News

Hey Gun Control People, the Gun Genie is Already Out of the Bottle!

Senate Judiciary Committee

Have better words ever been uttered? “The Senate delivered a devastating blow to President Obama’s agenda to regulate guns by defeating a bipartisan proposal to expand background checks.” The votes failed due to bipartisan efforts either on the vote or the proposed amendments. Naughty or nice, we know the anti gunners penchant for never letting a crisis go to waste. This vote was just the latest example. They say two things are certain, death and taxes. We can add another one to the list, the gun control crowd’s shameless attempts to use every tragedy to advance their political agenda.

Smoke pistol coming out of a blue genie bottle
Once out, lawmakers will never be able to put the gun genie back in the bottle.

And why shouldn’t they? The President has said and repeated many times, “Mass shootings are something we should politicize” and “It is too easy to commit violence.” Yesterday’s vote was only the first salvo. The anti gunners are lining up and taking aim at the Second Amendment. President Obama has already declared his failure to enact more restrictive gun control measures, threatening to use his pen to do what Congress refuses.

Putting the Gun Genie Back in the Bottle

Obama and the anti gunners’ problem is that there are somewhere between 200 and 300 million guns in the hands of U.S. citizens and about 12 trillion rounds of ammunition by some estimates. If guns in the hands of people were the problem, Congress would not be debating the issue; distorted facts and faulty claims would not be necessary.

Obama’s Plan

President Obama released his plan back in 2013 to address gun violence in the nation. The initiative consisted of 23 executive actions and three presidential memoranda. Many parts of the plan would have significant effects on states.

The plan:

  • Require background checks for all gun sales and strengthen the background check system. This would include removing barriers under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act so that states may more freely share information about mental health issues involving potential gun purchasers.
  • Provide states with monetary incentives for sharing information so records of criminal history and people prohibited from gun ownership due to mental health reasons are more available.
  • Ban “military-style” assault weapons and limit magazines to a capacity of 10 rounds.
  • Provide additional tools to law enforcement. The plan proposes a crackdown on gun trafficking by asking Congress to pass legislation that closes “loopholes” in gun trafficking laws and establishes strict penalties for “straw purchasers” who pass a background check and then pass guns on to prohibited people.
  • Urge Congress to pass the administration’s $4 billion proposal to keep 15,000 state and local police officers on the street to help deter gun crime.
  • Maximize efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime. The President calls upon the attorney general to work with U.S. attorneys across the country to determine gaps occurring in this area and where supplemental resources are appropriate.
  • Provide training for “active shooter” situations to 14,000 law enforcement, first responders and school officials.
  • Direct the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services to issue a statement to health care providers that they are not prohibited by federal law from reporting threats of violence to the proper authorities.
  • Launch a national gun safety campaign to encourage responsible gun ownership and authorizes the Consumer Product Safety Commission to examine issues relating to gun safety locks.
  • Help schools invest in safety. The President’s plan calls for more school resource officers and counselors in all schools through the Community Oriented Policing Services hiring program. The plan also calls for the federal government to assist schools in developing emergency management plans.
  • Improves mental health awareness through enhanced teacher training and referrals for treatment. The plan calls for the training of 5,000 additional mental health professionals nationwide. The plan also calls for coverage of mental health treatment under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008.
Senate Judiciary Committee
The photo shows a Republican on the left and Democrats in the center and right, but that depiction could not be further from the truth when it comes to gun control. Pay attention and let your feelings be known to your elected officials.

What has the result been? Rhetoric, distortions, and lies that vilify and target the rights of law-abiding gun owners while doing little to nothing to those who wish to do evil. “Paris was a ‘setback,'” “ISIS is contained,” “Al Qaeda is on the run,” “ISIS is a JV team”—can we believe anything he says about guns being too easy to own? The most likely areas to watch would be another attempt to expand background checks. Sure, it was just defeated (again), but remember, Harry Reid weighed in after he was sure the vote would defeat the bill so he could get another bite at the apple at a later date. The antis are not done with this one.

The President may also try to limit online sales of firearms and ammo. Given the record Black Friday sales with 185,000+ requests, I would say the people are not behind this proposal, but it only takes one President and/or 51 Senators…

Conclusion

Our best defense is to get involved and vote. We need lawmakers who are strong supports and defenders of the Second Amendment. We need strong groups such as the NRA, SAF, and NAGR and the membership to support them.

What do you consider the biggest threat to our Second Amendment rights? Who would you put on the naughty or nice list? Can the anti get the gun genie back in the bottle? Share your opinions in the comment section.

The Mission of Cheaper Than Dirt!'s blog, The Shooter's Log, is to provide information—not opinions—to our customers and the shooting community. We want you, our readers, to be able to make informed decisions. The information provided here does not represent the views of Cheaper Than Dirt!

Comments (127)

  1. again with the non-gun safety concerns. i agree, all of them must be eliminated. ok? good enough?

    back to the point about gun-related deaths.

    the fact that you will never (yuk, yuk) will never, ever, no how-no way will trigger a negligent discharge does not remove the threat (there are only two types of gun owners: those who had a negligent discharge, and those who will), your stance (and maybe most on this blog) is that the ND resulting in death is so infrequent that it can and should be ignored. of course, you have never been a victim of an ND (probably don’t know anyone who has). that means everyone else should just accept the risk of someone being able to kill them or their children from afar due to negligence. my point about distance killing is that all the other threats you mention cannot cross the street/yard fence, enter a home uninvited and destroy a life. (cars and airplanes crashing into residences fall under that statistical rarity you use to justify enduring the risk of negligent discharges.

    what i do not see on this blog is a groundswell for public service announcements touting the need for safe gun handling, i do not see a clamor for nra or other gun rights organization to run ads, seminars, classes, or whatever in the attempt to improve gun safety. what the pro-gun crowd offers is, “tough. it is my right, you are stupid, and just get used to random killings because we don’t care.”

  2. It would be great fun to get those records, but….if he is not a US citizen, the legal nightmare that would ensue would be astounding. Realistically, not even the most ardent political foe does not want to live through that.

  3. “This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!”

    Adolph Hitler, 1935,
    on The Weapons Act of Nazi Germany

  4. Sorry if this is not the area to try to correct what I just heard on Fox news. Gun Show’s loop hole that allow people to buy guns. GUN CONTROL idiots do not know what they are talking about. I have a CCW Permit in Florida. I can go to any gun show or gun shop and buy a gun. With my permit I don’t have the 3 day cool down period. Everywhere I PURCHASED A GUN I have to go through a new background check for every purchase of a hand gun. Just like a gun shop if I purchase a gun I MUST do the paper work and pass the FBI background check! The same is true for a Gun Show the same law’s as the Gun Shop owner.
    Each time and every time I purchase a gun I MUST do the paper work and pass the FBI background check! Where is the loop hole?

  5. I note a mention of how to resist “home invasions”. Looking at some of the latest news stories out of Australia, over half of all home ‘burglaries” are now committed when someone is home – so there’s a wallet and a purse with cash and cards to be had – with the threat of force, rather than looking for something that can be taken and sold later. Resist that “invasion”? – with what? Semi-auto and pump action long-guns are all gone, and there’s talk of “buying-back” (confiscate) lever action rifles. That’s what happens with a gun registry.

  6. we don’t really have a disagreement here, do we? since this blog is about guns, my comments are related to guns. comparing to other threats/dangers is not useful, because the subject is about greatly reducing the number of unintentional (accidental?) deaths by gunfire (forget suicides, japan has a rate about twice what we do, and oppressively tight gun restrictions). but what is different about guns? well….i can’t kill the kid in the house across the street with the plastic bags in my closet (without leaving my house); i can’t kill the kid in the house across the street with my prescription meds; i can’t kill the kid in the house across the street with my swimming pool; i can’t kill the kid in the house across the street with my kitchen knife; i can’t kill the kid in the house across the street with my whatever implement. the kid in the house across the street can be killed by a negligent discharge of my firearm, no matter how much training i have. i have read about gun statistics, and one item sticks out….”there are two types of gun owners: one who has never had a negligent discharge, never have a negligent discharge, until they do.” no one is immune to negligent discharges because no one is perfect all the time. that risk is what needs to be reduced. things like trigger disconnects help (but don’t eliminate). it is the fear of discovering what other measures can be useful in preventing innocent death by gunfire that is puzzling.

    1. While I am not in favor of negligent discharges (those who obey the rules for safe gun handling will never have one, those who don’t, will.) I AM familiar with how vanishingly seldom they occur.

