6 ms·

>Also making sure there are no secondary sales without background checks, which is supported by (I think?) the majority of Americans would help. It's only supp

>Also making sure there are no secondary sales without background checks, which is supported by (I think?) the majority of Americans would help. It's only supported by the majority of Americans until you ask them about specific situations and policy implications. Instead of a generic "Do you support universal background checks?" question they should try asking "Should you have to perform a background check to loan a gun to your roommate to take to the range?" or "Should you have to perform a background check to loan a gun to your next door neighbor who is worried her violent stalker ex-boyfriend has figured out where she lives?" and you'll find much lower levels of support.

kelnos 4y ago
That's a bit of a straw man. Even closing loopholes around private sales would improve the situation somewhat, and a majority of Americans definitely support that.
- HideousKojima 4y ago
  >That's a bit of a straw man. Not at all, the current state-level bans on private sales only make exceptions for immediate family members and a few other specific groups/situations, they would make the behavior in my questions a felony. Here's Washington State's exceptions (note that c would not apply to my violent ex scenario because the violent ex would need to be actually present at the time of the transfer and threatening harm): (4) This section does not apply to: (a) A transfer between immediate family members, which for this subsection shall be limited to spouses, domestic partners, parents, parents-in-law, children, siblings, siblings-in-law, grandparents, grandchildren, nieces, nephews, first cousins, aunts, and uncles, that is a bona fide gift or loan; (b) The sale or transfer of an antique firearm; (c) A temporary transfer of possession of a firearm if such transfer is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to the person to whom the firearm is transferred if: (i) The temporary transfer only lasts as long as immediately necessary to prevent such imminent death or great bodily harm; and (ii) The person to whom the firearm is transferred is not prohibited from possessing firearms under state or federal law; (d) A temporary transfer of possession of a firearm if: (i) The transfer is intended to prevent suicide or self-inflicted great bodily harm; (ii) the transfer lasts only as long as reasonably necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm; and (iii) the firearm is not utilized by the transferee for any purpose for the duration of the temporary transfer; (e) Any law enforcement or corrections agency and, to the extent the person is acting within the course and scope of his or her employment or official duties, any law enforcement or corrections officer, United States marshal, member of the armed forces of the United States or the national guard, or federal official; (f) A federally licensed gunsmith who receives a firearm solely for the purposes of service or repair, or the return of the firearm to its owner by the federally licensed gunsmith; (g) The temporary transfer of a firearm (i) between spouses or domestic partners; (ii) if the temporary transfer occurs, and the firearm is kept at all times, at an established shooting range authorized by the governing body of the jurisdiction in which such range is located; (iii) if the temporary transfer occurs and the transferee's possession of the firearm is exclusively at a lawful organized competition involving the use of a firearm, or while participating in or practicing for a performance by an organized group that uses firearms as a part of the performance; (iv) to a person who is under eighteen years of age for lawful hunting, sporting, or educational purposes while under the direct supervision and control of a responsible adult who is not prohibited from possessing firearms; (v) under circumstances in which the transferee and the firearm remain in the presence of the transferor; or (vi) while hunting if the hunting is legal in all places where the person to whom the firearm is transferred possesses the firearm and the person to whom the firearm is transferred has completed all training and holds all licenses or permits required for such hunting, provided that any temporary transfer allowed by this subsection is permitted only if the person to whom the firearm is transferred is not prohibited from possessing firearms under state or federal law; (h) A person who (i) acquired a firearm other than a pistol by operation of law upon the death of the former owner of the firearm or (ii) acquired a pistol by operation of law upon the death of the former owner of the pistol within the preceding sixty days. At the end of the sixty-day period, the person must either have lawfully transferred the pistol or must have contacted the department of licensing to notify the department that he or she has possession of the pistol and intends to retain possession of the pistol, in compliance with all federal and state laws; or (i) A sale or transfer when the purchaser or transferee is a licensed collector and the firearm being sold or transferred is a curio or relic.
  - ChrisLomont 4y ago
    >they would make the behavior in my questions a felony. They would also stop of lot of existing homicides, which are also felonies already being committed. Your cases are honestly quite contrived and rare, especially against the number of homicides and other crimes using straw purchases. I think most people would trade common case homicides for rarer cases you pick. The stats are pretty clear on which cases are most common. That is why the support for such laws is so widespread and bipartisan.
    - XorNot 4y ago
      The cases are so contrived they do not happen. Just think of the situation he's proposing: your neighbour who you apparently trust enough to give a loaded gun too, to potentially kill a person with, does not have a gun themselves but apparently is completely capable of using it? And you know, this problem has to be solved right now: too much of an imposition to look out for them while they go and buy a gun from one of the numerous gun stores - but giving away a loaded gun, that's what you want to do (no one would do this in this scenario).
HWR_14 4y ago
> "Should you have to perform a background check to loan a gun to your roommate to take to the range?" or "Should you have to perform a background check to loan a gun to your next door neighbor who is worried her violent stalker ex-boyfriend has figured out where she lives?" Yes to both. It takes 30 seconds to run the check. They're not required to interview kindergarden classmates or something crazy.
- HideousKojima 4y ago
  It takes a trip to your nearest FFL willing to run a background check, and who will usually charge for it. And oops! Your next-door neighbor's name matched a different person who has a criminal record, and she now has to wait three days to transfer the gun. And oops again! She already got raped and beaten to death by her ex in the time it took for NICS to clear her.
  - ChrisLomont 4y ago
    Alternatively, we can continue to have mass killings, single killings, and lots of crime by guns bought by people that should have been blocked. For every person you cherry picked getting raped that would have stopped the assailant with a gun, many more are killed under the current system. Instead of picking outlying events and trying to put them forth as common, why not look at common events to start with? You'll get much better policy and understanding from that.
    - xienze 4y ago
      > Alternatively, we can continue to have mass killings, single killings, and lots of crime by guns bought by people that should have been blocked. Sounds possible in theory, but not so much in practice. Let's say I live my whole life as a model citizen, then one day buy a gun with the intent to kill a bunch of people. No background check in the world would deny my purchase. What now?
      - relaxing 4y ago
ChrisLomont 4y ago
>It's only supported by the majority of Americans until you ask them about specific situations and policy implications. It also seems you're trying to stack the deck in your favor. If you're going to ask questions designed to pull support away with cherry picked circumstances, then you should also ask cherry picked questions leading the other way, like pointing out how many mass shootings are done with guns that bypassed background checks. So cite your poll please. I'd like to see the questions. Or you can ask a fairly neutral question, like [1], a poll with the question "How much do you support or oppose each of the following? Requiring background checks on all gun sales" 73% strongly support, 15% somewhat support, 4% somewhat oppose, 4% strongly oppose, 5% don't know/no opinion. That's a pretty neutral question, has massive support. Let's see your data on your split questions. [1] https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000180-fe72-d0c2-a9ae-ff7250f80000&nname=playbook&nid=0000014f-1646-d88f-a1cf-5f46b7bd0000&nrid=0000014e-f115-dd93-ad7f-f91513e50001&nlid=630318 https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000180-fe72-d0c2-a9ae-ff725...
- Ancapistani 4y ago
  > [...] like pointing out how many mass shootings are done with guns that bypassed background checks. Can you name some? Better yet, can you point to data on how often this has happened? Off the top of my head, I can think of several instances where the guns were legally purchased and the shooter passed the background checks. I can think of a couple where they were stolen, and one where they were taken from a family member after that family member's murder. I can't think of any where the firearm(s) were acquired exclusively through private sale.
- R0b0t1 4y ago
  I hate to be the one, but he's right: more background checks is hilariously unpopular outside of blue cities and states. A lot of people in red states, even in cities, think that the gun regulations we have are too strong.
  - tristan957 4y ago
    Anecdote: I know many gun owners who are fine with universal background checks if they can be performed at home for free in a reasonable amount of time. I don't understand why people who want gun regulation aren't pushing for this. Free, easy, and fast background checks.

