“40% of Guns Sales Take Place Without Background Check at Gun Shows and Over the Internet”
As I have said repeatedly, every time there is a shooting, the anti-gunners trot out the old talking points, which they have been sticking to for years and years.  I recently address the “gun show loophole”, and this post is an extension of that, in response to an article that I read just this morning from our friends at the staid bastion of fine journalism, the Huffington Post.  Here is what they have to say:
“…at the very least, extending background checks to cover those private transactions, many of which take place at gun shows. (That’s why it’s come to be known as the “gun show loophole.”)”
“Exactly how many sales take place through private channels is the subject of some debate. Research suggests it’s anywhere from 20 to 40 percent of the total, which, very roughly, means that at least 6 million sales a year ― and probably quite a few more ― involve buyers who haven’t passed a background check.”
This tired, old, and factually inaccurate statement has been trotted out time and again, most recently by both Hillary and Bernie Sanders, and every time, it is completely debunked.  Yet, that does not stop them from continuing to bring out this “zombie” claim.  The claim is based on a 1994 study: “Guns in America, Results of a Comprehensive National Survey on Firearm Ownership and Use.”  In this study, that number is claimed.  However, the “study” was a phone survey of 2,500 people in Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania.  In that study, many people stated that they did not know if they had a background check, or the authors assumed that they did not, based on other answers, such as purchasing a gun with cash.
In a 2017 editorial article, one of the study’s authors, Phillip Cook, stated this: Â
“Even though I bear some credit (or blame) for the earlier estimate, I could not be more pleased to be done with it, given that it is based on data from a survey done more than 20 years ago and that, in any event, never directly asked participants about background checks.”
The study’s own Author admits they never actually asked the people a specific question about a background check. Also, please note, that they say nothing at all about gun shows.
Mr. Cook’s statement is in response to a recent study that reduces that number from 40% to 20%.  Even that study is flawed as it includes inheritances and gifts, such as from father to son, in their number.  Anything that will inflate it as much as possible.  More deception and subterfuge.
And, at the end of the day, no one is claiming that they have any hard data that these legal private transfers are responsible for any significant portion of firearm crime or that firearm crime would actually be reduced, or actual criminals would be affected by this change, at all.  After all, they obtain their weapons illegally, by and large, in the first place! Or, as we have seen lately, they make a completely legal and above board purchase, and then go crazy. You simply cannot legislate against that. It is just another “do something” to make it look like you are “doing something”.
In 2013, Hillary Clinton stated that “…40 percent of guns are sold at gun shows and over the Internet.”. Clearly, she was trotting out the old 1994 numbers. What is quite funny, actually it is quite sad and pathetic, is that the “internet” barely existed in 1994.  There were only a few thousand “websites” at that time, and online shopping, as we now know it, did not even exist. No matter, just “mix-and-match” any data you want to “prove” your point.
We already know that any legal internet sale must be completed at an FFL dealer, including the legally required background check. Â We also know that anyone that does not follow this procedure is committing a felony and that someone willing to do that, would not follow any new law anyway. Â Only law-abiding citizens would be affected in any way. Â Just another example of how they will say absolutely anything to achieve their political goals.
And, at the end of the day, firearms will still only account for fractions of percentages of both fatal and non-fatal injuries in this country, and all of this bluster, and time, and money will be completely wasted, when it could be spent on other causes where some good might actually be done, such as securing our schools better, feeding hungry children in this country, reducing child abuse and maltreatment, feeding and housing our veterans that have been discarded, and addressing the root causes of crime and suicide, for instance.