      Statistically they are a non-issue. Bicycles are a bigger threat to that kid than my firearms are. Diarrhea is, too. Suicide, by any means, is a far bigger threat to a teenager than my firearms are.

      Your prescription drugs are, in fact, more likely to kill the kid across the street than my firearms are.

      Your swimming pool is likewise more dangerous to him than the pistol on my nightstand.

      The kid across the street is more likely to die at the edge of your kitchen knife than he is to perish as the result of my negligent discharge. ALL of my firearms spend their lives loaded and your paring knife is a bigger threat to him than they are because I KNOW that they are all loaded and I treat them that way.

      If that hypothetical “kid across the street” enters my home to do me mischief or harm my family then, yes, my firearms will, whichever one I am closest to at the moment, present a real and credible threat to his life. But that won’t be the result of a negligent discharge or even an accidental one … it will be the result of a volitional and directed discharge … one that I hope will restore my family to safety in their own home.

      Keep your booger flicker off the bang switch and negligent discharges pretty much disappear. Keep the muzzle aimed in a safe direction and the lethal potential of negligent discharges DOES disappear. Any firearm you have not recently verified to be unloaded is to be treated as if it was loaded by some evil genie while you were distracted.

      So don’t go there. Your quote only applies to those who, in their over-confidence, get careless.

      These are FBI numbers and you could have looked these facts up for yourself.

  7. Cursory review of this data reveals that firearm deaths are on par with the other reported mechanisms and if we remove the suicide deaths from that equation guns are but a fraction of any other mechanism reported. Further, automobile injuries occur 100x more frequently than firearm injuries accounting for significant financial impact on social medical expenditures. Additionally, suicide tops the spectrum adding validity to the issue of mental health within our country. Also notable, is the fact that the most highly publicized and politicized mechanism (mass shootings) accounts for negligible death within the country. Now understand that this is a data review. I am just as distraught and infuriated as the rest of the country with these events and they are all tragic to the Nth degree. I have two young children and am highly concerned with respect to their safety at school. I am not immune to these emotions; however, it is the highly contended and emotion inspiring problems that require objective review and analysis to prevent ineffective knee-jerk solutions with unintended consequences. For example, if we remove guns from the equation we may save 1,600 lives due to accidental death; however, note that there was an equivalent number of civilians saved in defensive situations and perhaps more if each death accounted for more than one saved life. Also note, in the 12,000 firearm deaths (excluding suicide) 40% was from police or defensive situations. This leaves just over 7,000 deaths annually within this country due to firearms; again, not trivial but statistically insignificant with respect to the alternative mechanisms of death reported. If you truly want to save people from the gun, help the 21,000 people with mental illness and depression to not shoot themselves. You say we don’t care but it appears that you do not care as you dismiss the tens of thousands of other innocent lives in a effort to reduce minimal losses with ineffective solutions.

  8. the elementary school assertions that all sources of accidents must be eliminated before gun people will consider improving the safety record of firearms is one of the reasons gun control efforts continue unabated; ya’ll sound childish and ignorant. you instinctively decide that any discussion of reducing the death of innocents by gunfire is equivalent to banning. yes, complete removal of every single firearm in the country will result in zero deaths by firearm; not gonna happen. but….why the fear of mandates or suggestions or legislation requiring steps to continue to try to reduce or nearly eliminate accidental deaths of innocents? why the continuing insistence that the rest of the population must accept innocent people being killed by mis-handled guns? just because we have not reached zero deaths by automobile does not mean we should refuse attempts to reduce gun-related innocent deaths. yet just about anytime anyone mentions the unnecessary risk to innocent life, we get the screaming about gun rights being superior to gun safety? how can you not see that people who do not want to be part of the gun culture write you off as “bitter clingers”? you will not listen to anyone who wishes to not be killed by “accident”. thus, you will one day face the gun confiscation you are so afraid of.

    1. @ george from fort worth,

      You certainly know nothing about the Supreme Law of the Land do you? The Constitution clearly states in black and white that gun rights shall not be infringed. Nowhere in there does it mention a Supremacy Clause regarding gun safety, but it sure does mention the uninfringeable right to bear arms. Therefore as the Supreme Law of the Land it does in-fact make gun rights superior to gun safety.

      It’s just a fact which the rest of America understands whether you accept it or not. However, based on your previous ramblings which show your inability to comprehend facts over your personal opinions, I’ve no doubt you’ll be right back here firing off more nonsense. (Oops I’m sorry, I wrote “firing off”, did that offend your wimpy senses?)

      It is exhausting to continually watch you idiots waste your time over something you can never lawfully do anything about. So if we “scream” about it, that is because of your ignorance to these facts and we are just getting louder in hopes the law will finally sink in one day.

      And for the record, we don’t fear confiscation, but we do dread the unfortunate civil war that such unlawful act will thrust upon this Country. The loss of life you whiney anti-gunners cause will be far greater than anything you think you are preventing.

      I’m just gonna throw you a bone here and hint that since the ant-gun people like you don’t have guns, take a guess at who will be coming out on top?

      P.S. You have to click reply on the website under the comment you wish to address, not the email.

    2. thank you for the tip on how to reply. never thought to go directly to the blog page.

      regards the constitution and supposed unconstrainable rights: there is nothing in the constitution that is immune to alteration; that’s what amendments are for. there are no absolute rights, at all, anywhere.

      all the court case law verifies, supports, underscores, proves that restrictions on constitutional rights are valid. once the supreme court rules something, there are only two alternatives: legislative fixes; armed resistance. to date, there has been virtually zero legislative action to define, defend, interpret, reinforce, nullify the myriad restrictions placed on “rights”, especially gun rights (heller did not “settle things”). continued screaming about “shall not be infringed” is pointless, useless, intemperate, counterproductive…it doesn get you anywhere.

      required training, safety features on firearms (else you would be using pistols with no triggerguard…the colt patterson was the last full size gun to not have a trigger guard), safe storage when you are not physically in control of your guns (gone for the day, at work, that sort of thing), withholding authorization to carry until proof of safe firearm handling, magazine disconnects, new technologies (once proven) to add safety, restrictions on possession of guns for people on certain medications that have bizarre side effects, all of that is a reasonable approach to civilian armament. but the pro-gun supporters take the position that life is tough, sometimes we accidentally kill people; live with it. that attitude means you have very little interest in people simply trying to live their lives. this is what costs you the support of nearly half the population.

    3. Well then, since you refuse to be receptive to comprehending the laws as they were intended in this Country, this is where we must part ways. I suppose you’ll just have to take your opinions up with the Lord Almighty himself when your time comes.

      Meanwhile the rest of us will continue to live life in the knowledge that the right to defend life can never be granted or taken away by mere men, but instead has always been bestowed upon man by God eons before the Constitution ever existed.

      It is sad that you believe a few men can override the will of God. Because unlike you, the Framers of the Constitution knew they had no authority to grant man the uninfringeable right to bear arms; they were instead simply acknowledging God’s everlasting rule by affirming such a right has already always existed.

      All your combined words will never undo the strength behind the belief in our Lord which is evident throughout all documents establishing the foundational principles which created this Nation. And that my friend is what you are truly up against. Have a Merry Christmas.

    4. too many unfounded assertions…

      – i understand the constitution as written
      – – we live in a system unlike what was intended, and this is what we must contend with

      – God turned this planet over to Satan/Lucifer, the prince of the power of the air

      – God’s law has no standing in the justice courts of men; just try asserting man’s law is contrary to God’s law
      – – try asserting the “God-given right of self-defense” when you are arrested for carrying a firearm without permission (where required)
      – – – right seldom makes might in this world

      – Constantly appealing to a higher law in an effort to persuade the grieving parents of a child killed by an imbecile, incompetent gun owner (and there are many) that unfettered gun rights trump the right to life of the family member is not convincing any anti-gun people to change their mind about controlling what can be controlled when it comes to guns
      – – the point is no gun rights advocate can find a compelling argument for society to condone absolutely no standards of firearm training, proficiency, safety (the “four rules” are no comfort to those “accidentally” harmed…and the damage is too often unrepairable).

      if refusing to talk to people who insist dangerous weapons should be obtained and transported judiciously is the gun rights answer to real problems, then thankfully the “war” between pro and anti gun camps will never end. until those who can kill inadvertently from a distance come to grips with the potential destruction they wield, they should have no rest.

      no “rights” are absolute, in all circumstances, all the time. btw, under the rule of God, people have no rights, they are slaves to the Master; people have only those privileges the Master grants, and no justification for insisting they are being treated unfairly.

      whew…way far afield, eh?

      and yes, it was/is a nice Christmas; thank you

    5. In your rush to move accidental gun deaths to the bare minimum possible (zero?) you invite comparison with other forms of accidental death and you stand accused of defending far more dangerous pursuits in your single-minded zeal regarding firearms.

