by Tim Griffith

Guest Editorial Graphic Schilling Show BlogFolks who speak the words “Gun Show Loop Hole” often use angry tones of voice to help create the suspicious idea that something evil is going on at gun shows.

Lets get a solid fact said right at the start, there is no such thing as what’s being called the “Gun-Show Loop Hole.” Furthermore, there never was. The same laws apply and are obeyed at gun shows as in any gun shop or in your living room, back yard or shopping mall. The idea of a law being broken depends entirely on the individual transaction taking place.

There are the only two possible reasons for anyone to make so much noise about something that doesn’t exist. Those who continuously bray about a 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. The people who call for a close of “the gun show loop hole” because they really think there is such a thing are dupes and unwitting tools of that very real government scheme. There is no middle ground here. It’s an either/or situation. Ask yourself where you fit into this picture? If you can be honest with yourself, (few can,) ask yourself what you think you really know about this subject?

Do you even know what a “loop hole” is? A loop-hole is an opening or portal through, (or within,) an existing barrier. Its classic meaning was a term for small openings in fortification walls that allowed defenders to fire upon those who were laying siege to those fortifications. They offer relative protection from the weapons of aggressors outside the wall. Ordinary windows would become “loop holes” if you were defending your house from a gang of aggressors, such as “jack-booted thugs,” (a term coined by past-Pres. George H.W. Bush when remarking about a dark day in American history.) So, without a wall or other sort of “works” in place there cannot be a loop hole through it. Since there is no law specifying where private trade of private property [in this case guns] may or may not take place, there is nothing for a “Loop Hole “ to get through. No law about it exists. Therefore a “loop hole” [in such a law] doesn’t exist either. It just isn’t real.

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 foolish idea of, “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 cannot make them real. 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!

Law makers, law enforcement officials and politicians all know these things. 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. They are either lying or too ignorant of the their job to correctly perform their duties. (Think carefully about that during the next election cycle.) The authorities are banking on the institutionalized ignorance created by the public school system which as been teaching Americans not to use their brains for many decades. Getting America to believe there is such a thing as a gun show loop hole will help the government get you to willingly give up more of your rights based on a non-existant idea.

Confused? Here are the facts to follow:

Let’s say a gun is legally purchased from a license-holding gun dealer. Once bought, the gun becomes the private property of the one that bought it. This is the single most important fact of this matter!

Many of the vendors at gun shows are licensed gun dealers. At a gun show, many of the tables showing guns for sale were rented by those dealers. Licensed gun dealers obey all the registration and record-keeping laws no matter where they do business. Being at a gun show changes nothing for them and it never did! They do all the paperwork and background checks just like in their shop. No loop hole!

Some of the vendors are private citizens who have rented their space in an effort to sell off some of their personal private property which may include a gun or two or several. The same laws apply to them as would apply to any transaction they might make in their living room at home. Currently the trade of private property is not controlled by government and this is the real crux of the issue. There is no loop hole because there is no law [controlling private trade of private property] wherein a loop hole might exist.

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 (and tax) on yard sales. If the government could get citizens to go for a special law that presumably controls the private trade of guns it will have made a giant step forward towards regulating private trade in general. Such a law will certainly [eventually] cover any other private property you want to sell. Remember, where the sale takes place changes nothing in the law. That’s one of the most important details 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 has been no impact on poaching or the sale of animal parts generally. 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 continue to rise at faster rates than state-biologists say is healthy, notably so for bears. The only thing the prohibition on the sale of “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 govt take away with 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 closing a supposed gun show loop hole. It’s really about regulating the trade of private property. Wailing and gnashing our teeth over the latest atrocity will not change these facts.

