HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » How did a convicted kille...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 04:42 PM

How did a convicted killer get guns?

Really.

The guy has a history of killing

Let's make sure the asshole his armed.

NRA leaders can rot in hell for all I care.

81 replies, 4333 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 81 replies Author Time Post
Reply How did a convicted killer get guns? (Original post)
LynneSin Dec 2012 OP
Denninmi Dec 2012 #1
HooptieWagon Dec 2012 #2
LynneSin Dec 2012 #3
Denninmi Dec 2012 #4
HooptieWagon Dec 2012 #5
ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #13
HooptieWagon Dec 2012 #15
ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #20
HooptieWagon Dec 2012 #22
Historic NY Dec 2012 #53
ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #57
Bonhomme Richard Dec 2012 #6
slackmaster Dec 2012 #8
nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #44
nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #43
Bonhomme Richard Dec 2012 #50
nadinbrzezinski Dec 2012 #51
beevul Dec 2012 #54
slackmaster Dec 2012 #7
Carolina Dec 2012 #35
The Straight Story Dec 2012 #9
bobclark86 Dec 2012 #37
SummerSnow Dec 2012 #10
In_The_Wind Dec 2012 #11
Lex Dec 2012 #12
OneTenthofOnePercent Dec 2012 #14
TeeYiYi Dec 2012 #16
AgingAmerican Dec 2012 #26
Recursion Dec 2012 #31
AgingAmerican Dec 2012 #32
Recursion Dec 2012 #68
AgingAmerican Dec 2012 #71
Recursion Dec 2012 #72
AgingAmerican Dec 2012 #75
Recursion Dec 2012 #77
AgingAmerican Dec 2012 #80
Recursion Dec 2012 #81
RomneyLies Dec 2012 #17
ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #23
Dyedinthewoolliberal Dec 2012 #18
HooptieWagon Dec 2012 #24
Recursion Dec 2012 #19
AgingAmerican Dec 2012 #25
guardian Dec 2012 #27
AgingAmerican Dec 2012 #29
guardian Dec 2012 #30
AgingAmerican Dec 2012 #33
former9thward Dec 2012 #36
AgingAmerican Dec 2012 #39
former9thward Dec 2012 #41
hack89 Dec 2012 #46
kwassa Dec 2012 #47
hack89 Dec 2012 #48
PeaceNikki Dec 2012 #55
hack89 Dec 2012 #58
kwassa Dec 2012 #61
hack89 Dec 2012 #65
kwassa Dec 2012 #60
hack89 Dec 2012 #66
bobclark86 Dec 2012 #38
AgingAmerican Dec 2012 #40
former9thward Dec 2012 #45
AgingAmerican Dec 2012 #63
Recursion Dec 2012 #73
beevul Dec 2012 #56
AgingAmerican Dec 2012 #62
beevul Dec 2012 #64
doc03 Dec 2012 #79
johnnie Dec 2012 #21
slackmaster Dec 2012 #28
baldguy Dec 2012 #34
Raine Dec 2012 #42
lynne Dec 2012 #70
ManiacJoe Dec 2012 #49
Historic NY Dec 2012 #59
ManiacJoe Dec 2012 #67
MichiganVote Dec 2012 #52
spanone Dec 2012 #69
Blue_Tires Dec 2012 #74
Marrah_G Dec 2012 #76
doc03 Dec 2012 #78

Response to LynneSin (Original post)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 04:43 PM

1. A little lost .. Who are you talking about?

?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Denninmi (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 04:51 PM

2. Probably the guy who shot several firemen this morning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #2)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 04:52 PM

3. yep - he was a convicted killer

thank you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LynneSin (Reply #3)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 04:54 PM

4. Sorry, I only heard the headline.

N/M.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LynneSin (Original post)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 04:58 PM

5. Same ways they all do.

Convicted felons are responsible for most homicides. They aren't allowed to own guns. Most obtain their guns by theft, borrowing from others, or by private purchase where there is no background check made. Measures can be taken to make it more difficult for felons to obtain guns, but that won't completely eliminate the problem. The only way to 100% prevent a felon from buying a gun is to keep them locked in prison.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #5)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 05:11 PM

13. Title wrong - I believed the media>>>>>>He was barely out of jail

Last edited Thu Dec 27, 2012, 11:17 PM - Edit history (1)

Percentage bet would be theft. Be interesting to know how he got them.