      I note the frequent opposition that the Eddie Eagle program of teaching gun safety to kids meets with from “gun safety” proponents. I don’t think your side of the fence is interested in safety regarding guns: I think you are only interested (blindly zealous) in eliminating all guns from civilian hands. Given the number of negligent discharges wherein members of the LAPD have been shooting themselves, I don’t think that disarming me would accomplish as much in the pursuit of firearm safety as disarming the police.

      You are right … the Constitution can be amended. Until it is, however, it says what it says and I would hope that, as an exercise in good citizenship, you would respect that.

    6. am still forgetting to come directly to the blog to reply to comments, but managed this time.

      “my side” would surprise you. the point of all this is that the pro-gun element has no answer to the emotional quotient of the gun rights argument. emotion will trump logic any day. the stats do not tell us we have a convincing majority, a majority that can easily put to lie everything the anti-gun crowd claims. if logic, law and statistics could win the day, the discussion would be over long ago. i find so many (most? all?) pro gun-rights people have no clue how radicals successfully operate. those rules are free to read on the internet. they are compact, effective and easily implemented. when i was a youngster, the argument over gun rights was unimaginable (despite certain leftist-controlled cities and legislation). “everyone” knew it was the hallmark of being an american male to own one or more firearms. now, we face destruction (small majorities in polls do not make for security). almost every politician accepts the need for “common sense” gun controls, the heller decision is becoming toothless as the lower courts impudently defy the supreme court, we are seeing oblique attacks on gun ownership through restrictions on ammunition, magazines, taxes on bullets and accessories, deferral to the need of communities to “feel safer”. the attacks are relentless, and all the pro-gun element can do is shout about rights. the vast majority of people are not interested in self-discipline, self-control, self-defense, personal responsibility. the culture is concerned with feeling good and being left alone to lose themselves in their electronic world of toys. the tide shifted, and pro-gun people are left with a single tool to fight a rear-guard: “rights”.

    7. You’re right – that’s what amendments are fore. Lincoln himself said so.

      From: First Inaugural Address of Abraham Lincoln, Monday, March 4, 1861. (Available at ‘The Avalon Project at Yale Law School‘.)

      “This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing Government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it.”

      The “Second Amendment” never had anything to do with ‘hunting’. Read the Amendment. It refers to “… the security of a free State, …..”.

      What is a “free State”? Did the framers mean a State that was free from outside oppression; or did they mean a State where the people were free from internal oppression?

      Security for whom – the State, or the people?

      “…., the right of the people to keep and bear …..”

      Think about it…..

    8. except lincoln didn’t really mean it (“…or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it., did he? force of arms settled that notion quite effectively. so much for unalienable rights, eh?

      culture change is happening; the left is winning.

    9. I doubt an inaugural address was delivered ‘off the cuff’, and since he didn’t have a tele-prompter, he probably passed out printed copies to the ‘press’. Did he mean it? I’m old, but not that old; so you tell me.

      “Force of arms settled that notion…..” What notion? Are you referring to the War of Northern Aggression?

      Yup – culture is changing – when was the last time you saw a teenager on public transport stand up so a lady or an older gentleman might sit.

      It’s changing alright – belay that – it’s changing all-wrong. So what are you doing to change it “all – right”?

      What have you done lately to instill a little patriotism, honesty, work ethic even a sense of history et al into a youngster who thinks the world owes him, or her?

    10. “I doubt an inaugural address was delivered ‘off the cuff’, and since he didn’t have a tele-prompter, he probably passed out printed copies to the ‘press’. Did he mean it? I’m old, but not that old; so you tell me.”

      – – see response below next quote

      ” “Force of arms settled that notion…..” What notion? Are you referring to the War of Northern Aggression?”

      – – absolutely. the “southern states” did nothing illegal. the northern money interests could not tolerate the idea of pursuing secession through the courts; even the chief justice told lincoln at the time that the outcome of such a case before the supreme court could not be predicted. thus, so much for the right to dissolve the compact,

      “Yup – culture is changing – when was the last time you saw a teenager on public transport stand up so a lady or an older gentleman might sit.”

      – – not since the mid-sixties.

      “It’s changing alright – belay that – it’s changing all-wrong. So what are you doing to change it “all – right”?”

      – – used to vote. see what that got us.

      “What have you done lately to instill a little patriotism, honesty, work ethic even a sense of history et al into a youngster who thinks the world owes him, or her?”

      – – i have the raw experience to know a failing rear guard action when i see one. if it isn’t on their smart phones, the young ‘uns today think it didn’t happen or is too unimportant to notice. our nation has had it too good for too long; effort to achieve anything is for old folks, so my kids told me.

    11. No children of my own, but over the past 30 years working in several different towns, I noted that virtually every time my employer hired a youngster, it didn’t work out. Unable to follow procedure, tardy, no social graces, and not even aware of what they lacked.
      Have a happy New Year, may it be all you hope for.

    12. yep, old folks should remain nervous and skeptical until check-out time. the young critters don’t have time for nonsense like work ethic and personal responsibility, not to mention respect for experience,

  9. regarding preventing accidents, i am all for “dummy-proofing” any implement that can cause harm to others (self-driving cars are not useful because the programs depend on all other drivers to obey the same driving rules/safety features as those programmed into the self-driving car). it is impossible to eliminate ALL unintentional deaths or injuries. but why should there be a suspension of efforts to improve things so as to reach the mystical “irreducible minimum”? what i have been saying all along is the gun-rights people seem to callously disregard any effort to make accidental death/injury by gun a statistical anomaly, say .01/1000. do we even know just how low the inadvertent body count can be if we really want to get there? as long as pro-gun people loudly assert that life is tough, and misuse of guns is just something the innocent must accept as the price for some people to have guns, then winning the argument among those who don’t want or like guns will be forever elusive. if a fraction of the heat and air that goes into attempting to humiliate and intimidate non-gun owners were put to programs to improve gun safety and reduce accidental deaths, the outcome might surprise you….in a way you would like. simply, enough sloganeering; put some effort into reducing innocent death.

    1. Firearms:
      Death: 33,000
      Suicide: 21,000
      Officer involved: 3,200
      Defensive: 1,600
      Home Invasion: 2,600
      Accidental: 1,600
      Mass Shooting: 300
      Injury: 23,000

      Automobile:
      Death: 33,000
      Injury: 2,000,000 ER treated
      (No further breakdown readily available)
      Unintentional Falls:
      Deaths: 30,000
      Unintentional Poisoning:
      Deaths: 39,000
      Suicide:
      Deaths: 41,000

      My point is that you place soooo much emphasis on one item which has such minimal effect on the result you seek to achieve. The reason auto safety doesn’t get significantly better is because the root cause is unqualified and incompetent drivers. Just the same, firearm accidents is most often due to lack of skill and competence. You can’t dummy proof stuff because they will just invent another dummy. Education and training is the only solution to autos and firearms. My issue is the efforts placed on guns without a peep regarding auto safety, unintentional falls and unintentional poisoning. We do not need to fix them before addressing guns but we sure need to place more energy and funds to correct them as they are far worse for our society.

    2. Given his goal of .001% of accidental deaths due to firearms, I think that we are already pretty much there. Following the 80/20 rule, it’s time to focus our efforts at safety somewhere else.

      Jesus said that the poor would always be with us. So will the incompetent and inept.

  10. p.s.

    i DO use the reply button. each email notification i receive has an embedded REPLY button, which is what i use. not sure why the responses appear to others as a general comment.

  11. i grant you “accidental” is problematic. “unintentional” may be a better description. i used “accidental” because the great mass of the population is not into guns, and “accidental” transmits the meaning that someone shot another person they did not intend to shoot, or shot some object they did not intend.

    are you contending that gun owners have a superior right to have deadly “accidents”? you must concede that the only way there can be a negligent firearm discharge is that a gun was involved. how many gun-related deaths happen when no gun is present? are you contending that protecting you and your family trumps the right to life of innocent victims of poor gun handling by people convinced their right to a gun trumps the right to life of innocent victims?

    automobile/truck safety is its own terrible blot on our society. after all the safety focus of the last 50 years, we are still killing and injuring almost the same number of people who were killed or injured back then; it is appalling and i support even more research and production of safety-first technology (not self-driving cars !), and government mandates that require safety features…because your poor driving puts me at risk.

    again, the death of innocents is too great a price to pay so that some others, sometimes, somewhere, just might, maybe, perhaps, possible could use a firearm for self-defense. not saying there is no reason to own a firearm, not saying there is no reason to carry one about. am saying that not enough has yet been done to drive to an absolute minimum the number of innocent lives taken by careless gun owners. careless drivers, careless gun owners both present a risk unnecessary and unwanted in this day and age.

    i would be more impressed if the blaring noise coming from the gun-rights people was accomplished by implementable ideas about how to make having/carrying a gun more safe for those of us merely walking around minding our own business.

