Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Kellhound]

It's less about implementing arcane rules but about rules that can be enforced and showed to work in other countries. But the ban-all-guns-boogeyman just makes it impossible, so yeah.

Enforce the rules already in place before adding more laws...

[Mayhem]

A dealer has to run a 4473 on every firearm sold in all 50 states, which encompasses the vast majority of all sales at gun shows

Not when they're selling firearms from their personal collection they're holding for more than a year. A weird exception.

[Stormdash]

Not when they're selling firearms from their personal collection they're holding for more than a year. A weird exception.

I don't know how many FFLs you personally know but I know several and it's genuinely amusing that anybody thinks they have these high volume side businesses going when they walk funny because the ATF rarely has fewer than three fingers in, and wiggling.

I expect the exception is a minor tip to the cap that they are in fact non-commercial humans some of the time and that alienability of property is a feature of the right to said property (because firearms implicate more civil liberties than just the 2nd Amendment - your 4th, 5th, and 14th Amendment rights apply to them as well (an oft overlooked factor as to why it's generally problematic to assume you can require a background check on any, every, and all private transfers, especially when private citizens can't even use the service).

The idea being the fact that John is an FFL doesn't mean that John, the individual non-inventory firearm owner, should have to submit an NICS check on his own son to hand down great-granddad's M1917 Enfield. That's just reasonable public policy

[PhaelixWW]

I don't know how many FFLs you personally know but I know several and it's genuinely amusing that anybody thinks they have these high volume side businesses going when they walk funny because the ATF rarely has fewer than three fingers in, and wiggling.

I expect the exception is a minor tip to the cap that they are in fact non-commercial humans some of the time and that alienability of property is a feature of the right to said property (because firearms implicate more civil liberties than just the 2nd Amendment - your 4th, 5th, and 14th Amendment rights apply to them as well (an oft overlooked factor as to why it's generally problematic to assume you can require a background check on any, every, and all private transfers, especially when private citizens can't even use the service).

The idea being the fact that John is an FFL doesn't mean that John, the individual non-inventory firearm owner, should have to submit an NICS check on his own son to hand down great-granddad's M1917 Enfield. That's just reasonable public policy

Furthermore, every single one of those firearms is documented in the FFL's bound book. The ATF takes a dim view of dealers who claim that they just happened to transfer a sizeable chunk of their inventory to their personal collection before selling them off. That kind of thing gets prosecuted as trafficking, which is why most non-idiot dealers avoid even the appearance of such a thing.

That being said, there are always going to be a few low-hanging fruit out there who will find themselves getting plucked because they're just too stupid to realize that they're going to get caught.

[Zan15]

Enforce the rules already in place before adding more laws...

you know you can do both right and be even more effective?

[Kellhound]

you know you can do both right and be even more effective?

You know you can do the first one and see if it is enough before reducing the rights of others "just in case"?

[Mayhem]

You know you can do the first one and see if it is enough before reducing the rights of others "just in case"?

Some of them just can't be enforced. Like moving firearms across state lines, how do you enforce that? People privately selling guns to people that would fail a background check, how do you enforce that? Heck, even FFLs can stock up on firearms and occasionally sell them without a background check.

The rules aren't useful. Sure people might rightfully say, well there aren't many FFLs that sell a vast amount of firearms under the table, the "loophole" exists and the ones that want to make a quick buck extra, can do so. But then there are articles like this that make me think it's not just a few FFLs that really don't give a shit about the law:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/03/u...iolations.html

And then you have constant budget cuts to the ATF making it even harder for them to enforce the few rules that actually can be enforced and don't hinge on criminals just not doing criminal things.
https://apnews.com/article/4d9b1d41d...aa104a29ec6910

[Zan15]

You know you can do the first one and see if it is enough before reducing the rights of others "just in case"?

you know you can do both right and be even more effective since most of the "new" ones are a whole different ball game....

[Kellhound]

Some of them just can't be enforced. Like moving firearms across state lines, how do you enforce that? People privately selling guns to people that would fail a background check, how do you enforce that? Heck, even FFLs can stock up on firearms and occasionally sell them without a background check.

The rules aren't useful. Sure people might rightfully say, well there aren't many FFLs that sell a vast amount of firearms under the table, the "loophole" exists and the ones that want to make a quick buck extra, can do so. But then there are articles like this that make me think it's not just a few FFLs that really don't give a shit about the law:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/03/u...iolations.html

And then you have constant budget cuts to the ATF making it even harder for them to enforce the few rules that actually can be enforced and don't hinge on criminals just not doing criminal things.
https://apnews.com/article/4d9b1d41d...aa104a29ec6910

So, the ATF fails to enforce the law so the answer is, more laws? Again, enforcement of current laws would be a proper step. The ATF is not the only law enforcement that can pursue felon in possession.

- - - Updated - - -

you know you can do both right and be even more effective since most of the "new" ones are a whole different ball game....

Because enforcing the current laws do not impact law abiding gun owners.