Despite recently being declared the most evil Gungeoneer, I have a list of things that need to be changed in the law too, and that includes mandatory secure storage. All firearms must be secured when not in use, being cleaned, transported, etc. While California got stupid on parts of this, it is clearly the right thing to do. Some will miss their old time glass front display cases or wall rack, but proper security is a must.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #13)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 05:22 PM

15. Agree with you about security.

Certainly that would prevent some thefts. It's no guarantee, though. Apparently Lanza kept her guns in a locked case, yet son was able to somehow access them. We don't know anything yet how this latest shooter got his weapon.
I would also be in favor of banning private sales, requiring all person to person sales be conducted through a dealer acting as broker. Dealer would handle paperwork and hold weapon for waiting period while background check is performed. Again, not 100% effective, but would make a noticable difference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #15)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 05:54 PM

20. I agree with NICS checks for all transfers

My concern is places like DC that make it impossible for FFLs to do business. If there were plentiful FFLs in all areas to provide competition for the service, I could go with that. I would prefer a pre investigation that is verified at time of purchase. Simpler and cheaper in many ways.

Mixed feelings about waiting periods. New gun owners, sure. If you already have some, not so much. In the end I could see a 1 week universal waiting period.

Its not clear how Mary Lanza secured her weapons, and I am curious about that. A locked case is much easier to get into than a safe. Not sure we will know those kind of details. The crime is solved, the guilty dead. Despite my and many others curiosity, there is no real justification in digging deeper unless the police believe that there were others involved.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #20)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 06:05 PM

22. Inre Lanza's locked case:

That was how it was described by a friend who had seen it in the basement. We don't know how accurate that is, or any more details. It is also unknown how her son got into the locked case. I do hope these details are included in whatever official report is released, as there would be educational value in knowing the vulnerability of a particular storage container.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #13)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 11:05 PM

53. Spengler was released in 1998 his Max Expiration parole date was 2006...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Historic NY (Reply #53)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 11:17 PM

57. Quite Correct

I was going on an early media report at the time...and we know how their track record lately

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LynneSin (Original post)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 05:02 PM

6. Wasn't the law changed that that you could get a gun 5 years after....

getting out of prison and the old law said never. i thought I read hat somewhere. I guess the reality is whatever the NY state laws say.
I don't assume he had the gun legally. Actually I assume he didn't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonhomme Richard (Reply #6)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 05:06 PM

8. No.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Bonhomme Richard (Reply #6)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 09:35 PM

43. Yes...

Introduction

The National Rifle Association (NRA) claims that it supports vigorous enforcement of our nation's gun laws and efforts to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. Yet the NRA has actually worked to put guns back into criminals' hands. Following is the saga of the federal "relief from disability" program. The NRA has worked to expand and protect this guns-for-felons program that has rearmed thousands of convicted—and often violent—felons.


Creation of the "Relief" Program

Under federal law, those convicted of a felony are forbidden from purchasing or possessing firearms and explosives. Yet as the result of a 1965 amendment to the Federal Firearms Act of 1938, convicted felons were allowed to apply to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) for "relief" from the "disability" of not being able to buy and possess guns. The "relief from disability" program was established as a favor to firearms manufacturer Winchester, then a division of Olin Mathieson Corporation.1 In 1962 Olin Mathieson pleaded guilty to felony counts stemming from a kickback scheme involving Vietnamese and Cambodian pharmaceutical importers. Under the law as it existed at the time, Winchester could no longer be licensed as a firearm manufacturer. The "relief from disability" program allowed Winchester to stay in business.


"Relief" Program Becomes Felons' Second-Chance Club

Although created to benefit one corporation, the program quickly became a mechanism by which thousands of individuals with felony convictions had their gun privileges restored. In the 10-year period from1982 until 1992, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms processed more than 22,000 applications. Between 1985 and 1990 ATF granted "relief" in approximately one third of those cases. (ATF estimated that approximately one third of those not granted "relief" chose to drop out of the process, while the remaining one third were denied "relief.")