  12. FYI: Just Posted in the Washington Post, 22 December 2015 @ 11:29AM.

    Virginia, WON’T recognize CCW Permit’s from the Following States: Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Washington, Wisconsin and Wyoming.

    Virginia, WILL STILL recognize CCW Permit’s from: West Virginia, Michigan, Oklahoma, Texas and Utah…

  13. More recently, Obama has called for prohibiting those on no-fly list from purchasing firearms. There is no due process and includes far more than terrorists, Including one guy who wrote a letter of protest to the White House. Most don’t even know they are on the list. It can easily become Obama’s hate list. He’d assign Lois Lerner formally from IRS to administer it.

    1. The First “No-Fly” List was introduced after 9/11 of 2001. An consisted of 16 names. So what seem to be the Problem To That?

  14. your note is an example of the callous disregard of safety fort those around you.it is why common sense gun control supporters have such suspicion and antipathy toward gun owners.

    why is it idiotic, evil, silly, un-american, impossible, unimaginable, whatever words fit, to want to do everything possible to prevent accidental shootings by people who own guns? why do pro-gun supporters care less about the number of unintended deaths caused by poor handling of guns? there may be hundreds of millions of guns and gun owners, and the accidents are very rare, but in all cases not having a gun available anywhere would have prevented the accidental shootings and accidental deaths. are these lost loves worth nothing, or simply the price you are willing someone else to pay in order for you to own, use, carry guns? if we could save one innocent life, is it not worth finding out? not talking here about trying to eliminate all gun deaths, criminals will be criminals, and i do not support a continuing gun battle between police and gangs in an effort to remove all guns from the country. but why to pro-gun people simply have no reliable method to prevent accidental deaths? why do pro-gun people present the rest of the country with the proposition that gun rights are absolute and if some people accidentally die, well tough stuff?

    1. Just ban cars too, while you’re at it:) oh wait lets add food(choking hazard), tobacco and alcohol. Better yet lets just sell the country since it sucks because people like you are allowed to have a say so.

    2. Well, george from fort worth, we don’t want our firearms limited or taken away because for one thing, governments having the monopoly on firepower has led to the death of millions of people by those governments. Yes, it CAN happen here.

      But let’s just do the “accidental death” scene for you since that’s where you place your plank on the platform for gun control. If you would research deaths by accidents and then get back with us about what else you want to take away from us to prevent THOSE particular accidents, you might find a better direction to steer your campaign for public safety than handing an overwhelming advantage to a rogue government that is already showing signs of marginalizing those who believe differently than they do.

    3. @ george from fort worth,

      Wait, let me get this straight – you actually believe we should be rendered defenseless from protecting our own families, and would rather they be raped and murdered during an armed home invasion just so all the other idiots’ lives can be spared because they were too stupid to practice proper gun safety?

      Just for the record, there is no such thing as an accidental shooting, because someone is always ultimately at fault. Every single death was preventable had true “common sense gun-control” been responsibly applied by each gun owner.

      It is utter ignorance for you to espouse that this Country needs your brand of fascist imposition forced upon the masses just to protect the stupidity of the few. Way more senseless deaths have occurred by irresponsible drivers yet I don’t see you willing to turn in your car. Please stop with your bleeding-heart liberal hypocrisy.

      And one more thing, try using the “REPLY” link so we know who you are addressing with each of your rants.

  15. There was a close-up of one of the shooter’s AR 15 laying in the street after police killed the terrorists in San Bernardino. It had a 30 round magazine in it which is illegal in California. That speaks volumes about how gun laws make us safer.

  16. Odumbo wants to bypass the house and senate with illegal executive action. The only reason he gets away with all of his illegal actions is because he controls the attorney general of the U.S.
    We need a new attorney general after the elections that will seek to prosecute him for all of the illegal acts he has committed and we need a president and congress that will put a law into place that makes it treasonous to restrict any lawful American from owning the firearm of his or her choice.

    1. Also we need the next president to be willing to forcce open all obsmmy’s sealed records so we can see just who this punk really is. I feel he is not a legal citizen of this country and that would automatically recind every law he’s passed. And probably jail him too !!

  17. I will consider Obama’s honesty about needing “gunfree zones” and that “guns are the problem” when he does 2 things: (1) Make the WH a gun-free zone and disarm all of his guards in there; announce this to the world (lead by example) . (2) Remove all guns from the guards that guard his kids’ school, after all that school should be “gunfree” also (again, lead by example!) !!! If he does these, then maybe we can believe him. Anything else is just more political double-speak.

    1. AJ you’re absolutely right on that one and it is the ONLY reason I joined. NAGR (which I also belong to) does more than the NRA ever has to protect the 2nd amendment. In fact the NRA IS responsible for some of the hurdles we have to jump through now just to exercise a RIGHT GUARANTEED BY THE CONSTITUTION!!!

  18. It is not nor has it ever been, the Left’s intentions to provide protection, safety or prevent even one criminal from getting guns. Criminals do not obey the law. The Left wants to control ALL the law abiding citizens access to guns, then stop gun ownership. Hitler did it. Stalin did it. Mao did it. It is what dictators, Socialists and Communists do
    In order to prevent the people from having any power. The USA is unique. The people have the power- if they will use it. We don’t. We have Capitulated to government. We are on the downslope to Communism.

    1. Steve,
      Thanks for the sharp eye. There was a mixup on my data in my notes. Good catch, and thanks for reading. ~Dave Dolbee

  19. Many people believe the Boston tea party started the revolutionary war, but it actually started when the British attempted to take our guns away at Concord.

  20. The issue is not gun control, it is people control. Liberals and progressives want to control what you eat, what you drink, what you drive, where you live, how much income you are allowed, what to think (you think Newspeak is merely something from a novel?). They are superior beings, more educated, more caring, more enlightened, out to save the planet from forces much weaker than what was required to form the rock, in love with their self-image. No point in talking about common sense. And now they they have completely unhinged from the prior image and are calling for outright confiscation. Enforcing gun control laws are not even on the radar for them. If you remove guns from law-abiding citizens, gun control laws are moot. Don’t think for a minute they plan to take guns from criminals. That element of society is something that cannot be controlled, so the rest of us will just have to put up with being victims as a fair price to ensure the safety of liberals, progressives and government.

  21. Here’s a couple of thoughts to ponder: How about actually using the gun laws already ON THE BOOKS to take the criminals off the streets? Also, only from our Federal Gov’t…15,000 extra police on the streets costing 4 BILLION dollars? If you do the math, and figure $100,000 per officer hired, that works out to 1.5 Billion, not 4 billion. Apparently cops make WAY more than I thought! At that rate, it would pay $2666,666.67 per officer. Not bad starting wages.

  22. You have to understand the mindset of the progressive and his/her government accomplice. It doesn’t matter if a law or regulation actually obtains the desired outcome. The law/regulation remains a bat with which you may be beaten when you give the progressives/government accomplice an opportunity to identify you, track your activities, and haul you in for some other reason. The left does not care if drugs are out of control, they are pro-drugs. They are anti-gun; different response.

  23. For starters, the law does not require an “occasional” firearms seller to have license; however you can damn well bet there are BATF agents at most large gun shows on the lookout for just this scheme as well as “straw buyers” from legitimate dealers. Though they may not nail them all it really dosen’t matter because the Dept. of Justice does not have the time or people (as per Joe Biden) to prosecute “minor gun law violations”. Maybe if this administration would prosecute felons for gun law violation (you can get you 5 to 10 years in federal prison as well as $25000 fines per incident) what you worry about would not happen. Failure to prosecute is a major cause of any crime.

  24. In neither discussions for nor against more laws restricting firearms have I heard any mention of the fact that for many years, we have had a “war” on drugs and yet tons of drugs come across our borders.

    Prisons are one of the most regiment places in the world. I have seen pictures of contraband found in prisons and they included working firearms “manufactured” in prison. They were crude and minimalistic but if they could be made in prison, what could be made in even a basic machine shop?

    If someone wants a product and is willing to pay for it, someone else will find a way to produce it regardless of laws. Quite aside from the Second Amendment, laws restricting firearms will mainly affect the law abiding, not the lawbreaker.

