Here we go again.  Lies, damned lies, and gun banners.

1.) More than 50 percent of guns sold in our country are sold by private, unlicensed arms dealers.

WRONG!!!!

Instate transfer (sale) of a firearm between private parties is LEGAL.  Interstate transfer is ILLEGAL and MUST go through an FFL (Federal Firearms Licensee i.e. Dealer).

That statistic is wrong, and a LIE.  How would anyone keep statistics on private party transfer (sale) of property?  LIAR.

2.) but only federally licensed gun dealers are required to run background checks. In fact, there are documented cases in which al-Qaida, Hezbollah, and IRA terrorists have exploited a loophole in the gun laws to purchase military style, high capacity weapons at legal gun shows

Show me.  Give me the proof, otherwise this is just another LIE.  If there are known terrorists purchasing guns in the US, I think we would have heard about.

3.) where anybody can walk in and can buy guns without having to show ID or go through a simple background check. This is madness.

Madness is believing this crap.  ATF is ONSITE at every gun show, along with state and local LEO.  Background checks are run on EVERY transaction except for the "private" sale.  ATF will bust your @ss if you are suspected of selling firearms without a license, which means, that you are allowed to sell one or two items in private transactions at a gun show, however, if you are suspected of "dealing" (selling/trading) you will be charged with a felony.

one of the main points here is just what you're describing - the single item private transactions. 

As you state, people trying to cheat the system and act as "dealers" without following the established rules will be busted.  Great, I'm glad to hear that part of the system is working.

It's the private transactions that allow transfer of weapons without reasonable oversight.  Note that I said "reasonable" - I'm not advocating an impossible system and I'm pretty sure the group in Lowell's post aren't either.  They are gun owners/users themselves.  Just that there should be something in place to dissuade criminals from taking advantage of a wide open system.

groups supported by the Brady Campaign.  There are many of them.  So called "Hunter's rights groups" that purport to have the Sportsman's interest" at heart.

The 2nd Amendment has NOTHING to do with hunting.

Read this:

"Members of a radical militia group ambushed government agents in a massive shootout today at a small town near Boston. Government agents as part of an ongoing investigation into the groups criminal activities were preparing to raid known stockpiles of military weapons and ammunition and arrest group leaders.

Tipped off about the raid several members of the group, led by a Colonel James Barrett moved their stockpile of assault weapons (including artillery pieces) to alternate locations. They then gathered members of their group at a local bar Wright's Tavern and made plans to ambush the agents they knew were coming. They then placed armed members at key points in preparation for the attack.

The arriving agents soon spotted several armed men. Despite the show of force, they were not to be intimidated and moved into position. Government agents, under orders to not fire unless fired upon, took up defensive positions.

Believing that government agents were burning their buildings the militia group advanced on the agents positions. Government agents fired warning shots hoping to stop the assault. In the confusion several agents directly engaged members of the advancing militia group, who then returned fire.

Several men were killed and wounded in the ensuing gun battle.

Government agents have identified and issued warrants for the key leadership of the militia group. Among the wanted are James Barrett, Paul Revere, William Dawes, John Parker, Samuel Prescott, Samuel Adams and John Hancock."

Think about it!

link

  .B.I. officials maintain that they are hamstrung by laws and policies restricting the use of gun-buying records because of concerns over the privacy rights of gun owners.

  At least 44 times from February 2004 to June, people whom the F.B.I. regards as known or suspected members of terrorist groups sought permission to buy or carry a gun, the investigation found.

  In all but nine cases, the F.B.I. or state authorities who handled the requests allowed the applications to proceed because a check of the would-be buyer found no automatic disqualification like being a felon, an illegal immigrant or someone deemed "mentally defective," the report found.

are the people that maintain the database.  I do believe the Patriot Act allows these new Government Law Enforcement entities (under the DHS) to not only DENY these people their request to purchase a firearm (Form 4473) but to also arrest and detain these people without due process.

So don't tell me the FBI, BATFE, DHS, CIA and DOD have no recourse for interdiction and incarceration of suspected terrorists!

But that's another thread where we talk about Habeaus Corpus being denied to US Citizens.  Right?

So there is a NO FLY LIST but not a NO BUY A GUN LIST?  BS.

that's what the FBI told the New York Times.  If you choose to close your eyes to reality and facts, that's your problem.

must be provided.  Also proof of citizenship or VISA status.

Illegals are NOT allowed to buy guns.

Now, if there was a list of illegal immigrants....we wouldn't have an illegal immigrant problem now would we?

ETA - my eyes are wide open and I am paying attention. So you tell me one thing, just one, that the DHS, BICE, BATFE, FBI, SS (Secret Service/Treasury) and DOD has done that has prevented Osama from re-constituting Al-Qeda?

And what in God's name would Al-Qeda want with one single semi-automatic (means NOT AUTOMATIC) evil black rifle?  Have we learned nothng since 911?  It's the body count that Al-Qeda wants.  A few little black rifles shooting 22caliber bullets ain't gonna do much for that.  They risk more trying to obtain those evil black rifles (exposing themselves to increased and unneccessary scrutiny) than by just stealing large amounts of amonium nitrate and diesel fuel.

