Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Mosby

(17,468 posts)
Thu Sep 1, 2016, 01:16 PM Sep 2016

This message was self-deleted by its author

This message was self-deleted by its author (Mosby) on Mon Sep 5, 2016, 08:03 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

41 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
This message was self-deleted by its author (Original Post) Mosby Sep 2016 OP
The Devil's in the details. JonathanRackham Sep 2016 #1
Apparently all you have to do to is be a anti-gun preacher. oneshooter Sep 2016 #10
Yes, it's one of the exemptions. Straw Man Sep 2016 #11
Which version of "Universal Background Checks"? DonP Sep 2016 #2
OT: side question discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2016 #3
Some of them already know the results they want before they draft the questions n/t DonP Sep 2016 #4
And, in addition... discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2016 #5
Create your own scary definition ... to support our prejudice. DonP Sep 2016 #6
The survey places I've worked for and been involved with... discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2016 #8
Add that registration will be a part of it (so called UBC) and see how it polls. beevul Sep 2016 #7
Correction. Straw Man Sep 2016 #9
how is it a myth? Mosby Sep 2016 #12
rhetorical shorthands are buzzwords are propaganda gejohnston Sep 2016 #13
"Weapons of war", "weapons meant for war", "weapons meant for the battlefield". beevul Sep 2016 #14
whats "assault-style weapons" Duckhunter935 Sep 2016 #16
They have no clue what a "weapon of war" is.. virginia mountainman Sep 2016 #17
not really Duckhunter935 Sep 2016 #15
Here's how. Straw Man Sep 2016 #18
so what? I couldn't care less about the way gun shows are percieved Mosby Sep 2016 #21
What evidence is there, that private sales are a problem in need of a solution? beevul Sep 2016 #24
you don't support background checks on principle? Mosby Sep 2016 #25
I support private property rights on principle, so I'll ask you again... beevul Sep 2016 #27
can't answer the question? Mosby Sep 2016 #28
I asked you first. beevul Sep 2016 #29
"who do you support?" beergood Sep 2016 #34
Would that support change if they tell you registration is included? N/T beevul Sep 2016 #35
i live in CA beergood Sep 2016 #36
Obviously. Straw Man Sep 2016 #30
"the "gun show loophole" language is rhetorical shorthand or private party to party gun sales." pablo_marmol Sep 2016 #19
I think gun shows should be banned in the US Mosby Sep 2016 #22
Actually, they aren't brave gejohnston Sep 2016 #23
Great suggestion mainstreetonce Sep 2016 #26
If only social policy was based on 'feelings' rather than *facts*?! pablo_marmol Sep 2016 #39
Why? Straw Man Sep 2016 #31
"I 'think' gun shows should be banned in the US." pablo_marmol Sep 2016 #32
less guns, less death. Mosby Sep 2016 #37
"less guns, less death." Unproven according to at least 3 liberal criminologists. pablo_marmol Sep 2016 #38
".......which is why I avoid it." pablo_marmol Sep 2016 #40
get a grip. Mosby Sep 2016 #41
I have a slightly different take on the issus you raise... Eleanors38 Sep 2016 #20
My nomination for Thread Winner. pablo_marmol Sep 2016 #33

JonathanRackham

(1,604 posts)
1. The Devil's in the details.
Thu Sep 1, 2016, 01:41 PM
Sep 2016

In NC I can loan my brother or friend a rifle for hunting season. In NY by letter of the law a background check must be done. Seems a little anal retentive. What happens at the trap range if my shotgun breaks down, do I really need a background check to borrow one?

Unfortunately there seems to be no compromise or latitude for discussion.

Who's going to enforce background checks on gang members?

I think the solution is a two level approach, a FOID card or hunting license for long guns and a national CCW license for handguns. Documentation and certification would include firearm safety and storage.

oneshooter

(8,614 posts)
10. Apparently all you have to do to is be a anti-gun preacher.
Thu Sep 1, 2016, 03:52 PM
Sep 2016

And you can ignore that law entirely.

Straw Man

(6,771 posts)
11. Yes, it's one of the exemptions.
Thu Sep 1, 2016, 04:00 PM
Sep 2016
Apparently all you have to do to is be a anti-gun preacher.

And you can ignore that law entirely.

You can also ignore jurisdictional magazine capacity limits if you're a news anchor:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/dc-police-urged-meet-the-press-execs-to-use-picture-of-high-capacity-magazine/2015/01/24/f132eebe-a3f4-11e4-903f-9f2faf7cd9fe_story.html
 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
2. Which version of "Universal Background Checks"?
Thu Sep 1, 2016, 02:25 PM
Sep 2016

The Bloomberg drafted version, that his paid staff people are trying to sell in state legislatures, where loaning your son a shotgun is considered a "Transfer" and requires a paid for background check and another "Transfer" when he returns it?

