"closing the gun show loophole appears all but done"

Hahaha! That's cute, Goldy. Unfortunately it’s far from accurate as the “gun show loophole” was really a contrived and non-existent issue. The “loophole” was actually the sale of a firearm from one person to another, and had nothing to do with gun shows. So, if you were interested in one of my weapons and wanted to purchase one, you could simply pay me in cash and then I would give you my weapon and the deal would be completed. No background check required.

Here’s what’s changed: Nothing.

In order for this system of closing the private-sale “loophole” to actually be implemented and enforced, the government would need a system of gun registration or a receipt that a background check had been completed. A lot of you probably are not aware of this, but there is no gun registration out there, and registration is deeply unpopular. What I have in my closet is nobody’s business. So, registration is a dead issue, and gun owners will not abide by rules to register their guns with the State or Feds. In fact, when the Washington County started asking people on their Concealed Handgun License forms what weapons they owned, it resulted in a local and federal law suit, thousands of angry phone calls, and a bunch of unhappy gun owners. Gun registration is a non-starter.

In a regular gun transaction from a store, you walk in, pick one you like, and then you’re asked to fill out a form called a “4473.” This is the form that serves as “background check form” and as the receipt for the transaction. The form asks things like, “Have you ever been convicted of a felony?” along with another dozen questions in which most people answer “No.” The receipt is not stored by the government, it’s saved by the gun dealer in their safe, for 5 to 10 years. The government doesn’t keep a transaction history of background checks because it’s a 45-second process: Name, DOB, Address, and sometimes Social Security Number (SSN is voluntary). Adding a transaction log would slow down the process, and there would be no guarantee that the log would actually be completed accurately, thus a physical receipt would need to be sent to the seller and the purchaser. I highly doubt this would happen simply because of the costs involved.

Without a receipt of a background check, there would be no incentive to actually complete a background check, unless you were suspicious of the person you were selling to. I am a regular buyer and seller of firearms, I answer this dilemma by requiring my buyer to have a CHL. If they don’t have a CHL, and I don’t know the person, it’s a no-deal.

What would actually be useful is if there was a 1-888 phone number I could call and give someone a name, address, and DOB to see if anything pops up, but even this would probably be a privacy violation. Further, even with this 1-888 number, there’s no guarantee that the system would be accurate: my buyer could be lying to me, or I could be lying to this background check number to get a receipt.

Strengthening the existing background check system is highly desirable, as even felons and other convicted criminals regularly slip through.

Here’s the real problem: people who think that government can actually do something effectively. People who think that passing new laws actually changes people’s behavior. It’s all an illusion! Think about the drugs we’ve all bought, those were entirely illegal and yet every reader here has smoked pot. The same principal applies to guns and any market: regardless of the laws, commerce will still happen if there’s a market. Sorry folks, the government is going to fix nothing, yet again.

Meanwhile, when Obama fails to deliver yet another promise, retarded and delusional supporters will still give him praise, somehow finding fault in the “Republicans” even though Obama is exclusively responsible and has the full capability to enact whatever he wishes. Gitmo, Iraq, Afghanistan, Torture, wiretapping, bank fraud.....now let’s add “gun control” to the list. I’m sure Obama’s 3rd term will be his successful “Get it done” one - I mean, what else could he possibly be waiting for?