What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
366 Comments
- bellboy19, on 02/18/2009, -19/+90This is so true. I don't know why people think that going to a gun show automatically means its a free for all and you buy whatever you want without having to go through a background check. In my experience, buying from a gun show is the SAME as purchasing a gun from a store, with the only difference being you can save a little money. I just wish people would take the time to read up on the rules and regulations before they start trying to ban things they don't understand.
- govsucks, on 02/18/2009, -19/+82I recently went to a gun show in Atlanta. I tried to purchase a fairly nice shotgun but I was delayed. When I was 18 years old I was busted for pot. I am now 36 and have been in no further trouble and to this day I have a hard time buying a gun. The gun show free for all is a myth. Its EXTREMELY hard for a citizen to get a gun if they have ANYTHING in their past. Just another example of government preventing good people from buying guns. Just like the new taxes that will undoubtedly come on guns. They can't take our right to guns, but what they will do is place such high taxation on it that no average person will be able to afford one...legally. I am at the point now that I would willingly commit tax fraud against this government anyway, they fraud me everyday so turnabout is fair play.
- treehugger87, on 02/18/2009, -12/+58What about the "felony loophole" that denies the right to bear arms and the right to vote to hundreds of thousands of non-violent offenders?
- WhatBubbaKnows, on 02/18/2009, -8/+44The people making these anti-gun laws and the people pushing them to do so, understand perfectly what they're working against. They know the current rules and regulations as well as you do. They also are aware of the lack of logic in their reasoning, and the lack of common sense in their arguments.
Yet, they persist in their crusade to disarm the American citizen. You have to wonder why? We have to realize that these people want to disarm you for one reason only - they can't control you if you're armed.
We have got to stop battling the logic, stop arguing over the semantics and what does the 2A really mean. It's time to draw the line, and dare them to cross it. - inactive, on 02/18/2009, -11/+41Yeah... I've never seen any difference between shopping at Cabela’s and purchasing at a gun show except for two things... larger selection and generally better prices.
- sHockz, on 02/18/2009, -12/+40Hmmm...I think the one place I see the most ATF agents is <gasp> the gun show!
There is no 'gun show loophole'. There are more people ready to take you down there than you know.... - Vortex5, on 02/18/2009, -12/+39There is no loophole! They should never be allowed to restrict gun rights and ownership. Britain tried that and failed miserably. If guns are banned, criminals will buy them anyway on the black market. It's the same with anything you make illegal i.e. drugs, you ban it, and criminals distribute it anyway.
- zirconx, on 02/18/2009, -4/+30I agree this is another big problem. If you get busted for felony speeding (20+ over the limit) then you can no longer own a gun for the rest of your life? How stupid is that?
Or how about the guy that was facing felony charges for sitting in his car using a coffee shop's free WiFi? - zboyet, on 02/18/2009, -4/+29Most people who run a booth at a gun show have actual brick and mortar gun shops.
- 45superman, on 02/18/2009, -1/+26Ah--the gun haters' favorite "argument" when they run out of facts and logic to back up their points (which is pretty much right at the beginning of the debate)--claim that gun rights advocates are sexually inadequate.
OK, bombula--I confess, my penis IS woefully inadequate for protecting my life, liberty, and family. The .45 and the AR-15, on the other hand, should do the job nicely. - Bhatch514, on 02/18/2009, -2/+23BS, simply because anyone that owns a firearm at least would get the caliber right.
- jehan60188, on 02/18/2009, -2/+23they're talking about private sellers not requiring to do background checks at gun shows
turns out, private sellers never have to to background checks. gun shows are simply a way to facilitate the sales process
no criminal in his/her right mind would go to a gun show to get a gun, anyways - mst3kcrow, on 02/18/2009, -3/+23You can still buy firearms via private transfer between two citizens who are not FFL dealers, colloquially called "cash and carry", but here is what some people have missed from the article: "A Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) report on 'Firearms Use by Offenders' found that fewer than 1% of U.S. 'crime guns' came from gun shows, with repeat offenders even less likely than first-timers to buy guns from any retail source."
- Bloodwine, on 02/18/2009, -3/+23Either you are female or an emasculated male, probably the latter.
You are also sexist in assuming no women purchase firearms. - omgwtflawl, on 02/18/2009, -1/+20Right here, buddy. I rail against both the unconstitutional banning of drugs and the unconstitutional banning of firearms.
- zirconx, on 02/18/2009, -2/+20Hate them all you want. (and I didn't dig you down)
But its america and you don't stop other people from owning the things you don't like.
Oh, and even though you "hate" them, I'll bet when the **** hits the fan the first thing you do is call the men with guns. - ntmaster, on 02/18/2009, -0/+16and thus are FFL holders, who have to do all the same paperwork on a customer whether they're selling at a gun show or selling in their store.