Or

The one where a "transfer" refers only to permanent private sales for background checks; kitchen table or gun show, like 15 states already have in place and working?

The first one is a cluster fuck waiting to happen, the second one makes sense.

But neither will have any impact on crime, criminals or mass shootings.

(Would be the same Pew study that also just said that 44% of households now acknowledge having guns, shortly to be denied and attacked selectively by the "Grabnutz" who have invested their souls in the "shrinking gun ownership" belief?)

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,577 posts)
3. OT: side question
Thu Sep 1, 2016, 02:32 PM
Sep 2016

How is the opinion poll industry like the AWB fans?

 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
4. Some of them already know the results they want before they draft the questions n/t
Thu Sep 1, 2016, 02:49 PM
Sep 2016

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,577 posts)
5. And, in addition...
Thu Sep 1, 2016, 02:56 PM
Sep 2016

...if asked for a definition of "assault weapon" they both may answer: "Whatever those words mean to you."

 

DonP

(6,185 posts)
6. Create your own scary definition ... to support our prejudice.
Thu Sep 1, 2016, 03:08 PM
Sep 2016

Funny how they never ask for anyone to define the terms for something with so much room for misinterpretation..

In any survey I've done over the years, we always went to great pains to pre-test any term we thought might be even the least bit confusing. Then we'd use the most accurate and correct definitions and phrasing, even if we had to restructure the entire questionnaire.

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,577 posts)
8. The survey places I've worked for and been involved with...
Thu Sep 1, 2016, 03:32 PM
Sep 2016

...tended to have opinion polls without documentation for any possibly abstract or unclear terms. This sometimes made the questions about as a clear as the AWB folk are about what it is they want to ban.

A long time ago I read a book which suggested the reader go to a local mall with a clipboard and survey random folks as to whether they were for or against communism. Probably 99 out of 100 would say against but then not have much of an answer when asked to define communism.

 

beevul

(12,194 posts)
7. Add that registration will be a part of it (so called UBC) and see how it polls.
Thu Sep 1, 2016, 03:32 PM
Sep 2016

Last edited Fri Sep 2, 2016, 03:29 AM - Edit history (1)

I doubt very much that it would get majority support if the details were made known, the usual suspects will without a doubt use it as a means of getting their holy grail - registration.

Registration: The total control of ALL LEGAL gun sales. That's what they're after, and its been one of their goals since day 1.


Edited to add the word: LEGAL


Straw Man

(6,771 posts)
9. Correction.
Thu Sep 1, 2016, 03:34 PM
Sep 2016
For the past several years, large majorities of both Democrats and Republicans have favored making private gun sales and sales at gun shows subject to background checks.

Sales at gun shows are no different from sales anywhere: There is no federal requirement for a background check on private sales, but there is a federal background-check requirement for all sales conducted by federally licensed dealers. Some states do not allow private sales to take place without a background check, regardless of where they take place.

There is no specific exemption for sales at gun shows, at either the state or federal level. The "gun show loophole" is a myth.

Mosby

(17,468 posts)
12. how is it a myth?
Thu Sep 1, 2016, 04:08 PM
Sep 2016

the "gun show loophole" language is rhetorical shorthand for private party to private party gun sales.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
13. rhetorical shorthands are buzzwords are propaganda
Thu Sep 1, 2016, 05:01 PM
Sep 2016

tools to misinform people. Take "assault weapon" for example. It is simply a term that means what any politician wants it to mean. In New York, the target pistols used in the Olympics are "assault weapons". Under CT and CA law, none of the ARs used at Sandy Hook or the terrorist attack in San Bernideno were "assault weapons".

 

beevul

(12,194 posts)
14. "Weapons of war", "weapons meant for war", "weapons meant for the battlefield".
Thu Sep 1, 2016, 05:18 PM
Sep 2016

All propaganda.

 

Duckhunter935

(16,974 posts)
16. whats "assault-style weapons"
Thu Sep 1, 2016, 06:13 PM
Sep 2016

virginia mountainman

(5,046 posts)
17. They have no clue what a "weapon of war" is..
Thu Sep 1, 2016, 08:56 PM
Sep 2016

I have "REAL" weapons of war in my gun case, weapons actually used in war, and they would call it a "hunting" rifle.... (not my pic, but an example of what I have)



But they call these black semi auto's "weapons of war" but *no* army in the world uses them in their military...

The lack of basic knowledge, and the amount of bald face lying is infuriating.

 

Duckhunter935

(16,974 posts)
15. not really
Thu Sep 1, 2016, 06:12 PM
Sep 2016

just like internet sales. Funny, I have purchased several weapons via the internet and they had to be shipped to an FFL, and a background check performed. That language is used purposely to confuse. Why not just say "private sale", funny how the shorthand is longer, lol.

