Thursday, April 30, 2009

What They Really Think of Obama


Max Blumenthal reports on The Daily Beast (h/t The Gun Guys) that not everyone is celebrating Obama's first 100 days the same way.

On April 18 and 19, I attended gun shows in Antioch, California, and Reno, Nevada, to probe the culture of gun enthusiasts at the onset of the Obama era. I came away from these events with a portrait of a heavily armed, tightly organized movement incited by right-wing radio to a fever-pitched resentment of President Obama and his allies in Congress.

I believe if I were a gun owner, I'd want to disassociate myself from the folks in this video. How about you? Can anyone explain to me what the connection with Hitler is and how widespread it is in the gun world? Do any black people go to these things? Or Jews?

What about the modification of weapons to make them legal? Are gun owners generally law abiding except when it comes to laws they disagree with? Isn't there something wrong with claiming to be a "straight shooter" but encouraging these practices of skirting the law?

The sniper rifle that can be disassembled and stored in a backpack or briefcase, is for what exactly? This was the 50 calibre one that was banned because supposedly it could shoot down an airplane. Is there some reason for being able to transport it so surreptitiously?

What's your opinion? You know the old expression, a picture is worth a thousand words? Well, after many thousands of words, after all the discussions on this blog about guns, about why they're good for society, about how we're better with them, I think this video says it all.

What do you think? Please tell us.

30 comments:

  1. This is obviously a propaganda piece with just the right editing and culling the hundreds of regular people to portray some of the nuttier ones.

    I've been to a lot of gun shows and there are definitely some, uh, interesting people but by far and large the attendees are just nice, polite average people.

    It used to be that every show had a table that held the token neo-nazi or conspiracy theorist but I haven't seen any of that for the last 10 years. This video showed some Nazi pictures like they were handing them out with bubblegum but all they really showed was a few 65 year-old photos and then some booths specializing in military collectibles. If you notice, they didn't show nazi recruiters handing out pamphlets, just tables full of collectibles which is probably where those photos were purchased.

    And as for Jews attending, maybe you can tell us how to spot one so we will know. I assume there are Jews there as there are also Christians and Muslims. Gun collecting really isn't religion specific. And lets not forget the usual table manned by the "Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership." Guess the "journalists" were too busy trying to equate old military antiques with some sort of skinhead movement.

    What about the modification of weapons to make them legal?What about it. I would think you would be more concerned with people modifying weapons to make them illegal. If they are trying to modify to conform to the law, what's the problem? They are law-abiding.

    And oh yea, the dreaded 50 caliber super airplane killing sniper rifle. The media loves to spin that one. First of all, this new darling target of the gun banners is using a 90 year old cartridge designed by a man that has been dead since 1926.

    I guess in a stretch, you could shoot down an airliner with it, if the aircraft and shooter were at the same altitude and if the target aircraft turned at precisely the right angle to the shooter and if the shooter was accustomed to leading a target enough to make a shot at that speed and if the bullet passed through the cockpit and killed both the pilot and the co-pilot at the same time. You only get one shot with a bolt action rifle at a fast moving target. Media hype.

    This video does indeed say it all. It says don't run to an anti-gun group for impartial journalism. It shows to what length gun banners will go to spin something their way. Am I to assume that a video showing Obama supporters protesting the world monetary fund means that all democrats are anti United Nations? Give me a break. This piece of "video journalism" is obvious garbage.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "I believe if I were a gun owner, I'd want to disassociate myself from the folks in this video."

    I think we make ourselves pretty clear. Of course anti-gun bloggers like you would choose otherwise, as did the people who shot and edited their video.

    "Can anyone explain to me what the connection with Hitler is and how widespread it is in the gun world?"
    Pretty widespread for multiple reasons. He's the #1 example of a Despotic Dictator. #2. He disarmed the non-Aryans before exterminating them #3. WWII was a big war and has a HUGE collector's market. This goes for all forces who fought, but the media gets all bent out of shape over people collecting Nazi SS Uniforms, but not French, Itallian, or Imperial Japanese, which are just as prevolent.

    "Do any black people go to these things? Or Jews?"

    Of course they do. I personally shoot with several people who I know are Jewish. I'm sure there are several more I don't know are. I was an instructor at a Woman On Target event a few years ago
    http://www.nrahq.org/women/wot.asp
    About 60% of the Atendees were black women.

