Tearful Obama calls for 'sense of urgency' to fight gun violence in America

boing
21

Clarify?

2 Likes
22

Sort of like Trump nowadays?

23

I can spell it out later, but basically they make it sound like if you went through a gun show, internet sale, or set up an NFA trust, you can get a gun with out a background check, which isn’t true.

Only face to face private sales from two people in the same state are allowed with no NICS check, and I don’t believe anything proposed actually prevents this now.

1 Like
24

Actually, it will accomplish as much as is legally allowed to do to expand background checks and close gun-collector loopholes — the exact same loopholes that Paul Ryan suggested closing a few years ago.

Given the current NRA gridlock in Congress, what would you suggest to prevent gun violence in the future? I’d love to know.

2 Likes
25

Face to face private sales are part of the gun show / gun collector loophole that is specifically being targeted by this executive action. It’s meant to expand background checks to include “collectors” who can sell guns face-to-face under the guise of “selling collectors’ items”.

2 Likes
26

Well, it’s not for nothing that he has the endorsement of modern-day Hitler fans.

4 Likes
27

And when Reagan ran some people thought being an actor wasn’t a qualification for elected office.

3 Likes
28

You’re actually questioning whether he was shedding real tears at the thought of children’s deaths?

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/01/fox-host-president-obama-put-a-raw-onion-in-his-podium-so-he-could-cry-fake-tears-for-kids-killed-by-guns/

11 Likes
29

Being an actor is a pretty good qualification.
Especially if you can actually remember your lines, look good for the cameras, and don’t argue with the director.

8 Likes
30

I don’t think Reagan’s call for tighter gun regulation was an act either. Though it might have been influenced by that whole “getting shot by a loon with a handgun” thing.

19 Likes
31

  1. Gun collectors are NOT the people doing gun crime. Criminals aren’t buying 100 year old rifles for drive bys.

  2. Many actual collector have a C&R FFL license, which lets them buy SOME stuff directly and have it shipped to them vs go through a store.

  3. The problem is the old law didn’t really out line what constituted a “business”. How many guns a year can you sell and it be considered a business vs a hobby? I still don’t see what the actual guidelines for this will be, but it won’t stop someone wanting to sell a couple guns a year privately.

  4. This is probably aimed mostly at “gang armorers”. I have read about people who basically buy legally, and then sell to those who can’t normally buy them, claiming ignorance who they are selling to. I have a feeling those people will not be applying for an FFL, but let’s see.

  5. Ironically, IIRC during the Clinton era they “cracked down” and took licensees from “kitchen table” dealers. Basically people who sold guns as a side business, working from their home. Hell, for someone who does do a large volume of selling and trading, being allowed to get an FFL means they can get stuff shipped directly to their homes now and they won’t have to go through NICS when buying. So I really don’t see this as much of a problem. Nor is it really fixing much.

  6. Nearly ALL the guns at a gun show (of course this varies from show to show) were already dont by FFLs. Yes you might have a private seller set up a table, but nearly all guns were sold by FFLs, meaning charging TAX and going through the NICS check.

  7. Gun shows accounted for a few percent of where criminals go their guns.

2 Likes
32

On the other hand, a Gatling gun in the door of a minivan could be quite good for this. Those sliding back doors make those cars feel like gunship copters.

Edit: how would a drive-by with a Gatling on a horse buggy look? (Brain, stop, no thinking about Amish gangsters!)

4 Likes
33

And the people exploiting the gun show/private sale loophole aren’t all buying 100 year old rifles.

That’s what makes it a “loophole.” A law (or exception to a law) intended to enable one kind of sale is enabling others to circumvent the normal process.

7 Likes
34

Isn’t that where the Colmbine kids got theirs? And that Batman movie guy? Seems to me plenty of bad guys with guns are getting them from gun shows.

5 Likes
35

Well he mentioned collectors. But yes, there are those who deal in hunting and other types as well.

“Normal process”? Selling face to face with out a check has been the normal process for 200+ years. Here is the thing, if you are met with some shady bloke to buy your gun would you sell it to him/her? Or would you pass? If you would sell to them, then would a law making that illegal stop you or not?

80% of criminals get their guns from the black market or friends/family (who probably have a decent idea they aren’t going rabbit hunting). Well meaning legal gun owners getting fooled into selling guns to criminals I don’t think has been shown to be a real issue. In fact in the local BST forums I belong to, they vet a lot of people, and will out anyone they find as a restricted person. That is, don’t offer to buy guns when your face book is full of you smoking weed or bragging about illegal shit.

4 Likes
36

Columbine purchases, yes (but straw purchase by somebody who could have passed a background check). And the Batman guy did not buy guns at a gun show nor “online”.

In Columbine, 18-year-old Robyn Anderson made straw purchases on behalf of the shooters, She, and the shooters, would have passed a background check.
James Holmes bought the 3 firearms from two different retail stores, undergoing background checks on all three purchases.

2 Likes
37

With scare quotes. Implying that many of these sales are to non-collectors exploiting the loophole designed for the benefit of collectors.

38

I have no doubt that his crying was sincere. I also have no doubt that he had very sincerely decided to think about those kids during his speech so he could sincerely get mad and possibly cry. Just like an actor.

39

[quote=“sdmikev, post:3, topic:71595, full:true”]… No right is absolute, and people with the ability to process logic and can otherwise think clearly don’t have a problem with expanding background checks.
It ain’t a gun grab…[/quote]
I don’t have a problem with the limited “expansion” of background checks that will come out of this Executive Action.

Many people have a problem with the proposed legislation to implement “Universal Background Checks”, as these laws, at a minimum, implement a mechanism to create a registry of firearms owners, and at their most maximalist, create a firearms registry.

40

No - they are just designed to benefit the hobbyist. Just like any hobby, there are people who never set still and are constantly buying and trying the newest thing, and then flipping it for something else.

Or like I said, the side-business guy who buys, fixes something up, and flips it. Again, though 1) almost no criminals are getting guns that way, (ETA - by that way i mean gun shows) and 2) they make up a sliver of the number of guns at a gun show.

Also, one of the original complaints was selling guns over the internet. Even private sellers, unless you meet up with that person locally, you will have to ship it to an FFL and they will have to go through a NICS check.

2 Likes