on a potential buyer before they can sell a vehicle to another individual. What? How?

Now here is the real kicker: there are federal rules governing this "loophole", and most states have already closed the "loophole" already!

The federal law regarding transferring firearms to another individual clearly states that you cannot knowingly transfer (sell or give) any firearm to someone that is ineligible for buying a gun. IE, if you know the person couldn't pass the background check (they are a felon, mentally ill, have renounced their U.S. citizenship, are an illegal alien, have a restraining order against them, etc) then you cannot give or sell a firearm of any type to  said person. Doing so is a felony itself!

Further, most states have already closed this so-called "loophole" for all or some firearms. For instance, here in Michigan, any long gun can be gifted or sold to another individual without a background check. However, it is still subject to the federal restriction stated above. However, in Michigan, if you give or sell a handgun you do have to have a background check.

The Michigan system actually makes sense, the responsibility is all on the buyer. The buyer must go to their local police department, fill out a form. The police department runs a Michigan State Police background check on the buyer, and then gives them a 10 day (2 week) purchase permit if they are cleared. The buyer has 2 weeks to purchase the handgun, and then return one of the copies of the purchase permit back to the police station, filled out and signed by the seller.

Many other states have similar processes, and many even include long guns in that process, including every state where a high-profile shooting has taken place! In fact, none of the shootings (Columbine, Aurora, Sandy Hook, VA Tech) were perpetrated with a gun received via the "gun show loophole".

So while the media and idiotic liberal politicians (like 0bama) make a big deal of the "gun show loophole", closing it on a federal level would have done NOTHING to prevent those shootings. It is smoke-and-mirrors, bait-and-switch by the media and idiotic liberal politicans (like 0bama) to suggest that this is a natural outcome of those shootings.

So in short, there IS no "gun show loophole" and in fact that should get the award for the worst name ever. It is lie. It is a grossly misleading name. Which is precisely why the media and idiotic liberal politicians (like 0bama) use it.

4 comments:

Mike B said...

First you said it's an unfair burden to require that people who want to sell a gun to a relative or friend or someone who answers a want ad to figure out how to perform a background check. Then you said this:

"However, in Michigan, if you give or sell a handgun you do have to have a background check.

The Michigan system actually makes sense,..."

Like most pro-gun fanatics, you're double talking so fast you trip yourself up.

LoneWolfArcher said...

Mike, I know you pro-big government types have a tough time with states rights. But there are two major distinctions between the two which trashes your concept of "double talking".

1st, I said the Michigan system makes sense because it is a STATE law. This is where these things should be taken care of. Having a federal law govern these things is insane and stupid, as are most anti-gunners.

2nd, as I pointed out, the Michigan system leaves the burden of the background check to the BUYER, not the seller. The FFL/NICS check is for dealers. (That's the seller for those of you that are anti-gunners.)

Nice try though Mike.

Mike B said...

Rather than admit that you contradicted yourself, you resort to the "nice try" bluff.

The fact is it's not rocket science that background checks could be done for any transfer down at the local FFL guy. But you talked about that as if it was a near-insurmountable obstacle.

I always wonder why your side has to resort to such exaggerations and dishonesty if you have "right" on your side like you keep saying.

LoneWolfArcher said...

Now I don't know whether you are truly ignorant or being purposely obtuse.

The point is simple: the NICS check for a private (non-FFL) seller is IMPOSSIBLE. There is no way for it to be done directly with the ATF. Therefore, you are advocating that I'd have to pay a 3rd party (yes they charge for this) in order to sell a piece of private property? Yeah, that isn't an undue burden.

So rather than try and solve this via a federal law, it should be left to the states. That is not contradictory in any way. It is in keeping perfectly with my small government, states rights beliefs.

You continue to miss the point.

Thanks for playing.