Gunman killed neighbors, child with AR-15-style rifle, sheriff says

How does this legally avoid the background checks required by federal law?.

 

Did gun ownership go up during that time?

Gun Ownership in America | RAND

ownership.pdf (vpc.org)

GSS_Trends in Gun Ownership_US_1972-2014.pdf (norc.org)

 

Wait, what about the loophole where he got back into the US 5 times after being deported? If he was deported how did he even get back in to steal a gun?

 

From a political standpoint, maybe not so much on the loophole term. What was the purpose and scope of the law? A loophole is a LEGAL means to violate the SCOPE or INTENT of the law. All loopholes are legal.

The real point is it's perfectly legal to avoid a background check by selling a gun as a private dealer. And as such, a criminal can exploit that to avoid a background check that would otherwise preclude them. Which begs the question, why was the law written to exclude private dealers?

 

I don't know, by your buddy's definition that wouldn't be a loophole either.

 

Maybe he did. You can't prove it, but I suppose it's possible. But it's highly improbable given since then there have been millions of gun sales. Odds are he didn't get it from that debacle.

 

Federal background checks are only required for a purchase made through a federally licensed gun dealer. In Texas any John Doe can sell a gun he owns to any other John Doe, no background check required.

 

Your claim is number of guns -- more guns -- not gun ownership..

1994-1999 Gun related homicides fell; number of guns went up
2004-2014: Gun related homicides fell; number of guns went up
Keeping your comical claim in mind....
Explain how the number of gun-related homicides fell while the number of guns went up.

 

So... how does buying a gun in a private sale an example of a way to legally avoid the background checks required by federal law, as per your claim?

 

Is it possible to legally avoid the background checks mandated by federal law?
No?
Where's the loophole?

There's no background check to avoid.
As such there can be no loophole to exploit.

Ask the Democrats -- it's their law.

 

Are you actually counting guns without an owner...? That would be silly. Someone would have to pull the trigger to cause a gun death, wouldn't they?

Here's gun sales, doesn't go back to the 90's, but notice the dip in the early 2000's?

How Many Guns are in the US? [2023] (americangunfacts.com)

Looks like 1993 was the last record year for gun production and imports, not topped until 2009.

How Many Guns Are in the U.S.? (thetrace.org)

Of course, we can't see how many are thrown away, gotten rid of or lost. But as usual, I don't think you made a point here at all. It seems quite obvious that a gun that's sold has an owner. So if fewer people were buying guns and crime was going down in those same years...I don't know.

 

Nor can you prove that he didn't... Now that we got that cleared up, we should once again quit focusing on the inanimate object, and focus on the criminal that killed nearly and entire family and could have been 100% preventable if merely this man was NEVER allowed back into this nation.

 

Your claim is number of guns -- more guns -- not gun ownership..

1994-1999 Gun related homicides fell; number of guns went up
2004-2014: Gun related homicides fell; number of guns went up
Keeping your comical claim in mind....
Explain how the number of gun-related homicides fell while the number of guns went up.

 

It's more of an out.

Yeah, no, I can choose to buy a gun from a place that is required to have one, or I can choose AVOID it. So there is a legal way to avoid a background check, however, it's allowed as how the law is written. Sorry loophole gets your ass red like a baboon's, but it's more a loophole in ensuring we are doing everything we can to keep guns out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them. That's a more accurate statement than going after the law as it's written.

It was the NRA that lobbied to get it written that way. Democrats were just as susceptible to such efforts as republicans. It was clearly designed to avoid background checks on all gun sales. For what purpose, well, no good purpose.

 

What proof do you have that he was allowed back in? If someone circumvents the law to get a gun, wouldn't they also circumvent it to get back into the country?

 

Funny way to admit you cannot demonstrate the loophole in the law, but at least you now accept the truth.

You knew this statement was false when you made it.

You knew this statement was false when you made it.

 

For federally licensed firearms dealers there are no gun show loopholes at gun shows.

1) Is there a “Gun show Loophole?” (psu.edu)

Federally licensed firearms dealers are lawfully required to perform thorough background checks whether it's at a gun show or not.

"Federal firearms licensees (“FFLs” or “Dealers”) may only sell firearms at gun shows within the State in which their licensed premises is located. Furthermore, all activities must be in compliance with Federal, State, and local laws/ordinances."
How to Contact Us ATF - Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

 

Uh oh. There's no data that shows there more guns though. The only available data is gun ownership because guns without owners can talk.

So I maintain that the number of guns did go down, and indicated by the gun ownership data, thus that's why homicides and gun deaths went down.

Sorry, but the data moves pretty closely now that one actually looks at it as opposed to just repeats it.

And it's clear that in other countries, less gun ownership also results in fewer gun deaths.

It clearly caused by it based on the available data. Unless you have data to refute it.

 

Your claim is number of guns -- more guns -- not gun ownership..

1994-1999 Gun related homicides fell; number of guns went up
2004-2014: Gun related homicides fell; number of guns went up
Keeping your comical claim in mind....
Explain how the number of gun-related homicides fell while the number of guns went up.

You knew this statement was false when you made it.

 

No, I always accepted the truth.

Wrong. It's a true statement to say: I can avoid a background check by buying from a private dealer.

Wrong. The NRA lobbied to remove all background checks.

NRA Chief's Bogus Background Check Claims - FactCheck.org

 

He wasn't allowed back in. The term "allowed" denotes that LE blew it. The executioner should have been prosecuted for reentering without permission after the first time. He committed at least four felonies.

• “Illegal Re-Entry”/8 U.S.C. § 1326 makes it a crime to unlawfully reenter, attempt to unlawfully reenter, or to be found in the United States after having been deported, ordered removed, or denied admission. This crime is punishable as a felony with a maximum sentence of two years in prison. Higher penalties apply if the person was previously removed after having been convicted of certain crimes: up to 10 years for a single felony conviction (other than an aggravated felony conviction) or three misdemeanor convictions involving drugs or crimes against a person, and up to 20 years for an aggravated felony conviction.

Prosecuting People for Coming to the United States | American Immigration Council

 

Dude was a dreamer.

 

Right, I didn't use the term allowed. Someone else did. As if they were implying one political side of the aisle allowed him to come back in. No one allowed him back in. So, if laws can't stop criminals from getting guns, how can they stop them from illegally entering the country? In fact, what good are any laws then?

The point is, you mitigate risk multiple ways. Nothing is foolproof, but in this particular case, we know of two failures that facilitated this crime. His ability to get a gun, and his ability to get into the country. If neither happened, this incident probably wouldn't have happened given it all started because he was target shooting and asked to stop due to noise. The gun component is literally required because near as we know, he hadn't snapped and murdered anyone when asked to turn down his music or not order chocolate ice cream.

 

I bet dude's having nightmares now.

 

He was deported 4 times, meaning that our law enforcement failed to enforce the existing laws on the books and prosecute as a felon and detain him in a federal facility. In short, he was allowed back in as we did not enforce existing laws.