Still confused? Lets 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. 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 and the laws that apply to it are the same no matter where it takes place because it’s the sale of private property between private citizens. Where the sale occurs has no bearing on the the transaction. This legal situation also governs the sale of your used appliances, your private collection of stamps or Elvis memorabilia. All private property is treated the same in the law. Two private citizens that happen to meet at a gun show will have the exact same kind of transaction going on as long as they’re just selling personal private property, one to another. Whether or not it’s guns or marbles makes no difference. They are bound by no more regulation than if they were sitting in their living room. They just happen to be at the gun show at the time of the sale. Since there is no law regulating the trade of private property [except for “animal parts”] there is no loop hole in any existing law and there never was. Again, no loop hole exists.

The fact is, 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 dealers gun sales is properly recorded and every gun-related law applies at gun shows. There is no loop hole and there never was!

So, why do we keep hearing about it? Well, it’s because every government wants to have the general population disarmed so they cannot resist further steps towards tyranny. Disarming the general population is the most important step for any tyrannical government. No tyrannical government ever failed to put gun control to good use some time before they made their move on the general population. It’s a 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 through the tool 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 ever closer to controlling you. It’s how all the tyrannical governments work without exception.

Our government officials are quick to use 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 our kids. That’s right, the occasional school shooting incident does not change that fact. Much of what you hear being said about “gun violence” or “school shootings“ is just not true. When you hear those words, be ready to hear things that are wildly inflammatory and largely untrue.

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, airlines 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.

Let’s say it again, Schools are still the safest place for our kids. Children are safer in school than they are anywhere else including in their own home. Plenty of records and statistics back that up and none indicate otherwise.

Need more proof? The most deadly thing on the planet has almost no regulation what so ever. It’s hospitals. Hospitals kill more people each year than drunk drivers do. Hospitals kill more people each year than 10 years of war in Viet Nam. Each year more people are killed by hospitals than by shootings, knives, car wrecks and heart disease combined!

We are not talking about people dying of what was ailing them. We are talking about the various things that a hospital does to you [that causes your death] which had nothing to do with why you came to the hospital in the first place. Mistakes and errors in hospitals kill more people in America than any other single thing. Nothing else is even close! We don’t hear much call for controlling the hospitals, do we? That scary sounding term, “gun violence” loses a lot of significance when fairly compared to what really kills and injures the most people in America.

Where is the outrage about the hospitals?

The horrible events at schools have almost nothing to do with the guns or with the schools. They are a big flashing 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 it was irresponsible thinking and they were right. But those irresponsible youngsters grew up and had kids that they raised on those same irresponsible ideas. 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 be or do anything you want.” It is still irresponsible and now we have a 4th generation being fed the same nonsense.

It should come as no surprise that those 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 really 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 that will also regulate private trade of your private property. Is that what you really want? Because that’s what they really want. These are the primary facts about why the gun-rights advocates keep saying, “gun control is not about guns, it’s about control.” They’re saying it because it’s true.

15 COMMENTS

  1. Another common fallacy is that military-grade firearms are easily accessible in the United States and can be purchased online, shipped to any state – without any background check.

  2. the trade of private property is not controlled by government and this is the real crux of the issue. There is no loop hole because there is no law [controlling private trade of private property] wherein a loop hole might exist.

    So in other words, professional gun dealers are regulated, but non-professionals are not, and you seriously don’t see that as a loophole, right? And that disparity in the law is sensible too, right? Hey, let’s give the same non-loophole to drug sellers, shouldn’t we? If you’re a pharmacist, you should need to a prescription to sell Oxycontin. But if you’re just a guy with a bottle of Oxycontin, hey, sell it to anyone you like! The government has no ethical right to regulate any private trade – right?

    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 (and tax) on yard sales.

    First of all, there is no “government” in that sense. There are only government officials, who disagree on just about everything, including this. Secondly, it’s been illegal since 2008 to resell recalled toys.

    So, why do we keep hearing about it? Well, it’s because every government wants to have the general population disarmed so they cannot resist further steps towards tyranny.

    That’s the only possible explanation, right? When liberals say they’re sad about kids being gunned down with semi-automatics, they’re just lying, right? Why would anyone care? Or why would anyone think banning semi-automatics would cut down on the number of kids a shooter could kill?

