As a Canadian tradesman I say it honestly depends on the job. Metric is nice for tiny machining and manufacturing and stuff. Imperial is good for building houses and in Canada ya gotta know both and I like imperial more
They buy guns for a normal price and sell it without a check with a higher one for profit. The manufacturer sells more guns and the middle man makes some money too. No complaints from the state
@@FMSkyLoL that's the problem though, they saw money and policy stopped there. Here, whether you buy or are gifted a gun, you need a license and getting one of those is a drama and a half.
They pretty much made up a category, private sales do happen but they are almost always between friends and family. And the gun show loophole doesn't exist.
There is no such thing as "an unlicensed dealer." Seriously. A dealer, by definition, is licensed by the Federal Government. If someone is buying and selling guns as a business but has not federal license to do so, they care committing a felony.
@@Chris.Pontius key word is may. Obviously the majority of people will never do these horrible acts, but if you look at things like the milgram shock experiments, Stanford prison experiment, or even historical atrocities like the Holocaust and Abu Ghraib, it’s proven that the majority of humans have the potential to do bad things. It just needs to be drawn out of them. I was only commenting on that.
@@nathanlevesque7812 Yeah, criminal law is supposed to stop criminals, not hinder law abiding citizens. Police could probably catch more criminals if they just indiscriminately scooped people up and then released people that were proven innocent, but I think people would have a problem with that.
@@Nanofuture87 What you described would violate several human rights. Whereas the measures discussed in the video represent a minor inconvenience at most. Vehicle registration is not "hindering" law abiding citizens anymore than that. Both make crime more manageable.
@@Nanofuture87 No, to all of that. Guns are not a human right, no matter what your backwards country enshrined into law. Neither are swords, grenades, flamethrowers, bows, or laser cannons. Weapons are possessions. The only rights that relate to them are those of property in general. Owning a gun is no more a right and no less privilege than owning a car. Regulating both saves lives. That's why America is this massive outlier of ridiculously high gun death rates, compared to every other 'developed' nation on Earth.
Every person or dealer with an FFL is Federally required to run a NICS background check on every firearms sale. Also, 21 states currently require the same background check to be done even on private gun sales. Meaning if someone wants to sell their gun to their neighbor, they're suppose to go to a shop and have the same NICS background check done to legally complete the sale. I find for some reason the "we must have universal background checks now!" crowd rarely knows anything about this.
@@walikazmi7613 Umm, it's called the 2nd amendment. The right to "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed". Like it says SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
Can’t buy a gun without a background check at a gun show. Private sale is different. The law already states that you cannot sell to someone who couldn’t pass a background check. At least it does in Texas
“The current universal background system is flawed” because some government employee failed at their job to update information to a database. Solution: more government employees to fail at their job. Typical throw more money at a problem so it goes away.
@@Luca-sz5uy Those countries: 1 - Don't have as many people 2 - Don't have as many guns 3 - Don't have as many cultural differences between citizens 4 - Don't have a right to own a gun
@@Robert-cu9bm then how come the US has a homicide rate of 5.3, while not a single other developed country has more than 2? Even the safest of all 50 US states (NH with a rate of 1.0) is less safe than: Slovenia, ireland, taiwan, australia, netherlands, new zealand, poland, portugal, spain, greece, italy, austria, czech republic, switzerland, south korea, china, norway, oman, indonesia, singapore, hongkong, japan and about 20 other states and territories. And that is your Nr 1 safest state with the lowest homicide rate by faaaar!
@@DesertCoyotes most of those countries (except the east asian ones) have just as diverse populations. Montana on the other hand has less than 1% black people, virtually no latinos, no big cities and very liberal gun laws. Yet still has about double the homicide rate of the worst developed countries. All those safer countries are very diverse: there are asian, european, middle eastern ones. Rich and poor, more and less developed, thinly and densely populated ones, more and less religious ones. But the one thing they all have in common, is stricter gun laws than the US.
Except it wasn't explicitly written for self defense either, it was written for defense against the government, and I am sorry but you little handgun isn't stopping any tyrant. It is more worth it making it harder for safe individuals to own a gun and also making it harder for dangerous individuals to own a gun then making it easier for everyone to own a gun.
@@pyrinikos3477 Taliban forced USA out of Afghanistan with only rifles and improvised explosives and some modern technology from the soviet occupation era.
@@flopus7 As private security I worked gun shows for several years and purchased a gun at one of them. I was not able to leave with and had to pick it up at the vendors brick and mortar store, after the background check was completed. It has been that way for years.
