Stop private gun sales/transfers

[Tim Nunan]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government ... eir-Rifles

Speaking with reporters after meeting with various groups about gun violence last week, VP Biden made it clear that part of the gun control he and President Obama are pursuing includes not simply ending gun shows, but ending the transfer of firearms.

While the focus on gun shows is par for course for gun-grabbers, the focus on ending gun transfers is new and it poses one of the greatness threats to liberty in our time.

Here's what Biden said after meeting with the various groups: "I'm going to focus primarily on [the recommendations] that relate to gun ownership...Not just close the gunshow loophole but total, universal background checks, including private sales."

This is liberal-speak for we'll use the gun show loophole fallacy to wedge the door open and ban all private sales, which would necessarily include all firearm transfers.

Quick question: Did gun shows or private sales contribute to Adam Lanza's crime? No, but both are being exploited for the chance to chip away at the 2nd Amendment.

Now, when all private sales are ended, that necessarily means not only can't you sell your old handgun to your brother or your sister, but that grandpa can't pass his favorite rifle on to the grandson who works the ranch with him.

The reason the transfer will not be allowable is because once private sales stop, a national gun registry will have to be created in order to be sure no sales are taking place. Once the registry is in place, it will be illegal to transfer a firearm from one person to another without a background check--i.e., without asking the government's permission.

This also means that when a family member dies, his or her guns will have to be accounted for to the government, and background checks and fees for the government will have to be satisfied before the guns can be given to a surviving family member.

Sound cumbersome? Sound less and less like freedom and more and more like government overreach? Sure it does. But this is exactly what Obama & Co. have planned if they can find a way to do it.

[johnharris]

These are the types of government infringements that have one agenda - the ultimately reduction and elimination of private ownership. We cannot trust our federal Congressional delegation, particularly Alexander or Corker, to stand against this move. Sadly, we cannot blindly trust Haslam, Harwell or Ramsey (nor those who put them in leadership) to stand firm either. Our only hope is to be every demanding that these state and federal officials will do what the 2nd Amendment requires and then only by threat that their failure to do so will result in vigorous primary challenges at the first opportunity.