Sometimes stupid loses

"tony cooper" wrote in message
...


It is not just the Supreme Court's opinions that matter, though. The
opinions of the officials of Suffolk County, New York, in passing the
ordinances or laws that have imposed the restrictions that at least

I assume those are the laws of the State of New York rather than Suffolk
County. Laws that intrusive aren't usually created at the county level, as
far as I know.

one of us feels to be unreasonable, matter to him. The opinions of
the legislators in Florida matter to me because they are not taking
any steps to tighten up what I consider to be unreasonably lax rules
controlling the sale/purchase of guns.

I am not at all advocating that gun sales/purchases be halted in
Florida, but I do feel that flea markets, gun show vendors, and
private parties should be under the same restrictions that gun dealers
are under. I do understand that such sales/purchases are more
difficult to police, but the same laws should apply to all.

I'll bet that in most if not all states they already do. The much-touted
"gun show loophole" doesn't exist, except in the minds of rabidly anti-gun
politicians and activists. There is no special "loophole" that permits sales
at gun shows that would be illegal elsewhere.

My state has always required that the state police be notified of handgun
transfers or sales between individuals, by the party making the transfer,
with pertinent details. As you say, such things are difficult to police, and
undoubtedly some people don't bother. The state-required process in recent
years has become much more complicated, involves more paperwork, checking
and permission of the state police before making the transfer. All of which
just means, of course, that fewer people will bother to obey the law. That
is inevitably the way it goes.

On Sat, 9 Apr 2011 15:12:23 -0400, "Neil Harrington"
wrote:


"tony cooper" wrote in message
.. .


It is not just the Supreme Court's opinions that matter, though. The
opinions of the officials of Suffolk County, New York, in passing the
ordinances or laws that have imposed the restrictions that at least

I assume those are the laws of the State of New York rather than Suffolk
County. Laws that intrusive aren't usually created at the county level, as
far as I know.

Assumptions don't cut it. New York is a "May-Issue" state, meaning
that individual licensing officials have the option of placing
additional restrictions on the issuance of Pistol Licenses. There are
59 pistol licensing jurisdictions in New York, two of which are in
Suffolk County. The jurisdiction in which the poster cited the rules
may include the New York State requirements (New York State Penal Code
Law - Section 400), but may *add* requirements not included in Section
400.

one of us feels to be unreasonable, matter to him. The opinions of
the legislators in Florida matter to me because they are not taking
any steps to tighten up what I consider to be unreasonably lax rules
controlling the sale/purchase of guns.

I am not at all advocating that gun sales/purchases be halted in
Florida, but I do feel that flea markets, gun show vendors, and
private parties should be under the same restrictions that gun dealers
are under. I do understand that such sales/purchases are more
difficult to police, but the same laws should apply to all.

I'll bet that in most if not all states they already do. The much-touted
"gun show loophole" doesn't exist, except in the minds of rabidly anti-gun
politicians and activists. There is no special "loophole" that permits sales
at gun shows that would be illegal elsewhere.

That's a rather typical NRA-style twisting of facts to deny a problem.
True, there is no loophole specified for sales/purchases at gun shows.
Not that I said there was.

What is true is that the rules for FFLs (Federal Firearms License
holders) do not apply to non FFL holder vendors at Florida gun shows
or flea markets unless there is a local ordinance governing such
sales. Therefore, private firearm sales between Florida residents are
not processed the same as firearm sales by an FFL. No background
checks, for example. No requirement to show ID that establishes
either party is a Florida resident.

This means a convicted felon, a certified lunatic, or anyone else can
walk into such a place, buy a firearm, and walk directly out with it.

That's what we refer to as the "loophole". I don't have to be a rabid
anti-gun person - and I am not - to recognize that this is a dangerous
and unfair (to legitimate FFL holders) situation.

The "loophole" is an omission, not a clause that permits. I'm not
going to research the non-control at gun shows/fleamarkets in other
states, but your statement about "most if not all states" doesn't
wash. Only 17 states regulate private firearm sales at gun shows.

Like many - if not most - gun supporters, you want the issue to be
black-and-white. Either people support gun ownership without
restriction or they are "rabid anti-gun activists".

I'm in neither of those groups. I grew up with guns, I own guns, I
took my daughter and my son to a gun range where they were taught how
to handle and shoot guns, and I respect the right of other people to
own guns...with reasonable restrictions.

For example, I think it is sheer madness to try to enact the
legislation that allows open-carry on college campuses as was
attempted in Florida. Actually, the legislation would have prohibited
the college from prohibiting open-carry on their campus, but the
effect was to allow it. If the university feels it unsafe to allow
guns at a college football tailgate party, the university should have
the ability to prohibit it.

That legislation was initiated and supported by legislators backed by
NRA lobbying efforts and sanctioned by the NRA.














My state has always required that the state police be notified of handgun
transfers or sales between individuals, by the party making the transfer,
with pertinent details. As you say, such things are difficult to police, and
undoubtedly some people don't bother. The state-required process in recent
years has become much more complicated, involves more paperwork, checking
and permission of the state police before making the transfer. All of which
just means, of course, that fewer people will bother to obey the law. That
is inevitably the way it goes.



--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

Neil Harrington wrote:
"tony cooper" wrote in message
...


It is not just the Supreme Court's opinions that matter, though. The
opinions of the officials of Suffolk County, New York, in passing the
ordinances or laws that have imposed the restrictions that at least

I assume those are the laws of the State of New York rather than
Suffolk County. Laws that intrusive aren't usually created at the
county level, as far as I know.

one of us feels to be unreasonable, matter to him. The opinions of
the legislators in Florida matter to me because they are not taking
any steps to tighten up what I consider to be unreasonably lax rules
controlling the sale/purchase of guns.

I am not at all advocating that gun sales/purchases be halted in
Florida, but I do feel that flea markets, gun show vendors, and
private parties should be under the same restrictions that gun
dealers are under. I do understand that such sales/purchases are
more difficult to police, but the same laws should apply to all.

I'll bet that in most if not all states they already do. The
much-touted "gun show loophole" doesn't exist, except in the minds of
rabidly anti-gun politicians and activists. There is no special
"loophole" that permits sales at gun shows that would be illegal
elsewhere.
My state has always required that the state police be notified of
handgun transfers or sales between individuals, by the party making
the transfer, with pertinent details. As you say, such things are
difficult to police, and undoubtedly some people don't bother. The
state-required process in recent years has become much more
complicated, involves more paperwork, checking and permission of the
state police before making the transfer. All of which just means, of
course, that fewer people will bother to obey the law. That is
inevitably the way it goes.

And well they shouldn't. Unenforceable laws shouldn't be on the books at
all. Also, in this particular case, registration of firearms is an
infringement of your right to keep and bear, and is unconstitutional on the
face of it.