Guest Editorial Graphic Schilling Show Blog

Guest Editorial Graphic Schilling Show Blog

Folks who speak the words, “Gun Show Loop Hole,” often use cryptic tones of voice to help create the idea that something evil is going on at gun shows. Lets get it said right at the start, there is no legal “Loop Hole” regarding gun sales at gun shows. The same laws apply and are in force there as in any gun shop or in your living room, back yard, shopping mall, or flea market. 

Those who continuously bray about the awful Gun Show Loop Hole are either magnificently ignorant of the subject or they are part of an insidious scheme to get all of America under the thumb of government. There is no middle ground here. These are the only two possible reasons for anyone to make any noise about something that does not exist. Those who call to close of the Gun Show Loop Hole out of true ignorance are dupes and therefore tools of this very real government scheme. It’s an either/or situation. Where do you fit into this picture? 

There is no Gun Show Loop Hole and there never was! We hear the words “Gun Show Loop Hole” all the time. It has become a term that gets talked about frequently by anyone who clings to the fantasies enshrined in the equally inane idea, “Gun Control.” These words revolve around subjects that exist only in the minds of those who use them. They are made-up terms that are not real and continuing to use them as though they were cannot change that fact. The term was invented to help get the public to think there was something broken that needs fixing. Be careful of what you wish for! 

Lawmakers, law enforcement officials, and politicians all know these things to be true. If you corner them on the subject and they whine that they didn’t know, you should carefully consider if they are fit to hold their office and think on it during the next election cycle. The authorities are banking on the institutionalized ignorance created by the public school system (which has been teaching our youth not to use their brains for many decades.) Getting America to believe there is such a thing as a Gun Show Loop Hole will just help government get you to give up more of your rights based on a false idea. 

Here are the facts. Many of the vendors at gun shows are licensed gun dealers. When you go to a gun show most of the tables showing guns for sale were rented by these dealers. Licensed gun dealers must abide by all the usual registration and record-keeping laws no matter where they do business. Being at a gun show changes nothing for them. They do all the paperwork and background checks just like in their shop. 

Some of the vendors are merely private citizens who have rented their space in an effort to sell off some of their personal property, which may include a gun or two. For them this is nothing more than a big yard sale and the same laws apply to them as would apply to any transaction they had in the living room of their home. Currently trade of private property is not regulated (taxed), and this is the real crux of the issue. 

Government has been seeking a way to regulate private trade for a long time. There have already been attempts to get some sort of regulation (tax) on yard sales. If the government can get citizens to go for a “special” law that presumably controls the private trade of guns it’ll have made a giant step forward towards regulating private trade in general. Such a law will certainly control any other private property you want to sell. Remember, where the sale takes place changes nothing in the applicable laws. That’s an important detail of this topic. 

By the way, this subject is at the heart of various laws regarding the trade of “animal parts,” most notably, bear parts. Prohibition on the sale of animal parts was pushed on the idea that it would curb poaching. Well, such law has been in place for nearly 30 years. The authorities grudgingly admit that there is no impact on poaching or the sale of animal parts. They do occasionally catch someone in violation and try to make an example of them. These supposed anti-poaching laws remain in place even though the animal populations continues to rise at much faster rates than state-biologists say is a healthy, and notably so for bears. The only thing the prohibition on the sale of bear “animal parts” did was make a narrow segment of private property illegal to sell. It was a solid step in the direction of regulating private trade. It’s a right we let government take away and we got nothing in return. We were told it was one thing, but it turned out to be something else entirely. That is where it has its similarities with the idea of a Gun Show Loop Hole. It’s really only about regulating the trade of private property. 

Let’s say you own a gun and want to sell it for whatever reason. You have a friend who comes to your house to buy it. No paper work of any kind is required for this transaction (though some sort of bill of sale is wise and often exchanged.) It would be the same if you made that transaction in your garage, your yard, the parking lot of the local shopping mall, or even at a roadside stop. The transaction is the same no matter where it takes place, and the laws apply just the same at any of these places. The place where the sale occurs has no bearing on the nature of the transaction. This legal situation also governs the sale of your used kitchen appliances or your private collection of stamps or Elvis memorabilia. It’s all private property and therefore all treated the same in the law. So, two private citizens who happen to meet at a gun show have the same kind of transaction going on as long as they are selling their private property one to another. Whether it’s guns or watermelons they are bound by no more regulation than if they were in their living room. They just happened to be at the gun show. 

