Taking a 5 min sanity break at my desk. Thought I’d share this. Joan Peterson has a post up about the “Gunshow Loophole”….well except the story that “Proves” the gunshow loophole. An idiot Police Chief is claiming that guns were bought at gunshows in North Carolina. Only problem is that the handguns in question are illegal to buy without a permit in that state. People are kind enough to post the statutes. When asked if somebody is willfully committing a crime to do something nefarious (that is also likely a crime, such as use the gun to threaten or rob or kill) than what would Joan’s proposed plan do? Answer:
If everyone is on the same page and it is understood that the same laws apply to all, I am guessing that the law will be adhered to. There will be people watching to make sure that is the case. Right now, these folks may break some laws but they are breaking a law when they don’t require background checks since it is legal for them to do so. With a stricter law, they would be in danger of breaking several federal laws ( or state laws, if that is the case). That doesn’t mean that all will comply. But there will be a lot more pressure on them to do so.
See Joan promises just one more law to Utopia! See her silly law will work just fine. Except the law is already in place there…. There’s a certain troll you all know who often talks about the “Gunshow Loophole” in Massachusetts….probably because such posts get me to chime in that all private sales must be registered with the state here….
This is what passes for “Common Sense”… More on this later, if I ever get home tonight.
I really wish I would have posted those comment under my blog name.
Unfortunately, she
deletesmoderates way too many of my “Bob S.” comments. But the same words as anonymous gets through, go figure.I carefully crafted that sentence, gave her a follow up to make sure but in her ‘reality’ you are right – one more law will get people to stop being criminals.
Pet peeve — I think we need to start a new term to counter the “private sales with background check”. If other people know about it, it isn’t private any more!!!
Maybe “non-commercial sale”?
Heh, I had that happen after about 5 comments and had to comment under “anonymous.” Haven’t bothered reading or commenting there in a while though.
Ditto. There is absolutely no value in trying to converse with a woman whose idea of rational debate amounts to saying, “Nonsense,” over and over again.
Now, exposing her, on the other hand…
Saying. “Nonsense” when she just simply doesn’t shitcan the comment.
Should call her blog “Common Nonsense” 🙂
Ain’t nothing more common!
I have the same issue. I ‘d say that less than 25% of my comments make it up there. I’m not sure why either, as I haven’t posted anything particularly inflammatory. I’m surprised that Sean gets so many comments posted.
0% of mine have made it there, so I quit. I called her “Hon” so I’m the devil. 😀
Fuck that if I have something to say I’ll write it here where I know it’ll show up. If I want her to see it I’ll post a link in a comment. Never watched the net traffic to see if she reads them or not. I know she’s quoted my blog before (like most anti-gun blogs there is no traffic from it) but I suspect she probably doesn’t bother anymore.
She DOES seem to REALLY like Sean tho, doesn’t she?
Heh, remember that crazy anti-gun chick who was friends with Skywriter & Catherine. I called her “hysterical” and she got pissed and went off on some crazy, long ass feminist rant against me.
Anti’s are amusing, and as usual appear to get little or no traffic.
She puts waaaaay too much value on human love and kindness.
Not really, since she’s openly admitting that what’s happening is happening willfully and illegally. Just she says if we do it again, only harder, it’ll suddenly work!
Ok, then, she puts waaaaaaaay to much value on unicorn farts.
It’s like she just can’t admit that some people are going to break the laws no matter how strict they are. Seriously, do you think someone who plans to commit murder will give a damn if they’re breaking another federal law or three? They don’t fear prison, but do they fear armed victims. That will put pressure on them to comply with the law. I can see why she has her own blog though rather than trying to start threads on a real forum, her ‘arguments’ would be chewed to pieces and she’d look like a fool.
Yep Murder, assault, and theft are damn near as universal as they come…but I guess guns CAUSE those crimes so the law is irrelevant, but gun laws are OK. But then again the guy selling or making the gun has a gun….
“Right now, these folks may break some laws but they are breaking a law when they don’t require background checks since it is legal for them to do so.”
Read that five times fast and your brain will explode from the contradictions!
“If owning a gun was as illegal as murder nobody would be murdered!” 😛
Hold up, you mean to tell me murder is illegal? =P
The loophole DOES exist. It is the “loophole” of actually being in ownership and possession of the firearm. Making something illegal does not render that something impossible or non-existent. In Massachusetts, it’s still -possible- to make private, unregistered sales of firearms between individuals (coughcoughblackmarket); however, such practice is illegal.
In order to “close the loophole,” they must remove all firearms from our possession, save for certain specific times. (See, you can still -OWN- the gun, you just can’t have -POSSESSION- of it unless we say so!) Legal ownership, but not actual ownership.
Once “ownership” is reduced to a claim ticket, needed in order to check your firearm from state possession for your hunting/target practice/etc., it’s a simple matter to start denying the claims tickets.
Possession is 9/10’ths of ownership. But it’s not a -ban-, see, because they’d leave us a claim ticket.
Screw ’em. I’m keepin’ mine.
Mr_T (NOT a Mass. resident)
That’s EXACTLY the point. Given that Congress knew they couldn’t push a ban on all center-fire rifles, or all rifles with removable magazines they made what became the Federal Assault Weapons Ban. In that case the “Loopholes” were that you could buy an AR-15 with a fixed stock and the bayonet lug ground off, and a muzzle brake or crowned barrel predominantly affixed (or omitted) and have a perfectly legal rifle that was just as capable as any other gun.
In this new definition doing something illegally and not getting caught is a “Loophole”, much like people who run red light, or exceed the posted speed limit, but avoid the eyes of the Police are somehow stepping through a loophole.
Of course since Joan is so upset about the death of her sister, she should work to close the “Murder Loophole” as about 70% of all the murders in Boston go unsolved thanks to the pressure of the gangs that commit them.
Weer’d – I suddenly have the urge to respond to each new post she puts up with a comment that says but one word.
“Nonsense!”
🙂