The crimes committed by those individuals granted "relief" were not limited to non-violent, "white collar" crimes like those committed by Olin. Through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) the Violence Policy Center obtained 100 randomly selected files of felons granted "relief." Among those 100 cases were: five convictions for felony sexual assault; 11 burglary convictions; 13 convictions for distribution of narcotics; and, four homicide convictions. In fact, of the 100 sample cases, one third involved either violent crimes (16 percent) or drug-related crimes (17 percent).

http://www.vpc.org/studies/felons.htm


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #43)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 10:39 PM

50. Thanks. I had found that after I saw the no.

I figured it was a dead thread.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonhomme Richard (Reply #50)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 10:45 PM

51. I just get tired of gunnies denying reality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bonhomme Richard (Reply #50)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 11:08 PM

54. How does that square with CURRENT federal law?

How does that square with CURRENT federal law?

You know, the current federal law which says if you're a felon, that youre a prohibiteed person?

Funding to provide relief from disability has not been granted in over a decade.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LynneSin (Original post)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 05:04 PM

7. He was released from prison prematurely

 

While he was still breathing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #7)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 08:57 PM

35. and thed for best response

goes to you, slackmaster.

This guy should never have been released from prison.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LynneSin (Original post)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 05:07 PM

9. Easy. He hands his friend money, his friend buys guns, hands it to him

It happens.

Now you can have laws against that, but then again - the people we are most concerned about won't be the ones following ANY laws since they have no problem breaking ones against murder, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Straight Story (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 09:13 PM

37. Now you *do have laws against that...

There, I fixed it for you. Straw purchases are illegal and have been since the 1960s.

Obviously, it didn't stop anything. You're right -- somebody who kills their 90-year-old grandmother isn't the kind of person to care about a gun law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LynneSin (Original post)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 05:08 PM

10. Lots of guns are sold on the street

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LynneSin (Original post)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 05:10 PM

11. Good question!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LynneSin (Original post)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 05:11 PM

12. Because it's TOO EASY to get guns. And there are too many guns. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LynneSin (Original post)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 05:12 PM

14. Criminals do not obey laws.

 

Even laws barring them from owning firearms and other prohibited items. Laws only govern the law abiding. If there was a total ban, national war against the production/possession/use, and social scorn of firearms then they'd be about as available as methamphetamine and heroin... which is to say, easy to get if you really wanted them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LynneSin (Original post)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 05:26 PM

16. Same way people get drugs. It's easy.

Prohibition doesn't work.

TYY

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TeeYiYi (Reply #16)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 01:04 AM

26. You cant buy drugs at a drug show...

But anyone can buy a gun at a gun show. Even a convicted bank robber or murderer.

Registration and regulation of guns isn't prohibition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #26)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 12:04 PM

31. You've obviously never been to Sursum Corda?

But anyone can buy a gun at a gun show.

Numerous people on this thread have pointed out to you that laws at gun shows aren't different from laws anywhere else. Why do you keep bringing gun shows up? Particularly when even the "pro-gun" people agree with you for the most part that all transfers having background checks is a workable idea?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #31)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 08:51 PM

32. The "gun show loophole"

is why. I keep bringing it up because the gun show loophole allows anyone to buy a gun with no background check. Even a convicted murderer. That's why.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #32)

Sat Dec 29, 2012, 11:06 AM

68. But why bring up gun shows?

I just want to make sure: you do at least factually understand that what you're calling the "gun show loophole" has absolutely nothing to do with gun shows, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #68)

Sat Dec 29, 2012, 12:22 PM

71. Right, thats why it is called

The 'gun show loophole.' The fact that you can buy guns with no background checks and no ID at gun shows has nothing to do with gun shows, right? Thats why the "Gun show loophole act" went through congress in 2009, because the gun show loophole has nothing to do with gun shows. ROFL

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/111/hr2324http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/111/hr2324





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #71)

Sat Dec 29, 2012, 04:34 PM

72. Yes, it really has nothing to do with gun shows

It's called "the gun show loophole" because that scares suburban soccer moms, and it's unbelievably dishonest, and continuing to use that dishonest phrase is keeping a lot of people who agree with requiring background checks from private sales from helping you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #72)

Sat Dec 29, 2012, 08:30 PM

75. Oh, is that the reason?

To scare soccer moms lol.

