The Virginian-Pilot
©
RICHMOND
Legislation that would require criminal background checks on private sales at gun shows failed to win the endorsement Tuesday of the Virginia State Crime Commission.
The research and advisory body considered a law like the bill that failed to make it out of a Senate committee last year. The vote Tuesday to recommend it ended in a 6-6 tie.
Instead, the commission voted 7-5 to endorse a bill to make gun-show promoters pay to have a State Police trooper at their shows. The troopers would watch for illegal sales.
Family and friends of victims of the 2007 Virginia Tech shootings demonstrated on the Capitol lawn afterward. Among them were the parents of Smithfield native Nicole White, one of the slain students. They urged state lawmakers to close the so-called gun-show loophole. Similar bills have failed in the General Assembly in the past several years.
"The same indecision today of our legislators is what caused the murder of my daughter Nicole," Mike White said. "We cannot continue to wait for this to happen."
Gun-rights supporters with stickers that said "Guns Save Lives" also attended Tuesday's meeting. Philip Van Cleave, president of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, said he was pleased the commission didn't endorse another bill for the background checks. "It's really not a loophole," he said.
Van Cleave questioned the second vote, however. If legislators want extra enforcement, the general public should pay for it, not the gun-show promoters, he said.
Outside, Omar Samaha relayed his own experience at a gun show. Within five minutes he had bought an assault rifle without a background check, he said.
"It's like going to the store to buy a jug of milk or a candy bar," he said. "I had 10 guns in under an hour."
One, he said, was a Glock handgun more powerful than the one that Virginia Tech shooter Seung-Hui Cho used to kill his sister, Reema Samaha. Omar Samaha said he handed the weapons over to the State Police.
Gun-rights advocates point out that Cho did not buy his firearms at a gun show. Licensed dealers must already perform background checks, but the same requirement does not apply to unlicensed vendors at gun shows.
Chad Ramsey, an associate director for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said he believes the gun-show legislation will advance further in the Assembly this year than it has before, due partly to what he called Virginia's changing demographics and the work of the relatives of the Tech victims.
Dave Forster, (757) 477-6386, dave.forster@pilotonline.com
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo
a free society
On the one hand, I agree with Freedom4All that it *is* good when young people -- or any people -- get involved and try to make a difference.
On the other hand, I think it's pretty sad when peaceful, law-abiding adults who merely want to exercise their basic civil rights are referred to with such hateful slurs as "paranoid anti-government gun nuts" and "far right wing lunatics".
I suppose I should be reassured when someone who wants to deprive their fellow citizens of their basic civil rights skips past any attempt at rational argument and goes straight to ad hominem.
The fact is that firearms are the single most heavily regulated consumer good in the USA, and their sale is *already* restricted far out of proportion with any real or imagined danger they pose. Groups like the Brady Campaign, who prey on the fear and/or ignorance of their fellow citizens -- or resort to hateful insults to demonize those that disagree -- in order to further undermine basic human rights... well, I do *not* think such people should be setting public policy. Nonetheless, they *are* entitled to their opinions, and I would steadfastly fight to preserve their ability to express them.
Yes: I would
Great Work!
It's wonderful to see the victims from the Virginia Tech tragedy and these concerned young people getting out there to do something about changing this ridiculous loophole in Virginia law. It is asinine to allow people to sell guns(!) to others without conducting background checks. There are only two types of people abetted by such a backwards policy: 1) Criminals, the mentally ill, domestic abusers, and other people prohibited under federal arm from buying firearms; and 2) Paranoid, anti-government gun nuts who wish to stockpile firearms against our democracy without being monitored.
I have no doubt that with the courage being shown by people like the Whites and these students we will get this policy changed soon. Public safety should come first, LONG before we indulge the whims of far right wing lunatics who call for anarchy and vigiliantism.
A recent national poll by Mayors Against Illegal Guns showed that 87% of Americans wanted the Gun Show Loophole closed. VCDL and the like are fringe groups, period.
there is no "gun show loophole"
There is no "gun show loophole". It's a fantasy concocted by anti-civil-rights groups like the Brady Campaign, who cynically use a handful unfortunate crime victims to further their repugnant agenda.
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=4835
"Despite what some media commentators have claimed, existing gun laws apply just as much to gun shows as they do to any other place where guns are sold."
