The Virginian-Pilot
©
WASHINGTON
During a Capitol Hill event today, family members of those wounded and killed in the April 2007 Virginia Tech shooting massacre will continue to push for a law change requiring criminal background checks before certain firearms transactions are completed at gun shows.
A forum about closing the gun show loophole is scheduled to be held in the U.S. House Judiciary Committee room this afternoon.
The so-callled loophole is a wrinkle in state law that requires licensed gun dealers to run a criminal history check before selling a gun but doesn't hold private sellers to that standard.
Efforts to change the law to mandate background checks before private gun sales are completed have repeatedly failed to pass the General Assembly.
Tech families and others of their ilk argue that lax gun laws lead to violence. Gun rights advocates disagree, noting that Tech gunman Seung Hui Cho did not obtain at a gun show the weapons he used to slaughter 32 people.
On the eve of today's forum, Tech families and the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence issued the following statement:
The families of the victims, the survivors and their families would all like to thank Congressman Bobby Scott for his leadership on this critical public safety issue.
After the massacre at Virginia Tech, Governor Kaine created the Virginia Tech Review Panel comprised of eight nationally recognized and respected individuals with a wide variety of expertise The panel eventually produced an extensive report which included 81 specific recommendations covering: improved laws, policies, procedures, systems and institutions of the Commonwealth of Virginia and the operation of public safety agencies, medical facilities, local agencies, private providers, universities and mental health delivery systems.
From the beginning we, the families of the victims, the survivors and their families, gave our support to the panel members and, after the report was presented, to the agencies and legislators charged with implementing the recommended changes. Virtually all of the recommendations were acted upon with one glaring exception, that being: "Virginia should require background checks for all firearm sales, including those at gun shows."
The panel recognized the importance of limiting the ease of access to firearms for people that have been judged to be a danger to themselves or others due to severe mental illness. They also recognized that any improvements in the procedures that identified individuals prohibited from buying firearms due to mental illness through the NICS background check system, would be totally ineffective if some types of commercial firearm sales are allowed to continue to circumvent the background check system. Gun shows are one of the most popular public venues where firearms can be sold or exchanged between total strangers without the need for a background check on the purchaser.
Virginia has yet to close this "Gunshow Loophole," however, this problem is not limited to the confines of the Commonwealth of Virginia, but rather extends across all 37 states still allow the public sale of firearms without a background check.
Background checks on purchasers attempting to buy firearms from licensed dealers have prevented 1.8 million ineligible sales over the years that the Brady law has been in effect. The vast majority of background checks currently take less than a few minutes to complete and present no obstacle to eligible firearms buyers.
We know from firsthand experience the pain and devastation that can result when a person prohibited by law from owning or possessing firearms can nevertheless gain easy access to them and use them to maim and kill. That is why we are asking the Federal Government to step in and enact legislation to make it more difficult for dangerous people to obtain dangerous weapons.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo
Gertz said, "If we can stop
Gertz said, "If we can stop JUST ONE criminal from buying at a show then the background check is worth it."
I assume, then, that you would fully support lowering the speed limit to 20 mph nationwide, except for properly-licensed and registered vehicles on emergency runs. That would save vastly more lives than even the total disappearance of all firearms, and after all, 'if we can stop JUST ONE car crash then the national speed limit is worth it'.
Let me remind you of what one of the first comments on this thread said (from a guy who SUPPORTS universal B/G checks like you do): "Those with something to hide will simply acquire a gun outside of the dealer network."
if criminals, as you say, don't buy guns at gun shows
If criminals, as you say, don't buy guns at gun shows then what the heck is the problem? If we can stop JUST ONE criminal from buying at a show then the background check is worth it.
Criminals
Are you educated. Take a look at the past 20 years of criminal investigation and you will find that Criminals do not buy guns. They get them though illegal channels far from the mainstream of gun shows. Why would they go to a gun show? Have you been to a gun show? First of all at many gun shows there are numerous police organizations either educating, monitoring or whatever. Why would they expose themselves to that scrunity if they can acquire firearms in another way.
Criminals acquire guns from the backdoor illegal dealer who either steals from reputable sources or whatever. What we need to do is enforce the laws we have and check on weapon's dealers. We also need to encourage law-biding and well-trained ownership of firearms. Deterence has proven to prevent more gun violence then any regulation. If a person is properly trained and are willing to defend themselves then the criminal is on the losing side. Remember, I said trained and willing - if you are afraid of guns then you are a liability.
Gertz Point -- Let me guess you are a liberal Democrat who rather give up your freedoms for the chance at security? Well, then I suggest you move to a different country. G
the sad fact is I mostly agreed with you "until"
Yes I am educated, and yes I am mostly a Democrat, but no party tells me who to vote for.......now let's get to the meat of your comment....."Well, then I suggest you move to a different country"
What I find STUPID about so many of you gun advocates is when someone doesn't agree with you the first thing out of their mouth is MOVE. Well, you can forget that. This is my home, and I'm not going anywhere, and if you don't like for people to disagree with you then I suggest you MOVE to one of those countries where people aren't free to express themself.
I most agreed with your comment, but you blew it with your ranting.
my comment was polite, but
My comment was polite, but face to face I would tell you what I think of your MOVE comment that I can't type here. It begs the question.....are you an adult?
Gertz Point
Your true colors just came out. The "move" comment was my tactic to see where you stand. The point is that you villianize gun ownership and on turn puts gun owners on the defensive. Armed populist secures our rights. If you truly are a patriot and understand the home you claim you live in, you would read the Constitution, the Federalist Papers and the Declaration of Independence and understand the basis of our government and the 2nd Admendment. Unfortunately, most Americans do not read enough history, let alone understand it. Why do you object to my opinion that if you not willing to support the Constitution you should not be a citizen? I would rather have freedom than security because freedom guarantees security. Let Freedom Ring! Are you an honorable person is my question for you since you say your were polite and question if I am an adult? I can tell you that I am a honorable partiot who has fought and risk my life for the ideals of the Constitution so my children can live free. By the way I am a Libertarian and a Constitutionist!
Oh yeah...
trample on the majority to stop the minority.
SWEET!!! You are one great American!!
yes I am
yes I am a great American, because I believe laws should be fair.
You on the other hand are quickly becoming a staker. We don't agree, we will never agree, and I see no reason to continue to beat this dead horse.
It's not that I don't agree.
It's that I like to point out when people are wrong.
You seem to be wrong ALOT. So I point it out ALOT.
for what it's worth
I don't appreciate anyone questioning another's patriotism just because they hold a different point of view.