    "What about the modification of weapons to make them legal?" Ummm if a law says I can't have a gun with a bayonet lug, what's wrong with me buying a gun without one?

    If the law says pre 1994 Magazine holding more than 10 rounds are legal, while post '94 magazine are illigal, what's wrong with me buying pre-94 mags?
    "Are gun owners generally law abiding except when it comes to laws they disagree with?"
    Unlike you Mike, I follow the law.
    "Isn't there something wrong with claiming to be a "straight shooter" but encouraging these practices of skirting the law?"
    Somthing is either legal or illigal. Speed limit is 55, and I drive 55 am I "Skirting the law" or following it? (I expect an answer for that, it's not "rhetorical", Mike!)

    "The sniper rifle that can be disassembled and stored in a backpack or briefcase, is for what exactly?" Target practice and ease of transport?

    My Buddy and I like Mosin Nagant Rifles. He drives a Mazda 3. We take my truck to the gun club because our Mosin Nagant 91/30 Rifles won't fit in his trunk. We CAN fit them in his backseat, but Mass law is a bit goofy with that.

    "This was the 50 calibre one that was banned because supposedly it could shoot down an airplane." They can't. Sorry.

    " Is there some reason for being able to transport it so surreptitiously?" Carrying around a 35 Pound rifle in a large bag is surreptitious to you?

    "I think this video says it all."

    It does say a lot, doesn't it?

    It says "We can't win on facts, so we'll just have to work on fear!"

    So did you support Bush's "War on Terror" Mike? It essentially used the same playbook.

    I'm serious, did you?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mike - Please go read my most recent post on Blumenthal's article.

    He's not just stretching the truth Mike, he's flat out lying.

    You'd think a reporter might do actual research....I guess not.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Not going to watch the video.

    I'll stipulate that at a gun show, you will find weirdos. You will also find weirdos at gatherings of almost any other group.

    The arguments I've seen about racist and nazis at gun shows aren't ever pro-nazi, but rather about freedom of speech and whether a private organizer should restrict ideas. Most of us are uncomfortable with the association.

    What about the modifications of cars and trucks to make them legal? Should the original Hummer be banned from civilian use because it was originally military, or should it be allowed if it is modified to meet civilian standards? How about European cars modified outside the factory to meet US standards?

    Many guns have to be modified to meet California standards--they retain a stricter version of the Assault Weapons ban. Should a gun that was made for the Arizona market be forever banned from sale in California even if it is later modified to meet Cali standards?

    There is a federal ban on guns over .50 caliber, with informal exemptions for shotguns "particularly suited for sporting purposes". .50 is the largest of what is left...and where it is banned, people complain about the .48 caliber loophole...

    What makes a sniper rifle different than a long-range target rifle? (Hint: there is less difference than between an "assault weapon" and other guns)

    I prefer to use containers that don't look like they must contain guns when I transport, to avoid attention of thieves, and to avoid freaking out my neighbors. If I shot rifles, I'd like one that easily broke down and stored in a case that didn't look like a rifle case.

    We don't have enough minorities in gun activities. I've heard a whole lot of discussion on how we can work to change that, and none on how to preserve our white dominance.

    ...and the idea that they were selling working rocket propelled grenades and bazookas is unlikely in the extreme, and multiple federal felonies if true.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Meanwhile you have a pretty weak record of answering our questions?

    Why is that?
    I'd guess because your 'questions' aren't really 'questions' but rather in-your-face crap about your 'rights' to amass an arsenal based on an inane interpretation of an arcane Amendment that is currently meaningless.

    But then, I could be wrong and just one of those anti-gun, Obama-loving socialists who want to destroy your way of life.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I certainly don't deny that the piece is biased and edited for effect, but is the stereotype gun owner represented there really misleading?

    I have the greatest respect for Sevesteen's take on things, but explaining the Nazi business as just freedom of speech, seems a bit of a stretch to me. Aren't the Aryan Nation guys and all the other groups like them into guns? Don't they go to gun shows? Aren't they into all that hitler crap?

    ReplyDelete
  8. "Why is that?I'd guess because your 'questions' aren't really 'questions' but rather in-your-face crap about your 'rights' to amass an arsenal based on an inane interpretation of an arcane Amendment that is currently meaningless."