    Don’t be too surprised if this is new to you. The government has been telling you otherwise for a long time through the tool of the public schools. You only learn this stuff by looking for it and studying on your own.

    So exactly where did you find this information, this evidence that liberals want to disarm you so they can tyrannize you? Don’t you have it reversed? Aren’t you guys determined to keep as many guns as possible legal because you tell yourselves that some day you’re going to rise up against the government?

    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 our kids. That’s right, the occasional school shooting incident does not change that fact.</i?

    So in other words, not that many kids get killed in the schools, so what’s the big deal, right? It’s worth losing those kids so that some day you can threaten to shoot government officials – or at least fantasize about it.

    The single most deadliest thing on the planet has almost no regulation what so ever. Mistakes and errors in hospitals kill more people in America than any other single thing. Where is the outrage about the hospitals?

    Concern, and not outrage, is the proper reaction to mistakes and errors. A great deal of attention has been paid the the fact that hospitals are dangerous. That’s why hospitals are in fact highly regulated.

    The only law that can change that will also regulate private trade of your private property.

    If that’s true then why, in the eight years since the resale of recalled toys was outlawed, has their been no push to regulate every other private sale?

  3. Gee wiz, Ken! I thought I’d been pretty clear but you seem really worked up, and confused. Well, confusion does tend to get folks worked up.

    I’ll attempt more clarity by replying within or behind your remarks below in bold.

    Comment: the trade of private property is not controlled by government and this is the real crux of the issue. There is no loop hole because there is no law [controlling private trade of private property] wherein a loop hole might exist.

    So in other words, professional gun dealers are regulated, but non-professionals are not, (Uh, no “other words,” Ken. You plainly misunderstood. All Gun Dealers are regulated) and you seriously don’t see that as a loophole, right? Uh, right. It’s not a loophole. The same law applies to all types of Gun Dealers. And that disparity in the law is sensible too, right? sigh, No disparity there, Ken. Hey, let’s give the same non-loophole to drug sellers, shouldn’t we? If you’re a pharmacist, you should need to a prescription to sell Oxycontin. But if you’re just a guy with a bottle of Oxycontin, hey, sell it to anyone you like! You’re slipping, Ken. No one is “just a guy with a bottle of Oxycontin.” The government has no ethical right to regulate any private trade – right? Right, as long as you’re talking about private trade of lawfully possessed private property such as what I was clearly referencing.

    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 (and tax) on yard sales.

    First of all, there is no “government” in that sense. There are only government officials, who disagree on just about everything, including this. Secondly, it’s been illegal since 2008 to resell recalled toys. Maybe I should have said, “Governments everywhere have been seeking ways to…” That would indeed be more accurate. Thanks. About the toys, the point being…?

    So, why do we keep hearing about it? Well, it’s because every government wants to have the general population disarmed so they cannot resist further steps towards tyranny.

    That’s the only possible explanation, right? Right. When liberals say they’re sad about kids being gunned down with semi-automatics, they’re just lying, right? Where did THAT idea come from?!? Why would anyone care? Uh, that was really a rhetorical question, wasn’t it? Or why would anyone think banning semi-automatics would cut down on the number of kids a shooter could kill? Ken, there doesn’t seem to be any cogent relationship there. There are lots of places where semi-automatics are specifically banned but they get used illegally anyway, a lot. You’re sort of beating the same drum of the “gun rights” crowd with that tack.

    Don’t be too surprised if this is new to you. The government has been telling you otherwise for a long time through the tool of the public schools. You only learn this stuff by looking for it and studying on your own.