[postman1782]

A dealer has to run a 4473 on every firearm sold in all 50 states, which encompasses the vast majority of all sales at gun shows

And I am telling you, this was a gunshow that happened during the Obama administration, where a so called "private seller" sold over 500 AR-15 rifles in a weekend gun show. NO ONE, especially a private seller, would have that many rifles to sell in a weekend, without getting all kinds of red flags on him.

[PhaelixWW]

Some of them just can't be enforced. Like moving firearms across state lines, how do you enforce that? People privately selling guns to people that would fail a background check, how do you enforce that?

The very same argument applies to universal background checks, you know. Whenever that point is brought up on the other side, it's handwaved away.

Heck, even FFLs can stock up on firearms and occasionally sell them without a background check.

No, they can't. You grossly misunderstand the process here.

The rules aren't useful. Sure people might rightfully say, well there aren't many FFLs that sell a vast amount of firearms under the table, the "loophole" exists and the ones that want to make a quick buck extra, can do so.

No, lol, there's no loophole that allows this. What you're describing is still against the law.

But then there are articles like this that make me think it's not just a few FFLs that really don't give a shit about the law:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/03/u...iolations.html

And, from the same article:

The vast majority of America’s gun dealers largely comply with federal laws, and the level of violations cited in the A.T.F.’s reports varies widely. Many are basic record-keeping violations born out of the complicated paperwork required to purchase a gun. “You can’t do it 100 percent,” Steve Clark, the owner of Clark Brothers Gun Shop in Warrenton, Va., said of compliance inspections.

Clerical errors are common, said Mr. Clark, whose store opened in 1960 and was inspected by the A.T.F. this year. As long as dealers work with the A.T.F. to correct errors and file correctly, the violation is rarely seen as serious.

“Some gun shops consider it a pain. They feel like the A.T.F. is the bad guys,” Mr. Clark said. “The whole idea here is to catch bad guys. I want bad guys to not have guns just as much as anybody.”

“Most gun dealers abide by the law and are really careful to sell guns in a responsible manner,” said Avery Gardiner, the co-president of the Brady campaign. “There’s a small number of gun dealers engaged in really irresponsible practices, putting everybody at risk, and the A.T.F. knows exactly who they are and allows them to continue operating.”

The problem here is not the law, but the lack of uniform enforcement of said law. And that lack actually hurts the majority of law-abiding dealers, who would love for those laws to be enforced the way they're supposed to.

And then you have constant budget cuts to the ATF making it even harder for them to enforce the few rules that actually can be enforced and don't hinge on criminals just not doing criminal things.
https://apnews.com/article/4d9b1d41d...aa104a29ec6910

I've got no problem at all with the ATF having the proper budget needed to accomplish their mandate, as long as they don't overstep that mandate.

Honestly, I think everyone (but the criminals) win when enforcement is routine and consistent.

- - - Updated - - -

And I am telling you, this was a gunshow that happened during the Obama administration, where a so called "private seller" sold over 500 AR-15 rifles in a weekend gun show. NO ONE, especially a private seller, would have that many rifles to sell in a weekend, without getting all kinds of red flags on him.

Which is entirely why I doubt your memory in the absence of the actual video you're describing.

Again, anybody stupid enough to do so would find themselves arrested for trafficking pretty shortly. That's a no-brainer.

[postman1782]

Which is entirely why I doubt your memory in the absence of the actual video you're describing.

Again, anybody stupid enough to do so would find themselves arrested for trafficking pretty shortly. That's a no-brainer.

Oh, I am sorry, it was a year. But still, someone that sells hundreds of the same gun, in a "year", is not a private seller, that is a reseller and possibly a dealer.

And I found the video that I saw.



Yes, it is 11 years old, and I guarantee nothing has changed since then either. But literally all of these "private" sellers at these shows are committing felonies.

[PhaelixWW]

Oh, I am sorry, it was a year. But still, someone that sells hundreds of the same gun, in a "year", is not a private seller, that is a reseller and possibly a dealer.

Sure. They're definitely still illegally doing private sales. But also, yeah, a year is not a weekend, 348 is not over 500, and an SKS is not an AR-15.

SKS's are mostly C&R, and it's within the realm of possibility that a private collector might engage in many sales while attempting to "perfect" their collection.

Still, if they're selling 350 a year, then they should have an FFL, because they match the indicia of a person "engaged in the business". Doing otherwise is illegal and should be prosecuted.

And I found the video that I saw.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhgjLDeyNLQ

Yes, it is 11 years old, and I guarantee nothing has changed since then either. But literally all of these "private" sellers at these shows are committing felonies.

All of the ones that were targeted by the undercover team, found to be violating the law, and then subsequently included in the video, you mean. So 22 out of 312 private sellers at seven different gun shows. That's 7%.

But sure, I'm all for more investigation and enforcement. By all means, lock up the people who violate the law. That's the kind of thing that harms nobody but the criminals.

