Pat Toomey: Background Checks Died Because GOP Didn't Want To Help Obama

Translation: STY doesn't have a real honest, logical answer that can stand up under scrutiny, so he bluffs and blusters with this vague response tinged with a condescending attitude....which would work if STY hasn't consistently displayed willful and general ignorance on the subject.

Maybe he'll give us some specifics....hope springs eternal.

Oh well, at least STY has acknowledge that there are (or he is) NRA flunkies. But the question remains: why are they so afraid of a simple background check?
as usual your ignorance and stupidity is glaringly obvious. If you can't remember things about people you intend to insult, especially when they completely trump your asinine positions so far out of the water that it rains in japan, then we can simply accept the rest of your rants as pure bullshit. it's hilarious to watch you further compound your idiocy by failing to acknowledge that my history reference is dead on accurate, but you need to be that way or your entire position looks like pure childish tantrums. no worries though. I'm sure you can find a glimmer of rationale in the chronology of the posts.
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Translation: STY doesn't have a real honest, logical answer that can stand up under scrutiny, so he bluffs and blusters with this vague response tinged with a condescending attitude....which would work if STY hasn't consistently displayed willful and general ignorance on the subject.

Maybe he'll give us some specifics....hope springs eternal.

Oh well, at least STY has acknowledge that there are (or he is) NRA flunkies. But the question remains: why are they so afraid of a simple background check?


as usual your ignorance and stupidity is glaringly obvious. If you can't remember things about people you intend to insult, especially when they completely trump your asinine positions so far out of the water that it rains in japan, then we can simply accept the rest of your rants as pure bullshit. it's hilarious to watch you further compound your idiocy by failing to acknowledge that my history reference is dead on accurate, but you need to be that way or your entire position looks like pure childish tantrums. no worries though. I'm sure you can find a glimmer of rationale in the chronology of the posts.


And once again, STY babbles like a fool when given a simple challenge. Why is he so afraid of a simple background check? So far, he has not given a rational, valid, fact based answer. And as the chronology of the posts shows, what information he does reference can be easily deconstructed by OTHER FACTS that debunk his contentions.

STY is just another oather/threeper/libertarian/teabagger/neocon bullhorn.
 
Quote Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
And the question still remains: why are these NRA flunkies so afraid of a simple background check?


Most of us ain't "flunkies" but here ya go:

Background

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), which became operational in 1998, verifies that a person seeking to buy a firearm from a gun dealer is not prohibited from doing so by federal or state law.1 The National Rifle Association supported its establishment.2 Gun control supporters opposed NICS, preferring to require a gun purchaser to wait several days after stating the desire to buy a gun, before receiving it from a firearm dealer.3

Today, gun control activists are trying to expand this system to all firearm transfers, under the banner of “universal” background checks. However, no background check system will ever be truly “universal” because criminals will not submit themselves to the system. Therefore, the NRA does not support these proposals and is not working to implement this type of legislation. The NRA opposes, and will continue to oppose, private sales bans and registration schemes.

Federal and state restrictions on sales, trades, gifts or other transfers of firearms include:

Anyone engaged in the business of buying and selling firearms for profit must be federally licensed as a firearm dealer (FFL). A dealer must maintain a record of every firearm received from, or transferred to, another person or dealer.
Anyone who purchases a firearm from a dealer must pass a NICS check.
It is against the law for anyone to transfer a firearm or ammunition to anyone known or believed to be prohibited from possessing firearms or ammunition.
It is against the law (with rare exceptions) for anyone to transfer a handgun to a non-dealer who resides in another state.
It is against the law for a non-dealer to transfer any firearm to a non-dealer who resides in another state.
Anyone who acquires a firearm from a dealer is required to sign a federal Form 4473, stating under penalty of law that he or she is the actual buyer of the firearm. This is particularly relevant to the question of straw purchasers4—persons who can pass NICS checks, and thereupon buy firearms for prohibited persons—discussed below.
Dealers are prohibited from selling handguns to persons under age 21, and selling rifles or shotguns to persons under age 18. It is illegal for anyone to provide a handgun to a juvenile (person under age 18), and juveniles are prohibited from possessing handguns, with limited exceptions.


