Jim Kessler words things so carefully that it is clear he knows the subject matter well enough to tell the truth if he wanted to:
Since 1993, we’ve had two rules for gun sales. If you buy a gun at a store, you must submit to a criminal background check. If you buy a gun from an individual at a gun show, you are exempted from the background check.
There is a very simple solution to this problem: Require gun sales at gun shows to follow the same rules as gun sales at gun stores.
Kessler is Senior Vice President for Policy at Third Way. It is clear his policy is to deceive the public. Gun sales at gun shows do follow the same rules as gun sales at gun stores. If you buy a gun from an individual at a gun store (or gun show, or any other place) the Feds exempt you from a background check. So why the deception? The only reason I can come up with is that the truth yields results contrary to his desired outcome. Such people should acquaint themselves with 18 USC 241. They are treading a very fine line…
Lying to the public about the actual laws regarding firearms has been an key part of the strategy of Brady/VPC et al from their beginning.
The solution, really, is to make it illegal for individuals to sell guns.
And how are you going to police that?
How about making it illegal for individuals to sell knives, baseball bats, chain saws, hammers, gasoline, ………
Oh, wait, better not give them ideas……
The issue is not hardware, it’s behavior.
What makes the gun so different? I love how laws make all these crazy exceptions for GUNS…well because they’re GUNS!
Guns are different because guns are different!
Guns aren’t even different because of the Constitution. There’s another stupidity, why is it legal for me to carry a cocked-and-locked .45 around, but not a switch blade, or a pair of brass knuckles, or a collapsible baton, or a boot knife.
Sorry Arms != Guns. Guns are probably the best choice as far as arms go, but just like some people are more comfortable with a .45 or a .357, while others prefer to carry a .25 or a .32, some may find that a blackjack or a boot knife better suits their lifestyle or their preferences, and that should ALSO be protected fro Busy-Bodies like Ubu who live their lives attempting to shun reality.
ubu52, and you gloss right over the fact that VPC lies. Just to present a “solution” that isn’t.
And of course Ubu vanishes after her points are rebuffed.
Can’t engage in debate, but can’t admit you’re wrong. You must be a “Progressive”!
Why is it illegal for individuals to sell pharmaceutical drugs? Liquor? Bathtub cheese? Indian artifacts?
It would be policed the same way anything illegal to sell is policed.
So you’re saying that every time someone exchanges cash for dope they get caught? Because that’s already pretty illegal. My point is that such a law is pretty much unenforceable without constant draconian intrusions into everyone’s personal lives, much like drug laws. Basically the only way anyone need ever know about the transaction is if/when someone uses the gun in a crime. Even then, the original owner would be the only one who could be found, his fingerprints would be long gone, and if he were clever he could weasel his way out of it by belatedly discovering his weapon had been “stolen.” If they ever find the actual perp, even if he tells the truth there are no other witnesses & any charges would have to be dropped for lack of evidence.
Besides which, a semi-competent machinist can make his own guns in his garage if he wants & can afford the tools. It’s hard, but not that hard–it’s like any other skill. I bet you could learn to do it well enough to churn out something serviceable, say a single-shot or maybe even a revolver, in a week, if you spent the entire week working at it. The cat’s already out of the bag on that one.
ubu, you don’t seem to even realize that you are describing prohibitions on perishable items. There is nothing of any kind of realization of how reality works in the schemes of gun control advocates.
“So you’re saying that every time someone exchanges cash for dope they get caught?”
Of course not. They don’t catch everyone who does something illegal and they never will… But, gunnies will admit that they are mostly “law abiding” and being such, they will not break the law. Only criminals will break the law, and only criminals will get caught.
As a side note, my mother was a machinist at the Springfield Armory during WWII. She liked the job. 😉
Indian artifacts are perishable? You better go back to school.
I forgot to mention: Check out how California polices private sales. Most people get caught because they sell to an undercover agent or an informant.
ubu, thanks for demonstrating my point about your credibility.
So what you’re saying is that it will inconvenience law-abiding, non-criminal gun owners all the time, and only rarely succeed in netting actual criminals?