AHSA Makes Their Stance Known

[rbernie]

The Bush administration let the ban expire in 2004 even though the ban resulted in a dramatic 66% reduction in these weapons used in crime over the 10 year period

Not according to the US Department of Justice. In fact, the DoJ tracking showed that semiauto rifles with military features were used in a disproportionately LOW number of gun crimes - less than five percent, if I recall correctly.

Got data?

 

[RPCVYemen]

The former, but not the latter. You completely failed to address the WHY of the issue.

The competitive disadvantage - I thought I explained that:

I do not think that it's fair to require dealers at gun show to perform NICS checks but a guy outside in the parking lot not to perform NICS checks. That places law abiding dealers at a competitive disadvantage. I am generally skeptical of government policies that disadvantage law abiding entities.

Mike

 

[rbernie]

You're playing games, and you're back to using the 'law abiding' moniker for dealers and implying that FTF deals are not law abiding in some fashion. I suspect you're just guilty of sloppy cut-n-paste and are really trying to say that you believe that some good comes from NICS and you wish to extend that to all transactions. If so - OK.

But then why not allow private sales to perform a NICS check instead of mandating that a dealer be placed in the middle of the transaction?

More to the point - have you ever gone to the US DOJ web site and reviewed the data on NICS rejections? Almost ten percent of the rejections are successfully fought and overturned because they were WRONG. I can't even begin to guess how many people were turned away without fighting it, when in fact they had no reason to be labeled a prohibited person.

What do you say to those people?

 

[RPCVYemen]

But then why not allow private sales to perform a NICS check instead of mandating that a dealer be placed in the middle of the transaction?

I agree 100% with that.

and you're back to using the 'law abiding' moniker for dealers and implying that FTF

Sigh. No, I cut an paste from an earlier post because you asked me why I supported required NICS checks for all sales at gun shows was a good idea. I was demonstrating that I thought I had answered that question.

Do you understand why I object, whether or not you in fact agree with me? I am not trying to persuade you to agree with me, I am answering your questions about why I think the way that I do on this issue.

Mike

 

[RPCVYemen]

Almost ten percent of the rejections are successfully fought and overturned because they were WRONG.

I accept your that this is true - though I haven't been to the DOJ site. But that is no reason to require NICs checks by dealers at gun shows, but not non-dealers at gun shows.

Mike

 

[rbernie]

I accept your that this is true - though I haven't been to the DOJ site. But that is no reason to require NICs checks by dealers at gun shows, but not non-dealers at gun shows.

It points to fundamental flaws in NICS, both in the data collection process and in the appeals/adjudication process. Extending the use of the system with its current flaws seems unwise.

If you told me that you, or AHSA as your proxy in Washington, supported a streamlined appeals process overhaul of NICS and allowing private citizens to use it to verify that FTF deals were not involving a prohibited person - I'd be solidly in your corner. Until then, we will have to disagree.

And none of this addresses how giving the FBI access to NICS data makes us A Better Nation in any way.

 

[RPCVYemen]

It points to fundamental flaws in NICS, both in the data collection process and in the appeals/adjudication process. Extending the use of the system with its current flaws seems unwise.

Yeah, there are to ways to think about a flawed system:

1. Make its use binding on all parties at gun shows - so that even though it's flawed, it's equally flawed for everyone. No one gains a competitive economic advantage by not being required to use the (flawed) system.
2. Don't make anyone new use a flawed system - people who are currently required to use is are just SOL (sorta outta luck).

You can imagine reasonable positions for both, but I support the 1st.

Mike

 

[RPCVYemen]

http://www.newwest.net/topic/article...itics/C41/L41/

I have had time to do a little more verification - even some anti-AHSA sights seem to accept that Schoenke was in fact on the transition team for Gov. Robert Ehrlich - who allegedly has an NRA "A" rating. I wonder why the NRA forgot to tell us all that? Probably a type, like their forgetting to tell us about his involvement with the CMP?

Mike

 

[NeoSpud]

RPCV - I respectfully disagree about the "economic disadvantage" on dealers at gun shows. I had a much longer reply here, but I've cut it short to keep to the point.

Basically, I just don't think that the number of individual's selling a few guns each at a gun show even dents the number of guns sold by dealers at the very same show. If there's any disadvantage there, I believe that it is nominal. I don't believe that there is sufficient evidence to indicate that dealers are hurting due to individuals doing FTF transfers. Please correct me if that's wrong.

One other point: Functionally, there is no difference between selling a gun FTF to someone you pm-ed here on THR's Trading Post and selling a gun at a gun show. The gun shows just facilitate FTF sales by individuals because it creates a common grounds for them to meet, the real-life equivalent of gun forums (like this one). I wouldn't support an NICS check for FTF transfers at gun show, nor THR.

 

[Phil DeGraves]

I agree with neo. Economic disadvantage? Are you serious? The reason you purchase a FTF from a private seller is that you don't have to pay retail, and the seller doesn't have to take wholesale. Anytime we can exclude the government from our personal lives and business is a good thing, not a bad thing. Criminals are criminals because they BREAK THE LAW, not because they bought a gun in a FTF transaction without a NICS check.

 

[yeti]

Dealers are almost always at an economic disadvantage vs private sales in direct competition. It is part of the cost of being in business.

A certain % of attendees are drawn to the show in hopes of a private sale. This is traffic generated by the prospect of FTF sales to the advantage of the dealers.

If I have a NIB gun I want to sell, I am at an economic disadvantage to the dealers who can buy at a cheaper price direct from a distributer or manufacturer. That is one of the perks of having the license and having to comply with extra regulations.

I think it is a wash. I can sell a few odds and ends, and a couple of guns I don't want with out having to deal with the cost and paperwork a dealer has. A dealer can sell some things at a lower price because his license allows him to purchase in bulk and at wholesale prices, he has purchase options denied to me because he does have a license.