  25. Obama will get his way and it won’t be through legislation. When he gets a conviction on the neighbor of the San Bernadino shooters for selling them the guns they used, he will make every future gun seller liable for how the buyer uses that gun. Private sellers will require background checks just to avoid the liability.

  26. laws mean what the courts say they mean, period. the legislature passes laws based on whatever the advantage of the moment recommends. emotion drives legislation far more effectively than a mountain of law and logic. the moral imperative is to prevent as many accidental or rage-based deaths by firearms as possible. can’t stop them all, but if there are no firearms in the hands of private citizens, the gun-caused deaths disappear (no, we can’t prevent all the accidents and intended destruction, but the number of bad guys with guns is insignificant compared to the number of good guys with guns. as a society, our mandate is to provide as safe an environment as possible, and removing all guns from (admittedly, only the law-abiding) individual owners goes a long way toward saving lives. even if only one life is saved, that life is priceless.

    as to the idea that any constitutionally enumerated right is inviolable, even the founders understood that is not so. else we would not have a prescribed means to constrain, curtail or even eliminate those rights; constitutional amendment (or, if you like, constitutional convention). all the logic, reason and law in the world is rubbish compared to the preservation of innocent life.

    1. @ george from fort worth,

      This is your invented reality as perceived within your own mind, of which, does not actually exist to anyone outside of yourself. It is mere wishful thinking on your part based on a warped and personal bias to control others’ lives. But I can assure you none of your delusions have ever been realized nor practiced in this Country lawfully.

      It is a good thing we only have to read about your fantasies through your incoherent rants. Might I recommend you move to another country that may more closely accommodate your socio-fascist belief system? Heck they might even give you a position so you can impose your dictatorial will on their underclasses.

  27. Interesting.,

    The last civil war here was about taking property. Again we are talking about government taking legal property from legal owners…and there is a “moral” element, again, too. As before, one side is about emotion and control, the other about rights and logic. Even O.W. Holmes, a civil war veteran, acknowledged that when the country is equally divided regarding unalterable visions for the country, the only remedy is gunfire.

  28. oh yes. it is a loophole. because there is not new law specifically addressing internet facilitated sales between states, or specifically requiring all internet facilitated sales be restricted to FFLs. to argue that because there is a law prohibiting firearm sales across state lines no matter how the transaction is conducted, specifically via the internet, then a new law conspicuously naming the internet sales is required. it is like “hate crimes”. it is not enough to have a law prohibiting an action, a law must be introduced to further punish the perpetrator for the thoughts that led to the crime. it is so much worse to be guilty of two crimes.

  29. “Military Style” is an unfortunate push of leftist propaganda. I know what makes an assault rifle such and it isn’t a description of AR (standing for Armalite not assault rifle for any libs reading).

    The thing I find comical is that the AR15 platform was originally designed for civilians. The only thing that makes this style weapon military is that the military adopted it, made it full and select fire automatic, years after it was created. So I think the answer is that the government needs to stop using civilian style weapons!

    By their definition are S&W M&P pistols military style because they can be used as side arms and labeled “military and police?” Crazy, I think they believe anything centerfire is “military style!”

  30. If this Criminal in Chief DOES “make this so”. I think it’s time to LOOK SERIOUSLY at AR2! OUr Founding Fathers went to war with England for FAR less than this!

    1. According to liberals with whom I have talked, they also think that they spray thousands of heavy armor piercing cop killer rounds with a single light touch on the trigger shredding Bambi into ground venison and (per my mother in law) firing at a rate of 223 rounds per second.

  31. It might be necessary to think on a wider canvas. Personally, I am undecided how much credence to pay these reports but there are stories of UN forces undergoing exercises on American soil, which some say are in preparation of Obama asking the UN to enforce the gun treaty. Maybe this is conspiracy theory stuff, but I am beginning to think that I would not trust O’Bummer not to try something like that.

  32. It appears that the repulicans that crossed over to vote in support the bill are no longer capable of upholding the constitution and are no better that the worthless non-truth telling Comander in Chief (that might be a stretch)As for kirk I believe that he has always been a a democrat(like a wolf in sheeps clothing)Collins is the same,Just how many Repulicans are there in Maine. Mccain,How long can a person who does have experience be so clueless about what real Americans(not Washington people)want. And just HOW does he keep getting elected,just because he served his country doesn’t mean that he is a good representaive of it. And last but not least Toomey, This guy has talked out of both sides of his mouth for so long I doubt that he could look you in the eyes and give you an answer with a straight face and not be telling a non thruth. This My fellow American gun owners is the kind of talk(crap) that WE the PEOPLE have fallen for for too long, and its well past time that some of these dinasours(and I’m 62)need to be put out of office (pasture)and WE need to look at other people that will follow the Laws of the Land and the Consitution and quit being like Jellow and do the job we sent them to Washington to do. These so called representatives have given away much of their power because they did want the resposiblity to make the decisions that WE elected them to do. Which is why Obama(yuck)has the power and options to do what he feels like. Hell Obama makes Nixon Look like Jimmy Carter. So in closing it all boils down to the people and to paraphrase” Those people who chose to be sheep will be eaten by the wolves.” A Thank You to the four Democrats who had the stones to vote for the needs of the people. I for one am Grateful to you!

  33. It seems obvious we are headed for a second civil war. This time Liberals against Conservatives. Since the police and military are being bullied by Liberals and the Conservatives have all the guns the war will be short. Stop worrying but realize, this issue will not be solved by civilized methods unless someone backs down. And I don’t believe it will be gun owners.

    1. James,
      I can’t see this ever happening. Political disagreement has not only been part of our American fabric since our founding, it is healthy to understand regional and ideological differences among the populaces. Disagreement allows us to think outside of our own position, look at issues from a different perspective, and learn. We do not have to agree, but it is important to understand the issue from the opposition, to better define and challenge our own beliefs. There is nothing that I have ever seen or heard of, however, that I believe would make Americans take up arms against other Americans because of their political leaning. ~Dave Dolbee

    2. Dave,
      A well written and intellectual comment, but it’s obvious you’ve lived in benefit of our military, who do take up arms against people with different political leanings. Too bad you’ve never had to contest with these others. American against American? It’s happened before and it will happen again. Humans are not that civilized. In the end it’s about survival and retention of territory. I’ve been there and done it.

    3. In benefit of our military? I did a six-year hitch, including my time in the sandbox if you check the records… I am no stranger to contesting with others, but over seas and American v. American are two creatures of different colors. ~Dave Dolbee

    4. Sorry Dave, but when you contest with others, every man in the platoon must have your back and you got theirs. If you can’t trust a troop in the group you get rid of them. Life is simple in combat, bad guy, good guy, dead is dead. American v American? Don’t get romantic.
      James

    5. What Dave said.
      And in addition, conservatives do NOT have all the guns. Far from it actually. You may not believe it, but there are many, many more pro-gun liberals than you realize. Sorry if that goes against all your preconceived rhetoric.
      Happy HOLIDAYS!

  34. @ george from fort worth,

    Having read all 3 of your posted comments, you make it painfully obvious that you possess no functional concept regarding the right to bear arms in this Country. Hopefully the following will help you realize that NOTHING you’ve written makes sense in the eyes of the law:

    Several times you’ve used liberal anti-gun buzzwords like “internet loophole”, “common sense approach” and “unarguable proposition”; however, none of that exists or is even allowable as a matter of the law which clearly states – “…the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

    So, when you write things like, “…how many times have pro-gun people screamed that more gun control laws are pointless…”, you need to understand that stems from the fact that “by law” there should be NO gun control laws at all. And any that do exist are unlawful in and of themselves.

    The reason is because educated pro-gun advocates as well as honest Constitutional scholars understand there has only ever been one lawful standing arms law in this Country. And that one single law clearly states through the Second Amendment there can be no other gun laws at all… of any kind… ever!

    I cannot help that you’ve allowed your proclivities towards liberal concepts to warp your sense of understanding the real Laws of this Land. The result of which is truly your own fault and ignorance that has perplexed and confused your ability to understand the true American that knows their duty to follow the law, which also requires we defend it and put up resistance towards those that are breaking it.

    The law breakers I am referring to are every single government entity that has ever passed or enforced a law that conflicts with the standing Second Amendment, along with every Judicial ruling that defies it. You should pay better attention, because if you haven’t noticed, we are redressing these issues one at a time in courts all across this land with victory after victory getting your unlawful gun control laws overturned left and right.

    However, should our diplomatic path to redress these issues before the government ultimately fail, that failure alone is proof the government has become a tyrant; and with that, the law is on our side to take up arms and put down such tyranny.