It's all just smoke and mirrors, right, to scare soccer moms, right? Has nothing to do with guns or any of that nonsense, right?

rofl

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #75)

Sat Dec 29, 2012, 08:49 PM

77. It has nothing to do with gun *shows*

I'm actually not sure you even understand that, which is troubling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #77)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 01:21 AM

80. You have spun yourself into a pretzel

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #80)

Sun Dec 30, 2012, 03:59 AM

81. Seriously. I really think you don't understand this.

It has nothing at all to do with gun shows. Really. Nothing. You haven't yet grasped that, and it's going to be difficult to make any progress until you do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LynneSin (Original post)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 05:28 PM

17. He could have gone to nearly any gun show and bought one no questions asked

 

40% of all gun transfers happen with no background checks whatsoever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #17)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 06:07 PM

23. Depends on the state

and that 40% includes gifts and inheritance.

I agree that all transfers should go through a NICS check.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LynneSin (Original post)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 05:30 PM

18. Not sure how we can stop people from obtaining guns.

There is so much money involved someone will always be willing to sell and buy. Maybe what needs to be done is to enact a law with real teeth. Use a gun in ANY capacity to commit a crime, the sentence is mandatory 5 years minimum in the big house. Use a gun to harm someone (short of killing them)mandatory 15 years minimum. Kill a person using a weapon, life. If you are negligent and someone is harmed or killed, somewhere along the lines of 10 years.
This would be the best way(imho), though it would take time, to send the message that using guns to hurt/kill people is something society now takes very seriously.

These years are added to whatever years one gets for the crimes ie: burglary, robbery, etc

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dyedinthewoolliberal (Reply #18)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 06:12 PM

24. There are already minimum sentences with teeth...

...that are credited with the reduction of gun deaths over the past 20 years. Still, when these felons are released it is ridiculously easy for them to get a gun, by theft or buying it on the street. And the rehabilitation rate is dismally low. Most of these guys get out of prison and go right back to committing crimes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LynneSin (Original post)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 05:40 PM

19. Illegally.

Were you expecting a multiple murderer to say, "oh, you mean it's illegal for me to steal this gun or buy it on the black market? Well, there go my plans..."?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #19)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 01:01 AM

25. Or he bought it at a gun show

Used gun shows can be bought by anyone at a gun show with no ID, no background check and no registration.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #25)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 10:40 AM

27. When are you anti gunners going to stop wetting yourselves over "gun shows"?

 

You sound like a bunch of children crying about the boogie man. Gun shows are essentially a bunch of gun stores that already have a Federal Firearms License (FFL) displaying and selling their wares. They still comply with all the applicable laws, such as background checks and registration where required by law. It doesn't matter if the gun is used or not.

Some states don't require background checks for private party transfers, some do. Most private party transfers happen between relatives such as inheriting grandpa's old gun, or a spouse giving a gift, or a couple of shooting buddies trading things they already own. Some minority of private party transfers happen between strangers. Every FFL is going to comply with the law. They are not going to risk their business and livelyhood for one sale.

The language of "gun show loophole" is just another example of the flaming ignorance of the anti gunner crowd. If you want to accurately call it the "private sale loophole" then fine. At least then you would have a reality based point whereby dicussion and potential legislation changes could take place. So you could impose some pain-in-the-ass paperwork and fees for little Johnny to inherit a gun, or for Dad to give Suzie her first skeet shotgun. But mostly what will happen is affect people the are law abiding already. You wont stop criminals, nuts, or people bent on evil.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guardian (Reply #27)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 11:00 AM

29. I pointed out a simple fact

Used guns are sold at gun shows with no background checks or registration. It's commonly referred to as the "Gun show loophole". Any bank robber can go to a gun show and purchase a used weapon, no questions asked. Stop wetting your selves over simple facts.