Where do criminals get guns? Theft, black market transactions, and straw purchases.

In 1985, the Department of Justice reported that only about one in five convicted felons obtained guns through legal channels such as retail stores.5
In 1991, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms reported that 37% of armed career criminals obtained firearms from street sales, 34% from criminal acts and associates, 8% from relatives, and only 7% from dealers and 6% from flea markets and gun shows.6
More recently, a Bureau of Justice Statistics survey of state prison inmates convicted of firearm crimes found that 79 percent acquired their firearms from “street/illegal sources” or “friends or family.” This includes theft of firearms, black market purchases of stolen firearms, and straw purchases. The survey also found that 12 percent obtained their firearms from firearm dealers (gun stores, pawn shops), while only 1.7 percent obtained firearms from anyone (dealer or non-dealer) at a gun show or flea market.7
The FBI’s National Crime Information Center stolen firearm file contained over 2 million reports as of March 1995, and an annual average of 232,400 firearms were stolen between 2005 and 2010.8
46.3% of firearms traced by the BATFE in relation to firearm trafficking investigations originate with straw purchasers.9


Where do law-abiding gun owners acquire firearms?

While the studies mentioned above dealt with where criminals get guns, a survey of gun owners generally, conducted for the Police Foundation and often misconstrued by gun control supporters, concluded:

The predominant sources of guns, unsurprisingly, were stores (60 percent). Other important sources included family members and acquaintances.10

Of course, stores (dealers) are required to conduct NICS checks already, and people are likely to know whether family members and acquaintances are prohibited from possessing firearms.

Furthermore, only four percent of those surveyed acquired guns from dealers and non-dealers at gun shows and flea markets, and three percent did so “through the mail” (which, as the study noted, requires a NICS check through a dealer). Acquisitions from strangers are the exception, not the rule.



Would prohibiting private sales reduce crime?

As noted above, most criminals obtain firearms by theft or black market transactions, or from straw purchasers.

California prohibited private sales of handguns in 1991 and rifles and shotguns in 1994, along with imposing mandatory handgun registration, and rifle and shotgun sale recordation. But the sharp increase in crime that took place prior to those laws, and the return of the crime rate to pre-surge levels, concurrent with the imposition of those laws, was accounted for mostly by juveniles, who are already prohibited from buying or possessing handguns. According to the California Department of Justice:

Between 1986 and 1999 the crime rate increased (peaking in 1991 nationally and in 1992 in California) and then decreased. The increased crime rate was largely due to the crack cocaine epidemic, while the subsequent decrease was largely related to the decline in the use of crack. The use of handguns by juveniles and youth (increasing then decreasing) accounted for most of the changes in the rate of violent crime. Violent crime by adults over 30 years of age and property crime by individuals of all ages did not go through this cycle of increase and decrease, and generally decreased over the entire period.11



What do gun control supporters say about private sales?

Based upon the Police Foundation survey, the Brady Campaign claims “40% of all gun sales . . . take place without background checks, not only at gun shows, but also with the added anonymity of the internet.”12

However, the survey—which was of gun owners generally, not of armed criminals—found that only four percent of gun owners acquired their guns from gun shows and flea markets, from dealers and private sellers combined.

Furthermore, the Brady Campaign’s claim about the “anonymity of the internet” is false. A dealer is prohibited from transferring a firearm to a buyer who is not a dealer, unless the buyer appears in person and presents ID, for purposes of signing the Form 4473 and running the mandatory NICS check.