    Doubtful, but hopefully now you’ll understand why you meet such resistance when you come in this type of forum and spew such liberal rhetoric. When you defend laws and more laws that shouldn’t even exist, you have to accept that you are nothing but a whiny annoyance and antagonist to those of us that truly know our rights under the law.

  35. the “loophole” is not related to, nor in consideration of, legal gun transfer at gun shows. the “loophole” is that people who are not FFLs make purchases and sales to private individuals with no controls/safety concerns. while it is nice to think that non-FFLs at a gun show would be careful to whom they sell, or from whom they buy, the truth is we have no way of knowing. thus, pro-gun folks cannot claim there is no “loophole” regarding private sales. what prevents a private person with a table at a show from selling or buying form a convicted felon? what prevents sales to out-of-state residents? it is these conditions that lend credence to “common sense” gun control of private and gun show sales that don’t require background checks. i am not an FFL or collector or whatever, but if i were in business to sell guns, i would be irate that my customers must do all the paperwork, and the guy at the next table can sell guns anytime (and those guys attend every gun show available) without putting their customers through the hassle of background checks. and we do not, and cannot know who many illegal sales are completed at gun shows and via internet postings. that means no one knows if bad guys are getting weapons through gun shows or internet postings. the “system” is too easy to avoid. and as noted before, pro-gun types cry out that “criminals don’t obey the existing laws” so no new laws are needed. but the loopholes exist. pro-gun types are fortunate the anti-gun people have not yet latched onto the actual loopholes, and just claim “the sky is falling”. but once the loopholes are clearly identified and publicized ad nauseam, it will be difficult to argue such actions never occur.

  36. The biggest threat/s to the 2nd Amendment and gun ownership in America is the apathetic citizenry and their politicians who are more than willing to sell out the people the supposedly represent and the constitution they all swore to uphold and protect.

    Unconstitutional Executive Orders and Laws are without meaning or effect, unless we the people fail to challenge and ultimately refuse to obey them. The also holds true, If we do not hold our representatives accountable for violating their oaths and supporting such acts.

    It’s way past time that we remove these individuals from office and find honorable representatives to take their place. If you’re not involved than get involved!

  37. it is the interstate sale/purchase of guns, between private individuals, that is the “loophole.” these type sales cannot be declared non-existent. thus, the “common sense” action is to make it illegal to use the internet to facilitate such sales. and one day someone will wake-up and realize that illegal gun sales can be made across state lines by a number of different means, and those “loopholes” must be closed upon discovery. the “common sense” approach is based on the unarguable proposition that if you make it illegal for people who are not interested in, or likely to make, illegal gun sales, then illegal gun sales facilitated via the internet will not happen !

    1. Umm… Interstate sales between private individuals – via the internet or any other means – are already illegal. All firearm transfers, except those between licensed dealers, are required to be conducted in face-to-face transactions. It is illegal to transfer a firearm to someone who is not a resident of the same state as the seller without going through a licensed dealer. Not a “loophole.”

  38. laws, laws, laws….how many times have pro-gun people screamed that more gun control laws are pointless because people intent on violating laws will do so anyway? therefore, what validity is there to claiming that laws prohibiting interstate gun sales ensures no one can ever collude to trick the system and sell firearms across state lines without any regard for FFL or backgorund checks? now we have the logical disconnect of claiming laws do not prevent illegal activity, but in one special case (internet sales between individuals across state lines), laws entirely prevent illegal activity.

  39. Seems to me that were it not for the 5 dems that crossed over, this bill would have passed. And with the 4 Rinos that voted with the dems, I’m not feeling so assured that it wouldn’t pass in the future. Kirk always votes with the dems so I don’t even know why he is even in the Republican party. McCain is a disgrace, and since I live in AZ I can only hope that we have strong opposition to his re-election bid. Though I will take any victories that we have, lets not get complacent because next time all the Democrats that voted against the bill may very well change their votes the next time around.

    1. In the Senate, almost any controversial legislation requires at least 60 votes to get passed, due to rules on “Holds” and “Filibusters.” The votes in question in this article were no exception. 51 votes in favor would not have been enough to get this through.
      Democrats like Pryor in particular, should not be given too much credit for “crossing over.” Pryor has voted on both sides of the track on gun issues. He has demonstrated a willingness to stab gun owners in the back if it will provide a victory for his party, but Harry Reid knows how many votes he needs and how many he has. If Reid had been able to scrounge 59 votes, you can bet that Pryor would have been number 60. As long as the vote can’t win, Reid gives Democrats from pro-rights states permission to vote against them, but in return for that gift, he expects them to be ready to come to his aid when there’s a vote that matters.
      Analyzing Senate votes can be tricky thanks to convoluted rules and procedural smoke and mirrors. Most news outlets just skim the surface, either because their reporters don’t understand the process or because they assume you won’t understand it.

  40. The latest move by the administration is to add the “no fly” list to the “no gun” list of the NCIS data base. Considering that your name can be put on the No Fly list by mere suspicion (what WEB sites are you checking or you have the same name as someone the FBI/CIA/etc. is looking for), and the fact that it is almost impossible to get your name off this list this is a major attack on Constitutional rights. Homeland Security as lost track on almost 10,000 people that have had visas revoked for suspected terrorist activity, have their names been added to the No Gun database – doubtful. This is not about “gun control” this is all about PEOPLE CONTROL.

  41. Stop falling into the ultraliberals’ trap of calling every semiautomatic rifle an assault weapon. They aren’t. There is already a ban on “military style” assault weapons. It takes a heap of money and over a year of your life to get a permit for one.

    1. I’m not sure what you’re talking about or where you’re from but I don’t know of any ban on “military style weapons”. For instance one of the most popular and most sold gun out there is the ar15 m4. That is nothing but a military style rifle. That’s the number one rifle used by our soldiers and all the extras they use you can buy at any store that sells guns. Anyways I am a strong supporter of the 2nd amendment and have a few firearms myself, however, I DO think that something needs to be done about trying to keep weapons out of the hands of certain people. The only problem is there’s really nothing that can be done to help prevent that. You can’t take the right to bare arms away from every good citizen. And no matter what the government does, the kind of people that would go on a shooting spree would probably wouldn’t buy a firearm the legal way anyways. As long as there are rules and laws, no matter what they are, there’s always going to be a small few that breaks them. Being a law abiding citizen myself I don’t have a problem with maybe making it a little harder to purchase a weapon to a certain extent. But that being said don’t punish everybody for the very small few bad ones. This is a very touchy subject and unfortunately there is no easy answer if one at all.

    2. And they waste a lot of ammo. The M16-A2 was a much better design with 3 burst fire. That being said Liberals think AR stands for assault rifle. If they ever did research to back their claims they wouldn’t have any. For instance they never tell you what percentage of the 30,000/yr gun related deaths are attributed to gang and drug wars. And then they lump them into the statistics of legally purchased fire arms.

  42. i think the “internet loophole” refers to the “thousands” of online sales between individuals where the guns are shipped across state lines. these “deals” are almost entirely between people who would otherwise be unable to sell/buy the guns through ‘normal’ channels. why else would anyone not go to a legitimate gun store and go through all the checks? only people with dangerous intent seek to avoid scrutiny, therefore, anyone who uses the internet to sell/buy guns has dangerous intent.

    right?

    1. I would be curious to know where your facts come from. As for Internet sales, there are numerous legitimate online retailers to buy from. Do people think you go online and buy a gun like amazon and it ships to your door? Private sales excluded (although I think it is illegal across states lines) a gun sale gets shipped to a legal registered Federal Firearms License holder. When the gun arrives at the FFL you go fill out the ATF form 4473, get your NICS background check and if passed the firearm is transferred to you at a fee. I am a loyal online shopper of firearms and have no ill will or need to avoid scrutiny. I shop online for the same reason I buy most things online, price and convenience

    2. You haven’t a clue to the legalities of buying and shipping firearms over the internet and through the mail. You appear to be a liberal fishing for comments to try to stir things up.. I would advise you to look up the MANY laws restricting and regulating interstate sales including the law that requires the seller to ship to a licensed FFL dealer who then MUST preform a background check on the buyer before allowing the firearms to be released into the buyers possession. I know all of this because I am a licensed FFL dealer and you, sir, are ill informed.

