WaPo Looks at “Gun Show Loophole”
Yet another round of noise was heard this week from the mainstream media, including The Washington Post on the topic of the infamous “gun show loophole,” and the paper notes that the latest call its closure include survivors from Virginia Tech.
We do feel for these victims, and truthfully any victim of violent crime – whether a gun was used or not. The point however, remains a vast understanding of the issue of guns, gun shows and private sales. The paper noted how Colin Goddard, a former Virginia Tech student told about his work with the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which documented “the ease with which he could buy arms at gun shows.”
The blog post from WaPo offers little in the way of counterpoint, so it is a typical anti-gun story. That isn’t really all the surprising.
Nor is the tone of the story all that surprisging. After all, shouldn’t it be easy to buy guns at a gun show? Just as it should be easy to buy a boat at a boat show, or furniture at a furntiure store. The purpose of a gun show is to sell guns. And yes, many states allow guns to be sold by private individuals without a background check.
What is seldom reported is that the criminal is already breaking the law for being at said gun show, is breaking the law for touching the guns and is breaking the law for buying the guns. Criminals will always find a way to get guns, and banning private sales would truly hurt the sport shooters, hunters and collectors. Of course we don’t expect the anti-gun crowd to care. But we’ll make the point again, if you want to solve drunk driving problems, ban all alcohol. That is essentially what the anti-gun is trying to do.
Banning private sales would increase costs to those who obey the law but wouldn’t make it that much harder for criminals to get guns.
Alamogordo Daily News Questions “No Guns” Signs
Here is a question: can you have a sign that says “no guns” if the venue has gun shows? That would be a lot of tables of gun cases, knives, t-shirts and all the other things we’re using to seeing at gun shows. The location would have to have a gun show without guns. Except it the signs now say “No firearms (except during Gun Shows.” Frank Gebbia Jr. writing for the Alamogordo Daily News offers an editorial on this issue – including how the signs aren’t exactly within the law:
Read More: New “No Guns” signs at fairgrounds are still illegal
Gun Show Report Offers Biased Stance
In a blog post titled “Gun show stirs concern,” the writers at LoHud.com, which is powered by The Journal News, offered a rant against a recent gun show:
“No doubt a good time was had by all at the weekend gun show at the Westchester County Center, hosting the emporium of guns, knives and collectibles for the first time in 11 years. We just hope that the event does not mark the end of the pragmatic bipartisan support for smarter gun policies that has been the regional norm these last few years.”
While this post is more editorial than news feature, we do ask whether anyone was really “concerned” by the event? Like many gun shows it is just an event. Likewise, is there really “pragmatic bipartisan support” for stricter gun policies? We would tend to disagree.
Vermont Newspaper Notes Gun Show Not Hit By Recession
In a surprisingly unbiased story about this weekend’s gun show, The Times Argus reported that this weekend’s gun show was seeing breakout business. Vermont might be a “blue state” but it was also one of the original colonies calling for independence from England back in the 1770s, so it is no surprise that its residents understand how firearms keep one free!
The story noted not only that attendance of the gun show was up, but called out a few highly desirable pieces, “including a musket carried by a soldier in a New Hampshire regiment in the Revolutionary War.”
Kudos to The Time Argus. It is nice to see news in the mainstream media that calls out the importance of historical firearms.
Fox23 Picks Some Choice Words in its Reporting
In a surprisingly upbeat and unbiased story FOX23.com offered a great headline about the Tulsa Gun Show:
“Tulsa Gun Show: Loaded With 1st Time Buyers”
Thanks for the fair and even reporting, and great headline FOX23.
Firing Back: Gun Dealers vs. Car Dealers
One of the biggest complaints that the anti-firearm crowd has about gun shows is that supposedly guns can be sold without background checks. The argument is that firearms can pass through many hands, and supposedly enter some gray market. The problem with this logic is that if a gun is legally purchased at ANY point it enters the system. If the gun is used in a crime it can still be traced back to that owner. If the owner illegally sells it, such as to a criminal, that last “legal” owner could be traced back to the gun. Thus these so-called straw purchases aren’t really all that common – or certainly not as common as the mainstream media has made out.
The other problem with this complaint is that the anti-firearm zealots, along with the mainstream media expect everyone to act like a licensed dealer. This is a problem because some individuals, including this reporter, can’t really become dealers. It isn’t that I’ve broken any law, but based on where I live I can’t get into the “guns business.” I can still legally buy and sell guns, and have to report everything to the police – at least anything that comes through New York City. For many individuals who only buy and sell a few guns, there is no reason for them to become “gun dealers” either. There is an extensive process to go through, paperwork to maintain, and essentially it becomes your job.
This is the case even if you just want to on the rare occasion set up a table at a local gun show, or even bring in a rifle to sell to another collector. The anti-gun crowd says these purchases are a problem because the guns change hand and could end up in criminals’ hands. Yes, this could happen, but should the bulk of legitimate buyers and sellers be made to suffer?
Now imagine that to buy or sell a used car you had to become a used car dealer? This is essentially what the anti-firearm crowd is asking for when it comes to guns. And actually, it would take everything a step further, this would mean making sure that when you sell a car the person has a license, insurance, isn’t wanted for a crime, etc. So instead of relying on the person to be responsible for all these things, you as the seller of a car would have to do this work. But given the direction this country is headed, it probably won’t be too long.
TPM Writer Misses Mark on Gun Owners
In an editorial for TPM Café writer Leonard Zeskind suggests that gun shows have transformed from a regular event that was about hunting and collectibles, into something aimed (no pun intended) at recruiting a white nationalist movement. He states this by noting:
“A few collectors remain, who display antique weapons in the same way as their cousins might collect stamps, particularly at the smaller weekend events. Nevertheless, as anyone who has been around these shows long enough to remember the time when mahogany exhibits of Civil War muskets were the rule and not the exception.” Read more
My Goodness, MyCentralNewJersey.com Really Should Get the Facts Straight
Editorials are fine when the writer argues with points. But when the writer of an editorial just spouts off nonsense it should fall into something that isn’t even defended by the First Amendment of our constitution, namely “DANGEROUS SPEECH.” Case in point, this argument of the “facts” of gun laws on the MyCentralNewJersey.com Web site:
“The Second Amendment was written as follows: ‘A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.’
“I cannot see how these words mean that there should be ‘gun shows’ where anyone can buy an Uzi, a missile launcher or any other weapon that our military uses. Why has our government allowed so many guns to be in our country? There were over 9,000 murders by shootings in our country last year. In England and other countries in Europe the number of murders by shooting in all these countries totaled less than 50.”
NPR: One Side Shot Against Guns and Really Dated Photo!
What do you expect from NPR. This “news organization” doesn’t even try to be unbiased. Note the introduction in the story from partner site The Nation: “Gun (In)Sanity:”
“Despite a Democratic Congress and President, it’s been a bad time for common sense measures to curb gun violence.”
