Email From An Anti

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Treo

member
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Messages
3,109
Location
Co. Springs
Would you say that the 40% of guns purchased without any background check was part of the problem? What about gun shows that don't do them? Or straw buyers that distribute and are only prosecuted 10% of the time, while 85% of individuals who commit crimes face prosecution? I agree that bans don't work but our enforcement of reasonable standards is horrible.
Click to expand...

Got the above as a reply to something I posted on Youtube today. I need some help formulating a proper response (by proper I mean something that might turn an anti back from the darkside)

My first thought is that if 40% of guns were sold W/out a background check ( I wish) how in the Hell would anybody know they were being sold?

The video, if anyone is interested, is "Richard Pryor: Gunshop" It is horrendeously anti.

Richard walks into a gunshop and all the guns start bragging to him about all the people they killed.
 
Last edited:
tell them that you appreciate that they do not think gun bans are a good idea. That is the first time I've heard an anti say that. they kind of deserve some credit here.
 
Regarding "Richard Pryor: Gunshop" :rolleyes:

You may want to point to all the gun pictures posted on THR, TFL and other websites. 99.99999999999% of all those guns you see here have never harmed anyone.

And if they have, it was probably a bad guy.

"A great many of those who 'debunk' traditional values have in the background values of their own which they believe to be immune from the debunking process." -CS Lewis, The Abolition of Man-
 
I agree that bans don't work but our enforcement of reasonable standards is horrible.
Click to expand...
So you would rather punish only the people that are following the law? That's what bans do, no ifs, ands, or buts.

Lazy enforcement is not the fault of law-abiding gun owners.
 
As far as gun shows, I'd be interested to know what percent of people at the gun show are classified as dealers, requiring them to run a check, as opposed to the private sellers, who aren't required to do such. I'm sure it would vary depending on location or who shows up on a given weekend, but still, I'd like to know some rough numbers.
I know I've bought guns from both at the gun show. I think a lot of uniformed people hear "gun show loophole," and automatically assume that just because you're at the gun show you don't have to get checked out for anything you buy.
 
In Colorado at Gunshows every body has to get a background check. I can't imagine that the ATF doesn't have people there scoping things out.

Going back to my original problem W/ the guys post, if 40% of guns are sold W/out a background check how does anybody know they're being sold?

That said I purchased most of my guns privately W/out a background check, and I'm sure the criminals (or a very small %) buy their guns at gun shows or gunshops.

I expect that's the tack I'll take.

Plz if you read this thread hit that video and post a pro RKBA comment
 
As far as gun shows, I'd be interested to know what percent of people at the gun show are classified as dealers, requiring them to run a check, as opposed to the private sellers, who aren't required to do such. I'm sure it would vary depending on location or who shows up on a given weekend, but still, I'd like to know some rough numbers.
I know I've bought guns from both at the gun show. I think a lot of uniformed people hear "gun show loophole," and automatically assume that just because you're at the gun show you don't have to get checked out for anything you buy.
Click to expand...

If you do find such an "official" "statistic", I would take it with a grain of salt and watch how it's worded. "Gun Show Sales" would, of course include books, knives, WW2 souveniers, WW2 beef jerkey, $4 bottled water, soda, beer, etc. "Gun-Related Sales" could include scopes, grips, etc...all of which, of course, do not (yet) require government approval, and expand the numerator.

As far as your question goes, of course, there are more non-dealers at gun shows. Many of the visitors bring guns there looking for parts, holsters or looking to sell.

In a free society, how could anyone possibly count all sales transactions between free citizens?
 
That said I purchased most of my guns privately W/out a background check, and I'm sure the criminals (or a very small %) buy their guns at gun shows or gunshops.
Click to expand...

I think the majority of those who committ crimes with guns buy their guns "on the street". Many of these guns have been stolen.

Watch out for the "statistics" - because, of course, stolen guns were once sold to someone by dealers or maybe even at EEEEEVIL GUN SHOWS.

Based on the crowd and the prices, I would think your average criminal would be crazy (and probably TERRIFIED) to cough up the $5 and enter a gun show. It would be like going to a pharmacy to buy crack.
 
My guns have killed fewer people than Ted Kennedy's car.

I can't remember where I first heard that, but it's my favorite response to this kind of bull.
 
To return to the original request.

Dear X.

Whilst it is refreshing to have a rational conversation on both sides of the divide I feel we need to make sure we're talking about the same things.

You brought up a wide selection of percentages, could you point me in the direction of where you got the figure from? Blank statements like that concern me as they are usually less than accurate. We all remember the old saying that there are Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics......

For example

Your view that 40% of all firearm sales are "off book", are we talking all states, all types of firearm, are we including firearm components such as a magazine or ammunition, does this including weapons other than firearms, are we talking of illegal sales or legal sales?

It's the same with a phrase such as straw buyer, we really need to lock down what we are talking off. Are we including, for example, the situation where a father purchase his daughter a rifle as a present?