    Comming from the man who cried and took in his comments section because people were refuting the wrong stuff he was saying.

    Preach on Muddy!

    ReplyDelete
  9. "Aren't the Aryan Nation guys and all the other groups like them into guns? Don't they go to gun shows? Aren't they into all that hitler crap?"

    Yes, crazy radical hate groups like guns...Do they go to gun shows? Well did you read anything above? Maybe incognito, But I doubt they'd get a table for their group at any gunshow I'd ever seen...especially since JPFO has a table at EVERY gun show EVERYWHERE.

    Again, all the "Hitler Crap" I've always seen is either political propaganda (Watch your rights, Hitler can happen again) or WWII Collectibles.

    Any reason why you want to distort the truth yourself Mike, with claiming that hate groups hang out at gunshows?

    ReplyDelete
  10. I have the greatest respect for Sevesteen's take on things, but explaining the Nazi business as just freedom of speech, seems a bit of a stretch to me. Aren't the Aryan Nation guys and all the other groups like them into guns? Don't they go to gun shows? Aren't they into all that hitler crap?
    I am glad everyone here realizes that video was edited for bias. Again though, this video in their attempt to paint all gun owners as Nazi's failed to show more than tables of Military Collectibles. Further, so what if Aryan Nation guys are into guns? Does that mean every gun owner is a Nazi? There are over 80 Million gun owners in the United States. If any but a very small minority were all Nazis, things would be a lot different.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Quite right Mud Rake,

    I hate "in your face crap" too. I would rather just have a discussion back and forth. So, how about clearing some things up that were in your post:

    1. Why is the 2nd Amendment Arcane?

    2. How can an inalienable right be meaningless?

    3. What constitutes an arsenal? How many small arms do you have to own to be considered an arsenal?

    ReplyDelete
  12. I certainly don't deny that the piece is biased and edited for effect, but is the stereotype gun owner represented there really misleading?Again a problem of definitions. There are racist assholes who are interested in guns-both Aryan Nation and Black Panther types. I don't count them as part of the lawful gun culture. I also haven't noticed nazi or aryan crap at the few gun shows I've been to--I've seen much more of it at flea markets.

    Gun control has been a distinct part of racist law. "It would give to persons of the negro race, ...the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, ...the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went." Many state gun control laws were designed to prohibit gun ownership by blacks without overtly stating that blacks couldn't own or carry guns.

    And why are you blaming gun owners for the actions of White supremacists--wouldn't it be more logical to blame white men?

    I want the speech of white supremacist assholes to be public, so we can both keep an eye on them and ridicule them. There aren't many with a room temperature or better IQ that will find what they have to say logical. Unlike the KKK-associated people who helped draft a lot of Southern gun control laws, I want blacks to be able to defend against the few of these assholes that might take physical action, and I don't want them again relying completely on law enforcement that won't protect them--If it comes to needing the Deacons for Defense or similar, I want them armed and able.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I came away from these events with a portrait of a heavily armed, tightly organized movement incited by right-wing radio to a fever-pitched resentment of President Obama...

    Even with the editing, I didn't see much that'd make me think these people are "organized" or "at a fever pitch". The host interviewed a decent number of people who fell in generally the same place on the political spectrum, but I would easily have gotten the same results if I'd asked around about abortion at the Rochester Erotic Arts Show; that wouldn't mean that the demographic of "people who appreciate erotic art" is made up of members of an extremist pro-abortion cabal. Gun shows skew conservative. That isn't especially scary.

    As for the Nazis, I saw a table of colectors' books, a table of white-supremacist propaganda, and two historical photos obtained somewhere, somehow and shown out of context. Lots of people collect militaria, gun owners are more likely to do so than, say, photography enthusiasts, and the Nazis produced a lot of effective, high quality, elegantly designed guns. The connection in _interest_ is clear, but that doesn't imply any sympathy for Nazi ideology (at the same art show, I had a conversation with one of my techies about Nazi uniforms; she loves them and wants one very badly... And she's a Jewish lesbian). So keep this in perspective: this guy went looking for evidence of Nazis at gun shows, and he found one booth and no shots of anybody buying anything.

    ...but is the stereotype gun owner represented there really misleading?

