“Gun Safety” activists who are trying to appear reasonable will claim that they support “Common Sense” reforms to gun laws.
One of their common fallbacks is “universal background checks” – in other words, running a background check for every single transfer of a gun, whether sold at Cabela’s, or handed down from Grandpa to grandchild, or a friend lending a friend a rifle for a hunting trip.
Of course, these background checks – which add $50-100 to the cost of every firearm sold, further driving them out of the reach of poor people – have been the law of the land in California for years. And from the investigation into the terrorist attack in San Bernardino, we see how well they work:
On Thursday, one of the federal government sources told The Times that Farook asked his friend and neighbor, Enrique Marquez, to buy two military-style rifles used in the attacksbecause he feared he “wouldn’t pass a background check” if he attempted to acquire the weapons on his own. The rifles were bought at a local gun store, the source said.
So – we’ve got a “Straw Purchase” – a legal buyer making a purchase in the stead of an illegal one, which is illegal under federal law – followed by…:
There was no paperwork transferring ownership of the assault rifles from Marquez to Farook, as required by California law, government officials told The Times.
But wait! They broke the law, even though it requires a background check for private transfers!
Surely there must be some mistake!
Once again, liberal logic doth amaze. Apparently, those determined to break the laws– both man and God’s– against murder will be deterred by adding a little misdemeanor gun law.
Yea, J.
In every one of these incidents, the perpetrator(s) were not deterred by any laws in place, yet the libidiots think that more laws would fix everything. What’s that definition of insanity again?
Confiscation hasn’t worked out all that well in Australia, either, yet they keep pushing for that as a “solution”.
If we have the mandatory background check, even for a transfer in the family, let’s at least make it free of charge.
The liberal says, “What’s that? It costs a lot of money to do all those background checks. No, you wing-nuts need to pay for it.”
Hey, you know what else costs money to administer? Elections. What if we charged for that? Maybe call it a poll tax.
How often is the straw purchase prosecuted? Even considering the national attention around this case, I’m not confident this guy will ever be charged.
Silly Merg. If there was no local gun store, no laws would have been broken. Get with the libturd logic, stat!
SSC – only when it suits the libturd narrative. There was recently a nationally publicized case of a gun store being sued for legally selling what later was determined to be a straw purchase. It’s like immigration laws – we have them but only persecute when it is politically expedient.
JPA, don’t forget the gun stores that thought something was fishy and reported a suspected straw purchase but were told by the ATF to sell guns to straw purchasers as part of Fast and Furious.
Pingback: In The Mailbox: 12.16.15 : The Other McCain