Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Bolo Boffin

(23,872 posts)
7. It should.
Wed Apr 10, 2013, 08:03 AM
Apr 2013

As long as they are advertised. And from what I read, gun trafficking would be a federal offense now.

I don't understand all this 'noise' about the Senate passing a gun control bill as everyone knows Purveyor Apr 2013 #1
I'm holding out hope that pressure on the House will move some of them, but we have to Laurian Apr 2013 #3
dems + compromise usually ends up smelling bad unless u are a repub. we will see nt msongs Apr 2013 #2
No background checks on "non-commercial" weapons sales. kelly1mm Apr 2013 #4
But this would get gun shows. Bolo Boffin Apr 2013 #5
Would it cover online sales? BainsBane Apr 2013 #6
It should. Bolo Boffin Apr 2013 #7
Online sales are already covered. Lizzie Poppet Apr 2013 #17
Yes. It would. rdharma Apr 2013 #8
That's very strange. All commercial sales are already subject to background checks. slackmaster Apr 2013 #9
It only covers private sales "where advertising or an online service involved." rdharma Apr 2013 #10
Background checks don't and fundamentally can't stop straw purchasers. slackmaster Apr 2013 #11
Doesn't stop straw purchaser....... rdharma Apr 2013 #12
No, it doesn't have anything to do with stopping straw sales or prosecuting straw buyers. slackmaster Apr 2013 #13
You evidently don't know how these cases are prosecuted. rdharma Apr 2013 #14
Apparently you aren't familiar with how the background check system works slackmaster Apr 2013 #15
"A NICS check does not create a paper trail." rdharma Apr 2013 #16
Requiring a background check on a private transfer does not necessarily imply creating a 4473 slackmaster Apr 2013 #18
Then the House gets their turn Pullo Apr 2013 #19
No. We don't have to wait. It's in the Manchin/Toomey" agreement. rdharma Apr 2013 #20
I'd like to see the acutal text. An "agreement" isn't a bill. slackmaster Apr 2013 #21
"legitimately fail the background check" rdharma Apr 2013 #22
Initial false denials are very, very common because a lot of people have names that are... slackmaster Apr 2013 #24
Some details of the bg check compromise jimmy the one Apr 2013 #23
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control Reform Activism»Gun control talks in Sena...»Reply #7