[postman1782]

Sure. They're definitely still illegally doing private sales. But also, yeah, a year is not a weekend, 348 is not over 500, and an SKS is not an AR-15.

SKS's are mostly C&R, and it's within the realm of possibility that a private collector might engage in many sales while attempting to "perfect" their collection.

Still, if they're selling 350 a year, then they should have an FFL, because they match the indicia of a person "engaged in the business". Doing otherwise is illegal and should be prosecuted.




All of the ones that were targeted by the undercover team, found to be violating the law, and then subsequently included in the video, you mean. So 22 out of 312 private sellers at seven different gun shows. That's 7%.

But sure, I'm all for more investigation and enforcement. By all means, lock up the people who violate the law. That's the kind of thing that harms nobody but the criminals.

There are all kinds of people that go to these shows, knowing there are people like these guys that will sell them anything they can find or want. Like a former friend of mine, that went literally insane with conspiracy bullshit when Trump got elected, he is a former National Guard member with PTSD, and he knows that without gun shows, he would never be able to buy a gun, because he would fail a background check.

[Kellhound]

There are all kinds of people that go to these shows, knowing there are people like these guys that will sell them anything they can find or want. Like a former friend of mine, that went literally insane with conspiracy bullshit when Trump got elected, he is a former National Guard member with PTSD, and he knows that without gun shows, he would never be able to buy a gun, because he would fail a background check.

There are very few legal private party sellers at gun shows. It is illegal to act as a private party when you are in the business of selling firearms. It is illegal to sell a firearm to anyone you have cause to believe cannot legally own one. It is illegal to sell any NFA weapon without proper paperwork and tax payment, private party or not.

[postman1782]

There are very few legal private party sellers at gun shows. It is illegal to act as a private party when you are in the business of selling firearms. It is illegal to sell a firearm to anyone you have cause to believe cannot legally own one. It is illegal to sell any NFA weapon without proper paperwork and tax payment, private party or not.

I just showed you quite a few examples, and I have been to the gun shows, that do the same exact thing in the last year.

[Kellhound]

I just showed you quite a few examples, and I have been to the gun shows, that do the same exact thing in the last year.

I will try this again..... We do not need more laws we just need the ones we already have enforced!

[Mayhem]

The very same argument applies to universal background checks, you know. Whenever that point is brought up on the other side, it's handwaved away.

What, that they are uneforcable? I mean if you want to make my point for me, be my guest but I thought you were on the other side of the debate. Thanks though that you agree simply demanding "enforce the rules" is not a solution to unenforcable rules. It's also the reason why people are talking about firearm-registry because it would make it way easier to weed out illegal sellers.

No, they can't. You grossly misunderstand the process here.

Yes, they can. Heck, I've found even two websites were you can train for FFL, explain how you the process of selling your private firearms works and what best to avoid to not get the attention of the ATF. They don't require a background check for private sales. They have to write information about the buyer and the sale into their books, sure but that is not a background check. And as stated in the article some even ignore that and are in return not punished.

No, lol, there's no loophole that allows this. What you're describing is still against the law.

Yeah, under the table was hyperbole.

And, from the same article:

The problem here is not the law, but the lack of uniform enforcement of said law. And that lack actually hurts the majority of law-abiding dealers, who would love for those laws to be enforced the way they're supposed to.

Agreed, I also never once said that all laws are unenforcable.

I've got no problem at all with the ATF having the proper budget needed to accomplish their mandate, as long as they don't overstep that mandate.

Honestly, I think everyone (but the criminals) win when enforcement is routine and consistent.

Good, I think so too.

- - - Updated - - -

I will try this again..... We do not need more laws we just need the ones we already have enforced!

Explain how and you maybe have an argument "do something" is not it.

[postman1782]

I will try this again..... We do not need more laws we just need the ones we already have enforced!

Because the ones that we have right now, don't cover everything. This is why we need fucking universal background checks. You know, the bill that has 80-90% support?

[Kellhound]

What, that they are uneforcable? I mean if you want to make my point for me, be my guest but I thought you were on the other side of the debate. Thanks though that you agree simply demanding "enforce the rules" is not a solution to unenforcable rules. It's also the reason why people are talking about firearm-registry because it would make it way easier to weed out illegal sellers.



Yes, they can. Heck, I've found even two websites were you can train for FFL, explain how you the process of selling your private firearms works and what best to avoid to not get the attention of the ATF. They don't require a background check for private sales. They have to write information about the buyer and the sale into their books, sure but that is not a background check. And as stated in the article some even ignore that and are in return not punished.



Yeah, under the table was hyperbole.



Agreed, I also never once said that all laws are unenforcable.



Good, I think so too.

- - - Updated - - -



Explain how and you maybe have an argument "do something" is not it.

Hmm... Start by arresting and prosecuting people illegally selling firearms?

- - - Updated - - -

Because the ones that we have right now, don't cover everything. This is why we need fucking universal background checks. You know, the bill that has 80-90% support?

The ones we have right now cover the ones you have been complaining about....