POLITICS - Please contact your Senators - Gun Shows

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 3:14 pm

I'll let their words speak for themselves.

New Senate Bill to Require Background Checks at Gun Shows
No background check, no gun, no excuses.
Dear Molon,

Virginia Tech survivor Lily Habtu joins Senators Lautenberg (NJ) and Reed (RI) at press conference to announce new Senate bill aimed at closing the gun show loophole.
We started this year with a huge victory â€” thanks to you and our many allies â€” with a new law that will strengthen the Brady criminal background check system!

Now we need to keep up the momentum and take the next logical step: make sure that everyone who wants to buy a gun gets a background check.

Earlier today, Senator Lautenberg (NJ) introduced legislation that will keep criminals and other dangerous people from buying and selling guns without Brady criminal background checks at gun shows.

Gun shows should not be a haven for convicted felons, domestic violence abusers, or someone who is dangerously mentally ill who wants to evade a background check. Letting criminals and other prohibited purchasers get away with buying guns at gun shows is at odds with common sense, and recklessly puts lives at risk. We believe the law should be "no background check, no gun, no excuses."

CLICK HERE TO EMAIL YOUR SENATORS NOW
Urge Them to Support Senator Lautenberg's Bill to Close the Gun Show Loophole

Whether they are called gun shows, flea markets, or swap meets, there are thousands of events every year in our local communities where unlicensed individuals can sell firearms without doing background checks. (Federally-licensed firearm dealers at the same event are required to conduct Brady criminal background checks.)
People prohibited from buying or possessing guns seek out these unlicensed sellers, because they know that they can simply put down their money and walk away with deadly weapons.

Law-abiding gun buyers and sellers have nothing to fear from background checks. Only criminals and corrupt sellers do. Allowing dangerous people to buy guns at gun shows from unlicensed sellers without a background check threatens the safety of our families and communities.

Here's What You Can Do Today:

1. EMAIL YOUR SENATORS NOW.
Urge them to support Senator Lautenberg's bill to close the gun show loophole. Tell them you want the law to be "no background check, no gun, no excuses." Click here to send an email to both of your Senators.

2. SPREAD THE WORD.
Our Senators need to hear from as many of us as possible. Please click here to use our tool to forward this email to friends and family.

3. LEARN MORE ABOUT THE ISSUE.
Visit our website to download talking points and issue briefs on this important subject.
America is turning a corner on the gun issue, and I want you to be a part of what could be an historic moment for our country. I ask you to join us in helping make 2008 a safer year for all Americans.

Sincerely,

Sarah Brady, Chair

If this e-mail was forwarded to you, click here to sign up for your own Brady Campaign alerts.

Donate to Support the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

LeverBob · Post by **LeverBob** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 6:00 pm

Maybe if we throw water on her she'll melt...calling us all a bunch of brats

LeverBob

Scott64A · Post by **Scott64A** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 10:16 pm

Um, we already have to have a federal backgrond check when buying a gun at a gun show.

Are there places where you don't need a BG check?

Whatever, she is just using every opportunity to villify guns.

TedH · Post by **TedH** » Thu Jan 31, 2008 10:23 pm

What she's wanting to do is stop the sale of firearms between individuals.

The "gun show loophole" is just the sneaky way of getting it done.

El Chivo · Post by **El Chivo** » Fri Feb 01, 2008 4:32 am

I thought they had to be transferred anyway, through a FFL.

It would be dumb not to, from the seller's point of view, because the BATF would still have them on file if the gun was ever used in a crime. Though I guess that would only happen if the perp left the gun at the scene.

Leverdude · Post by **Leverdude** » Fri Feb 01, 2008 5:43 am

Like Ted said, its not to do with dealers but individuals.
Face to face in most states you can sell long guns with no BS. If your a non FFL you can sell guns at ashow the same way, just dont happen much & has nothing at all to do with he VT tragedy.