    So exactly where did you find this information, this evidence that liberals want to disarm you so they can tyrannize you? Don’t you have it reversed? Aren’t you guys determined to keep as many guns as possible legal because you tell yourselves that some day you’re going to rise up against the government? Wow! Lots of wild speculation there, Ken. You guys? I’m simply pointing to the facts easily found in history. If you don’t think it’s so, check it out. While checking, see if you find where a tyrannical govt wasn’t or isn’t plainly oozing starkly liberal philosophy. Even the most infamous political ideology known in the modern world, (not counting Islam,) the Nazis, held nearly identical philosophies as the liberals of the world, past and present. Give it a go. You might learn something you didn’t know.

    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 our kids. That’s right, the occasional school shooting incident does not change that fact.

    So in other words, not that many kids get killed in the schools, so what’s the big deal, right? It’s worth losing those kids so that some day you can threaten to shoot government officials – or at least fantasize about it. Wow! You made some mighty big leaps to change the context into some fairly disturbing ideas that were definitely not present in my text! People threaten govt officials [or fantasize about it] all the time without anyone getting hurt. Sadly, when a psycho starts shooting, it’s usually a liberal psycho. Interesting little factoid, huh? Look it up.

    The single most deadly thing on the planet has almost no regulation what so ever. Mistakes and errors in hospitals kill more people in America than any other single thing. Where is the outrage about the hospitals?

    Concern, and not outrage, is the proper reaction to mistakes and errors. A great deal of attention has been paid the the fact that hospitals are dangerous. That’s why hospitals are in fact highly regulated. Highly regulated? Reeeealy? The annual death toll seems to hold pretty steadily above 50-K every year. Maybe hospitals are being regulated but certainly not in their practice of killing people that come seeking help. They seem to get a pass on that particular subject, even from you.

    The only law that can change that will also regulate private trade of your private property.

    If that’s true then why, in the eight years since the resale of recalled toys was outlawed, has their been no push to regulate every other private sale? Gee, I don’t know. Why? If I were a betting man I’d wager that most men/women on the street have no idea that it’s illegal to resell anything that’s been recalled. Do you know if that law has been effective in any way?

    Maybe that law is just left there lying in wait for occasional use, just like the “bear parts” prohibition that didn’t accomplish anything either.

    Ken, we keep hearing the same tired rhetoric about closing the loophole from the liberal-left politicians even when they have the power to do anything they want, (“Obamacare” for example.) Why do they still bray about it instead of “closing” it? Because it keeps lazy thinkers believing in a fantasy so they’ll keep on voting for them, that’s why. A gun show loophole has never existed. That’s specifically why it can’t be “closed.” You cannot close a door or window that isn’t there. They know it and they know YOU don’t know it. It’s just “the big lie” principle at work. Look that up, (Google it. There’s a lot of information about it.) You might get to see the naked truth of this issue once you understand “the big lie.” I hope this was helpful.

  4. Tim, you seem to be playing dumb. OK, all gun “dealers” are regulated. But all sellers are not, and that’s an obvious loophole, since the real purpose of the existing regulations is not to regulate dealers – that’s the means, not the end – but to regulate the sale of guns.

    There are many guys, and gals, with legally bottles of OxyContin. If the government has no right to forbid the resale of guns which are legally owned and lawfully obtained but are dangerous in the wrong hands, then it logically follows that the government has no right to forbid the resale of OxyContin, which likewise poses a danger. So be consistent.

    If governments everywhere have been looking for ways to regulate private trade, why has the federal government not seized on the precedent set by the ban on reselling recalled toys?

    If the facts of history show that American liberals, or all liberals in general, want to disarm the populace, of which they’re a part, so that government can tyrannize it (you can see how silly this is getting), then it should be no trouble to point me to those facts. The real fact is that you’re conflating outcomes in some times and places (not in all times and places) with motives.

    Also, you seem to have forgotten Godwin’s Law, and its corollary that whoever feels the need to bolster his argument by comparing his opponent to Hitler has thereby lost the debate. I’ll add that the claim that liberal philosophy (which I find much fault with) is “nearly identical” to Nazi philosophy is the very best proof I’ve ever seen of the truth of Godwin’s Law’s corollary.