In fact, there are a great many things other than guns to be found for sale at a gun show. It’s really just a great big flea market where everyone there either paid for a space to show their wares or paid to come in and see those wares. Some of them have guns or gun parts to sell. Some are actually selling stamp collections, coin collections and all manner of clothing and equipment along with lots of gun related stuff. Gun dealers come because they know there will be a high concentration of gun buyers present and these dealers sell a lot of guns at these shows. Each and every one of a dealer’s gun sales is properly recorded and every gun-law there is applies at gun shows. There is no loophole and there never was! 

So, why do we keep hearing about it? Well, it’s because government wants to have the general population disarmed so they cannot resist further steps towards tyranny. Disarming the general population (i.e. “Gun Control”) is the most important step for any tyrannical government. No tyrannical government has failed to put gun control to good use some time before they made their move on the general population. It is part of the process of tyranny that cannot be ignored. Don’t be too surprised if this is new to you. The government has been telling you otherwise for a long time by way of the public schools. You only learn this stuff by looking for it and studying on your own. Gaining some form of regulation on the sale of your private property will take them even closer to controlling you. 

Our government officials are using a few horrible events to stir up emotional sentiment against guns, as if it were the guns that did the awful things. You may be sure that the government doesn’t care one bit about the safety of your kids in school. They know that the schools are still the safest place for those kids to be. The occasional school shooting incident does not change that. Most of what you hear them saying about “gun violence” or “school shootings” is just not true. When you hear those words, be ready to hear things that are inflammatory and largely false. 

Incidents of school shootings are a lot like plane crashes in the airlines industry. When a plane crashes there are many deaths and it’s a horrible scene for everyone involved. Even so, we are not trying to eliminate the planes and flying is still the safest form of travel there ever was. The relationships that exist between school shootings, airline crashes, and relative safety are exactly the same. There is no difference at all! The horror of the event should not make us willing to lose our freedoms in hope of something that we cannot have anyway. Safety is relative. Schools are still the safest place for our kids. They are safer in school than they are anywhere else including at home. Plenty of records and statistics back that up and none say otherwise. 

These horrible events at schools have almost nothing to do with the guns or with the schools. They are a big, glowing sign telling us that something is very wrong with our society. It’s not about guns or schools at all. It’s about how we raise our children to think and behave. This is a poisonous plant that took root in the ‘60s as the “do your own thing” movement caught on. Adults of that time said that was irresponsible thinking and they were right. But those irresponsible youngsters grew up and had irresponsible kids that they raised on those same nonsensical ideas. And then those kids grew up and raised their own kids on the same nonsense. Well, the latter generations of all that irresponsible thinking are now a bunch of brooding, sulking self-centered and mentally unbalanced young people who are still being told to “be yourself” and “you can do or be anything you want to.” It is still irresponsible and now we have a 4th  generation being fed the same nonsense. It should come as no surprise that the same irresponsible kooks of the ‘60s are now running our government and telling us that none of us bear any responsibility for our evil acts. It’s those awful guns that make us crazy! We must get rid of them! Of course, what they mean is that you must get rid of your guns. They will keep theirs. After all someone should have guns, you know, just in case of emergencies (like having to control an angry public when it wakes up to the truth.) 

In summary: There is no Gun Show Loop Hole and there never was. The only law that can change the perception of it is one that will regulate the trade of your private property. Remember, gun control is not about guns. It’s about control.

 

9 COMMENTS

  1. Those who continuously bray about the awful Gun Show Loop Hole are either magnificently ignorant of the subject or they are part of an insidious scheme to get all of America under the thumb of government. There is no middle ground here. [ . . . ] It’s an either/or situation.

    It’s always black and white and either/or for fanatics. Their opponents are always incredibly ignorant or have an insidious scheme. Serious people recognize shades of gray, practical trade-offs, and good goals and intentions on the part of people they disagree with. They recognize that good people can disagree on hard issues, where, for example, individual liberty is in conflict with public safety.

    The gun show loophole is the fact that, to quote you, a gun show is “a big yard sale” for many gun sellers. In other words, it’s that at a gun show anyone, mentally ill or not, can buy a gun without having to submit to a background check. If keeping weapons out of the hands of unbalanced people is sensible, then selling them to anyone who wants one at guns shows is not. Tyrannical, or common sense?