How much scrutiny do you suppose a Middle Eastern human gets at a gun show or gun shop?  Come on, think about.  We are fanatical gun totin red(neck), white and blue, racist American gay bashing bigots right?  They'd stand a better chance paying cash for a one way ticket to Mecca.

The FBI and ATF complain at every turn that they do not have enough information of one type or another for one cause or another.  War on drugs for example.  It's all about the $$$$.  "We need bigger, better databases that are crosslinked with other agencies incompatable databases so that we can share unrelated and dissimilar information that will enhance our use of more computer processing power so that we can give you the same answer ten years from now that we have given you today.  It will only cost $10B."

UC-Davis study of gun shows in California, Arizona, Nevada and elsewhere found just 30% of gun dealers were identifiable as licensed dealers. Plus, more assault weapons were available and more straw purchases happened at gun shows in states with less regulation, the non-California ones.
http://press.pspring...

NRA only represents themselves. They continue to support measures that hurt law enforcement, that are opposed by the people they'd affect and that put ordinary people at risk. NRA is no different than Big Oil or Big Tobacco lobbyists who are defending an industry and firms; NRA throws in gun rights because that sounds better than "we're doing this to protect an industry." I have no problem with private gun ownership for home protection, hunting or hobby collecting, but NRA must be confronted and crushed as a force on Capitol Hill and in state legislatures.

is out of favor with gun owners.  Gun Owners of America along with the 2nd Amendment Foundation are probably the two organizations that best represent gun owners.

The NRA-ILA has "jumped the shark" by consistantly ignoring legal issues that affect the average gun owner.

If the NRA were truely an advocate for 2nd Amendment rights, this would have been sttled long ago.  But why cure cancer when there is so much money to be made?

shed on this sham organization ought to make it shrivle up and die:

Source: http://www.ojp.usdoj...

Injury

From 1993 through 1997, less than 1% of serious nonfatal violent victimizations resulted in gunshot wounds.
The number of gunshot wounds from assaults treated in hospital emergency departments fell from 64,100 in 1993 to 39,400 in 1997, a 39% decline.
Offenders

According to the 1997 Survey of State Prison Inmates, among those possessing a gun, the source of the gun was from -

a flea market or gun show for fewer than 2%
a retail store or pawnshop for about 12%
family, friends, a street buy, or an illegal source for 80%

During the offense that brought them to prison, 15% of State inmates and 13% of Federal inmates carried a handgun, and about 2%, a military-style semiautomatic gun.

On average, State inmates possessing a firearm received sentences of 18 years, while those without a weapon had an average sentence of 12 years.

Among prisoners carrying a firearm during their crime, 40% of State inmates and 56% of Federal inmates received a sentence enhancement because of the firearm.

If you say no, then you are for gun control - in some form.  The only question remaining is, do we have the will to pay what it costs to check buyers to see if they are violent or crazy before they can buy guns.

The last case I read involved a gun seller telling an ineligible buyer to "bring a friend" to fill out the paperwork for a gun.  The buyer was hoping to kill someone, and did, and the family sued the gun store.  Federal law, or rather "Republican activist judges" interpreting the law, stopped the suit.

According to a 2000 report summarized here,

[A}pproximately 1 percent of guns dealers sell approximately 57 percent of the guns that are used in crimes .... For an individual shop that is supplying the illegal market that means having hundreds of "crime guns" traced back to them per year, as compared to a law abiding gun dealer who may have one or two of their guns per year recovered from crimes. In fact, 86 percent of gun dealers had no "crime guns" traced to them at all.

but only 1/2 of a point.

Should violent felons and mentally ill get guns?

A FELON has served his term.  Paid his debt.  Should he/she be denied the right to vote or the right to protect himself or property?  Same with so called sex offenders.  Do they qualify for extra legal incarceration because of the nature of the crime eventhough their punisment has been served?

Anyway, the article continues:

"ATF is now targeting enforcement and inspection resources at these dealers, as well as making crime gun trace analysis available to criminal investigators (FBI perchance?). By following up on crime gun trace information and other trafficking indicators, ATF can determine the reasons for diversion of firearms from this relatively small proportion of dealers to the illegal market and take regulatory and criminal
enforcement actions that will curb this illegal flow of guns. This targeted enforcement should yield significant results: preventing diversion from this concentrated group of dealers will curtail a significant portion of the illegal market in firearms."

There is no lack of databases, lists, inspections, audits on the part of LE.  As the article concludes, the ATF is on the JOB.

The VT mental illness compromise is a ruse as it makes it easier for anyone to be "involuntarily commited".  And once so committed there is NO WAY to get the involutary commitment removed from your record (whatever record means in this case).  And it cuts bad for gun owners the same way it cuts for security clearances and government jobs.

The law of unintended consequences is the law of the land i.e. Bush 43 and Iraq.  Depends on how you measure success.