Additionally, while anyone can advertise a gun on the internet, a seller who is not a dealer is prohibited from selling a firearm to a resident of another state without going through a dealer, and cannot mail or ship a firearm to another person other than a dealer. As the survey noted, “The 3 percent of respondents who indicated that they obtained guns ‘through the mail’ (which is illegal for all but FFLs) may have misremembered or may have referred to a mail-order purchase arranged through an FFL.”



Do gun control supporters have an ulterior motive?

Is it reasonable to conclude that gun control supporters believe that subjecting all firearm sales to NICS is a necessary step in the direction of gun registration? And, if so, that they see registration as a prerequisite to the confiscation or some or all guns?

In 1976, the chairman of the National Council to Control Handguns—later renamed Handgun Control, Inc. and now known as the Brady Campaign—said:

The first problem is to slow down the increasing number of handguns being produced and sold in this country. The second problem is to get handguns registered. And the final problem is to make the possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition—except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors—totally illegal.13

Currently, the FBI is not permitted to retain records on persons who pass NICS checks. However, in 2009, Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) introduced legislation, co-sponsored by handgun and “assault weapon” ban advocate Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), proposing that the FBI retain such records for 180 days.14 In 1995, Feinstein said about “assault weapons,” “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them, Mr. and Mrs. America turn them all in, I would have done it.15 And in 2012, she said that she might introduce legislation requiring owners of “assault weapons” to turn them over to the government within the framework of a “buy-back.”16

http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/f...-sales-restrictions-and-gun-registration.aspx

Straight from the horses mouth, as it were.

More like straight from a NRA Flunkies supposition and conjecture laden commentary attached to excerpted information.

Here's the bottom line:


To date, the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) has prevented nearly 1.8 million criminals and other prohibited purchasers from buying guns. The law also has a deterrent effect—prohibited purchasers are less likely to try to buy guns when they know comprehensive background check requirements are in place.

Unfortunately, current federal law requires criminal background checks only for guns sold through licensed firearm dealers, which account for just 60% of all gun sales in the United States. A loophole in the law allows individuals not “engaged in the business” of selling firearms to sell guns without a license—and without processing any paperwork. That means that two out of every five guns sold in the United States change hands without a background check.

Though commonly referred to as the “Gun Show Loophole,” the “private sales” described above include guns sold at gun shows, through classified newspaper ads, the Internet, and between individuals virtually anywhere.

Unfortunately, only six states (CA, CO, IL, NY, OR, RI) require universal background checks on all firearm sales at gun shows. Three more states (CT, MD, PA) require background checks on all handgun sales made at gun shows. Seven other states (HI, IA, MA, MI, NJ, NC, NE) require purchasers to obtain a permit and undergo a background check before buying a handgun. Florida allows its counties to regulate gun shows by requiring background checks on all firearms purchases at these events. 33 states have taken no action whatsoever to close the Gun Show Loophole.


http://www.csgv.org/issues-and-campaigns/gun-show-loophole

And then there's this little tidbit:


In 1997, 14% of State inmates who had
used or possessed a firearm during
their current offense bought or traded
for it from a retail store, pawnshop, flea
market, or gun show (table 8). Nearly
40% of State inmates carrying a
firearm obtained the weapon from
family or friends. About 3 in 10
received the weapon from drug
dealers, off the street, or through the
black market. Another 1 in 10 obtained
their gun during a robbery, burglary, or
other type of theft.
From 1991 to 1997 the percent of State
inmates with guns who acquired them
at a retail outlet fell from 21% to 14%.
At the same time the percentage
reporting that they used firearms
furnished by family or friends increased
from 34% to 40%. Between the two
surveys the Brady Handgun Violence
Prevention Act of 1993 was enacted.
The act requires background checks
for persons purchasing firearms from
federally licensed firearm dealers.
Changes in how inmates obtained
firearms, when the two surveys are
compared, may or may not reflect the
requirements in the Brady Act.
Inmates may have procured their
firearm or entered prison before the
Brady Act became effective in 1994.


http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fuo.pdf


And in case you want to repeat other mythology:


MYTH: There Is No Such Thing As The Private Sales Loophole
NRA News Host Cam Edwards: People Prohibited From Owning Firearms Cannot Exploit The Private Sales Loophole. During the January 3 edition of Cam & Company on NRA News, host Cam Edwards first told guest Jim Geraghty, who writes for the National Review Online, that Geragthy was "incorrect" in his assumption that background checks are not required at gun shows. Edwards would later acknowledge that private sellers at gun shows conduct sales without running a background check on customers, but he also claimed that it was impossible for individuals prohibited from owning firearms under federal law from obtaining weapons through this process. [Cam & Company, 1/3/13]

FACT: Private Sales Without A Background Check Are Extremely Common, Including At Gun Shows And Online
Law Center To Prevent Gun Violence: Private Sales Loophole Has Been Exploited By Gun Traffickers And Used To Supply Firearms To Criminals. The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence explained how a deficiency in federal law concerning how firearms sellers are licensed allows dangerous individuals to obtain firearms without a background check:

The Gun Control Act of 1968 provides that persons "engaged in the business" of dealing in firearms must be licensed. Although Congress did not originally define the term "engaged in the business," it did so in 1986 as part of the McClure-Volkmer Act (also known as the "Firearms Owners' Protection Act"). That Act defined the term "engaged in the business," as applied to a firearms dealer, as "a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms."

Significantly, however, the term was defined to exclude a person who "makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms."

Consequently, unlicensed sellers may sell firearms without conducting background checks or documenting the transaction in any way. In addition, because federal law does not require private sellers to inspect a buyer's driver's license or any other identification, there is no obligation for such sellers to confirm that a buyer is of legal age to purchase a firearm. As a result, convicted felons, minors and other prohibited purchasers can easily buy guns from unlicensed sellers.

According to a 1999 report issued by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), the current definition of "engaged in the business" often frustrates the prosecution of "unlicensed dealers masquerading as collectors or hobbyists but who are really trafficking firearms to felons or other prohibited persons." A June 2000 ATF report found that unlicensed sellers were involved in about a fifth of the trafficking investigations and associated with nearly 23,000 diverted guns. A national survey of firearm ownership conducted in 1994 determined that 60 percent of all firearm sales in the U.S. involved federally licensed dealers, while the remaining 40 percent of firearms were acquired from unlicensed sellers. [Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, accessed 4/11/13]

Carry on.

http://mediamatters.org/research/2013/04/11/seven-media-myths-about-the-gun-background-chec/193588
 
So your point is that literally no criminal gets a gun through retail gun stores....where the law-abiding citizens do acquire their weapons...

Criminals gets guns from relatives, family(private sales), robbery, burglary, on the street(private sales), etc

and extended background checks will help how ?
 
Where do criminals get guns? Theft, black market transactions, and straw purchases.

In 1985, the Department of Justice reported that only about one in five convicted felons obtained guns through legal channels such as retail stores.5
In 1991, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms reported that 37% of armed career criminals obtained firearms from street sales, 34% from criminal acts and associates, 8% from relatives, and only 7% from dealers and 6% from flea markets and gun shows.
More recently, a Bureau of Justice or “friends or family.” This includes theft of firearms, black market purchases of stolen firearms, and straw purchases. The survey also found that 12 percent obtained their firearm Statistics survey of state prison inmates convicted of firearm crimes found that 79 percent acquired their firearms from “street/illegal sources” s from firearm dealers (gun stores, pawn shops), while only 1.7 percent obtained firearms from anyone (dealer or non-dealer) at a gun show or flea market.
The FBI’s National Crime Information Center stolen firearm file contained over 2 million reports as of March 1995, and an annual average of 232,400 firearms were stolen between 2005 and 2010.8
46.3% of firearms traced by the BATFE in relation to firearm trafficking investigations originate with straw purchasers.

34% from criminal acts and associates,
8% from relatives,
7% from dealers
6% from flea markets and gun shows.