    Also, there is no such thing as having a cryptic tone or being magnificently ignorant.

  2. Well Ken,
    If you stand under an umbrella in the rain and declare that it’s not raining on the strength of the fact that you’re not getting wet, it’s still raining whether you say so or not.
    You’re not disagreeing, you are ignoring facts to serve your own misguided and highly prejudicial viewpoint, (which is obviously devoid of factual foundation.)
    You might be a product of the government’s propaganda program, oops, I mean, public education system.
    How sad for you if so.
    If you insist on picking through the facts to put together an OUT-OF-CONTEXT idea that’s as flawed as the term “gun show loop hole” it might help you look less silly to address the facts, which happen to remain in place.

    You seem to have totally ignored the fact that trying to close a non-existent loop hole is actually a play for creating a way to control the trade of private property.
    It is NOT about public safety and it never was!

    Your governments, (state & federal,) have enacted many laws under the guise of making us all safer but the FACTS show that where there are more and stricter “gun-laws” there is a commensurately higher incidence of crime, gun related or not.
    With history showing only failure, it seems obvious that the government cares very little about “public safety.”
    Maybe these facts and their import are a little over your head, (a high likelihood if you are the beneficiary of a public education.)
    No one likes to admit it but, you’ve been duped!

    The TV and radio are not telling you what is happening.
    They’re only giving you the “approved version” and largely ignoring or picking through the facts, (just like you.)
    Hmmm, sounds a little like the blind leading the blind, doesn’t it?
    There still isn’t a gun show loop hole whether you think/say there is or not.

    Let’s talk about that public safety. It’s also true that guns don’t kill people. It’s not a catch-phrase. It’s a fact.
    People kill people and they sometimes use guns to do it.
    They also use cars and scalpels.
    But, guess what, all the gun-related deaths and injuries put together, don’t even come close to the number killed or injured every year with knives, cars or even by the well-intentioned doctors in hospitals.
    Where are the calls for controls on these things?!?
    Which is the greater danger to the public? Hmmm?
    Facts, Ken, facts. You don’t have to like them but you can’t pick and choose the ones you like and ignore the others.
    Real life doesn’t work that way and you’ll always look foolish if you keep ignoring the facts.

    BTW, your last sentence was very wrong too.
    Looks like you get an F for reading comprehension.

  3. It is the same situation when a father gives a child the guns the child has called his or her own as the child was growing up. When they leave the nest they take that single barrel shotgun, that 22 squirrel gun, or in today's world it might be a pink Smith and Wesson semi-auto rifle that I saw a father teaching his 10 year old daughter to shoot off a rest at the range. These folks were just wonderful, a father and daughter enjoying a great afternoon together, she was looking very proud in her sound deadening headset and safety glasses and her dad was a picture of pride as he was departing the information she needed to be safe, and hit that little reaction target at 50 yards. It was one of my favorite afternoons at the range. Now think about all those fathers that are criminals because they give those guns to their children when they move away without a criminal background check, and how about the biggest criminal of all, Santa, every year he leaves kid sized 22s under Christmas trees all over the country, and those kids are not checked out by the FBI.

  4. Tim, first of all, what I’m interested in is keeping guns out of the hands of unbalanced people and gang members. I have no interest in controlling the trade of private property. That’s a fact. And why would I? So who’s duping who? Maybe the gun industry is duping you by making up silly reasons why liberals favor gun control when the real ones are obvious.

    Second, allow me to quote from the New York Times: “There is no shortage of opinions about whether gun-control laws accomplish what they are designed to do—reduce violent crime. What is lacking are data [ . . .] Researchers say they don’t have access to enough data to draw firm conclusions. Still, some say they have found moderate evidence that certain interventions help to cut violent crime, though they don’t agree on which ones. Others say there is no evidence of that at all.”

    Third, I get my news and opinion from conservative as well as liberal sources. Fourth, as Monty Python told us, a contradiction (“There still isn’t”) is not an argument. I’ve already told you what the gun show loophole is. It’s comical to hear conservatives say there is no such loophole because most gun dealers at gun shows, etc. etc. It’s as if they don’t what a loophole is.

    Fifth, yes it’s true that guns don’t kill people. It’s also true that many people use guns to kill innocent people they couldn’t kill without them (ever hear of a drive-by knifing?), and use assault weapons to kill more people than they could with other guns.

