What exactly is the "Gunshow Loophole"?

[62coltnavy]

Thorough discussion here, let me add just a couple of comments.

1. It is called a "loophole" because it allows someone to legally purchase a firearm without passing a background check, and the antis think that all sales should have a background check. (Like here in California). They support the desire for universal background checks with the oft stated (but debunked claim) that 40% of gun show sales are to prohibited persons.

2. As noted, an FFL must conduct a NICS on all sales.

3. A private seller CANNOT knowingly sell a firearm to a prohibited person.

4. A private seller CANNOT knowingly sell a firearm to any person who resides out of state without involving an FFL. To do so is a federal firearms felony. (The recent Armslist case involved such a transaction, and the seller served a year in prison.) Specifically, although an out of state resident can arrange a purchase, the purchase must be sent to an FFL in the buyer's state of residence (where a background check will be conducted).

5. A prohibited person commits a felony by purchasing and possessing a firearm.

 

[Tom Servo]

It is called a "loophole" because it allows someone to legally purchase a firearm without passing a background check, and the antis think that all sales should have a background check.

loop·hole
ˈlo͞opˌ(h)ōl/
noun
1. an ambiguity or inadequacy in the law or a set of rules.

As I posted on page one, advocates for the Brady Act deliberately excluded private sales because they knew the bill wouldn't pass without that exclusion. That's not a loophole.

 

[JimDandy]

or inadequacy

Your own quote allows for calling it a loophole. Additionally while Brady may have agreed to it, that doesn't mean the current Brady, Bloomberg or Moms Bully did, any more than the current NRA , or NAGR agrees to background checks or the Mulford Act, the GCA and so on... See the quote from a 1968 American Rifleman

 

[Tom Servo]

while Brady may have agreed to it, that doesn't mean the current Brady, Bloomberg or Moms Bully did,

Senators Feinstein, Schumer, and Lautenberg did, and they're the ones who were pushing for it last year, as did Sarah Brady.

See the quote from a 1968 American Rifleman.

That article is based on a faulty premise, and it really isn't credible.

 

[JimDandy]

That article is based on a faulty premise, and it really isn't credible.

So the quote is not accurate? Anyone have a Rifleman from 1968 to verify the quote does not exist? I'm not old enough.

Senators Feinstein, Schumer, and Lautenberg did, and they're the ones who were pushing for it last year, as did Sarah Brady.

And that has what to do with Bloomberg, Everytown, Moms Demand, and so on down the line?

Are those folks you mentioned not allowed to change their mind? Find something inadequate after the fact?

There's more than enough to find fault in what they want, getting distracted over the semantics of catch phrases like Assault Weapon, Gun Show Loophole - or from our side- ridiculing Gun Free Zones, Good Guys With Guns and the like doesn't really help us much.

 

[tomrkba]

I define it as the ability of a person to buy and sell firearms without government permission.

In other words, buying and selling firearms is part of the right to keep and bear arms.

 

[Tom Servo]

So the quote is not accurate?

The quote is real. The idea that the Nazis were the architects of German gun control is not.

And that has what to do with Bloomberg, Everytown, Moms Demand, and so on down the line?

The people I mentioned are the patron saints of the Bloomberg/MDA axis. They provide backing, legislative muscle, and strategic advice to this day.

Are those folks you mentioned not allowed to change their mind? Find something inadequate after the fact?

There was no changing of minds or sudden finding of inadequacy. They wrote the bill and were aware of the exception.

The idea was that they got their bill in a form they found acceptable, and we'd be left alone. That lasted less than 24 hours. The night the Brady Act was signed, Senator Metzenbaum went on the talk shows and crowed about how they hand't gone far enough and they needed to do more.

They started calling the exception a loophole, which wasn't true. The response was "Shaddup! I don't hear you! Lalala...loophole!"

So, you can understand if we're a bit hung up on semantics. Politics sometimes hangs on such things.

 

[Paul B.]

"Unlicensed dealers are already breaking the law, making this fundamentally a law enforcement problem
Definitely. The irony is that the ATF doesn't consider such prosecutions a worthy use of their time."

I beg to diiffer. There were two brothers who always had a couple of tables at the gun shows. They always had different guns on their tables at each show and prices were very reasonable. Apparently they were approached by the BATF and told they couldn't sell at the shows without a license. Come the next show they were arrested. Haven't seen or heard from them since.

On another note, I looked up the March 1968 article and I think there was some cherry picking going on. All I could do was a quick scan of both as I don't thave the time to go through word by word.
Paul B.