Revolvers for Everyone!

[Lycorth]

B/c those of his ilk know law-abiding gun owners don’t shoot back whereas criminals do.

That's exactly it. Paranoid terror over boogeymen in the form of law-abiding gun owners has these anti-gun fanatics all whipped up into a tizzy. They don't live where crime happens, they don't have experience with criminals and criminal behavior - they don't know what they're talking about.

I say not. You said there is no gun show loophole.

This is totally and completely false. This is an outright falsehood which can easily be checked by anyone.

I say again, there is no loophole and I have conclusively proved there is not. You have no experience with gun shows, gun buying, NICS, or criminal behavior, so you don’t get to have an opinion, because it is uninformed and worthless. Prattle on all you like, leftist - consider your cover blown.

If you don’t like the fact that I own guns and advocate others to do so, come and take them.

In all honesty, that’s not relevant to this conversation.

No, it’s totally relevant. Strict gun control leads to disarming of the population, which leaves them vulnerable and unable to effectively defend themselves with the most effective means available. Anti-gun fanatics try to ignore the simple lessons of history, because they utterly disprove the arguments of gun-control paranoiacs.

Helena, no one here (at least not that i’m aware of) is advocating the total elimination of all guns. Just handguns; people would be able to keep their rifles and shotguns. And as such could use them to defend themselves.

Everyone here is talking about the ban of all firearms. Handguns are perfectly suited to self-defense, especially inside the home or carried on the person when in public. Rifles and shotguns are large, heavy, and unwieldy compared to handguns. There is not and never has been a rational reason to ban handgun possession or carriage to the law-abiding.

Why is no one talking about banning criminal culture and cracking down on criminal social elements? Gun-control maniacs focus on inanimate objects and never the human source of crime, and then wonder why violent crime persists.

As an aside, the BATF has made it so cumbersome and invasive to get an FFL by slowly increasing restrictions and fees, and requiring unlimited access to your home as well as your business, that many who used to do business as small gun dealers simply quit (who knows, maybe that was the point).

That is precisely it. The government cannot ban firearms outright without causing chaos, as the people know that right is legally guaranteed. They can, however, use finance and red tape to make it impossible to own firearms, ammunition, or necessary supplies. Just turn up the heat little by little and before you know it, we’re boiling alive.

Contrary to what you may think, its not up to me whether restricted gun laws are put into place, that falls under the purview of the politicians. They’ll be the ones disarming you and others, not me. I have no guns, so it doesn’t affect me either way; Its them you should talk to.

Then why don’t you talk to the politicians and not to us, then? Why advertise your anti-gun mania if we’re not the ones responsible for making the laws?

Gun-control fanatics know that without popular support, outright gun bans will never be accepted by the public. We will continue to advertise the truth about firearms and the rational need to have them available to the law-abiding. We will not shut up.

I ask the gun-control fanatics here, again: why do you not support cracking down on criminals and criminal culture? Why support cracking down on inanimate object that the law-abiding do not use to harm their countrymen? Why are you intent on making the law-abiding into criminals and treating actual criminals with kid gloves and special favor?

What is the real agenda?

 

[AnotherVoice]

There seems to be an assumption that if we could only have a national ban on guns that the crime rate would tumble. Why do people think that more laws will make us better or that the new laws will be enforced better than the laws we currently have?

Does anyone actually think that the criminals would not be able to buy their guns from one of the several hundred countries manufacturing weapons?

Look at the drug trade.

 

[sidbrown]

In 33 states no PRIVATE sales have to be registrered. .

This contrasts sharply with the law on registering cars in private sales. So criminals can buy whatever guns they want, without any background check and no records being kept at gun shows provided the dealer is not in the business of selling guns. This is the gunshow loophole available in 33 states.
Here is the proof on video tape:
youtube.com/watch?v=4b-ztawuh98

youtube.com/watch?v=9L_s7N-I5SA

youtube.com/watch?v=baPgr_tw79Q&feature=related

No background check, no ID, any criminal can buy a gun. It is here captured on video tape for anyone to see.
People, you can see by the responses of these pro-gun people on this thread, that they have not been truthful about this. If they have not been truthful about this, then what is your conclusion about how trustworthy they are with all of these assault weapons they want to own.