    Sixth, medical practice is regulated, and so is the use of cars, and there were an epidemic of stabbings with certain kind of knifes that no one needed for other purposes, we’d regulate them too.

    Finally, part of what I’ve written above is not true. That quote about there not being enough evidence on whether gun regulations work? It’s not from the lying liberal media (or a government propaganda program). It’s from the Wall Street Journal.

  5. Wow the wall street journal. it doesn’t matter how regulated something is. if someone feel they can get over on you, dam right they are going to try. doesn’t matter if they use their mouth or written word or a gun. if they can get away with it they are going to do it. the felon is already of mind set that they are going to be successful. they know on average that average American in this country is not going to stand up to them. Can do all research you want and answer is still the same. We are human being and some of us do a good job keeping ourself accountable. Where other are like the wind. than let throw in the group the sky is falling and we need government to fix it. Well the problem is government is made up of cross section of human being and on a good day we are all lucky we are not in jail. Because of their screwup. Doesn’t matter in the short or long run. Yes there has been drive – by knifing. More you regulate the more the felong know he or she can get away with more crime because the average individual is going to bust a nut to follow the regulation. We may not agree with it we will try and follow it. has regulation of speed limit stop people from speeding? has the regulation of income tx laws stop peopel from cheating on their taxs? If there is away around something, someone will try to get over. So what do we do next, mind alternating drugs, electric fence to keep us in are place, ankle braces to let the government know were we are, implants… What is next?

  6. Well Ken,
    Now you’re just making it up as you go.
    I’ll take your paragraphs (talking points?) as they came in an effort to help keep you from getting too confused. Following your disjointed reasoning is hard and I’m glad you’re taking the time to write it down.
    The sheer volume of your skips from sense to nonsense would be difficult for anyone to keep up with.

    First, we ALL are interested in, “keeping guns out of the hands of unbalanced people and gang members.”
    You also say you have no interest in controlling private trade even though you clearly consider private trade to be a “loop hole” on no better reasoning than the location of where it takes place. What you seem to have skipped over is that private trade is private trade no matter where it occurs. Also read back, (a little slower this time,) and see that the piece specified that it is the government that wants to regulate (tax) private trade, not you. However, your mindless devotion to restricting private trade because of where it takes place is going to help them accomplish that while not doing a thing to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and psycos. Your willingness to ignore these important legal facts makes me wonder as to whether or not you might be a “willing dupe.”

    Second, quoting from the New York Times on nearly any subject isn’t a strong position to speak from. Few institutions are as biased and just plain wrong about so much as the New York Times. Neither they nor the Wall Street Journal has anyone on staff that knows any more about gun related issues than you do. The record of the Times is absolutely abysmal for accurate reporting or factual editorializing. I’d have thought a true believing liberal would be embarrassed to utter their name as a reference for anything. There seems to be plenty of evidence that the U.S. Govt thinks of as credible. It’s all real facts and evidence. They gather, store and disseminate it. They use lots of our tax dollars to gather it as raw data and then study it as statistical data. Sadly, since this data only disproves all the liberal dogma about crimes in general and “gun related” crime in particular it is cast aside and not taken into account. What good are the facts if they can’t be made to make your case? Saying there is no evidence at all on any crime related subject, no matter who says it or why, is utter nonsense. I’d have guessed you’d be a little sharper that to lean on such a weak crutch. My mistake.

    Third, your declaring the private trade that takes place at a gun show to be a loop hole in law does not make it so. It is increasingly obvious that it is you who does not know what a loop hole is. You get another F in the subject of reading comprehension. I suggest you give that subject up until you understand what a loop hole really is. Sensible and reasonably educated folks, some of which are conservatives, say there isn’t a loop hole because there isn’t one. Got a dictionary?

    Fourth, um, you actually called your fourth paragraph the fifth. Apparently you haven’t heard of drive-by knifings. They have and still do occur but since a gun isn’t used it isn’t considered news worthy. I didn’t see a relevant link to your remark about the use of assault weapons but if you take the time to check it out you’ll learn that the incidence of the use of “assault weapons” for criminal action is so low that it takes fairly imaginative mathematics to create any statistic about it at all. The numbers are really really small.