    In my experience, yes it is. I know about a dozen gun enthusiasts in real life, and exactly one of them is a straight white male: me. All of them, white, black, gay, bi, left, and right (and all those demographics are represented) believe in the right to choose your own lifestyle, and would laugh in your face if you suggested one race was better than another. I know far, far, far more gun owners online, and if the Nazis at gun shops ever even come up, the context is always an eyeroll and a joke. They're a joke in the community, and are generally just dismissed, if they're even thought about in the first place.

    I know that there are white supremacists with guns out there, and I'm sure white supremacists go to gun shows. But Nazis are to gun owners and gun-show attendees what clinic bombers are to anti-abortion activists, or what ecoterrorists are to environmentalists: they don't represent the group, they don't represent the movement, and judging the one by the other is grossly unfair.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Incidentally, regarding "skirting" the law, I have only one thing to add to what others have said about it: If the law is so easy to "skirt", what exactly was the law accomplishing in the first place?

    The California ban on rifles chambered for .50 BMG caliber was always a political calculation just like the "assault weapons" ban: demonize one gun, and use it as a stepping stone for others. We can go into why these guns aren';t actually dangerous if you'd like, but even if all the propaganda was true, the .50 ban would still be useless because there are many other cartridges that are as powerful or moreso. If California had really seen an interest in banning guns that were "too powerful", it could have easily passed a law banning "Cartridges that generate a muzzle energy of 18,000 joules or greater", the same way Britain limits the "power" of airguns.

    Gun control advocates who talk about manufacturers "skirting" the law by removing restricted features are completely mystifying to me. I mean, if your city passed a law banning cars with spoilers, and so you removed the spoiler from your car, would it be reasonable for advocates of the "gangsta car ban" to accuse you of skirting the law?

    ReplyDelete
  15. I have Jewish family. Now while I do not consider myself Jewish, because I am very secular. I do not go to many gun shows, because I do not have a lot of free time, or money to spend. I will say, that in any gathering you will see some strange, misguided, or stupid people.

    As for guns, I myself would own a Walther PP/PPK, or a Luger P08. Personally the Sauer 38H looks similar to the Walther PP, but it is still a sharp looking piece.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I find that many people who are very pro-gun, as in they don't want any kind of controls on guns at all, they don't even like background checks or anything (and yes I know personally some people who feel this way, and they remind me of the people in that video, and are pretty normal until you bring up any of the hot topics) are very afraid of the government (and in fear of all kinds of other things, like illegal immigrants). They think that the government is corrupt (can't argue with that) and that they are going to take away everyone's guns and round them all up and put them into re-education camps. I feel that perhaps they read 1984 or A Handmaid's Tale one time too many.

    From my perspective, the chances of that happening on a probability scale, are pretty much nil. For one thing, our government has a hard time agreeing to do anything, even mundane things. Also, everything is very transparent now with the Internet. It just wouldn't fly IMHO.

    Secondly, if you think this through, what good would having automatic weapons do you? You're going to fight the military, who has tanks and fighter jets, with M-4s? That makes a good story for the fiction section, but is total lulz in my mind. Oh, there's ways to fight oppressive regimes, and it doesn't require heavy firepower. But then again I'm creative.

    On the flip side, I'm in Texas, and even the liberals here have guns. Just about everyone has at least a deer rifle. Liberals like venison too :P

    I am for background checks on guns. I believe this should include gun shows. I don't want some wacko or criminal able to walk into a store and buy a gun no problem. I understand that they can and do get them from the black market, but you should at least make it difficult for them. A law abiding citizen should be able to own a gun. But as I said above, the argument that you need an M-4 or an AK-47 to defend yourself from a corrupt government, in my head is just flawed. Now, there are probably a few people who just like firing these guns at ranges, and don't have them for that reason, but I think that's probably a rarity.

    As an aside, I have a nostalgia for more primitive weapons such as bow and arrows and swords and such. I think there's more art to it, and more skill required than firing a gun. Anyway, that's just my two cents, and we know what that can buy. Not a thing.
    "...let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear... is fear itself..."--FDR

    ReplyDelete
  17. A World Quite Mad, Thanks for the comment. I like your views on these issues. I'm not sure how we're gonna improve the gun violence problem without requiring some sacrifices of the gun owners, though. It's good for us to keep in mind, that in Texas, even the liberals have guns.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Wow MikeB,

    Are you paying people to come to your blog on drop every gun control canard or are you just lucky?