And if you are in the gun business, and you find no economic reason for you to try to sell at gun shows, why are you there? If you are like me, you enjoy the show, being around other gunnies, seeing some new or unusual stuff, you are having a good time, if sales are made it is a bonus. If you are there to make a profit, and with all the economic advantages you gain by having an FFL, you find yourself losing money, because of a few competing private sales, it is your business plan that need re-evaluating, not imposing new federal regulations on private sales. I don't have the FFL, I don't gain your economic advantages, don't force your burdens on to my back without giving me the same benefits you enjoy.

 

[Eyesac]

RPCVYemen. I am convinced that you are part of the AHSA organization. I don't know why an organization with every intent to deceive wouldn't have representatives on gun forums defending them, and you seem to do just that everywhere it's mentioned. You sir, are my enemy. If you consider this a personal attack, so be it. But I'm convinced.

 

[RPCVYemen]

I am convinced that you are part of the AHSA organization.

You are 100% correct - I am a member of all the groups listed in my signature.

You sir, are my enemy.

Oh well.

Have a nice day,

Mike

 

[RPCVYemen]

Dealers are almost always at an economic disadvantage vs private sales in direct competition. It is part of the cost of being in business.

As a dealer, many of those decisions (location of a store, how big of a storefront, how much inventory to stock, how much to pay/train your employees) are more or less, etc). Those are all commercial decisions that you are free to make. Maybe you think the way to succeed to do an enormous volume with low margins. Maybe you're going to stock nothing but English double rifles, and you'll see one month. You can make that decision, and live with the economic consequences.

But as a dealer, you are not free to make the decision to sell guns without a NICs check. That is a government mandated economic burden.

If some folks selling guns at a gun show have to bear the cost of the government mandated economic burden, then all should. It is not fair to require some people to bear that burden, and others not. That's what I mean by an economic disadvantage.

Mike

 

[12131]

Anyone with half a brain already knew AHSA's true color before the election.

 

[yeti]

But as a dealer, you are not free to make the decision to sell guns without a NICs check. That is a government mandated economic burden.

That is part of the cost of doing business as a licensed dealer.
It is not an economic burden it is a business expense.
And you gain the benefit of additional traffic brought in by these same private sellers. I tend not to count on the dealers for that rare once in a life time deal, but there are things that I do look to dealers for, and that is because they are licensed, they have a monopolistic economic advantage, in some areas.


And frankly I would not buy from any dealer that wants to force more regulation on me, rather then sucking it up and working to have the unreasonable burdens removed from everyone. Any form of wanting to 'level the playing field' by screwing the other guy is unscrupulous in both practice and desire.

 

[caseypj]

Ray Schoenke is a lieing sack of ****, he's said many times in the past about what he'd like to do gun control wise. Now he goes on HuffingtonPost saying he doesn't want that, it's BS. It's meant to make it look like Obama has actually garnered support of a pro-gun organization when it's just the Brady Bunch with a different name.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ray-schoenke/hunters-and-shooters-supp_b_97028.html what he says now

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/17/AR2008031702579.html what he's done in the past

He's given a "$5,000 donation to Handgun Control Inc., predecessor to the main anti-gun lobby, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence."

RPCVYemen, thanks for giving him money which he could in turn donate to the Bradys.

 

[Phil DeGraves]

If some folks selling guns at a gun show have to bear the cost of the government mandated economic burden, then all should. It is not fair to require some people to bear that burden, and others not.

Here's the "wealth distribution" angle.

FTF sellers are not selling to make a living like gun stores are, so you are comparing apples to oranges. Most FTF sales are to raise money to pay bills or to buy a different gun without taking the big loss you would if you traded it in to a retailer who HAS to make a profit. But I suppose it would make sense to "even the playing field" (as if the consumer ever has an advantage over the businesses) to a socialist.
Repeat after me: LESS government - GOOD.
MORE government - BAD.

 

[RPCVYemen]

He's given a "$5,000 donation to Handgun Control Inc., predecessor to the main anti-gun lobby, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence."

Did you actually investigate this claim yourself, and at least make yourself aware of his description of this event? Or are you more or less parroting what someone else told you?

Mike

 

[carlrodd]

He hopes president-elect obama knows that "70 to 80 percent" of violent gun crime is committed by black and Hispanic people in innercities, yet he supports oppressive legislation that affects the largely inoffending 80 percent of the country. Its all so unbelievably stupid, I feel silly for commenting.

 

[RPCVYemen]

Repeat after me: LESS government - GOOD.
MORE government - BAD.

Didn't we just have a big election about this? Didn't the people claiming they were champions of small government lose?

But I suppose it would make sense to "even the playing field" (as if the consumer ever has an advantage over the businesses) to a socialist.

In fact, didn't the folks who claimed the other folks were "socialist" also lose?

But just for the heck of it, what does socialism have to do with this discussion about whether or not everyone selling guns at a gun show should have to play by the same rules?

Mike

 

[samtron]

Hey Yemen do you own a firearm? Are you a troll.

 

[RPCVYemen]

Hey Yemen do you own a firearm? Are you a troll.

Use the search function.

Mike

 

[samtron]

emen do you own a firearm?

 

[yeti]

But just for the heck of it, what does socialism have to do with this discussion about whether or not everyone selling guns at a gun show should have to play by the same rules?

Is this the way the AHSA thinks? I'm stuck with these burdens, but rather than fight to get them lifted from me, we will argue to have them applied to everyone else? Perhaps if there is a new AWB, rather than fight to get rid of the ban, AHSA can fight to have the same ban applied to bolt action rifles, just so we all can play by the same rules.