    Fifth, still out of step. Oh well, “change-step, march!” This thought simply made my earlier point. That being that no matter which of them you care to talk about, cars, doctors or knives, they each account for more deaths than all the “gun related” incidents put together. Let me be clear on this. I’m saying cars are used to kill and injure more people than all the gun incidents. And that doctors kill and maim more people than all the gun incidents. And more people are cut or stabbed with knives than killed or hurt with guns. Each one accounts for far more deaths and injuries than guns. Whether or not they are regulated does not seem to have any impact on these facts.

    These are facts and sensible people are trying to get nonsensical people to grasp them so they can engage in a well reasoned discussion. A well reasoned discussion cannot ensue if one party insists on being taken seriously when it is very obvious they don’t have any idea what the facts of the matter are. You cannot solve a problem by deciding what the answer is before learning the true causes of a problem. Our nations problem is a societal problem, not a gun problem.
    Private trade of private property, is not a loop hole just because of where it takes place. Opinion cannot change that.
    Further there is very little evidence or reason to suspect that gun shows have much at all to do with the few violent incidents that tend to get the public stirred up. The recent shooting at a grade school, while horrible and tragic had nothing at all to do with gun shows. The shooting a few years ago at Virginia Tech had nothing at all to do with gun shows yet you rarely hear of it without a call for closing that elusive loop hole. The catch phrase, “gun show loop hole” is little more than a trick of words spoken to inflame simpler minds into thinking there is something going on that is somehow insidious and harmful. Sadly for you and your ilk, there are just no facts to support such an idea. That “loop hole” is elusive because it isn’t real. These are the facts. Declaring things to be otherwise does not make them so.
    Maybe you should give decaf a try.

  7. First, we ALL are interested in, “keeping guns out of the hands of unbalanced people and gang members.”

    Good. How do you propose to do that? Do you think these people don’t attend gun shows? Why not?

    You also say you have no interest in controlling private trade even though you clearly consider private trade to be a “loop hole” on no better reasoning than the location of where it takes place. What you seem to have skipped over is that private trade is private trade no matter where it occurs.

    You miss the point. Controlling private trade isn’t the goal. (And your draconian term is inaccurate anyhow). _Regulating_ one particular kind of private trade, the trade of guns, would be a means to an end, not the end itself. Liberals favor regulating guns as a means to limit gun violence – not, as you people self-pityingly tell yourselves, to control you, to take away your freedom, etc. Liberty is one good end. But safety is another. Sometimes one or more good ends are in conflict, as they are here. Serious people acknowledge that and debate which should be given priority, and what means of accomplishing ends are effective. Serious conservatives think government is a poor instrument for accomplishing the ends to which liberals try to put it, but they acknowledge the good ends. Fanatics like Rob fantasize and rave about “insidious scheme[s] to get all of America under the thumb of government.” Responsible people try to have conversations. Irresponsible people like Rob post inflammatory editorials that sway the uneducated and appeal to the worst in people (claim that the other side’s motives are bad), and then never do the real work, of trying to defend their positions.

    the piece specified that it is the government that wants to regulate (tax) private trade, not you.

    Right, and that’s a common piece of conservative cant, a silly notion which falls apart at the first application of simple logic, this idea that the big, bad government exists apart from, and operates entirely outside the will of, the people. We live in a democracy, and you just lost an election. Liberals don’t love regulation for the sake of regulation and “control.” They just believe that dangerous things like guns are better regulated than not.

    However, your mindless devotion to restricting private trade because of where it takes place is going to help them accomplish that while not doing a thing to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and psycos..

    Why not? Again, showing that to be the case would require showing that criminals and psychos don’t go to gun shows.

    Second, quoting from the New York Times on nearly any subject isn’t a strong position to speak from. Few institutions are as biased and just plain wrong about so much as the New York Times. Neither they nor the Wall Street Journal has anyone on staff that knows any more about gun related issues than you do. The record of the Times is absolutely abysmal for accurate reporting or factual editorializing. I’d have thought a true believing liberal would be embarrassed to utter their name as a reference for anything.

    The Times has a strong liberal bias – that why I actually quoted the Wall Street Journal instead. ;-) Please take your own advice and read slowly and carefully.

    There seems to be plenty of evidence that the U.S. Govt thinks of as credible. It’s all real facts and evidence. They gather, store and disseminate it. They use lots of our tax dollars to gather it as raw data and then study it as statistical data. Sadly, since this data only disproves all the liberal dogma about crimes in general and “gun related” crime in particular it is cast aside and not taken into account. What good are the facts if they can’t be made to make your case? Saying there is no evidence at all on any crime related subject, no matter who says it or why, is utter nonsense.