    Quite Mad World hits just about every one of them.

    very pro-gun, as in they don't want any kind of controls on guns at all, they don't even like background checks or anything (and yes I know personally some people who feel this wayAre there are few people who don't want any controls on firearms, yes. Just like there are a few people who want no laws against sex, marriage, or any other activity. Every group has a fringe element.

    and they remind me of the people in that video,Nicely implied statement that in order to believe that "shall not be infringed" makes a person racist, a member of the white supremacy groups. A very sly statement implying many gun owners are racists.

    pretty normal until you bring up any of the hot topics)Again, a nice statement implying that many gun owners are mentally unstable. Because everyone knows if you believe in the 2nd amendment rights you must be off your rocker, right? Nice Slur.

    are very afraid of the governmentAgain, instead of being aware of history, being aware of the path of governments, instead of being aware of the limitations imposed by the Constitution and wanting to keep those in place....we are "afraid". Sorry but not true. There is a major difference between fear and respect. I respect the power of the government and seek to maintain the checks and balances on it. so that we don't get a government ran by people like Stalin, Pol Pot, etc. Big difference between respect and fear but gun owners are always accused of being afraid.

    (and in fear of all kinds of other things, like illegal immigrants)Again, another slur that gun owners are racists. Sorry not true, we respect the rule of law and ask that people follow it. We also recognize the dangers of open borders and seek to secure the border. The current H1N1 influenza shows the dangers of an unsecured border and a bad immigration policy.

    They think that the government is corrupt (can't argue with that) and that they are going to take away everyone's guns and round them all up and put them into re-education camps. I feel that perhaps they read 1984 or A Handmaid's Tale one time too many. Nicely done, implying that gun owners are paranoid instead of vigilant. We gun owners would never remember that America has rounded up people and put them in re-education camps before....ala the Japanese Americans in WWII.

    Instead of stating that gun owners are vigilant against that possibility, Mad implies that we think it will happen, not that it can happen again. Instead of talking about the gun confiscations that HAS HAPPENED Mad implies we are paranoid. Has gun confiscation happened, yes and recently -- New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina....but let's not let facts stand in the way of slurring gun owners, eh?

    Then Mad goes into the "Nobody stands a chance against the US military". That ignores a couple of facts.

    First, people in Afghanistan and Iraq are did well against the military.

    Second, it also ignores the fact that the military is composed of American citizens who might on the same side as those paranoid gun owners. http://oath-keepers.blogspot.com/

    So, the contest might not be as one sided as supposed.

    Again, this is assuming that we let the situation get to that point. Gun owners are some of the most politically active groups around and getting more so. We recognize, perhaps belatedly, that our rights are under attack by people like Mad, Mike, Mud and others.

    On the flip side, I'm in Texas, and even the liberals here have guns. Just about everyone has at least a deer rifle. Liberals like venison too :P first thing he's said that I agree with. This isn't a left right issue. It is an authoritarian / libertarian issue.

    I am for background checks on guns. I believe this should include gun shows.BING, BING, BING. We have a winner, the gun show canard makes an appearance. Never mind reality where an FFL must perform a background check no matter where the sale happens. What he wants to close is the right of the people to sell private property to another person without government approval.

    I don't want some wacko or criminal able to walk into a store and buy a gun no problem. I understand that they can and do get them from the black market, but you should at least make it difficult for them.And does Mad show any way that any proposed law would make it difficult for someone to buy a gun on the black market? Nope. Neither does MikeB.

    So, how about it. Can you show what laws would make it more difficult to buy a gun on the black market?

    A law abiding citizen should be able to own a gunAnother agreement point. Hurrah.

    But as I said above, the argument that you need an M-4 or an AK-47 to defend yourself from a corrupt government, in my head is just flawedFirst, NEED has nothing to do with it. It isn't the right to keep and bear only the arms you need.
    Second, the law is fairly well established and becoming more so. Heller showed that the right isn't tied to militia, that bans are illegal, that people have a right to functional firearms. The recent, but poorly covered Nordyke Decision incorporated the Heller decision to cover state laws.