Straw Man

(6,771 posts)
18. Here's how.
Thu Sep 1, 2016, 10:32 PM
Sep 2016
how is it a myth?

the "gun show loophole" language is rhetorical shorthand for private party to private party gun sales.

It's a myth because the real situation has nothing to do with gun shows. In jurisdictions where private party to private party sales without a background check are legal, they are legal everywhere -- not just at gun shows. In jurisdictions where private party to private party sales without a background check are illegal, they are illegal everywhere -- including gun shows.

Calling it the "gun show loophole" gives the false impression that sales at gun shows are exempt from background check requirements. This false impression is widespread. If you don't think so, poll the next ten people you meet and ask them what the "gun show loophole" is.

Mosby

(17,468 posts)
21. so what? I couldn't care less about the way gun shows are percieved
Mon Sep 5, 2016, 02:29 PM
Sep 2016

Last edited Mon Sep 5, 2016, 03:27 PM - Edit history (1)

Regardless private person to private person gun sales happen all the time at gun shows, so claiming that it's a myth is stupid. Some research just came out that said 22 percent of gun sales at shows did not require a background check, that's a lot of weapons.

Obsessing about language is not an argument.

All gun sales should involve a background and mental health check and all guns should be registered in a national database. Thats my opinion.

 

beevul

(12,194 posts)
24. What evidence is there, that private sales are a problem in need of a solution?
Mon Sep 5, 2016, 03:15 PM
Sep 2016

So far, all I've seen is assertions based on a presumption.

Mosby

(17,468 posts)
25. you don't support background checks on principle?
Mon Sep 5, 2016, 03:25 PM
Sep 2016
 

beevul

(12,194 posts)
27. I support private property rights on principle, so I'll ask you again...
Mon Sep 5, 2016, 03:38 PM
Sep 2016

I support private property rights on principle. I support solutions when a problem (not a 'potential' problem) can be demonstrated.

So I'll ask you again:

What evidence is there, that private sales are a problem in need of a solution?

So far, all I've seen is assertions based on a presumption.

You've demonstrated the presumption with your reply to me.

Can you substantiate that the measures you support are actually necessary?

Mosby

(17,468 posts)
28. can't answer the question?
Mon Sep 5, 2016, 04:17 PM
Sep 2016

I support the President's position on the gun show loophole, who do you support?



 

beevul

(12,194 posts)
29. I asked you first.
Mon Sep 5, 2016, 06:13 PM
Sep 2016

What evidence is there, that private sales are a problem in need of a solution?


Can't answer the question?

beergood

(470 posts)
34. "who do you support?"
Mon Sep 5, 2016, 07:56 PM
Sep 2016

i support no one, only facts and truth.

i'm in favor of private party background checks only because they cause no problems and prevent people from accidently selling to a prohibited person.

 

beevul

(12,194 posts)
35. Would that support change if they tell you registration is included? N/T
Mon Sep 5, 2016, 08:04 PM
Sep 2016

beergood

(470 posts)
36. i live in CA
Mon Sep 5, 2016, 08:17 PM
Sep 2016

so i refuse to answer that question.

Straw Man

(6,771 posts)
30. Obviously.
Mon Sep 5, 2016, 06:49 PM
Sep 2016
so what? I couldn't care less about the way gun shows are percieved

Regardless private person to private person gun sales happen all the time at gun shows, so claiming that it's a myth is stupid.

And private sales happen all the time at parking lots, yard sales, and people's homes. The "gun show loophole" is a deliberate misnomer, created and promulgated with the intention to deceive.

Any means to an end, eh?

pablo_marmol

(2,375 posts)
19. "the "gun show loophole" language is rhetorical shorthand or private party to party gun sales."
Sat Sep 3, 2016, 12:41 AM
Sep 2016

The HELL it is! It's intentionally misleading rhetoric intended to convince people that it's easier for criminals to obtain guns illegally at gun shows than they could elsewhere. PERIOD.

Pure culture war........as The Controllers despise gun shows.

Mosby

(17,468 posts)
22. I think gun shows should be banned in the US
Mon Sep 5, 2016, 02:31 PM
Sep 2016

Some brave cities already have like Tucson.

They realize that's not the kind of commerce they want in their city and county.