    Right. That’s why I didn’t say it. I said there is not “enough evidence.” And I don’t discount the possibility that a liberal press organ like the Times would discount evidence contrary to its stated position. We’re all tempted to do that, both on the left and the right. Have you read “The Righteous Mind”? (Rob, when are you going to have Haidt on your show?) So what facts do you see as conclusive evidence that none of Obama’s proposals will do any good? Or frame the question anyway you like. Why is the case clear that gun control doesn’t reduce gun violence? Show the facts you say the government has. And show how Adam Lanza could have killed as many people as he did without an assault weapon.

    Third, your declaring the private trade that takes place at a gun show to be a loop hole in law does not make it so. It is increasingly obvious that it is you who does not know what a loop hole is. You get another F in the subject of reading comprehension. I suggest you give that subject up until you understand what a loop hole really is. Sensible and reasonably educated folks, some of which are conservatives, say there isn’t a loop hole because there isn’t one. Got a dictionary?

    Semantics. The fact is that people who can’t buy guns at gun shops can buy them at gun shows. We need to close that . . . call it what you like. You yourselves admit it exists.

    Apparently you haven’t heard of drive-by knifings. They have and still do occur but since a gun isn’t used it isn’t considered news worthy. I didn’t see a relevant link to your remark about the use of assault weapons but if you take the time to check it out you’ll learn that the incidence of the use of “assault weapons” for criminal action is so low that it takes fairly imaginative mathematics to create any statistic about it at all. The numbers are really really small.

    Why would the press not report drive-by knifings, especially if they were anywhere near as common as drive-by shootings? And how could they be common, given their much greater difficulty? And of course only a relative few people use semi-automatics for assaults. Again, liberals don’t favor gun control because they think the average gun owner is dangerous, or is a bad person. They favor gun control because they want to keep guns away from the dangerous few who endanger everyone else.

    Let me be clear on this. I’m saying cars are used to kill and injure more people than all the gun incidents. And that doctors kill and maim more people than all the gun incidents. And more people are cut or stabbed with knives than killed or hurt with guns. Each one accounts for far more deaths and injuries than guns. Whether or not they are regulated does not seem to have any impact on these facts.

    Really? Prohibiting 14-year olds from driving doesn’t make the streets safer? Requiring doctors to have medical licenses doesn’t make medical practice safer? If mowing people down with cars became a common crime, mentally unbalanced would still be allowed to buy cars?

    These are facts

    You didn’t present any facts about how to stop gun violence, you just said that they exist. I have presented facts: criminals who can’t buy guns at gun shops can buy them at gun shows through unlicensed dealers; assault weapons are the weapons of choice for guys like Adam Lanza and Dylan Klebold and Jared Loughner. Even if, in the absence of assault rifles, those guys would have planned and staged assaults with other guns (something we don’t know), they would have killed fewer people. Facts.

    sensible people are trying to get nonsensical people to grasp them so they can engage in a well reasoned discussion. A well reasoned discussion cannot ensue if one party insists on being taken seriously when it is very obvious they don’t have any what the facts of the matter are. You cannot solve a problem by deciding what the answer is before learning the true causes of a problem. Our nations problem is a societal problem, not a gun problem.

    Right, guns don’t kill, people do. But they kill with guns. Of course this is a societal problem, not something the gun itself causes, and we need to do more than regulate guns and ammunition. But that doesn’t show that we shouldn’t regulate as well.

    Further there is very little evidence or reason to suspect that gun shows have much at all to do with the few violent incidents that tend to get the public stirred up.

    Correct, as far as I know. But as you know, those few incidents are only the most dramatic instances of gun violence in this country. 19,392 people committed suicide with a gun in 2010, and 11,078 were murdered. Newton is the spur for this latest round of gun measures – not the sole or main reason.

  8. Eloquent words from an article circulating on the issue:

    “Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force.

    If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that’s it.

    In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some….

    The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats.

    The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.”

    ‘Nuff Said

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

    So, in your brief treatise on the loophole fallacy, you describe the same scenario as described above and make the case that it doesn't really exist. How Sartre-esque of you.
    " Currently trade of private property is not regulated (taxed), and this is the real crux of the issue." "There have already been attempts to get some sort of regulation (tax) on yard sales. "

    Using your own logic(?) one can then prove that we are regulating (taxing) militias.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here