- offrdbandit, on 02/18/2009, -1/+17Yeah, the "bury the ignorant *****" nerve.
- yuppiexj, on 02/18/2009, -2/+18You miss the part where being a criminal means you don't follow these laws.
They just go steal a gun from a cop's house or car when he's not around.
That's the easiest way to always find a weapon for nefarious means. - pathouston22, on 02/18/2009, -1/+16Nothing wrong with hating guns. Just don't try to force your beliefs onto others, which is what too many people who hate guns try to do.
- kosser, on 02/18/2009, -10/+25it doesn't matter because eventually Obama will take away our 2nd amendment slowly but surely. And people will applaud him for the loss of our rights. Don't believe me, just look up his voting record...I know 99% of people wont
- LordStryker, on 02/18/2009, -0/+15Exactly. Control over such a matter is an illusion. The tighter your grip, the more "good" people will get hurt creating a paradox. The very system you put in place to protect people has the opposite effect.
- RawShark, on 02/19/2009, -0/+15MuadDave.
So in other words, the 'loophole' is nothing more nefarious than private commerce and the right to sell your own private property. - pbone, on 02/18/2009, -3/+18Which way to the gun show? Is it this way? *points to bicep*
Or that way? *points to other bicep* - yuppiexj, on 02/18/2009, -0/+15The point of gun control is control of people moreso than guns
- jehan60188, on 02/18/2009, -1/+15I'm sorry for your loss, but your friend would've killed himself in some other way if he couldn't get a gun.
Guns are tools. Just like hammers- you can pound nails, or skulls. Just like sleeping pills- you can take one, or 50...
You can shoot at bad guys, deer, targets, or at innocent people.
people can be evil. guns can not... - aletoledo, on 02/18/2009, -4/+18what if we require a background check before free speech as well? Please submit your SS# and home address before replying to this comment.
- mst3kcrow, on 02/18/2009, -2/+16The anti-gun crowd loves to tout the "gun show loophole" as something extremely dangerous. That's why it's important people get the facts straight; not digging you down or anything, just clarifying.
- bkrejchi, on 02/18/2009, -3/+17oh yea good idea. I bet you tell people that are arguing over women's reproductive rights to just not get pregnant. Thanks for being helpful, and go ***** yourself.
- 45superman, on 02/18/2009, -5/+18"We have got to stop battling the logic, stop arguing over the semantics and what does the 2A really mean. It's time to draw the line, and dare them to cross it."
I agree with most of what you're saying, but I don't think we have to limit ourselves to an either/or choice of dispelling their "logic" on the one hand, or preparing to fight them, on the other.
I'll fight them with words until those fail. After that . . . they need to hope there IS no "after that." - jehan60188, on 02/18/2009, -0/+12no, he got it right. it's really, REALLY tiny bullets
- zirconx, on 02/18/2009, -1/+13If you come across a free WiFi signal and use it, you can be charged with a felony. Are you stupid? You think thats appropriate?!
- Akairenn, on 02/18/2009, -1/+13@horixon:
You seem to be insisting that, during a popular rebellion, an armed citizenry would not be capable of seizing military assets. And that the military wouldn't fragment, simply thrusting armored assets into their hands.
Absurd on both counts. You might want to read up about some goings on back in the middle of the 19th century. - regeya, on 02/18/2009, -1/+12What's everyone's stance on:
- Freedom of Speech
- Freedom of the Press
- Illegal wiretapping
- Torture
Just curious. Many people I know who are strongly 2nd Amendment have called me a traitor because I want to see Guantanamo Bay shut down.
For the record, I'm strongly for CONSTITUTIONAL rights, not cherry-picked rights, and treating others like human beings, no matter how they'd treat us if they could. It's the American thing to do, and since I'm from the Bible Belt, I'll point out that being kind to your enemies is the CHRISTIAN thing to do.
Oh, and I've got fantastic aim. - zirconx, on 02/18/2009, -2/+13The hicap magazines could still be had *anywhere* (gun shops, magazines, cabelas, etc.). The law just prohibited any more from being manufactured or imported.
And what exactly is your point? Did mass murders go down when hicap mags were banned? Did they go up when the ban expired? No and no.
And getting a handgun in Florida is no easier than in 45 other states. (Places like CA and DC and MD are few crazy exceptions where they think self defense is wrong) - 45superman, on 02/18/2009, -0/+11That's a valid point--but probably a point for another discussion. I would certainly like to see the utter failure of the "War on Drugs" abandoned--which vastly reduce the number of non-violent felons.
- bentman78, on 02/18/2009, -3/+14I don't believe you at all.
I purchased a Lee Enfield bolt action rifle at one and they did the check right there. This was in VA, one of the most pro-firearms states in the union. - fyngyrz, on 02/18/2009, -0/+11Why? Is there some part of the 2nd that says "except arms invented tomorrow or later" or "except for arms we haven't thought of yet"?