Oh, and I'm not an 'Anti-gunner'. I have owned guns my whole life. Thanks for playing!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #29)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 11:17 AM

30. I've had more intelligent conversations

 

with sign posts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guardian (Reply #30)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 08:52 PM

33. Translation

You can't refute a word of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #33)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 09:07 PM

36. You are wrong.

He was a resident of NY. NY requires background check for any firearms whether at a gun show or anyplace else. There is no gun show loophole. Federal law does not allow out of state resident purchases at a gun show without going through a FFL dealer in your home state. There a background check is made.

I have no idea where he got the weapons. Neither do you until the police tell us. I find the lack of information about this odd since it would take no time to run the rifle serial numbers. Usually after an incident like this they tell us in a day or so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #36)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 09:25 PM

39. Dont need ID to buy used guns at a gunshow

I have purchased used guns from a private party at a gun show with no ID. How would they know where I was from when no ID is required? Your entire premise is hogwash.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_shows_in_the_United_States

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #39)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 09:29 PM

41. You don't know the laws of NY.

Or federal laws. Keep digging.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #39)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 09:50 PM

46. Not true according to the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence

six states (CA, CO, IL, NY, OR, RI) require universal background checks on all firearm sales at gun shows. Three more states (CT, MD, PA) require background checks on all handgun sales made at gun shows. Seven other states (HI, IA, MA, MI, NJ, NC, NE) require purchasers to obtain a permit and undergo a background check before buying a handgun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #46)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 10:30 PM

47. So, 9 states out of 50 require background checks at gunshows, leaving 41 not requiring ...

as you last statistic is completely unclear whether or not it applies to gun shows ....

This leaves a big, whopping loophole.

Doesn't it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kwassa (Reply #47)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 10:34 PM

48. Only for private sales

the point is that gun laws inside gun shows are not different then outside. And the loophole is not actually a loophole. The federal government does not have jurisdiction on intrastate private sales - it is purely a state matter.

Now I support background checks on on private sales - my state has such a law. But stop yammering about gun shows - it merely shows that you don't fully understand the issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #48)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 11:12 PM

55. One of those private sales resulted in an abuser getting a gun, killing his wife & 2 others,

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PeaceNikki (Reply #55)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 11:17 PM

58. How?

the Constitution limits what the federal government can do - lets not forget that the states have sovereign powers that the federal government can't interfere with. For bettor or worse, that is how our system of government was designed. Private intrastate sales are a state matter.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #58)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 11:39 PM

61. Private intrastate sales should not be a state matter, obviously. They should be federally regulated

Most guns were manufactured out-of-state and originally sold from those sources., I think it would work under the commerce clause.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kwassa (Reply #61)

Fri Dec 28, 2012, 06:06 AM

65. That would be stretching the commerce clause beyond recognition

the states would not accept it. They would challenge in court and most likely win.

In any case, no one in Congress is even proposing it. They understand the Constitution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hack89 (Reply #48)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 11:36 PM

60. who is yammering? This is my first post on the subject.

A loophole is a loophole. The fact that it is a state matter does not make it less of a loophole. Leaving it up to the states is a huge mistake by the federal government in the first place.

and it is a gigantic loophole. Or a series of 41 loopholes. All dangerous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kwassa (Reply #60)

Fri Dec 28, 2012, 06:08 AM

66. I apologize

I didn't look closely at who had answered. I am sorry.

The answer is to pressure the states. I don't know how exactly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #29)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 09:15 PM

38. NY has no "gun show loophole"

You cannot go to a gun show in New York and buy a firearm without a NICS check. Non-dealers are barred from selling guns at NY gun shows.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bobclark86 (Reply #38)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 09:27 PM

40. Yes

Thats why they go to Pennsylvania or New Jersey to get used guns at gun shows from private parties with no background check.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #40)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 09:42 PM

45. That has been illegal since 1968.

If you are saying people break the law then just say that. Quit saying there is a loophole because there is not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #45)

Fri Dec 28, 2012, 12:26 AM

63. They can sell any guns but handguns

privately with no background check at gun shows in NJ.

