No, you overestimate it. About 80% of people shot by a handgun live. That figure includes people shot multiple times. And even if the person HAS sustained a mortal injury, they may take several minutes to die - and during that time they may still be capable of harming you.
You also seem to be forgetting there’s no reason to expect you’re only going to be facing one attacker.
The problem is, I’m not the one doing the choosing. The intruder is. Believe it or not, not everyone runs away when a gun is pointed at them. If the intruder doesn’t run, you’d better be prepared to use that firearm on him, or you’re in very deep trouble.
I think most of them do, but I think anyone that doesn’t know the difference should do a little bit more listening and a little less hyperventilating. Obama suggested the same thing.
Where does the constitution mention the word abortion?
Why is a right that is not mentioned in the constitution also constitutionally protected but a right that is explicitly preserved by the constitution so open to interpretation? Does the Constitution only apply when it agrees with you?
It doesn’t have to be murder. States have the ability to cirminalze just about anything that is not inconstitent with the constitution (or that hasn’t been pre-empted by federal law.
And BTW, I’m pro-life (at least for the first trimester and frequently for the second trimester).
I’m generally pro-choice but lets face it the VAST majority of abortions are elective abortion. I don’t care as long as you take care of it in the first trimester. I don’t know if you’ve ever had a kid but for the first few weeks of life a baby doesn’t really know what the fuck is going on either.
Because states can do that as long as its constitutional.
Once again, most of them are elective.
Its shorthand for the private sale loophole to the background check requirement.
A magazine is a small, simple, non-consumable item whose only job is to push cartridges through a slot. It is a little box with a spring in it. It’s about as practical as trying to ban matches to combat arson.
Again: How is it a “loophole” if it’s the both the law and the intent of the law? Why not just say your’e in favor of banning private person-to-person sales without goverment permission, instead renaming the existing law to something you think will scare more people?
I’m not sure how this is possible. Please explain. A private sale is a private sale. If it is legal in that state, how is it an abuse of the law to do so at the local fairgrounds or convention center?
Are you sayng that FFL dealers have the exact same regulations as private or gun show sales? Educate me as according to the ATF, you actually have to pass background checks and have regulations over the sale of firearms such as:
“Licensees must maintain records of all firearms receipts and dispositions, including the name, age, and place of residence of purchasers. 18 USC 922(b)(5) and 923(g)(1)(A). Licensed importers and manufacturers are required to identify firearms they import or manufacture by means of a serial number, which must be recorded in licensee records. 18 USC 923(i). Licensees are required to respond immediately to ATF firearms trace requests. 18 USC 923(g)(6). Reports of multiple sales of two or more handguns sold at one time or during any five consecutive business days are also required to be submitted to ATF. 18 USC 923(g)(3). Licensees who discontinue business must deliver their records to ATF. 18 USC 923(g)(4).”
So, are you saying that for private sales and gun shows, that the above is followed?
I don’t have an agenda beyond a very strong belief that America should regulate guns *at least *as much as we regulate cars and driving licenses. Hell, I’ll go out on a limb and say the US should regulate at least as much as casual bass fishing. And I look at the non-suicide firearm death rate of the US being at least 4x that of every other developed nation and think to myself the answer is not more guns and less regulation. And yep, to answer your question, I *am *in favor of banning private person-to-person sales without government permission.
*My *agenda is neither un-American nor anti-second amendment. And I’m definitely in the camp of guns are a hoot to shoot off and maybe in my younger days thought that a couple of beers and shooting up things in the woods was a fun way to spend a few hours.
Now I never in a million years imagined that Gun show loophole would bring out such a passionate response from anyone. Ignorance fought there, so thanks. Further educate me, without inflammatory language, how would you prefer it worded?
By FFL dealers, yes. By private sellers, no. In gun shows or in their homes, or in their cars or in the streets. Why is the particular venue, out of all the other venue possibilities for private sales, important? That is, why do you call it a “gun show loophole” and not “non-regulation of private sales”?
I’ve noticed that, even here on a message board dedicated to fighting ignorance. The gun control advocates are to the left as young Earth creationists are to the right.
I think one of the reasons they call it a gun shop loophole has been explained by another poster earlier in this thread. It’s one thing if I go to a gun show with one, two or even three firearms to sell. It’s quite another thing when someone rents a table and has twenty firearms on display and then claims he’s not a dealer.
Because these guys at gun shows that purport to be “private sellers” are at every frikking gun show with 100 guns, half of which are new in the box. These guys aren’t private sellers, they are dealers and should be required to get an FFL. They don’t have to charge sales tax. They don’t have to do background checks. And they don’t have to maintain records and get an FFL. All this while selling hundreds of guns a year.
It also highlights the flaw of a system that doesn’t require universal background checks.
So at what point does one become a dealer? 5,10,20,100 guns to sell? Not trying to be a dick, I am just trying to understand where you are coming from. Without an FFL , that guy cannot get guns at wholesale or receive firearm shipments to his house. His income potential is significantly reduced by being not being a dealer.
Perhaps, the solution is to lower the barriers to become a dealer?
Like those people who put up signs for a garage sale, and when you get there they have four tables set up with cheap, slave-labor costume jewelry. That ain’t a garage sale.
I’m not sure what makes you think I’m being a dick. I think every gun should be subject to background checks. I think anyone that keeps an inventory of guns with an intent to sell (as evidenced by turnover) is a dealer. I would interpret it very broadly so that anyone that sells more than 12 guns (new or used) per year creates a rebuttable presumption that they are a dealer.
I don’t know where they get their guns but their prices are competitive with the FFL dealers at these gun shows. The barrier to becoming an FFL dealer is fairly low.
Or like those folks who set up shop at a flea market 5 days a week selling new items. Those are businesses, they should be charging and paying sales tax.
Totally irrelevant. This depends entirely on whether you hit your target and where they are struck. Go watch some videos of police shootouts. They often expend a great deal of ammo.
The bottom line is, if I am forced to use lethal force, I want as many bullets as possible. If I run out of bullets before my opponent, I will die. It is very simple.
I was speaking of my intentions, not yours. So you want to eliminate private sales, not just private sales at the local fairgrounds. It’s a lot easier to state it that way without getting gun shows in the mix.