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Fri Feb 01, 2008 7:35 am

This kind of thing obviously would apply to relatives - they aim to 'catch' any guns that are transferred to wife, brother, sister, child. Pretty soon owning a gun that is NOT registered with the feds will be tantamount to a federal firearms felony, property seizure, and complete loss of firearms 'priveleges' - just like it is with full-autos now.

In part, we can thank the 'sporting use' gun owners who urged the NRA to 'compromise' and allow the various machine gun laws to be placed - they rationalized it as a necessary compromise, and 'only affecting machineguns' but the obvious purpose wasn't registering a few tens of thousands of full autos owned by honest folks - it was laying down a template to use against ALL gun owners. Now the other shoe is hitting the floor.

Also, FYI the next step after this one will be that any guns ever registered will have to be accounted for. If you can't prove who you sold it to and when, it will be 'assumed' you sold it yesterday to someone who was a criminal, and you will be arrested for traffiking in firearms illegally. Not kidding, but most gun owners have a 'doesn't affect me, I don't own a ___' mindset, or a 'I already got mine' or 'cold dead fingers' mindset, but very few show up TODAY at legislative hearings to keep the onslaught under control. Seems like they just assume you can let the monster grow real big and then shoot it at the last minute, and I'm not sure that's good - too much violence, disruption, and chance for losing; far better to act now at the ballot box.

Tycer · Post by **Tycer** » Fri Feb 01, 2008 7:51 am

It would effectively require that all guns transfered in any way shape or form be REGISTERED.

Once they are registered, the government will know where to go to confiscate and destroy them for our safety.

Once they are destroyed, violent criminals and governments get to play without fear of retribution, and as a result, violent crime will rise as it has in Washington DC, GB and AU, and civil rights disappear as a fading memory.

Sure does not take people long to forget what the Patriots fought GB for. Or what Hitler, or any of a dozen other countries have done after disarming their citizens. Patricians and plebs. Conform or die. BAH!

Hmm...have not had my morning coffee yet....sorry for the rant......

Bitmap · Post by **Bitmap** » Fri Feb 01, 2008 8:37 am

sobenk wrote:I thought they had to be transferred anyway, through a FFL.

It would be dumb not to, from the seller's point of view, because the BATF would still have them on file if the gun was ever used in a crime. Though I guess that would only happen if the perp left the gun at the scene.

You are in CA right? In most of the rest of the US that is not the case.

The only way you could get in trouble for selling a firearm to an individual is if you did it when you knew the person was prohibited from owning it or if you knew the person planned on using it to commit a crime.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Fri Feb 01, 2008 9:54 am

I agree gentlemen, just another way for guns to be taken.

That is why we need to contact everyone we can and tell them not to vote for this.

Johnny

JB · Post by JB » Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:25 pm

It would be nice if someone with a little literary skill could draft a letter we could all use to send to our representatives. I'm darn good with numbers, but suck at writing letters.

Blaine · Post by **Blaine** » Fri Feb 01, 2008 1:33 pm

JB wrote:It would be nice if someone with a little literary skill could draft a letter we could all use to send to our representatives. I'm darn good with numbers, but suck at writing letters.

Dear Sir or Madam,

Please follow the intent of the 2nd Amendment and do not infringe upon my right to own firearms. Remember what Thomas Jefferson said: "
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

Here's wishing you remain my faithful servant,

Blaine Garver

phlatnose · Post by **phlatnose** » Fri Feb 01, 2008 5:44 pm

No point in writing to the senators here in california. We already have that law, and thats been in force since 1992 I think.

marlinman93 · Post by **marlinman93** » Fri Feb 01, 2008 7:54 pm

We already have the gun show law in Oregon, and the defines a gun show as any place where more than 25 guns are for sale. So if there's 25 or less at a swap meet or garage sale it's exempt. Also all face to face sales are exempt.
If the proposed law is worded without any specific number of guns for sale, then it will target everyone, even private single sales.

BruceB · Post by **BruceB** » Fri Feb 01, 2008 9:33 pm

I'll jump right on that. I'm sure DiFi and Babs Boxer will be very responsive.

sobenk, transfer through a dealer in state is CA law.