New Jersey is one of four states that require background checks only for used handgun purchases. All other used gun purchases at gun shows from private parties require no background check.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #63)

Sat Dec 29, 2012, 04:56 PM

73. Only to NJ residents

And, again, what you're talking about has nothing to do with gun shows and it's hard to take you seriously, since either you don't know that and you can't be bothered to learn, or you do know that and you're being dishonest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #40)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 11:13 PM

56. New Jersey? Really?

The state that bans hollow point ammunition?


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #56)

Fri Dec 28, 2012, 12:22 AM

62. Yes

Really, the state that bans hollow point ammunition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #62)

Fri Dec 28, 2012, 01:08 AM

64. I'm pretty sure NJ doesn't allow private sales without permit and background check. N/T

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to guardian (Reply #27)

Sat Dec 29, 2012, 09:51 PM

79. I have taken guns to gun shows to have dealers appraise them,

while there I have had several people just walk up and offer to buy them. Another thing you do is you put a price tag on the gun say $250 and if someone likes it you sell it, no paperwork, no records, no problems.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LynneSin (Original post)

Mon Dec 24, 2012, 05:55 PM

21. Fuck the NRA

And again, fuck the NRA

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LynneSin (Original post)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 10:41 AM

28. Illegally

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LynneSin (Original post)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 08:54 PM

34. From "law-abiding gun owners" of course.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LynneSin (Original post)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 09:33 PM

42. WHY was a man who beat his grandmother to death with a hammer out of prison

in the first place? This guy should have been left to rot in prison for the rest of his life IMO.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raine (Reply #42)

Sat Dec 29, 2012, 12:15 PM

70. Thank you for stating the obvious!

Had he been kept in prison we wouldn't be having this conversation and there would be 3 people still alive. The criminally insane need to be kept out of society. Period.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LynneSin (Original post)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 10:35 PM

49. $5 says the guns will not be traced

and no charges will be filed against the seller(s) within the year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ManiacJoe (Reply #49)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 11:34 PM

59. FEDS trace Spengler's guns..........

Federal investigators have positively traced the guns possessed by William Spengler Jr. in the shooting of four Webster firefighters on Christmas Eve.

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives spokesman Special Agent Mike Campbell said Wednesday that the agency has traced the Bushmaster .223-caliber rifle, the Mossberg 12-gauge shotgun and Smith & Wesson .38-caliber handgun found in Spengler’s arsenal after he took his own life.

“I can say that we have traced the firearms and we are working with the State Police to follow up on leads developing from that trace,” Campbell said.
Campbell said the agency is prohibited by statute from releasing specific trace information to the public and declined to say whether the traces offered any indication as to how Spengler obtained the weapons.

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/article/20121226/NEWS01/312260045/william-spengler-webster-shooting-guns-bushmaster

http://www.rochestercitynewspaper.com/NewsBlog/archives/2012/12/27/the-trouble-with-tracing-guns

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Historic NY (Reply #59)

Fri Dec 28, 2012, 02:54 PM

67. Sweet.

Nice to see expectations being beat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LynneSin (Original post)

Thu Dec 27, 2012, 10:54 PM

52. How was he going to practice target shooting?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LynneSin (Original post)

Sat Dec 29, 2012, 11:11 AM

69. Woman Helped Firefighters’ Killer Get Gun He Used in Ambush, Police Say

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spanone (Reply #69)

Sat Dec 29, 2012, 06:15 PM

74. She should serve any sentence that Spengler would have gotten...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LynneSin (Original post)

Sat Dec 29, 2012, 08:34 PM

76. He had a young woman buy them, saying they were for herself

Now she is in a world of trouble.

It's way to easy to get licensed and buy weapons in most of this country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LynneSin (Original post)

Sat Dec 29, 2012, 09:42 PM

78. Piece of cake, look in the classifieds for guns, bulletin boards at stores,

word of mouth, go to a gun show there are plenty of guys walking around with all types of guns for sale. Find the gun you want, give them cash, no paperwork, no record, it's all yours to go out and do some shooting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread