The Guardian: One in five Americans buy a gun without a background check
- Thread starter Nathan
- Start date
- Status
dogtown tom
New member
FFL's can only transfer firearms to other licensees, or to a nonlicensee via a 4473/NICS. They may also return a repaired or replacement firearm directly to the person that sent it in.....no 4473/NICS required.
An FFL is not a nonlicensee.
Federal law permits it, I don't know about FL law.
There is no "registration" of firearms under Federal law. ATF regs allow the return of a repaired or replacement firearm directly to the person that sent it in.....no 4473/NICS required.
Only if your state has such a law. It most certainly isn't required by Federal law because there is no such Federal registry of firearms and their owners.
turkeestalker
New member
Alright, 'registration' was not the right word to use, my apologies.
Prior to Missouri adopting the NICS system, all handguns were registered and permitted to the individual here, like many other states across the country. I still have a few I purchased back then and old perceptions die hard I guess.
I'll not voice my tin foil hat theory beyond that.
Prior to Missouri adopting the NICS system, all handguns were registered and permitted to the individual here, like many other states across the country. I still have a few I purchased back then and old perceptions die hard I guess.
I'll not voice my tin foil hat theory beyond that.
Sweet Shooter
New member
Again? So soon? We have to be smarter than this. Must be smarter. If this is the best argument we have, we are all doomed, and more-so because of asinine views like this. News does not have a nationality... for decades now. It's served up on demand, based on what you watch and subscribe to. Stop making us look like hicks. If this is who we really are, I say take the guns away.... because you scare me.
-SS-
Bartholomew Roberts
Moderator
The Guardian is a blatantly leftist publication even by European standards. At the same time though, in the last year their reporting on guns in the United States has been very solid. Even this piece, which is admittedly weak and produced in conjunction with Bloomberg's propaganda is still more insightful and informative than most of the major U.S. reporting (not that this is a high bar).
Sweet Shooter
New member
This is not fake news. It's real news and it's damaging. It should not be dismissed lightly by attributing it to one nationality or another... that is not a thing any longer. I am actually on your side. And I'm sick of Americans thinking that they have a corner on gun ownership, and that they are untouchable. We are very lucky in the U.S. that we can still exercise these rights. Lucky why? Because it is obviously not through intelligent argument that it's lasted this long. It doesn't matter whether the Guardian has an office in the U.S. It doesn't matter that the article is written by a left leaner or a right leaner. It is out there. British, American, left, right, these things divide us and no longer hold any weight.
Go pack your own sand.
-SS-
dogtown tom
New member
No...it's FAKE NEWS and being "real" is a given. It contains little actual fact and like a lot of supposed "news" is just a rewrite of another news article. That way they can push blame for the factual inaccuracy on the other news organization that published it.
It's FAKE NEWS because it simply isn't true, correct or genuine. Whether you like it or not the source has an anti gun agenda.
I've found that British "news organizations" merely repeat what they read in American news.....and don't bother with verifying the information is correct or truthful.
Be sick all you want but no one has made that assertion in this thread but you.
Luck has nothing to do with it.
.
Horsehockey.
If I weighed in on the politics of Country X I darn well better have some original source material rather than simply rewriting slop put out by Country X's media.
You seem to think us being critical "doesn't matter"? What planet have you been on the last twenty years?
Public opinion is shaped by the media and always has been. If you preach loud enough, long enough and keep your message on point eventually people will start to believe you, even if your message or news is fake, false, inaccurate or plain bunk.Lighten up Francis.
Sweet Shooter
New member
"Real news" in the sense that it's what gets reported, and honest or not, it works. Not to be taken lightly.
Now that is funny.
Not at all. The issue is bigger than this thread. Why do you think it's popular to call it America's gun problem? When it obviously isn't comparatively a problem at all.
The article is crap. Notice how it doesn't publish any part of any study - just references them. As others have said, there is no way to track this. However, of all of the firearms I've purchased, over the course of many years, only 6 that I can recall were purchased without any background check. Of those, two were rifles and 4 were handguns. One handgun was a revolver purchased in 1983 at an auction. Another was purchased from an estate where the estate attorney knew me and required that I sign an extensive bill of sale.
I only purchased one gun from an online auction where the sale was FTF with no background check. By chance, the seller worked within 5 miles of where I lived. The seller took my DL information to verify that I could purchase the gun. All other guns that I purchased online had to go through an FFL, so background checks were run.
One gun I purchased from a gun show, really more of a collectible, I bought from a private seller - no background check required, but did take my DL information.
So, maybe 10% of the guns I've purchased over my lifetime have been purchased without a background check. I could be off by +3 guns or so, but I really don't remember. Some of those were purchased before there were background checks. And, I'd say that I'm not the average gun buyer.
Harvard is where? Massachusetts? Not a lot of unregulated gun buying going on in that neck of the woods. Is Harvard still considered a College, or is it the new epicenter of fake news?
I only purchased one gun from an online auction where the sale was FTF with no background check. By chance, the seller worked within 5 miles of where I lived. The seller took my DL information to verify that I could purchase the gun. All other guns that I purchased online had to go through an FFL, so background checks were run.
One gun I purchased from a gun show, really more of a collectible, I bought from a private seller - no background check required, but did take my DL information.
So, maybe 10% of the guns I've purchased over my lifetime have been purchased without a background check. I could be off by +3 guns or so, but I really don't remember. Some of those were purchased before there were background checks. And, I'd say that I'm not the average gun buyer.
Harvard is where? Massachusetts? Not a lot of unregulated gun buying going on in that neck of the woods. Is Harvard still considered a College, or is it the new epicenter of fake news?
Criminals do not get a background check. That's not to say 1 in 5 are criminals. It's to say that a background check doesn't mean a whole lot.
The guy(Marc Lépine) who committed the murders in Montreal's École Polytechnique back in 1989 had passed such a check with no fuss. He shot 28 people, killing 14 women with a legally acquired Mini-14. And caused a lot of draconian useless laws that only punish the law abiding to be passed.
The guy(Marc Lépine) who committed the murders in Montreal's École Polytechnique back in 1989 had passed such a check with no fuss. He shot 28 people, killing 14 women with a legally acquired Mini-14. And caused a lot of draconian useless laws that only punish the law abiding to be passed.
Evan Thomas
Inactive
Closed for bickering, wandering off-topic, dragging in left-right politics, and general silliness.
- Status