    So I’m going to skip most of the rest of your replies, especially since they follow the same evasive “what me?” pattern, and try to change the subject instead of rebutting what I wrote. Sarcasm in a natural product of exasperation, but when you try to substitute sarcasm for an actual reasoned argument, which you do a lot, I lose interest. You’re playing dumb about the reasons for gun laws though. If all liberal government really cares about is disarming us in order to tyrannize us, then it’s lying, and those of us who support it are lying, in claiming to mourn the deaths of innocent gun victims. But obviously sorrow over the death of innocent people is a natural human common to all decent people. Ergo, it’s a great big obvious reason liberals favor gun laws. The so-called gun show loophole still exists because guys like you vote. It came into being in the first place as a political compromise between people who care first about saving innocent lives and people who care first about their so-called rights.

    No, banning semi’s doesn’t stop everyone from getting a semi. Just like setting speed limits doesn’t stop everyone from speeding and killing other drivers. So I guess we should abolish speeding laws, right? Again, taking your argument to its logical conclusion shows that the argument itself is illogical.

    I wish you a good day.

  5. (deep sigh) Ken, someone else called my attention to the fact that you had continued to bray about the non-existent “gun show loophole.” Even though I was very clear in explaining the facts, you chose to assign new meanings that are inconsistent with reality so you could continue to convince yourself that something is broken that needs fixing. You’re still, uh, wrong.

    Your accusation of my having broken “Godwin’s Law” or its corollary is in error. You may have already known that but tried it anyway. Perhaps you already knew there is no error when the comparison is legitimate. Maybe you were just trying to look knowledgeable via name dropping. It didn’t work.

    It is always fascinating to watch someone rework baseless assumptions so that they can find some way to convince themselves that their feeble thinking has merit enough to be worthy of discussion. You are mistaken in every premise you’ve attempted herein because you’re guilty of the very inconsistency that you accuse me of. Your refusal to embrace the facts and follow truly logical thinking is what has led you to your untenable argument. Logical thinking does not skip steps the way you have done.

    I confess to having indulged in making fun of you in hopes that it might snap you out of your funk and get you to examine history, the law and the realities they bring to the light of day. You’ve made it clear you won’t accept facts from me. I’ve invited you to study these subjects because in doing so you might find a way to accept reality.

    There is no “debate” being waged on the issue of “the gun show loophole.” There simply is no such thing. I used simple enough terms for anyone (even you) to understand that politicians just use that “big lie” mantra to help keep themselves in office. Since you didn’t hear your preconceived [and erroneous] idea of a loop hole, you fabricated one out of your “apples & oranges” type of thinking and applied it throughout your rants.

    Inanimate objects are not dangerous. That is an immutable fact. As I pointed out, the real issue is the people involved and their refusal to face facts and reality. That’s what leads them to do unwise or horrendous things. Their tool of choice matters little. Your attempts at argument have only helped underscore these facts.

    I’ll point out that there are many countries in the world that have the kinds of laws you so desperately crave. In comparison with the U.S.A. they are, without exception, “tyrannical” in how they control and maintain their power over the people. If the idea of being ruled by the government is so attractive to you there are many realistic options available. I’ll casually point out that wherever the followers of liberal ideals have been allowed to take the reigns of power life became more difficult for the common people instead of less so. This simple fact should be enough for any person of average intelligence to take a closer look before embracing such obvious nonsense.

    I’ll also glibly recommend decaff.

  6. wherever the followers of liberal ideals have been allowed to take the reigns of power life became more difficult for the common people instead of less so.

    Right. The guaranteed minimum wage, social security and welfare benefits and unemployment benefits, health insurance, and workers comp and safety laws all illustrate your point.

    I feel no need to respond to anything else you said.

  7. Well said! I see that we have common ground for agreement at last! You’re a quick study.
    Auf Wiedersehen.

  8. If it does not exist then how does closing it hurt you? Maybe we lefties are using the wrong words. From now on I will say…"let's close the gun show non loophole."