kelnos 4y ago

That's a bit of a straw man. Even closing loopholes around private sales would improve the situation somewhat, and a majority of Americans definitely support that.

HideousKojima 4y ago
>That's a bit of a straw man. Not at all, the current state-level bans on private sales only make exceptions for immediate family members and a few other specific groups/situations, they would make the behavior in my questions a felony. Here's Washington State's exceptions (note that c would not apply to my violent ex scenario because the violent ex would need to be actually present at the time of the transfer and threatening harm): (4) This section does not apply to: (a) A transfer between immediate family members, which for this subsection shall be limited to spouses, domestic partners, parents, parents-in-law, children, siblings, siblings-in-law, grandparents, grandchildren, nieces, nephews, first cousins, aunts, and uncles, that is a bona fide gift or loan; (b) The sale or transfer of an antique firearm; (c) A temporary transfer of possession of a firearm if such transfer is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to the person to whom the firearm is transferred if: (i) The temporary transfer only lasts as long as immediately necessary to prevent such imminent death or great bodily harm; and (ii) The person to whom the firearm is transferred is not prohibited from possessing firearms under state or federal law; (d) A temporary transfer of possession of a firearm if: (i) The transfer is intended to prevent suicide or self-inflicted great bodily harm; (ii) the transfer lasts only as long as reasonably necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm; and (iii) the firearm is not utilized by the transferee for any purpose for the duration of the temporary transfer; (e) Any law enforcement or corrections agency and, to the extent the person is acting within the course and scope of his or her employment or official duties, any law enforcement or corrections officer, United States marshal, member of the armed forces of the United States or the national guard, or federal official; (f) A federally licensed gunsmith who receives a firearm solely for the purposes of service or repair, or the return of the firearm to its owner by the federally licensed gunsmith; (g) The temporary transfer of a firearm (i) between spouses or domestic partners; (ii) if the temporary transfer occurs, and the firearm is kept at all times, at an established shooting range authorized by the governing body of the jurisdiction in which such range is located; (iii) if the temporary transfer occurs and the transferee's possession of the firearm is exclusively at a lawful organized competition involving the use of a firearm, or while participating in or practicing for a performance by an organized group that uses firearms as a part of the performance; (iv) to a person who is under eighteen years of age for lawful hunting, sporting, or educational purposes while under the direct supervision and control of a responsible adult who is not prohibited from possessing firearms; (v) under circumstances in which the transferee and the firearm remain in the presence of the transferor; or (vi) while hunting if the hunting is legal in all places where the person to whom the firearm is transferred possesses the firearm and the person to whom the firearm is transferred has completed all training and holds all licenses or permits required for such hunting, provided that any temporary transfer allowed by this subsection is permitted only if the person to whom the firearm is transferred is not prohibited from possessing firearms under state or federal law; (h) A person who (i) acquired a firearm other than a pistol by operation of law upon the death of the former owner of the firearm or (ii) acquired a pistol by operation of law upon the death of the former owner of the pistol within the preceding sixty days. At the end of the sixty-day period, the person must either have lawfully transferred the pistol or must have contacted the department of licensing to notify the department that he or she has possession of the pistol and intends to retain possession of the pistol, in compliance with all federal and state laws; or (i) A sale or transfer when the purchaser or transferee is a licensed collector and the firearm being sold or transferred is a curio or relic.
- ChrisLomont 4y ago
  >they would make the behavior in my questions a felony. They would also stop of lot of existing homicides, which are also felonies already being committed. Your cases are honestly quite contrived and rare, especially against the number of homicides and other crimes using straw purchases. I think most people would trade common case homicides for rarer cases you pick. The stats are pretty clear on which cases are most common. That is why the support for such laws is so widespread and bipartisan.
  - XorNot 4y ago
    The cases are so contrived they do not happen. Just think of the situation he's proposing: your neighbour who you apparently trust enough to give a loaded gun too, to potentially kill a person with, does not have a gun themselves but apparently is completely capable of using it? And you know, this problem has to be solved right now: too much of an imposition to look out for them while they go and buy a gun from one of the numerous gun stores - but giving away a loaded gun, that's what you want to do (no one would do this in this scenario).