"Gun shows are huge gathering points for people who are interested in Second Amendment issues. Gun rights groups frequently set up booths at gun shows to distribute literature and recruit members. Gun shows are places where Americans properly exercise their First and Second Amendment rights, and neither gun show patrons nor vendors deserve the mean-spirited campaign of abuse to which they have been subjected."
You are deriding an effort...
... that is attempting to fix just one small aspect of gun purchases because it wont fix ALL problems with gun purchases. No one is arguing that this will fix all problems, its just trying to fix one loophole.
As you say, if someone wants a gun there are ways to get them. That doesnt mean you should not try to fix loopholes that very well could keep a gun out of someone's hands. Granted they may go elsewhere but let them try elsewhere. Maybe they would be denied elsewhere. Or perhaps the authorities would be notified of the attempted purchase. But you dont avoid taking action because it doesnt solve all the woes.
Five Words for you
Gun Laws Do Not Work!!!!! If someone wants a gun there is always a way to get one ... Face it the Brady Bill was a Sham.. Washington DC has strict Gun Laws and more gun crime there thing 98.8 percent of the country.
Waste of time and money by our legislators
I haven't read the comments below, but I can only imagine the hilarity of some of them as this comes round and round and round again. The gunshow loophole is really a misnomer, and, at worst, it's a smoke and mirrors, feel-good issue that our legislators like to kick around to make them look like they're doing something. One day, maybe, we'll get someone in Richmond that actually does something constructive, but I'm not going to hold my breath!
Why is it a feel-good issue? Private sales of firearms at gunshows are NOT the norm. Further, private sales AWAY from gun shows are. Don't believe it? Pick up a copy of the Trading Post at any 7-11 store and turn to the sporting goods section to see how many guns are for sale. I rest my case on the "gunshow loophole" stupidity.
Finally, those that commit violent crimes don't buy guns where background checks are required, but the "gun, gun bad" elementary mentality of some folks cries for this illogical legislation. The waste of money on state police to "look for" something that really doesn't happen is even more evidence of the absurdity of the General Assembly. You elected them!
squirelly..
I ndespair for my country when people like you are allowed to vote...
" The Constitution was formed in a different day and age, one that is no longer necessary regarding the 2nd Amendment'
Forcing background checks for *all* guns sales...
... at gun shows COULD prevent a gun sale to a deranged, mentally unstable person, which could help avoid the death of one or more people, who would otherwise be dead & buried forever... and whose parents, family, and friends would grieve for the rest of their days. But the problem with this approach is it would be terribly inconvient to the seller. Good lord.
For the "ban this too" crowd, throwing an artery-clogging cheeseburger or a pack of smokes at someone doesnt have the same immediacy & finality. But those arguments are hilarious nonetheless.
Arguing that certain locales have implemented 'sensible gun laws' when one can go NEXT DOOR to the 'sensible' locale and buy guns galore to take back to the sensible locale puts a dent in the argument that any locale has really implemented sensible gun laws.
Get the Swiss facts straight, and tell the whole story
(And see how you feel when it's one of your family members who's shot by some deranged person who gets a gun without a full background check.)
The statement below about the Swiss being required to have guns isn't accurate or complete.
In Switzerland, former military personnel are ALLOWED (not required) to keep a gun. Automatic weapons are required to be reconditioned to semi-automatic status before they can be released to a home.
But here's the big difference - BULLETS are only sold and allowed to be used at authorized firing ranges. There are strict and harshly enforced laws prohibiting possession and use of bullets anywhere else in the country.
Comparing smoking bans to gun control is the point!!!
Comparing the support for smoking bans to gun control resistance is exactly the point. Think of how many places you cannot smoke and the list is growing. Now think back how it began. You started paying more for your right when politicians allowed big tobacco to get sued for people’s personal choice. Gun ownership is in our Bill of Rights just as is non-state sponsored religion and freedom of speech. We each have our limits of each invading our space but we must NOT infringe them. Gun control does NOT reduce crime as shown in localities that restrict ownership the most. This is a proven fact and any convict will tell you they fear an armed citizen. The fear of “sensible gun laws” is that areas that have accepted this notion no longer allow gun ownership like NYC, DC, and Chicago. Gun show loopholes make no sense when a criminal can buy a gun unchecked next to a dealer who is forced to run a check.