[Trayderjoe]

Originally Posted by ColdNoMore

This is for your previous post also, where you lied and tried to misdirect about..

First of all, you're being disingenuous in saying "NO" background checks are done"...as that is NOT what is being said. Licensed dealers are still required to perform the checks at gun shows...and no one is saying otherwise.

I never said that NO background checks are being done. Here is what I did say: In order to make actual progress, inflammatory, inaccurate reporting (such as continually misrepresenting what an AR-15 rifle actually is, or claiming that no background checks are done at gun shows) must stop as it only fuels the fire."

So who here is really being disingenuous? BTW, thank you for proving that statement correct, which was in my original post in response to the OP.

You also know that because of the 'loophole' that only requires 'gun dealers' to perform background checks (NOT private sellers), even those at gun shows...you're simply trying to deflect.

LOL

First, if a licensed dealer were to attempt to sell a gun as a private individual in order to duck a background check, we are now talking about someone breaking the law, aren't we? Exactly how many guns do you think are bought and sold through private individual to private individual sale at a gun show? There are numerous claims that 40% of guns are purchased without background checks. The link dispels that myth and quotes those who are using that number. Here is another fact checker link

My original point remains to the OPs query. Erroneously reporting data, and misleading purported truth is what keeps a healthy dialogue from moving forward.

"Called for" yet has done NOTHING since the NRA lunch...to push it along.

As for the NRA giving 'lip-service' to banning bumpstocks, here's the typical gun-nut site on that subject. Which people like yourself, are the ones demanding that the NRA virulently resist ANY new laws.

So who is deflecting...again? You still haven't supported your "lunch date" statement.

I also find it curious that you resort to name calling and quickly claim "lip service" to the posted NRA position. They are publicly supporting the review, yet you still attack. Interesting.

I encourage reasonable people to read the entire opinion screed (link below) and judge for yourself...from whence the opposition arises.
ATF Discovers a New Meaning of 'Automatic' to Regulate Bump-Stocks

BS!

The entire goal and sentiment by hardcore gun-lovers, as shown above in the link, is to drag out the process, twist the arms of politicians with the money & power the NRA wields...and wait for the next news cycle and hope people forget about it.

The favorite excuse to try and convince people...not to do ANYTHING.

<Sigh> The link brings one to an article that does discuss the function of a bumpstock. It also points to the process for changing legislation versus administratively making changes to the constitutional amendments. I have shown where the NRA is calling on the ATF to review bumpstocks in my earlier posting, but you have already dismissed that out of hand. Again, rhetoric is being used to circumvent the constitution. Please recognize that circumventing the constitution by administrative action should be abhorrent to anyone. There are "ultras" on both sides (OP: Can you see how your original post while well intended will just never work?)

I also suggest reasonable people read this article in its entirety.
Fact Check: Is Chicago Proof That Gun Laws Don't Work? : NPR

Oh wow, you didn't really go there...did you?

I appreciate the opportunity to present facts though.

Yep I did go there, but I am willing to acknowledge that my statement "strictest gun laws in the country" may be in error. However, Illinois does have the 8th toughest laws in the country (per your link), as well as Illinois concealed carry laws are also among the most stringent in the country.

Interestingly, the article points to the large number of gang shootings in Chicago as a result of gun acquisition from neighboring states, which may not have as stringent gun laws as Illinois. What is continually being overlooked is that we are talking criminal activity. I have already provided the federal laws that would prohibit the illegality of buying and transporting weapons across state lines, but will repost here to ensure that the citation is complete and not chopped:

Federal law prohibits a non-licensee from acquiring a handgun outside his state of residence and prohibits a non-licensee from acquiring a rifle or shotgun from a non-licensee outside his state of residence. (18 USC 992(a)(3))
Federal law prohibits anyone from transferring a handgun to a non-licensee who resides in another state (with rare exceptions), and prohibits a non-licensee from transferring any firearm to a non-licensee who resides in another state. (18 USC 922(a)(5))

So basically what we are seeing is that the gun laws that have been imposed, whether they are the strictest or not in terms of state rankings, actually don't work BECAUSE THE CRIMINALS DON'T CARE.

Perhaps the issue is not more gun laws, but actually tougher gun crime laws as indicated here in an article "Does Chicago Have The Strictest Gun Laws in the Country?" by Kelly Bauer. If you take the time to read the statistics presented, approximately 25% of the criminals arrested in Chicago from Jan. 1 to Sept. 30, 2015, had one or more prior gun arrests.

Trump appears to backpedal on gun control remarks after NRA meeting | The Independent

ARE YOU FREAKING SERIOUS?!

The president "appears" to be....

The article does not say that he is, just that he appears to be. In the second video on the same web page, he was supporting taking the guns first then doing due process. So by constitutional law, he would have to "back pedal". He was looking for an answer, had a discussion and indicated that he was open to discussion with the NRA as there is a common goal. But why acknowledge that? Hopefully people will read the whole article and listen to both videos.

Again, name calling and rhetoric aren't constructive. I say again, any attempt to circumvent the constitution by administrative controls and not an act of congress should be opposed and not rubber stamped. I don't care which amendment we are discussing, our founding fathers set up this system so that we don't have history repeat itself.

In an effort to keep this thread from being shut down due to too much politics, the response to your hilarious question can be answered in three words (or 280 characters)... JUST READ TWITTER!



This sad, but true, cartoon succinctly demonstrates yours and so many other...gun-lovers true position.

Really, posting a link to a tweet from a national leader to support your statement would make this too much about politics? I have already demonstrated a propensity to incompletely quote in order to make a statement fit an agenda. I would be remiss to actually believe someone who can't even quote me correctly.

But sorry, too many children have died...for it to continue.

Finally, a point I can completely agree on. Too many children have died.