 

[royal_archer]

There seems to be an assumption that if we could only have a national ban on guns that the crime rate would tumble. Why do people think that more laws will make us better or that the new laws will be enforced better than the laws we currently have?

Does anyone actually think that the criminals would not be able to buy their guns from one of the several hundred countries manufacturing weapons?

Look at the drug trade.

There is also an assumption out there that the left is motivated to reduce crime and protect people from dangers. If you subscribe to this assumption then many of the arguements of the left seem irrational. However if you consider that they have alterior motives, such as instilling a socialist state, then their attempts to disarm law abiding citizens do seem to follow a rational patern.

 

[royal_archer]

This contrasts sharply with the law on registering cars in private sales. So criminals can buy whatever guns they want, without any background check and no records being kept at gun shows provided the dealer is not in the business of selling guns. This is the gunshow loophole available in 33 states.
Here is the proof on video tape:
youtube.com/watch?v=4b-ztawuh98

youtube.com/watch?v=9L_s7N-I5SA

youtube.com/watch?v=baPgr_tw79Q&feature=related

No background check, no ID, any criminal can buy a gun. It is here captured on video tape for anyone to see.
People, you can see by the responses of these pro-gun people on this thread, that they have not been truthful about this. If they have not been truthful about this, then what is your conclusion about how trustworthy they are with all of these assault weapons they want to own.

Put the criminals in jail where they belong and this will be a non issue. Besides any criminal can buy a car, axe, chainsaw, machette, poison, etc. Why the paranoid hand up with guns?

 

[CPA2]

Congress believes in salvation by law. Congress believes that if only there were a perfect law, there would be a perfect society. What nonsense! Gun laws do not make us safer.

The SEC gives detailed reasons why rules-based accounting standards are subject to manipulation. Wow! I never thought that the SEC would admit that rules do not work. There is an old cliché that says that the tighter you hold on to a fistful of sand, the more that the sands slips through your fingers. In orther words, more gun laws mean more violent crime with guns. We have been sold a lot of rationalizations for taking away our freedom.

 

[gamewell45]

It would be very difficult for me to carry a rifle or a shotgun around as a self defense weapon. They’re not exactly easily portable, unless I slung it over my shoulder, which might look a little odd away from the gun range (not to mention, an obvious target for a mugger).

True, handguns are easier to conceal then a rifle or shotgun, but if arming yourself is as important as many here claim, then they won’t care either way; I wouldn’t be too concerned too much about how it looks; your safety is more important then looks.

At least the so-called criminal element will take notice and think twice about attempting to mug/rob/shoot you since they know that your already armed.

 

[royal_archer]

True, handguns are easier to conceal then a rifle or shotgun, but if arming yourself is as important as many here claim, then they won’t care either way; I wouldn’t be too concerned too much about how it looks; your safety is more important then looks.

At least the so-called criminal element will take notice and think twice about attempting to mug/rob/shoot you since they know that your already armed.

But because of concealment they can not identify who is armed and who is not. They therefore have to think twice before attacking any one. This is why many criminals support gun control; to disarm their victims.

 

[AnotherVoice]

True, handguns are easier to conceal then a rifle or shotgun, but if arming yourself is as important as many here claim, then they won’t care either way; I wouldn’t be too concerned too much about how it looks; your safety is more important then looks.

At least the so-called criminal element will take notice and think twice about attempting to mug/rob/shoot you since they know that your already armed.

Rifles are simply too heavy and combersome, check out what most people in law enforcement carry.

 

[sidbrown]

There is no “gun show loophole”; gun shows are strictly monitored by uniformed police and undercover agents, some of whom even pose as sellers or work with them to see that gun laws are being enforced. .