No, there bloody well isn't.
It says arms, and that's what it means.
You want to change it, they DID put in a means for you to do so; it's in article V, and I suggest you go read that. That's WHY they put article V in there, and WHY the amendments don't contain all manner of caveats.
NOT so some namby-pamby sophist bastards could ignore part of the constitution when it seems convenient to them.
I'm actually in agreement that the 2nd does need updating (specifically as regards WMD, nuclear, chemical and biological); but as it stands today, it means just what it says, and that is ARMS. Not *some* arms, not *yesterdays* arms, not *small* arms, not *unmodified barrel* arms, and not arms *you aren't afraid of*.
The fact that we haven't addressed this properly speaks to the corruption of our government away from its authorized powers, and to nothing else.
Something else: If you want to argue from the (wrong) position that it can only mean arms "of the day", I think a comprehensive list of arms "of the day" would probably make you ***** yourself. Specifically because it includes both biological and chemical WMD. - Mothrog, on 02/18/2009, -1/+12"Last gun show I attended, I picked up a .9mm Glock and walked out with it with zero paperwork."
Right. See if you can spot your error in that sentence. It's the kind of error only a moron that doesn't know anything about guns would make. - yuppiexj, on 02/18/2009, -2/+12Private sales are by definition private.
This is analogous to buying a car/knife/booze from a friend. (all 3 of my examples kill more people every year) - staffa, on 02/18/2009, -1/+11There is no error, he bought a 1/10 scale replica of a gun and wasn't required to fill out any paperwork because the bullets only contain enough powder to dent a wet tissue.
- fyngyrz, on 02/18/2009, -0/+10I just discovered how hard it is to clap and laugh at the same time. Well played, sir, well played. Bombula is now today's official "Internet *****."
- aletoledo, on 02/18/2009, -0/+10I read about someone that was having marital problems and killed himself by driving into a highway overpass. Just sayin'.
- zirconx, on 02/18/2009, -2/+12Did you know that in maximum security prisons, the most secure, locked down place you could imagine, people still kill each other with WEAPONS. And its not as rare as you would think.
We will never solve the US voilence problem by restricting weapons. Its never worked for any country thats tried it.
P.S. News flash - It hasn't worked for drugs either. - sphigel, on 02/18/2009, -1/+10So all laws are completely moral? If I were to smoke pot and get caught that would make me a "bad" person for the rest of my life? Seriously? Get a ***** clue buddy.
- zirconx, on 02/18/2009, -1/+10Luckily you don't get to only pick one right from the bill of rights, you get all of them, including the ones about privacy.
- MuadDave, on 02/18/2009, -2/+11Out of curiosity, what state was that gun show in? In Virginia, anyhow, non-private citizen sales are required to do the background check thing, and non-CHP holders are limited to one handgun a month. I wish I could afford one handgun a month!
- fyngyrz, on 02/18/2009, -0/+9Yeah, Mr. Doe? John Doe? We checked, and sorry, your name is on the no-speak list. Step off or go jail.
- fyngyrz, on 02/18/2009, -1/+10Extend the idea: If you get busted for felony anything, you no longer are allowed to own some of the tools that can actually defend your family against dangerous, violent criminals.
Worse, in the specific case of the drug war, these criminals were *created* by government prohibition, and it is the government that cripples your defense against them.
To which I'll add one of my favorite objective truths: "When seconds count, the police are only minutes away"
Nice, eh? - Mothrog, on 02/18/2009, -0/+9NidStyles, you don't know what you're talking about. Straight from the ATF:
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/faq2.htm
(B16) What record-keeping procedures should be followed when two private individuals want to engage in a firearms transaction?
"When a transaction takes place between private (unlicensed) persons who reside in the same State, the Gun Control Act (GCA) does not require any record keeping. A private person may sell a firearm to another private individual in his or her State of residence and, similarly, a private individual may buy a firearm from another private person who resides in the same State. It is not necessary under Federal law for a Federal firearms licensee (FFL) to assist in the sale or transfer when the buyer and seller are "same-State" residents. Of course, the transferor/seller may not knowingly transfer a firearm to someone who falls within any of the categories of prohibited persons contained in the GCA. See 18 U.S. C. §§ 922(g) and (n). However, as stated above, there are no GCA-required records to be completed by either party to the transfer.
There may be State or local laws or regulations that govern this type of transaction. Contact State Police units or the office of your State Attorney General for information on any such requirements.
Please note that if a private person wants to obtain a firearm from a private person who resides in another State, the firearm will have to be shipped to an FFL in the buyer's State. The FFL will be responsible for record keeping. See also Question B3." -
Show 51 - 100 of 378 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is