I personally, when in these discussions, try and use only points that I have seen are capable of checking and have been peer reviewed.

It would for example be relatively easy for me to point to the number of deaths due to negligence, incompetence or inadequate health care in the US and "prove" it is in your best interests to avoid doctors as opposed to handing firearms to juvenile delinquents.......

xxxxxxxx
 
There was no "loophole" to close BEFORE the anti-2A background checks! So if you want to close this manufactured "loophole" then do away with ALL background checks! Problem solved!
 
Look how well "reasonable" gun control has worked in Chicago, LA, NY, DC, Boston, England, Nazi Germany, Uganda, etc. etc.

How can a law against owning guns stop people that BREAK THE LAW from using them? The whole concept is fallacious.
 
Would you say that the 40% of guns purchased without any background check was part of the problem? What about gun shows that don't do them? Or straw buyers that distribute and are only prosecuted 10% of the time, while 85% of individuals who commit crimes face prosecution? I agree that bans don't work but our enforcement of reasonable standards is horrible.
Click to expand...

No, I would not agree -- and I would point to the statistics on how few prosecutions there are for violations of the Brady Act. If that law is stopping "dangerous criminals" from getting guns, how come those same "dangerous criminals" aren't being prosecuted?

(Hint: It's because the Act isn't catching dangerous criminals -- it's catching people like an old Black man who was prosecuted for having a deck of cards with pictures of nekked white women, and is as a result now inelligible to own a gun.)
 
You're not going to turn someone who's anti-gun into someone who's pro-gun with an internet post. You have to take them out shooting to do that. They see how guns aren't inherently evil, scary things and can actually be quite fun. They see that a couple fellas shooting paper and cans in the woods has nothing whatsoever to do with inner-city violence or the drug trade or whatever and they come away feeling not so bad. I had a bunch of anti-gun friends become gun owners that way.

So, long and short is: Don't bother trying to trying to convince people about things they can't be convinced of. You might as well try to turn them Catholic -- or un-Catholic.

I would ask where he's getting his statistics, though. Because, you know, 74% of all statistics are made up.
 
For one thing, you can ask him where they got the statistic that 85% of people who commit crime face prosecution, which according to the crime statistics in my criminology class, is incorrect. According to my notes that I have right next to me regarding from my fairly renowned criminology professor, the 8 major felonies ( violent crimes: murder, rape, aggravated assault, robbery and property crimes: Arson, motor theft, larceny and burglar7) out of 1000 crimes, approximately 567 are reported. Out of the 567 that are reported, 108 result in someone getting arrested. Out of the 108 arrested, only 19 are actually convicted of a felony. Out of the 19 convicted of a felony, 14 go to jail. So out of 1000 major felonies reported to the police, 14 crimes result in someone going to jail convicted of a felony, 1.4%. Now, I don't claim to be an expert, this is just what I have been taught so far. I'm sure I'll take some heat from people questioning my statistics, but again these are just according to what I've been taught. However, if these facts are true, it makes me feel a whole hell of a lot better being able to protect myself should the need arise.
Also, these are just stats relating to 8 major felonies, but if he is arguing the use of guns in crime, I would assume that the crimes he is arguing about would fall into one of these categories.
 
Treo said:
Got the above as a reply to something I posted on Youtube today. I need some help formulating a proper response (by proper I mean something that might turn an anti back from the darkside)
Click to expand...
Wait, I thought WE were the dark side. Now I'm confused.
 
Criminals will always find a way to get guns. They like gun control laws it makes it easier for them to ply their "trade". Gun control is an abysmal failure. It only makes it difficult for a person who will not commit a gun crime to get a gun for self protection and other lawful purposes. The problem is a spineless criminal justice system that is more concerned with "rehabilitation" than removing the violent offenders from society and keeping them in prison. Or if their crime calls for it fry them.
 
Right on FLA2760

Well at the gun show I go to They require the sellers to at least take their ID, address, and driver's number, Hell the guy I bought my rifle from had a 4473 and he needed my Dad's Id ( I am only 17) to me it seems the "gun show loophole" is a answer to a non-existent question
 
Last edited:
Background checks are an invasion of privacy that informs government of who is armed. Seeing as how the Founders intended for us to be able to resist government, background checks are an irony.

Understand that the rebuttal to what i just wrote is that the people are allegedly powerless against today's government, and that's a different topic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Curator
  • Locked
Would you use a free background check service?
2 3 4
Replies
83
Views
4K
SamT1
S
M
  • Locked
Owner of A.R.M.S. donates to anti-gun candidate, Martha Coakley
2 3
Replies
69
Views
6K
Art Eatman
A
P
  • Locked
Background Checks
Replies
13
Views
770
Soybomb
S
helitack32f1
  • Locked
Anti-gun next steps in WA state.
Replies
11
Views
724
sidheshooter
S
J
  • Locked
NICS Rant...
2 3 4
Replies
90
Views
5K
Robert
Robert
Back
Top