    I think the only canard Mad missed was the technology one. As in you can have as many muzzleloaders as you want.

    Overall grade....C+.

    Not enough hysteria, and a couple of points you actually agreed with gun owners on. Mad, keep up the effort, read the Brady Campaign website a little more.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I guess Mud Rake was not able or decided not to answer my questions about his post. Oh well.

    Update, I went to a gunshow today so I thought I would share my observations as related to this thread.

    I did not see any Nazi literature or propaganda. I did see several Nazi daggers and bayonets and a few Nazi marked rifles. I also saw plenty of other WWII collectibles from other countries. In fact, the offerings from the U.S., Italy, Austria, England, France and even Poland outnumbered the Nazi relics.

    A woman was selling flags. She had mostly American flags and I did not see any Nazi flags. The American flags encompassed all periods of American history including a few confederate variations that I had never seen before. I bought a Betsy Ross flag.

    I did see and here plenty of anti-Obama sentiment though. Mostly related to his cabinet's gun control schemes but some comments, shirts and bumber stickers were anti-Obama-tax too. I saw nothing racist or threatening.

    All in all, a good bunch of very polite people. I'm sure if the Gun Guy's videographers were there they could have found a nutcase or two to highlight or show my 15 year old checking out a Tommy Gun and Russian super secret double naught sniper rifle or some such thing.

    Aside from some over-priced primers and some inert rounds, I saw nothing in the double-evil terrifying anti-aircraft uber scary 50 caliber sniper variety.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Bob S. your entire post falls flat. You just blamed immigrants for Swine Flu. Travelers brought it back, they were American Citizens, high school students none the less. Come off it. Get your head out of your ass and turn off Rush Limbaugh and Faux News.

    Also, you assume too much. I didn't say "all" gun owners are anything, which you say repeatedly, putting words in my mouth. Gun owners are diverse, and a few of them WHO I KNOW PERSONALLY are a bunch of ignorant, fearful one-step shy of certifiable whack jobs. Did I say all of them were? No, I did not. I am speaking from first hand knowledge about people I know. Think real hard back to elementary school, long time ago, but you remember how your teacher told you to beware of statements that start with "Everyone" or "All of this or that". They're absolute statements, and are usually false.

    You say I want to take your rights away, that your rights are under attack by people like me? See this is the problem. So many people turn things in to a black and white issue. If the liberals aren't with us on every issue they must be against us! If the conservatives aren't with us on every issue then they must be against us! Well that makes it easy for the government to Divide, and Conquer. Let me tell you something. I am willing to die to defend the Constitution of the United States, that same piece of paper that G.W. Bush wiped his ass on. But I'm nothing but a socialist commie fascist because I don't agree 100% with you.

    BTW, what is this about being paid to post here? I could use the money LOL

    ReplyDelete
  21. Thanks to A World Quite Mad for going toe to toe with Bob. As one gun owner to another, maybe he'll hear you better than he hears me, but if my experience means anything, you shouldn't ever think what you've just said will shut him up.

    Fat White Man, Thanks for the first hand report on the gun show. What state was that in? I don't remember where you're from, if I ever knew.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Mad,

    Sorry but your counter falls flat.
    You just blamed immigrants for Swine Flu.My comment was "The current H1N1 influenza shows the dangers of an unsecured border and a bad immigration policy."I didn't blame immigrants, I pointed out that a pandemic can be spread by a porous border and a bad policy. I didn't say this one was caused by it.


    Mad, I don't think you write what I wrote because I'm not seeing that I said all gun owners are anything. I think I was very clear in not using inclusive statements like that.

    But I'm nothing but a socialist commie fascist because I don't agree 100% with you.You must be self identifying because I said nothing like that at all. I don't expect everyone to agree with me but was pointing out the proven canards in your comment.

    As far as getting paid, it was a joke and I figure if people can accuse me of being a paid NRA shill I would wonder if the gun control crowd has starting doing the same thing.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Hey Mike,

    The show was in Dayton Ohio--I do live in Southern Ohio.

