The title of this article has several meanings. The most obvious to people who regularly go to gun shows is that they’re generally a waste of time, with jerky vendors, jewelry sales booths, and that annoying guy who arcs his stun guns into the air every 15 seconds crowding out the people actually selling guns – many of whom have had the same overpriced stuff on their tables for the last 5 years.
People who’ve never been to a gun show should take the title literally – there is really nothing special about a gun show. From a legal standpoint, what occurs inside a gun show is no different than what occurs in a gun store or at a shooting range or even under a tree on Christmas morning. The transfer of firearms between unlicensed sellers – that is, everyday people – is not highly regulated. There is no “gun show loophole” that allows felons to purchase firearms at a gun show that they could not acquire elsewhere. Generally, the only requirements for private sellers are age and residency. From ATF.gov:
Q: Does an unlicensed person need an ATF Form 4473 to transfer a firearm?No. ATF Form 4473 is required only for transfers by a licensee.[27 CFR 478.124]
Beyond that, many background checks do take place at gun shows. Licensed dealers must always complete ATF Form 4473 prior to the transfer of a firearm, which may require a background check, depending on the state and the individual. It does not matter whether this takes place in the dealer’s store, at a gun show, or on the surface of the moon – the firearm cannot move from the dealer’s inventory for any reason without the transfer being documented in their “bound book” – and if the transfer is to an individual instead of another dealer, the 4473 must be completed.
New York City Mayor Bloomberg’s recent sting was nothing more than a stunt conceived to fool the ill-informed public into thinking that they were in danger from the unregulated transfer of firearms between private individuals – a notion that is simply false. According to a 1997 NIJ study, criminals acquired firearms from gun shows less than 2% of the time.
Bloomberg’s stunt, less than a month after the shooting of Representative Gabrielle Giffords, does raise an interesting question, at least to me. Why do anti-gun activists, such as Bloomberg, continue to focus on “issues” such as gun shows after mass shootings – when murderers like Loughner, Cho, and Hasan all purchased their firearms legally, undergoing background checks?
We were told when the 4473 came into effect that background checks would protect the innocent – why do they regularly fail to prevent homicidal maniacs from acquiring firearms? Given the abject failure of past anti-gun legislation at doing anything but preventing law abiding citizens from acquiring firearms, ammunition, and accessories, why should we believe that “just” closing this “loophole” – or “just” taking away “those” magazines – will have any real effect?
I’ve been to a gun show a couple times and I already know it’s not about the guns. They’re exactly how you write about them.
I asked a guy with a Ranger sweater on about a PPSH-41 and he told be it was a DEWAT/de-activated war trophy and just scoffed when I told him I didn’t have any money to buy it. Way to screw yourself out of a potential customer, heh.
It’s not about protecting anybody. It’s about control
I haven’t been to a gun show in about 8 years…for all those reasons .
Very succinct description of a gun show, it’s like you’ve been to one here in VA or the ones in MA I used to go to.
Tom is right, this is about control with the first goal of at least reducing if not eliminating private sales. The intermediate goal will be to require individuals to get FFLs to privately sell or force all deals to go thru a dealer. The subsequent goal will be to make FFLs so difficult that no one can get one. Creeping Socialism.
As for Bloomberg’s sting, first off, saying you won’t pass a background check is irrelevant, some bureaucrat or cop somewhere runs the background check and that’s who determines whether or not you pass (probably a computer does the work, but that’s not relevant). Second, the way I interpret the story, NYC paid someone to buy a gun for them which is a straw purchase and hence illegal. Isn’t there also something on 4473 that asks if you are who you say you are? so violating that would be a federal offense? On top of all that, it’s already a federal offense, and likely, state offense to try and purchase a firearm if you’re a convicted felon. Where’s the loophole? I wouldn’t be surprised if you were able to pay the State Police to run the background check on your potential buyer.
Logic and reason have no place in a liberal’s brain.
I’m a liberal when it comes to some things but am strongly opposed to gun control and believe in the right to bear arms. Please don’t lump liberal minded people into your illogical and unreasonable category without delving into their brains a little further. I’ve been a Democrat all my life but am thisclose to becoming a Libertarian.
I love how they called it a “sting” as if they were discovering something shocking that people didn’t already know. Great revelation for $100K- an understanding of the law.
I’ve watched this same pattern repeat itself over and over since the ’60s.
Tragic crime committed involving a gun. Anti gun crowd ram through legislation restricting purchase/ownership/capabilities of some class of firearms claiming this will somehow make everyone safer. Turns out it not only doesn’t work, things actually get worse. Fewer guns in the hands of honest citizens and crime gets worse, who would have thunk it! And those criminals continue to disregard the new law and manage to still get arms to conduct their business anyway.
So the anti gun folks come back saying that the laws just weren’t strict enough. Pass this new one and then everything will be better. Yeah, right. People are slow sometimes, but eventually we get the picture. It does help when places like Great Britain have actually achieved that gun free nirvana the US anti gunners are hoping for. You know, where per capita violence against citizens is approaching two or three times what it is here.
Just wish the Brady bunch and their ilk would quit beating that dead horse.
I feel as though gun shows are around for people that somehow can not access the deals on the internet. For example, G3 magazines were going for $1-$3 a piece while a local gun show had them priced at $12 a pop. While I applaud entrepreneurial efforts, most gun shows are overpriced wares for the uninformed.
You saw that too, I think they were used mags but still…$1-3, why not take that chance? If I had a G3 I would have.
http://www.thehighroad.org
Perfectly captures gun shows.
I go to a gun show every time I read Shotgun News. The folks at gun shows buy the same stuff advertised there, add a ridiculous markup and try to make a profit. And the costs to park and get it have gotten crazy. Not worth the time and effort to me.
I still go to gun shows for one reason and one reason only — to check out and handle the merchandise. Most gun shops do not have huge inventories for obvious reasons. You can’t tell ergonomics through the internet.
That, for me, is one of the pitfalls of gun buying — unless your local range is extraordinarily well-stocked with rental guns, you just never quite find out exactly how a gun shoots in your hand until you buy it and take it to the range. Unlike, say, car buying, there are no test shoots in gun buying.
I somewhat disagree with you about gun shows. I find some pretty excellent deals on bulk ammo, better than online (aim and others) especially since there is no shipping. Also, if you look in the right places plenty of the firearms to be found are well below what you would pay at a dealer, at least, here in eastern VA.