HWR_14 4y ago

> "Should you have to perform a background check to loan a gun to your roommate to take to the range?" or "Should you have to perform a background check to loan a gun to your next door neighbor who is worried her violent stalker ex-boyfriend has figured out where she lives?" Yes to both. It takes 30 seconds to run the check. They're not required to interview kindergarden classmates or something crazy.

HideousKojima 4y ago
It takes a trip to your nearest FFL willing to run a background check, and who will usually charge for it. And oops! Your next-door neighbor's name matched a different person who has a criminal record, and she now has to wait three days to transfer the gun. And oops again! She already got raped and beaten to death by her ex in the time it took for NICS to clear her.
- ChrisLomont 4y ago
  Alternatively, we can continue to have mass killings, single killings, and lots of crime by guns bought by people that should have been blocked. For every person you cherry picked getting raped that would have stopped the assailant with a gun, many more are killed under the current system. Instead of picking outlying events and trying to put them forth as common, why not look at common events to start with? You'll get much better policy and understanding from that.
  - xienze 4y ago
    > Alternatively, we can continue to have mass killings, single killings, and lots of crime by guns bought by people that should have been blocked. Sounds possible in theory, but not so much in practice. Let's say I live my whole life as a model citizen, then one day buy a gun with the intent to kill a bunch of people. No background check in the world would deny my purchase. What now?
    - relaxing 4y ago

ChrisLomont 4y ago

>It's only supported by the majority of Americans until you ask them about specific situations and policy implications. It also seems you're trying to stack the deck in your favor. If you're going to ask questions designed to pull support away with cherry picked circumstances, then you should also ask cherry picked questions leading the other way, like pointing out how many mass shootings are done with guns that bypassed background checks. So cite your poll please. I'd like to see the questions. Or you can ask a fairly neutral question, like [1], a poll with the question "How much do you support or oppose each of the following? Requiring background checks on all gun sales" 73% strongly support, 15% somewhat support, 4% somewhat oppose, 4% strongly oppose, 5% don't know/no opinion. That's a pretty neutral question, has massive support. Let's see your data on your split questions. [1] https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000180-fe72-d0c2-a9ae-ff7250f80000&nname=playbook&nid=0000014f-1646-d88f-a1cf-5f46b7bd0000&nrid=0000014e-f115-dd93-ad7f-f91513e50001&nlid=630318 https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000180-fe72-d0c2-a9ae-ff725...

Ancapistani 4y ago
> [...] like pointing out how many mass shootings are done with guns that bypassed background checks. Can you name some? Better yet, can you point to data on how often this has happened? Off the top of my head, I can think of several instances where the guns were legally purchased and the shooter passed the background checks. I can think of a couple where they were stolen, and one where they were taken from a family member after that family member's murder. I can't think of any where the firearm(s) were acquired exclusively through private sale.
R0b0t1 4y ago
I hate to be the one, but he's right: more background checks is hilariously unpopular outside of blue cities and states. A lot of people in red states, even in cities, think that the gun regulations we have are too strong.
- tristan957 4y ago
  Anecdote: I know many gun owners who are fine with universal background checks if they can be performed at home for free in a reasonable amount of time. I don't understand why people who want gun regulation aren't pushing for this. Free, easy, and fast background checks.