Tuesday, November 22, 2016

Gun Rights vs Gun Control

https://mic.com/articles/39683/gun-control-debate-universal-background-checks-aren-t-universal

Comprehensive pre-purchase background checks

Our current background checks aren't even fully enforced now. Also, they're missing a lot of data that could help in stopping bad people from acquiring a weapon. Why do we need to expand something when our politicians aren't doing anything to enforce the current system? The answer is simple: there would be no reason to continue infringing on your rights if the current system was actually being enforced like it was intended to. Politicians do this all the time--they drop the ball then demand that you hand over more freedoms. When does it stop?

Anyway, allow Joe Biden to explain it to you

______________________________________________

closing the gun-show loophole

There is no gun-show loophole.

A loophole is defined as "an ambiguity or inadequacy in the law or a set of rules."

The Gun-show loophole is a misleading term in two ways: it's not a loophole and it's not limited to gun-shows.

What the Democrats really mean by it is that you can buy a gun from a private seller (not a Federal Firearms Licensed (FFL) seller who sells guns as a business) without the seller having to conduct a background check so long as you both are in the same state.

However, it is not a loophole:

- The current federal laws strictly states that all FFLs must conduct a background check.

- The law allows for private sales without a background check. The only time a private sale is required is if the buyer and the seller are in different states, in which case, the seller must ship to an FFL where a background check must be performed.

- Also, the law says if a background check is not required because it's a private sale, the private seller must conduct due diligence before they transfer the firearm. If they don't, they are liable should the purchaser commit a crime with the gun.

Now, here's the folly with the logic of "closing the gun-show loophole": it assumes that criminals follow the law. You know who are going to be the only ones complying with gun control legislation? The same people who currently comply with gun-control laws now: the law-abiding citizen. So in the end, nothing changes, except more erosion of our freedoms.

So why do they call it the gun show loophole? Because a private seller can go into a gun show and sell their gun without having to conduct a background check on the buyer. However, this is true anywhere. Why did they chose to target gun-shows? My guess is that the Democrats focus group probably felt "Gun-show loophole" was an awesome buzzword. It rhymes, it has the word "loophole" in it, which naturally, people associate as a bad thing, and uses the word gun-show which makes it seem like this madness is happening in an area where there are hundreds of firearms.

______________________________________________

Making sure that terrorists are not allowed to buy guns.

This is not what it seems on the surface (are you starting to notice a pattern, yet?). Watch this short video to understand what they're really talking about, which is a slippery slope towards tyranny:

No comments:

Post a Comment