    3. Nope!
      You buy on-line for deals the same as you do everything else, the difference is on-line transaction are sent to an FFL (not to you) the FFLS is where you pick up your purchase AFTER you have completed form 4473 and past NICS…. private party transactions across state lines however they are done are against law already…

    4. I use the Internet for firearms related purchases for the same reasons I use Amazon, Ebay and other websights. Price, convenience, availability. If I want a specific gun not in stock at any of my local stores, I might well go through the Internet. Inter state sales HAVE, by Federal law, got to go through an FFL (a dealer with a Federal Firearms License) who will do the federal background check anyway, so where is the nefariousness you impute? Typical liberal, you criticise what you do not understand just because some bigger idiot has mislead you.

    5. george from fort worth. A pretty general and incorrect statement. I have bought guns from both FFLs and private citizens and am not trying to hide a thing. Any private seller I have ever met has always asked to see a state issued permit to purchase or permit to carry.

    6. George in Fort Worth,

      WRONG, totally wrong.

      I am a FFL Firearms dealer. It is illegal for anyone to ship a firearm across State lines to someone that is not a FFL holder. Every firearm I sell or transfer has to be done through the process of submitting to a background check before they can walk out the door with their firearm.

      I had one case where it was a Straw Purchase. I refused to do the transfer. I reported this to LEO and they did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! Even thought a felony had just been committed, the people in charge of enforcing the law simply ignored a felony crime.

      The cry to close the “gun-show loop-hole” is a lie. All they are trying to do is build a paper trail for future confiscation of firearms, pure and simple.

    7. I believe it was about a year ago, The Brady Campaign (or whatever they’re calling themselves now) trumpeted that something like 40,000 sales had been stopped by background checks. About the same time, ATF figures were released on arrests,trials and convictions for this felony offence: 12 arrested, 7 brought to trial, 2 convicted.
      The existing laws are NOT being enforced – and much as I hate to admit it, our trying to get ‘the media’ to even consider that is darn near impossible.

  43. Seems the current occupant of the White House is ‘talking’ with a certain Micheal Bloomberg about “gun control”. Bloombergs “laws” talk of “Transfer”, and define “Transfer” as any time a gun changes hands – such as: you’re at a friends house and he hands you his new gun to look at. This “Transfer” would require a trip to an FFL holder to fill in the paperwork as if it was a “sale”, and do the background check on you. Then the FFL holder will take the gun from your friend and pass it to you. Once you’ve looked at it, and want to return it, another background check – this time of your friend. That’s the second $20 or $30 fee. Unenforceable – but on the books any time the government wants to nail you for something – anything. The majority of the ATF’s cases taken to court are from entrapment. The “Bloomberg” laws, if enacted (look out Nevada – you’ll be voting on this subject) will only lead to more harassment of the law-abiding, and have no effect on crime, violence, safety, or suicide. Bloombergs “Transfer” isn’t limited to just ‘sales’.

    1. • In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
      • In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
      • Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
      • China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
      • Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
      • Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
      • Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
      Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century as the result of gun control: 56 million and I will assume that 99.9% were normal working class people that were absolutely no threat to their respective governments. A total violation of human right to defend themselves and their neighbor, if need be.
      Notice that regardless of the politics, whether communist, socialist, dictatorial, it made no difference.
      Now democracy wants to join and become a member of the historical record of murderers and assassins.
      You won’t see this on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information. Why? The answers in the history and half of the writing of history is the hiding the truth.

    2. @ Shooter.

      Executive Order signed in 13 November 1863 by President Abraham Lincoln. Called the Confiscation Act of 1863, aka “Suppress Insurrection, to Punish Treason and Rebellion, to Seize and Confiscate the Property of Rebels, and For Other Purposes” Act…

  44. People keep saying how the AR’s were purchased legally. That can’t be. California doesn’t allow high cap mags, or easily removable mags for that matter. They are limited to 10 pinned magazines. While his Mexican muslim convert buddy may have purchased the rifles they weren’t legally purchased in California. As for the idiot we have in the White House and our Senators that fail to represent the people They need to to read the Constitution, The Bill Of Rights and the Federalist Papers.

    Ive been reading some of Washington’s letters as well as Jefferson’s and I’m here to tell you that our right to keep and bear arms wasn’t to allow us to go hunting, or target practice. The Second Amendment was created to give the people a way of preventing a tyrannical government from forming and denying them their the rights.

    Washington also veiwed saw a well armed populace as a way to give the states a chance to raise a militia and the federal government a chance to raise an army in the event of an invasion.

  45. Where can you purchase a firearm either on line or from a licensed gun dealer without a background check. Even on line purchases are shipped to a FFL that must complete a background check before delivery of the firearm…

    1. @ Stvenkng,

      You are very correct, and those driving the call to close the so-called loophole are quite aware of their deceptive tactics.

      The engineers of this trickery draw their partial truth from Internet sites that offer a used guns classified section where your average unlicensed Joe-citizen is free to list a used gun for sale or trade. It is no different than meeting a person in your local coffee shop and discussing options to trade or sale a gun between enthusiasts. No FFL is required to transact private exchanges of guns in the same state.

      So to be clear, none of these classified ad sites, such as Backpage, Armlist and GunBroker, have anything at all to do with how individuals carry out the final sales transaction. It is all between the buyer and seller, and is all legal. This is synonymous with online dating sites where they help match you up, but thereafter have nothing to do with what happens on the actual date.

      Regardless, the anti-gun scum have created and pushed their myth so hard and for so long that now your average libtard actually believes that as long as you order a gun online that ALL Internet transactions result in guns being shipped to your door without a background check.

      Using this deception, their goal is to gain enough fabricated support to shut down this very powerful yet legal classified ad system which matches gun buyers with sellers, and do it all under false pretenses.

  46. It is unusual for Dave Dolbee to write something that causes me to pause and tilt my head in confusion, but the bulk of this article is recounting the April 2013 vote as if it happened just yesterday. Everything described in this article actually occurred over two years ago during the Senate vote to expand background checks in the immediate months that followed Sandy Hook.

    This may confuse some readers to mistake it with the more recent gun control votes on December 3rd of this year which occurred in the wake of the San Bernardino terrorist shootings. As recently as December 3, 2015 Congress voted down a measure to prevent individuals on the terror watch list from purchasing firearms. In addition to that vote a second vote shut down a proposal that was a rehashed bill very similar to the 2013 expanded background checks bill after Sandy Hook. Regardless, both bills were defeated.

    The 2013 gun control defeat enraged Obama into such an outrageously pissy attitude that it led to him enacting some unprecedented “get even” gun control executive orders.

    So our concern now should be that since the 2013 and 2015 scenarios are so identical – given they both involved mass shootings and they both involved immediate gun control defeats by Congress – that we should brace for another temper tantrum by Obama and expect another pissy attitude to lead him to enact even more ridiculous anti-gun executive actions.

    1. G-Man,
      Thanks for the compliment, and sorry if this caused any confusion. You are correct; the main point is that we have a majority of support from Congress thanks to the NRA and other Second Amendment groups. That eliminates the threat of the President’s phone. However, that leaves executive actions (his pen) as the major threat. This makes the selection of our next president even more critical. The next president would either support or undo any executive actions by Obama. The next president will also appoint one or more judges to the Supreme Court, which will affect the balance of power for at least a generation. ~Dave Dolbee

  47. A President that acts outside the Constitution is a TYRANT and unfit to hold office and further is an ENEMY of the PEOPLE.
    Any government that attempts to take my gun will get what they should from any FREE PEOPLE.

  48. The US would benefit from increased Civilian Marksmanship and Gun Handling Training. We need to bring back ROTC and some form of military training that teaches situational awareness and reaction to threats and attacks. That’s the kind of the ‘gun control’ we need to pursue. Radical Islam, or in my opinion, just Islam is on our doorstep.

    1. @John

      This is a spot on comment! We need to see this situation as an active war. We have an enemy who can infiltrate our borders, or who is already inside them, and we need to train the general population to be the first line of defense.

      The problem is, the pathetic inner city welfare crowd doesn’t care, and urban Millennials are simply not up to it. They are whiny little snivelers who would rather sit at Starbucks and spout regurgitated Democratic rhetoric, and get rewarded for doing nothing than actually do anything of any significance. Trust me, I work around them every day.

      The people who actually have the capacity and mindset to do this are the true minority in America. We are either from earlier generations, or from a smaller segment of our population every year.

  49. The leftists, statists, demoncrats and adult little children follow the Saul Alinski playbook. In the case of resistance, do not retreat, double-down, and again. Evil never goes away. Now, evil is stronger and more persistent that ever before. The polls tell us that only a fragile majority support gun rights, and that will not matter when Demoncrats find 5 more senators willing to impose “sensible solutions” to the gun problem. But, even 5 more senators will not be needed if the Supreme Court gains only one more leftist; precedence will be quickly abandoned, and the court will roll-back our 2A rights.

