You mean like CNN or MSNBC?
Moderating
Not sure IMHO is the best fit for this, and it looks like the tone of this thread is going rapidly downhill. Enjoy the Pit.
That link is pretty neutral, considering how far right the Review is. And no name calling in sight. 
No, you must have him confused with Charleton Heston. Bloomberg is one of the guys who doesn’t like guns.
Like an actual news story instead of an editorial. I don’t want it slanted either way-I want it objective as is possible. If you can tell what the opinion of the writer is, then it isn’t news.
Hey, what happened to the sparkly jackboots? 
I’m anti-gun, but not virulently. I think it’s great news that legitimate gun dealers, as a rule, don’t make illegal gun sales. Yes, there’s the caveat that that’s only outside the “Dark Web”, but, well, still good news. I’m not sure why the Congressional Democrats who requested the investigation are painted as villains, but I guess that’s just how Fox rolls. Not much is breaking their way these days, so they have to hit what does really hard.
So let me see if I have managed to piece this together from the given sources:
- In 2011, or a million years ago in Internet time, there was a study showing 62% of private sellers didn’t care if a buyer might not pass a background check.
- In 2017, as part of a review of ATF enforcement of appropriate laws, private sellers appear to care when told that a buyer is prohibited from buying firearms.
- There’s no statistics on how many ATF investigations involve the internet and the ATF doesn’t investigate private sellers unless they receive a tip.
- Profit
Is really “Hey you’re fine with shipping out of state, right?” (just over one third of the sales) and “Hey you’re fine with shipping to someone with a prohibited status, right?” (stopped another third and) the best way to determine whether it’s easy to obtain a gun illegally online?
As long as we’re now in the pit. You are a worthless poster. You add nothing and use nothing but slurs and innuendos that seem to come from some central source of disinformation. Please stop posting so much garbage.
If you don’t want to that is fine, but judging Fox not worth reading or the NRA as a legitimate source is hardly extreme. I’m one of the moderates on the board. The study looked sound enough and as I am not normally part of the gun debate on either side I was interested in what Bloomberg was suppose to have said. Or is this a case of Fox said a Bloomberg associate said something? I usually ignore the gun stuff on the board.
NM. Just fuck you. Yeah you.
He’s on a post count building mission. He drives by threads and drops one line turds in them all the time.
It may not be extreme, but it is a bit narrow minded. I don’t like most of what I read on CNN, but I still read it.
Anyways, the real point, as I made upstream was that both articles provided a link to the Bloomberg study which was the whole premise for the GAO study.
The jackboots only sparkle brightly when she’s handing out Mod Warnings. And you should see the jackboot fireworks when she actually bans someone! You don’t want it to be you!
Does this mean that Republicans will recommend channeling all gun sales through licensed dealers? I mean, since those guys don’t cotton to illegal sales, that might make it hard for criminals to get guns… he says innocently.
I only bust those out when I’m modding people. Jackboots seems a little extreme for a thread move.
On preview: What Senegoid said.
No, I think he’s just aware that Fox News is a PR machine for Republican wingnuts that just makes shit up for the satisfaction of their slack-jawed right-wing viewers, and the NRA is a lying shill for the gun industry and insane gun-worshipping troglodytes. If you believe either of those are credible sources, perhaps you’re so lost in right-wing propagandizing that you think guns don’t kill people or that the US doesn’t have by far the highest rate of gun violence in the developed world. But it does, and that’s a fact that civilized people are legitimately concerned about.
OK, so based on what I quoted from naita, this looks to be good news that Legal sellers of guns appear to be doing a far better job then 6 years ago of not selling guns to people that legally should not be sold guns.
Again, this looks like really Good News, but on the other hand, I’m not sure it disproves the 2011 study.
As to Fox & CNN I take don’t treat either as real news sources. Both are pretty poor. Throw MSNBC in for good measure. CNN is actually the least activist of the three but maybe the most poorly vetted. I tend to go with BBC News, New York Times and other more responsible news sources then the 3 major cable network news agencies.
Is the snark necessary, or can you just not help yourself?
There are those in the pro gun community that would like to find a way to get around private gun sales. More commonly known as ‘over the fence’ or what the anti-gun crowd likes to erroneously call ‘the gun show loophole’. I’m sure you know that all gun sales by a licensed dealer must go through NICS.
The problem here is nobody has found a way to do so without violating the constitution. That’s why all attempts to date have been tossed in numerous courts.
And to be clear, criminals get guns by a other means than just ‘buying’ them. Theft is one, and having their girlfriend/uncle/mommy buy one for them, despite numerous laws already on the books that criminalizes that behavior.
lol…
Why didn’t you ask naita for citations?
Let me answer that for you. Because there has never been a time in human history when you could legally buy a gun on the internet if you were otherwise prohibited from owning a gun, from a legitimate gun dealer.
IOW, that post was pure bullshit. As was the Bloomberg study.