79 % acquired their firearms from “street/illegal sources” s from firearm dealers (gun stores, pawn shops)
1.7 % obtained firearms from anyone (dealer or non-dealer) at a gun show or flea market.


and this data is pretty old....
 
I just traded a Savage 223 for a Franchi 12 gauge. According to some this spur of the moment deal shouldn't have been legal to have been made. But then according to some a 223 shouldn't be legal (sniper rifle) and the Franchi 12 gauge shouldn't be either (semi-auto). Be honest now, which camp are you in?
 
I just traded a Savage 223 for a Franchi 12 gauge. According to some this spur of the moment deal shouldn't have been legal to have been made. But then according to some a 223 shouldn't be legal (sniper rifle) and the Franchi 12 gauge shouldn't be either (semi-auto). Be honest now, which camp are you in?

And the reality is that trades like yours go on every day, WITHOUT a background check on whether or not the trader or receiver has a criminal record.....and the fact that guns being bought and sold outside of legal and registered gun shops end up being used in crimes in other states with stricter gun laws means NOTHING to people like you.

Now if those weapons were registered like cars, you'd have a much better tracing system and a less likely chance of a criminal taking a chance or going through the efforts to conceal the tract of that weapon.
 
Where do criminals get guns? Theft, black market transactions, and straw purchases.

In 1985, the Department of Justice reported that only about one in five convicted felons obtained guns through legal channels such as retail stores.5
In 1991, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms reported that 37% of armed career criminals obtained firearms from street sales, 34% from criminal acts and associates, 8% from relatives, and only 7% from dealers and 6% from flea markets and gun shows.
More recently, a Bureau of Justice or “friends or family.” This includes theft of firearms, black market purchases of stolen firearms, and straw purchases. The survey also found that 12 percent obtained their firearm Statistics survey of state prison inmates convicted of firearm crimes found that 79 percent acquired their firearms from “street/illegal sources” s from firearm dealers (gun stores, pawn shops), while only 1.7 percent obtained firearms from anyone (dealer or non-dealer) at a gun show or flea market.
The FBI’s National Crime Information Center stolen firearm file contained over 2 million reports as of March 1995, and an annual average of 232,400 firearms were stolen between 2005 and 2010.8
46.3% of firearms traced by the BATFE in relation to firearm trafficking investigations originate with straw purchasers.

34% from criminal acts and associates,
8% from relatives,
7% from dealers
6% from flea markets and gun shows.

79 % acquired their firearms from “street/illegal sources” s from firearm dealers (gun stores, pawn shops)
1.7 % obtained firearms from anyone (dealer or non-dealer) at a gun show or flea market.


and this data is pretty old....

And folk like you have NO PROBLEM with 13% of weapons that can be used in crimes......crimes that could have been prevented with a simple background check.

Also, if all weapons were registered and treated like cars, your statistics overall would drop significantly (8% from relatives,
7% from dealers, 6% from flea markets and gun shows,79 % acquired their firearms from “street/illegal sources” s from firearm dealers (gun stores, pawn shops), 1.7 % obtained firearms from anyone (dealer or non-dealer) at a gun show or flea market. )

Nothing is perfect, but this insane resistance to cut down even 13% (7% from dealers and 6% from flea markets and gun shows)with a simple background check is just that, insane. You have yet to give one rational explanation as to why background checks should not be mandatory at gun shows and flea markets.
 
And once again, STY babbles like a fool when given a simple challenge. Why is he so afraid of a simple background check? So far, he has not given a rational, valid, fact based answer. And as the chronology of the posts shows, what information he does reference can be easily deconstructed by OTHER FACTS that debunk his contentions.

STY is just another oather/threeper/libertarian/teabagger/neocon bullhorn.
and once again, TaiChi can't help but show his dumbass as he completely forgets who is what and tries to cover his ass by lumping everyone in to a single clusterfuck of labels. do us all a favor TC and learn something about a subject before you go on a rant like an idiot.
 
and once again, TaiChi can't help but show his dumbass as he completely forgets who is what and tries to cover his ass by lumping everyone in to a single clusterfuck of labels. do us all a favor TC and learn something about a subject before you go on a rant like an idiot.

