tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20077444.post9127248265882869369..comments2024-03-26T04:21:43.535-05:00Comments on Free Association: About Universal Background ChecksSheldon Richmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15672237234580563637noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20077444.post-14171289441473277452013-02-09T09:48:02.391-06:002013-02-09T09:48:02.391-06:00Tangent Style, guns almost always move from legiti...Tangent Style, guns almost always move from legitimate channels to the black market via theft. This is why gun owners objected so strongly when that New York newspaper published the map of firearms licensees. It was seen as aiding and abetting thi channel.<br /><br />But even if there were a magic wand that could be waved to prevent firearm theft (make it illegaler!) that wouldn't shut down the black market. Narcotics are smuggled into this country by the ton, despite a trillion dollar "War On Drugs". If you really think that laws can stop a black market, can you explain which weighs more: a ton of cocaine or a ton of Glocks?<br /><br />And as to your disputing our host's premise, the large number of people arrested as felons in possession would suggest that it is not at all hard for a prohibited person to obtain a gun.<br /><br />As to your last point about mass shooters, it seems that you are missing the point. Some mass shooters would not show up on a background check as prohibited persons, and so would be legally allowed to purchase the gun they intend to use to shoot people. Since they haven't committed a crime in the past, Universal Background Checks would be useless in preventing this.<br /><br />If a prohibited person intended to commit a mass shooting they would of course simply buy their gun off the black market. <br /><br />The proposed law is stupid and useless, other than to encumber lawful gun ownership. Borepatchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05029434172945099693noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20077444.post-49605548047139846242013-02-09T08:10:26.635-06:002013-02-09T08:10:26.635-06:00"People with criminal intent can reasonably b..."People with criminal intent can reasonably be expected to find gun-buying channels that require no background check"<br /><br />I don't agree with the premise, but I will still offer this argument: Don't all guns pretty much start out in legitimate channels? Manufactured by some gun manufacturing company. I think the benefit of the background check is to hopefully prevent the movement of guns from normal markets with all their checks, to the black market. I guess it depends on the way in which a gun goes from being manufactured by a reputable gun maker to being illegally and secretly bought and sold on a black market. If you have any insight into that, I would be keen to hear it.<br /><br />"Someone determined to commit a mass shooting or other crime can reasonably be expected to buy his or her guns through channels that do not require background checks, and that won’t be too difficult"<br /><br />I don't know about either part of this. People who commit mass shootings so often expect to (and do) die in the act. Why would they choose an illegal vs legal market? Also, I have no idea about the difficulty of acquiring black market firearms, but it doesn't seem THAT easy.Tangent Stylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17707454680772026268noreply@blogger.com