That is not a loophole. It means anyone can sell a privately owned firearm to another private citizen w/o having to do background checks. Whether I do it with my neighbor, or in the parking lot of a church, or the parking lot at a gun show, it isn’t a “gunshow loophole.”

Everyone is denying the relation to gun shows.

IT"S NOT A LOOPHOLE! What do you not understand about this? … You are intentionally distorting the facts to suit your own agenda, which isn’t much better than lieing. Quit being dishonest and please use some common sense.

I say again, there is no loophole and I have conclusively proved there is not. You have no experience with gun shows, gun buying, NICS, or criminal behavior, so you don’t get to have an opinion, because it is uninformed and worthless. Prattle on all you like, leftist - consider your cover blown.

It’s not a “gunshow loophole”, that’s just a phrase used by gun control advocates to drum up support for something that if it were honestly addressed (that they don’t want unregulated sales or transfers of ANY kind) would be more unpopular. .

WRONG it has nothing to do with gun shows unless you can point to a specific law which specifically exempts gun shows from other gun transaction laws.

Gun owners say no gun show loophole, and claim that I am a liar, but the following videos prove them wrong:
youtube.com/watch?v=EGJ-BLHXl9c&feature=related
youtube.com/watch?v=cc97OUyMkQA&feature=related
youtube.com/watch?v=Gq2faC-u87g&feature=fvw

youtube.com/watch?v=baPgr_tw79Q&feature=related
youtube.com/watch?v=9L_s7N-I5SA
youtube.com/watch?v=4b-ztawuh98
After watching these videos do you still say that I am a liar and distorting the facts? The facts are here for anyone to see on these videos, regardless of the vicious attempt to slander me, calling me dishonest.

IT"S NOT A LOOPHOLE! What do you not understand about this? … You are intentionally distorting the facts to suit your own agenda, which isn’t much better than lieing. Quit being dishonest and please use some common sense.

 

[royal_archer]

Gun owners say no gun show loophole, and claim that I am a liar, but the following videos prove them wrong:
youtube.com/watch?v=EGJ-BLHXl9c&feature=related
youtube.com/watch?v=cc97OUyMkQA&feature=related
youtube.com/watch?v=Gq2faC-u87g&feature=fvw

youtube.com/watch?v=baPgr_tw79Q&feature=related
youtube.com/watch?v=9L_s7N-I5SA
youtube.com/watch?v=4b-ztawuh98
After watching these videos do you still say that I am a liar and distorting the facts? The facts are here for anyone to see on these videos, regardless of the vicious attempt to slander me, calling me dishonest.

The truth is not slander. This socalled loop hole is not unique to gun shows. the same applies to garage sales, flea markets, and people selling guns out of the back of their car. Those who are selling large numbers of weapons are not taking advantage of a loop hole, they are breaking the law.

your examples and videos of people committing these crimes at gun shows is simply an attempt to malign gun shows by using the carrot arguement. (science has proven that all people who eat carrots will die). Would you argue that alleys should be banned since some criminals commit crimes in alleys? How about Central Park?

 

[sidbrown]

This socalled loop hole is not unique to gun shows.

I did not say it was unique to gun shows. Show me where I said that this loophole is unique to gun shows. I say it exists in gun shows. Show me where I said anything about it being unique to gun shows.
I offered the proof in the form of six videos showing that this loophole exists in gunshows.

 

[TheWalsh]

Helena, no one here (at least not that i’m aware of) is advocating the total elimination of all guns. Just handguns; people would be able to keep their rifles and shotguns. And as such could use them to defend themselves.

Dear Gamewell 45, The Supreme Court has just recognized that a handgun is the most practical firearm for self-defense. (Heller Decision) To oppose handguns is to oppose the right to self-defense. Saying that rifles and shotguns are as useful as handguns for self-defense betrays a lack of experience. I could go on at length to demonstrate that gun control has little, actually nothing, to do with safety or crime, and everything to do with the progressive/collectivist program to subjugate individual rights and prerogatives to an all powerful state. Each individual person is created in the image and likeness of God, and a royal being having the right to preserve his or her life, and to live it in freedom limited only by the rights of others to do the same. I believe my understanding of the issue to be compatible with Christianity and the Natural law. State-ism is another thing entirely.