I throughly enjoyed the way he pole vaulted right over his argument of background checks and into registration.
Either he thinks they are one in the same, or he's just an idiot.
I vote for the last one.
 
I throughly enjoyed the way he pole vaulted right over his argument of background checks and into registration.
Either he thinks they are one in the same, or he's just an idiot.
I vote for the last one.
and it's not like we didn't give the moron an answer about not wanting background checks. it's that he doesn't care for the answer. I think he just doesn't like people having rights, which would go right along with him being a statist/sheeple/lemming/totalitarian/socialist
 
So your point is that literally no criminal gets a gun through retail gun stores....where the law-abiding citizens do acquire their weapons...

Criminals gets guns from relatives, family(private sales), robbery, burglary, on the street(private sales), etc

and extended background checks will help how ?


Are you really this fucking stupid, NOVA? I mean, it's either that or you can't comprehend what you read or you're just willfully ignorant. I swear, you come across like a protege for Limbaugh or Beck or Levin or Hannity or Crowley, etc. Or maybe you're just some stupid neocon/teabagger crank with time to kill?
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
And once again, STY babbles like a fool when given a simple challenge. Why is he so afraid of a simple background check? So far, he has not given a rational, valid, fact based answer. And as the chronology of the posts shows, what information he does reference can be easily deconstructed by OTHER FACTS that debunk his contentions.

STY is just another oather/threeper/libertarian/teabagger/neocon bullhorn.

and once again, TaiChi can't help but show his dumbass as he completely forgets who is what and tries to cover his ass by lumping everyone in to a single clusterfuck of labels. do us all a favor TC and learn something about a subject before you go on a rant like an idiot.

and the chronology of the post shows YOU to be a LIAR, STY....because every time I provide FACTS from reputable sources that contradict your assertions, you just either change the subject, move the goal post or ignore what you don't like.

the question remains, you intellectually impotent parrot.....why are YOU so afraid of a simple background check?
 
I throughly enjoyed the way he pole vaulted right over his argument of background checks and into registration.
Either he thinks they are one in the same, or he's just an idiot.
I vote for the last one.

You're thoroughly LYING your ass off once again, Freedumb. The chronology of the posts makes you out to be a liar, yet you consistently just fabricate your own narrative despite that. YOU failed to deconstruct any of my source material that disproved your assertions and contentions. Then YOU lied about what I wrote, as I repeatedly stated that I never claimed absolute or perfect solutions, but a market decrease in the availability of weapons to criminals based on CURRENT FACTS USING BACKGROUND CHECKS.

YOU kept moving the goal posts, Freedumb....and you were proven wrong every time. But hey, if you are so sure of your claim, you could easily reference the post(s) where I did what you said. But we all know you won't/can't....so you'll do your usual Freedumb shuffle by detouring to personal attacks and regurgitating your accusations or just rehashing past discussions. You always were and always will be a fucking joke, Freedumb. Laugh, clown, laugh.
 
and it's not like we didn't give the moron an answer about not wanting background checks. it's that he doesn't care for the answer. I think he just doesn't like people having rights, which would go right along with him being a statist/sheeple/lemming/totalitarian/socialist

What answer did you or your equally intellectually dishonest friend give, STY? Because if it was just your worthless opinion, I and others provided FACTS that proved you wrong. Then you just whine like a little bitch that the FACTS are all from biased sources, which is another lie given the FACTS used are by the same reputable sources YOU cherry pick.

That's the difference between you and I, STY....I read EVERYTHING, while your brain shuts off the second you read anything that contradicts your beliefs.

But carry on with your maudlin exchange with Freedumb....tweedle dumb and tweedle dumber.
 
Back
Top