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)
23. Actually, they aren't brave
Mon Sep 5, 2016, 02:42 PM
Sep 2016

They are virtue signalling fools who want to say they are doing something about violent crime, when in fact they are doing absolutely nothing of value. Like registration, does nothing but provide public sector jobs. Gun registries cost money and provide no benefit, which is why Canada and New Zealand ended registration of several types of guns. No crimes are solved, no evidence of crime dropping, no empirical value at all. If a policy or restriction doesn't provide any empirical benefit, then it shouldn't exist. For example, when my state liberalized concealed carry, nothing bad happened. In fact, no noticeable negative effects anywhere that does. That tells me the restriction shouldn't have existed in the first place.
Actually, some members on the city council did, I doubt the majority of the citizens support it or care.

mainstreetonce

(4,178 posts)
26. Great suggestion
Mon Sep 5, 2016, 03:26 PM
Sep 2016

If only....

pablo_marmol

(2,375 posts)
39. If only social policy was based on 'feelings' rather than *facts*?!
Mon Sep 5, 2016, 08:33 PM
Sep 2016



Nope. Gonna have to pass on that idea.

Straw Man

(6,771 posts)
31. Why?
Mon Sep 5, 2016, 07:37 PM
Sep 2016
I think gun shows should be banned in the US

Because you're opposed to private sales? Then you'd better ban yard sales, garage sales, and Wal-Mart parking lots too.

pablo_marmol

(2,375 posts)
32. "I 'think' gun shows should be banned in the US."
Mon Sep 5, 2016, 07:44 PM
Sep 2016

Since thinking clearly has little or nothing to do with the way your belief system has been developed, this post only serves to underline the manner in which your team has rendered itself irrelevant, given the pitch-perfect responses it attracted! So.......thank you very much!!!

Edited to add the fantastic description regarding culture war from post #20. Great job, E38!!

"Gun shows" are a means to carry out private sales if you are a non-FFL (few such "vendors," in my experience), but the venue is mentioned because gun prohibitionists are obsessd with looks, meetings, advertising, sport -- any physical representation of That Thing in general culture, and wish to bar gun shows de facto. Most of this country's prohibitions are suffused by the "dirtiness" of the act, the thing, the status which is proposed for prohibition. Witness the massive lines around gun shows post Sandy Hook. Gun-owners, like the cultures "attached" to any prohibition, are quite aware of this attempt at stigma, and respond aggressively and doggedly to ANY attempts to go after their culture (the same can be said of the "AWB&quot . Some of these responses are ill-advised and over-the-top, but one can say the same of others subject to culture-war prohibitions: LBTQ rights, drinkers, dope users, minorities, etc.

Mosby

(17,468 posts)
37. less guns, less death.
Mon Sep 5, 2016, 08:23 PM
Sep 2016

Somehow that simple fact escapes a lot of people in this group which is why I avoid it.

Cheers.

pablo_marmol

(2,375 posts)
38. "less guns, less death." Unproven according to at least 3 liberal criminologists.
Mon Sep 5, 2016, 08:29 PM
Sep 2016

But you keep that faith-based emotwaddle comin'!



Edited to add: You've got one helluva tough sell -- given that gun violence is less that 1/2 of what it was in 1993 while the national gun stock has risen dramatically. (I know, I know..........all you have to do is make pronouncements -- no empirical backup required.)

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/05/07/gun-homicide-rate-down-49-since-1993-peak-public-unaware/

pablo_marmol

(2,375 posts)
40. ".......which is why I avoid it."
Mon Sep 5, 2016, 08:41 PM
Sep 2016

You fool nobody. You avoid this forum because your feet are held to the fire to support your bogus claims, and that makes you vewy, vewy uncomfortable.

Mosby

(17,468 posts)
41. get a grip.
Mon Sep 5, 2016, 10:02 PM
Sep 2016
 

Eleanors38

(18,318 posts)
20. I have a slightly different take on the issus you raise...
Mon Sep 5, 2016, 02:18 PM
Sep 2016

1) "Gun shows" are a means to carry out private sales if you are a non-FFL (few such "vendors," in my experience), but the venue is mentioned because gun prohibitionists are obsessd with looks, meetings, advertising, sport -- any physical representation of That Thing in general culture, and wish to bar gun shows de facto. Most of this country's prohibitions are suffused by the "dirtiness" of the act, the thing, the status which is proposed for prohibition. Witness the massive lines around gun shows post Sandy Hook. Gun-owners, like the cultures "attached" to any prohibition, are quite aware of this attempt at stigma, and respond aggressively and doggedly to ANY attempts to go after their culture (the same can be said of the "AWB&quot . Some of these responses are ill-advised and over-the-top, but one can say the same of others subject to culture-war prohibitions: LBTQ rights, drinkers, dope users, minorities, etc.

2) Concerning UBCs (which I support), the prospects of achieving these grow dimmer for the near future due to the prohibitionist track record of the small but elite and well-placed groups which call for UBCs. Gun owners know about this ruse as well. The controller/banners nevertheless remain politically tone-deaf to a fault in not changng their ways for the past 30 friggin' years.

pablo_marmol

(2,375 posts)
33. My nomination for Thread Winner.
Mon Sep 5, 2016, 07:50 PM
Sep 2016

Bravo, sir/maam.......bravo.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»This message was self-del...