 

[mark_a]

This is a premise that I heard and I thought worthy of debate. I tend to lean against it because it sounds absurd.

The premise is that we would have a much safer country and a much more polite society if everyone was required to wear a loaded sidearm at all times.

One side seems to think people are capable of rational behavior and this would help us control ourselves. It would eliminate a number of crimes, particularly those in which a weapon is used as a means of exerting power over others.

The other side seems to think there would be a perpetual bloodbath.

What do you think? Why?

-Tina “Presently Unarmed” G

I think I would be on the losing end of the barrel in just about any situation that involves the need of a gun.

 

[Lycorth]

There seems to be an assumption that if we could only have a national ban on guns that the crime rate would tumble. Why do people think that more laws will make us better or that the new laws will be enforced better than the laws we currently have?

Does anyone actually think that the criminals would not be able to buy their guns from one of the several hundred countries manufacturing weapons?

Look at the drug trade.

That’s precisely it. Laws are not magic spells that instantly cause change. We have enough laws about gun control and gun crime is still a problem in the US. The paranoiacs’ solution - more laws.

The definition of insanity is said to be someone who does something over and over and expects different results than what keep happening. Gun control fanatics are insane by this definition because they insist that more laws will magically solve the problem when the laws we have now have not.

I’m still waiting for the gun control fanatics to answer my question as to why do they not advocate cracking down on criminals and criminal culture. I don’t suppose I will get an answer, though. I really didn’t expect to.

 

[gamewell45]

Dear Gamewell 45, The Supreme Court has just recognized that a handgun is the most practical firearm for self-defense. (Heller Decision) To oppose handguns is to oppose the right to self-defense. Saying that rifles and shotguns are as useful as handguns for self-defense betrays a lack of experience. I could go on at length to demonstrate that gun control has little, actually nothing, to do with safety or crime, and everything to do with the progressive/collectivist program to subjugate individual rights and prerogatives to an all powerful state. Each individual person is created in the image and likeness of God, and a royal being having the right to preserve his or her life, and to live it in freedom limited only by the rights of others to do the same. I believe my understanding of the issue to be compatible with Christianity and the Natural law. State-ism is another thing entirely.

I think since you and I have a lot of fundamental differences, I think in this case both you and I are going to have to agree to disagree on this.

 

[wabrams]

I did not say it was unique to gun shows. Show me where I said that this loophole is unique to gun shows. I say it exists in gun shows. Show me where I said anything about it being unique to gun shows.
I offered the proof in the form of six videos showing that this loophole exists in gunshows.

It has been pointed out to you that not needing a background check for private sales is not unique to gu shows, you ignored those statements (ie you didn’t acknowledge it), so what else do you expect us to think? Plus, if it is not unique to gunshows, then it isn’t a loophole since that was intentionally written into the law. To call something that was intentionally written into a law a loophole is to be dishonest. A loophole is a mistake that one exploits.

 

[royal_archer]

I did not say it was unique to gun shows. Show me where I said that this loophole is unique to gun shows. I say it exists in gun shows. Show me where I said anything about it being unique to gun shows.
I offered the proof in the form of six videos showing that this loophole exists in gunshows.

And it also exists at Dunkin Donuts. And the cases cited were violations of the law, not a loop hole. So it is inaccurate to call it a gunshow loop hole.

 

[royal_archer]

I think since you and I have a lot of fundamental differences, I think in this case both you and I are going to have to agree to disagree on this.

And there are many places where you can live where your views of gun ownership are the law of the land.

 

[steveandersen]

You have not been around a group of people who wear guns, have you? Everyone is very, very polite! Of course, Hollywood paints a different picture. Who do you believe?

I’d rather people were polite because it is the right thing to do

guns shouldn’t come into it one way or another