  50. I don’t think “letting the gun control genie out of the bottle” or anything related to getting the obvious truth about guns out is the issue. The Marxists are closer than ever to a complete ban on guns for civilians. Why do I say this? Because, while its been going on for many years, the Obama administration has not only kept at it, but have turbo charged the importing of a new set of voters for socialist policies. The continual push to legalize illegal aliens, bring in “refugees,” etc. are all aimed at out voting the traditional, freedom loving American (which I also hold is fading from the scene). In addition, Obama is using HUD to force zoning changes in traditionally republican communities such as their test case, Westchester County NY, that will force low income housing to be built right in very high end neighborhoods and other neighborhoods, that, while not super affluent, are conservative in nature. He is planting socialist leaning votes in all areas of the country to tip the scales in the favor of a more, bigger and more powerful Federal government. The reason that Al Franken is now a Democrat US Senator from Minnesota is because of a huge number of Somalians who were settled in the Minneapolis/St Paul area and were bussed to the polls to out vote Norm Coleman’s supporters. Now, Mr. Colman was a RINO type, it was better that than a Democrat in the seat. Because the Somalians were brought into the country as ‘refugees’ they were automatically granted citizenship and the right to vote.

  51. I First would like to say to the families of concern how sad and angry I am for what has happened in their lives and for their loss of family and friends. There are no words I can say which will lessen the pain and sorrow you feel. My prayers are with you all.
    As for the gun genie, I say no, no, no. The Gun Genie should never, must never be forced back into the bottle. The information and news presented by the genie is much to valuable to ever be stopped. If I had but one wish for the gun genie it would simply be to remind the American people that terrorist act was committed by those who’s goal is to change the face of America. The last thing any of us want is to allow our country to become the disgusting hell that these cowardly terrorist come from. Please remember that it is terrorist who cause this and not the hard working American people; the gun owners of America. Washington needs to be, must be reminded that it is they; the congress, the senate, the president, who allow these terrorist into our country to do their deeds of destruction. If it were not for Washington and our self serving leadership, I sincerely believe we would not be having the problems with terrorism we presently have and America would be the respected country it once was.
    Ask your self these questions. Under who’s leadership did the muslims and terrorist enter our country? Under who’s leadership did these cowards of terrorism first start killing our families and friends? Now ask your self why he is still in office? Of all the gun laws that have been implemented none of those laws have prevented the destruction of American lives caused by terrorism. In fact. Terrorism has flourished under the gun laws in our country and if you think about it are a invitation to more terrorism and terrorist acts.
    Washington, the congress, the senate and Obama need to place more emphasis on stopping terrorism and not encouraging it. But then again I may be expecting too much considering we have, what I think and believe, is a friend to terrorism in the White House.
    It is TERRORISM Mr. Obama and not the AMERICAN PEOPLE you need to be concerned with. But then again you already know that.
    There is a final thought I have regarding this latest cowardly act of terrorism. Shouldn’t those who allowed these muslim terrorist into our country be held accountable for the acts of these terrorist? Those who made entry into America possible “Obama” are as much a part of the terrorist act as the terrorist themselves. Responsibility, Accountability, Responsibility, Accountability. These words used to mean something.
    So Gun Genie do not even think about going back into your bottle. Your presence is imperative when it comes to advancing the truth and encouraging the fight for our rights to continue. I know that we gun owners are responsible gun owners and that we hold ourselves accountable for what we do. It is the fact that we hold ourselves accountable that makes us responsible. Shouldn’t the friends of terrorism in Washington be held accountable?
    Thanks for listening.

    ho

    1. @ garfield kat

      The Second President of the United States of America, President John Adams. The First Barbary War or Tripolitan War (1801-1805).

    2. I wish we had more people like the person who wrote this fine report about who’s in the White House. ….and how and when these Muslims and Obama have a lot in common! And they do by all means. .thank you who ever you are. Garfield. U are so right. God bless you Brother in Arms. . Mac10

  52. The author made a sobering comment…..it only takes one president and/or 51 senators. That’s a scare reality. Hence the gun community needs to be perpetually on our feet. Constant aware and willing to take action (peacefully of course). And like the author said, we need get out and VOTE for politicians who believe in the 2nd amendment and all of the Constitution. I will admit, I got a little scared when the president began his anti-gun rhetoric. I knew the recent events, was a terrorist attack, via radical muslims. Once, I heard the perpetrators were subsequently muslims. Didn’t take a rocket scientist to put it all together. This president or Hilary will be “relentless” when it comes to gun control. Some thing tells me, it’s going to get worse, before it gets better for the gun community. Obama is playing with fire. He doesn’t realize, that his actions could spark a real uproar. Perhaps, Obama, doesn’t understand what it’s like to be a gun owner. Due to being raised over-seas. He just doesn’t get it about America and its firearm culture. Not making excuses for the man. If anything we should learn from this ordeal we have endured over the last 7 years. And never elect a person like an Obama. America elected Wilson in the early 1900’s And Wilson’s presidency was exactly like Obama’s. America can’t afford to elect a president like a Wilson or Obama again. An already fractured nation. Will most definitely, become permanently divided.

  53. I love my country. I have served her for many years. I spent 2 1/2 years in Iraq, and many more in places like Afghanistan, the West Bank, Egypt, Pakistan, etc. etc. And yet their response is to treat me like a pariah for my beliefs. I will support and defend the Constitution against all enemies.

    I would worry that this post would get me on some list, but i’m sure I’m already there.

    1. Thank you for your service. It is MUCH appreciated. I enjoy reading your posts and GMans posts too. It gives me something to look forward to in this age of doom and gloom and the Liberal nutjobs. Hope you and your family have a Merry Christmas.

  54. What’s to stop obama from using “executive power” and making every gun transfer subject to a background check? What happens next will be a $100 surcharge to “pay” for this check. Suddenly that gun sure became a lot more expensive!

  55. I live in Colorado where we have background checks for all types of purchases or transfers including purchases at gun shows. Colorado has had a number of these “mass” shootings both before and after some of these provisions were passed. So tell me, did they do any good?

  56. Arizona is the most gun friendly state according to a recent article. With that said the people of Arizona need to oust John McCain. He is not only anti gun but anti America in his views. For the life of me I cannot fathom why the Arizona people keep reelecting him! They must be downright stupid, why else would they do it…..

  57. Don’t underestimate Obama bin Laden trying to issue an executive order to impose his will – after all, his highness always thinks he’s the smartest guy in the room and he knows what’s best for all the peons

  58. Correction… Max Baucus is now the Ambassador to China… While still a MT Senator, as the rumors go, he was leaning toward being pro gun, which is why they politely kicked him out…

    The D Senator, Jon Tester, is as anti-gun as they can get, but writes letters to his constituents saying how much he loves the 2A

    The R Senator, Steve Daines, can always be trusted on 2A issues

  59. Plus with the FBI San Bernadino “TERRORISM” announcement today, it puts a damper on all the liberal plans to use this incident for their own selfish political gun control goals.

    From what I heard on the news, this nimrod was supposed to pull off something much bigger, but the Jewish guy at the Christmas party insulted him and his religion, so he went home to get his guns.

    1. Yep, they definitely were preparing something much bigger providing the 4500 rounds, about 20 pipe-bombs and some other explosives found stashed in their place. That also explains their strange behavior after the shooting: Instead of running (4 hours would be more than enough to cross the border and disappear in “Messiko”), they came back to their place and waited for something or someone. Further instructions, maybe? An emissary from the mosque to set up next task? In any case, it looks like the couple had change the plan without consulting with or an approval from the cell commander, so they did not know how to proceed…

    2. I don’t know how much of a “damper” it was. It’s still a fact that the guns were purchased legally and if stricter regulations were in place, or if guns were not allow to be sold legally at all, then they wouldn’t have been able to obtain the guns and carry out this attack. I’m not agreeing with this, just saying what they will be saying.

    3. LOL. The EU has some of the most strict gun control laws in the “developed” nations and still terrorists on a watch list were able to get full automatic weapons and explosives.

      What makes you think these two would not have gotten weapons just because weapons were banned? Gun control does not stop criminals or terrorists and never will.

      People need to stop looking to undermine the constitution of the US and focus on real police work.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Time limit exceeded. Please click the reload button and complete the captcha once again.

Your discussions, feedback and comments are welcome here as long as they are relevant and insightful. Please be respectful of others. We reserve the right to edit as appropriate, delete profane, harassing, abusive and spam comments or posts, and block repeat offenders. All comments are held for moderation and will appear after approval.