    One more comment as to the gun show loophole nonsense. While gun shows in the past, I have seen a lot of folks walking around selling stuff, this one, not quite so much. Further, other than a few vendors selling non-firearms, I did not see any "private sellers" with tables. Usually there are a few and at the last show I attended in Columbus Ohio, I did sell a handgun to one and bought a rifle at another. All firearms tables I saw at this show were FFL dealers making NICS checks. I didn't buy any guns--I'm afraid I have reached my quota for the year--but I did get some powder and primers.

    ReplyDelete
  24. FWM, Thanks for the first hand and recent report on the Ohio gun show you attended.

    Do you think it's different in Mississippi or Alabama as far as the Nazi and racist stuff goes? In Ohio, is there a limit to the number of guns a private guy can sell? You said you'd reached your quota for the year, but is there anything stopping you from buying from a private seller? Why is the gun show loophole, nonsense? If it were better named, say the private seller's loophole, would that be OK?

    ReplyDelete
  25. There is no limit to the number of guns you can buy in Ohio--Quota is more than likely a budgetary one, rather than legal.

    If there were more racist crap at Mississippi gun shows, wouldn't that indicate the problem was the area rather than the show?

    Why is complying with the law so often called a "loophole" by anti-gun people? Do we also have "prescription drug" and "alcohol and tobacco" loopholes to drug policy?

    A "law abiding gun owner" loophole to gun ban efforts?

    ReplyDelete
  26. "is there a limit to the number of guns a private guy can sell?"

    Yes and no. If you are selling off a bunch of guns via private sale and many start showing up as used in crimes the ATF will start asking questions.

    If you set up a table / booth at a gun show and start selling armfuls of guns you're going to have law enforcement all over you.

    As far as I know the ATF has no real set criteria for determining such, but they WILL go after you if you start acting like a gun dealer rather than just some guy selling off a few guns from his private collection.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I have never attended a gun show in Alabama or Mississippi so I don't know.

    My quota is imposed upon me by my wife and my bank account. In Ohio, there are no limits to how many guns you can buy.

    The "gunshow loophole" is nonsense because 1) there is no loophole.
    2) it is a non-existent problem. Fewer than 1/2 of 1% of guns used in crimes are purchased by a criminal at a gun show. 3) the media portrays the "loophole" as allowing gun dealers to bypass the law and NICS checks when in truth any licensed dealer is bound to the same laws inside the show as they are outside of it. There is no magical law-free gun area as Helmke and the media would have you believe. 4) most all laws addressing the so-called loophole seek to bar private sales of any kind anywhere--not just in gun shows. Actually, you would probably find more guun owners willing to put up with a gunshow "loophole" law that only required gunshow transactions to be completed by NICS. The real problem is that since the number of private deals at shows are really insignificantly small, the proposed laws always seek to ban private transfers anywhere-not just gunshows which of course is unacceptable. So the answer to your question is no, naming it a private-seller would not make it better--actually that is the heart of the problem with the "gunshow loophole".

    ReplyDelete
  28. ""is there a limit to the number of guns a private guy can sell?"

    Yes and no. If you are selling off a bunch of guns via private sale and many start showing up as used in crimes the ATF will start asking questions."
    How does that work? If they were private sales there are no records so how could the ATF detect a source if "many start showing up as used in crimes?"

    ReplyDelete
  29. How does that work? If they were private sales there are no records so how could the ATF detect a source if "many start showing up as used in crimes?"

    The private sales that you made wouldn't be recorded, but any guns that you bought from a dealer and subsequently resold privately would be traced to you if they were subsequently used in crimes.

    FWIW, the ATF's lack of standards for what constitutes a "dealer" strikes me as a fairly serious problem. Lots of people would love to register as "dealers" and do background checks so that they could avoid the draconian restrictions on shipping firearms, but the ATF policy is to only issue FFL permits to people who meet vague, inconsistent, and unspecified standards for being "dealers".

    ReplyDelete
  30. "How does that work? If they were private sales there are no records so how could the ATF detect a source if "many start showing up as used in crimes?""

    Yes, there's no record of the private sale, but there is a record of my original purchase of the firearm. I sell it private sale to someone else. It shows up used in a murder and the cops will run the SN. This trace data tells them what gun shop / FFL I purchased my gun from. They talk to the FFL, and he gives them my info since he records it all (including the SN) in his bound book as required by Federal law.

    If this begins happening for a number of guns I've purchased the ATF is going to take a serious interest in me.

    ReplyDelete