  9. I’ll just say “If something is so dangerous that commercial sellers of it are regulated, it’s so dangerous that private sellers should be regulated too – anywhere.”

  10. Deep sigh,
    Once again, inanimate objects are simply not dangerous. Saying otherwise can’t make it so. (Please refer to the quotation below.)
    And again, things that don’t exist just don’t exist. That’s specifically why nothing can be done about them.

    As spoken by a great man, “The only problem with our democrat friends is that they know so much that isn’t so.”
    You guys are making that remark more and more valid with every reply.
    Maybe you should read this stuff more slowly. The light may finally come “on” and the world won’t seem so dark and scary.

  11. inanimate objects are simply not dangerous

    True. An object at rest stays at rest. If that’s a valid argument against gun control, however, it’s also an argument for letting little kids play with guns and knives.

    You’re playing dumb.

  12. Wow, Ken! You just can’t keep from mixing the fruit, (apples, oranges and now strawberries?)
    The fact that inanimate objects cannot be dangerous (something we agree on) is just an immutable fact. (Apples) It’s not an argument.
    That objects at rest “tend” to remain at rest; is a LAW of Physics. (Oranges)
    Letting kids play with guns or knives is a plainly irresponsible thing to do (Strawberries) that has nothing at all to do with the guns or knives. The object is still no more dangerous than before. In this respect it’s just like a hammer or a sharp wood-carving chisel, an ax or even a piece of broken glass. Non of these things are dangerous by themselves. The human element is what’s dangerous.
    Are you so accustomed to NOT dealing with [the] inherent responsibilities of life that you habitually blame inanimate objects instead of looking to the only place where blame can lie, (with the human that owns or holds the object?)
    Without the human element there is no danger that can be associated with inanimate objects no matter what they are.
    The immutable-facts and truths of life don’t care what you think about them. Until you understand that you’re doomed to continue walking in that circular reasoning your masters have prescribed for you.
    Said another way; If you keep on doing and thinking as you’ve always done, you’ll keep on getting what you always got. Is that what you want?
    All that I’ve written herein sits squarely on a solid foundation of what “is.”
    All that you’ve written above is based on what “is-not.”
    You’ve added validity to the original essay with every reply.
    I appreciate it but it’s getting old, don’t you think?

  13. You’re putting words in my mouth, and when people do that it’s usually because they can’t rebut what the person actually said. The argument I’m referring to is the false one you draw from the fact that inanimate objects are not in themselves dangerous. That fact is a law of physics – of course. That’s why I quoted from that law. “The human element is what’s dangerous,” not the object by itself – of course. In other words, certain humans are dangerous when given access to guns. Who are those humans? First and foremost, kids and criminals.

    But there’s where you’re inconsistent. You acknowledge that letting kids play with guns is irresponsible. But you refuse to admit what’s equally undeniable, that it’s also irresponsible to let criminals buy them at gun shows. You will of course want to deny that you approve of them buying guns there, but actions speak louder than words, and you oppose the very measure that would prevent the thing you’ll say you oppose.

    So maybe you’re right, and “gun show loophole” really is a misleading term. After all, you wouldn’t let kids but guns there. Just criminals. Maybe the proper term is “criminals at gun shows loophole.” Try that as your slogan, and when the overwhelming majority of the people, who favor increased gun control, look at you like your nuts, you tell ’em – Guns don’t kill, criminals do! Er, I mean, except if the guns are around kids!

  14. ““For America and Canada, it’s much easier for them to get them over the social network, because they say the Americans are dumb — they have open gun policies,” {former ISIS recruit Harry Sarfo] said. “They say we can radicalize them easily, and if they have no prior record, they can buy guns, so we don’t need to have no contact man who has to provide guns for them.”

    How a Secretive Branch of ISIS Built a Global Network of Killers – NY Times

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here