I thought this was going to be something innovative and interesting but instead it really hit us with the "you'd have to take this thing called a 'firearm safety course' and get a little card that says you have a 'license'" I can't believe I never really noticed that the stuff America is lobbying for or considering drastic measures are the same things that I've been doing in my country for years.
@pow Rice A total ban just has the problem you mentioned yourself: then they will just go and get illegal guns. Gun owning shouldn't be illegal. But getting a gun should be troublesome enough so that only people who are actually enthusiastic about guns will get them, but not too hard that it would be just easier to buy from the black market.
Getting illegal guns is another problem from this problem. Neither solutions will stop from someone getting guns illegally. To stop that, needs another solution
you have to have a background check for every gun purchase across the country... even at a gun show or an online purchase. You will never regulate personal sales because your never going to know who owns what to begin with, so "universal background checks" is just a feel good fairy tale that will become a registration... another fantasy unless you go door to door looking to see who has what and finally it ends with a confiscation.
5 років тому+21
they conveniently chose to turn a blind eye to the Chicago statistics as well, which is in one of their "more safe" license required states on that list.
they don't understand that regulating the law abiding citizens just takes the weapons out of their hands but does not deter those who would use it for crime.
Because you go to known sellers with licenses. A lot don't have them and don't abide by the background check law. You can also buy a gun privately from literally anyone with a gun and not have to go through a check either.
Tbh, I don't think that most gun safety advocates actually think that universal background checks will have a huge effect on gun homicides. Rather, it's more of a symbolic gesture to get the people who have historically been unwilling budge on these measures to do literally _anything_ preventative in that vein. I'm sure licensing is in fact a better and more effective path, but it's also moving the post, which will likely make the 2nd Amendment people jumpy
Yea in Poland same idea was proposed and after that we lost our gun rights in no time now only 1% of poles are armed and each time there is mass shooting in Europe this licences getting harder and harder to obtain
If it's presented to people like this, I think most people will be on board. It's really just the next step from background checks, which most people, including those who are self-affirmed NRA members support. It's doing SOMETHING, rather than sitting on your hands. Is it enough? Probably not, but sitting around and waiting for a perfect solution isn't getting us anywhere, so let's take that reasonable next step and see what happens.
@@HallowqueenCrafting I would love to share your optimism, but we live in a country that did nothing after a grown man walked into an elementary school and shot children. I agree that this video presents a more _logical_ and effective course of action, but that doesn't mean the ignorant or self serving people who are resisting change won't try to spin it into something far more nefarious
@@YouCallThataKnife253 yeah but it's just hypothetical talk anyway. No reason to be cynic where you don't have to be. We are discussing in a YT comment thread, it's not like this video itself or these comments will change what people in power do, but it potentially has its own effect by getting more people talking about it, agreeing to such ideas or getting into discussions etc. If the polls are even partially true, most people are already on board. With us humans, everything takes time and/or initiative. So let's stay positive at least so that we ourselves still remain ready to speak up and potentially do something where it COULD have an impact (i dunno call/write to your senat, sign a petition, demonstrations etc) instead of hopelessly giving up on everything we don't have a direct impact on. Cheers :)
You'll have to clear that w the DNC, and you already know how they feel about substitute single issue debates. They wouldn't want to insult their donors!
To answer your question, it was more of an artistic choice I take sometimes with rhetorical questions. I use it to make them dry statements, as if I was exhausted rather than genuinely confused. It'd only need a question mark if it was an enquiry. Does that answer your question?
There's been numerous cases of black children in open carry states (ie, where they are allowed to carry real guns in public) being shot dead by police just for holding toy guns, so in reality, no black person is going to apply for a gun licence, as it would just get them killed!
@@Hater_Ultima look up the 2nd amendment on the constitution's website, then check section 2.4. I'll quote: "The Court did clarify, however, that nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of firearms, among other presumptively lawful regulations." This makes licensing constitutional, for you are imposing conditions and qualifications on the buyer. It also makes denying felons or the mentally ill constitutional.
@@roadtrain_ A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed i dont see that part
I mean it actually is. Living in Austria, not owning a gun or owners-license (but a handling license so i can shoot at a shooting range with a rented weapon).. haven't done it in years because ammo is expensive but it is fun
@@trollolololololol2361 Shooting guns are fun. Almost all the people in my life who I have known to have shot a gun, regardless of political stance or opinion of guns, thought that it was real fun.
It's not impossible, it's just that virtually everyone at the show to sell guns is a dealer, using the show as another avenue to move their inventory. They're required to do background checks regardless of where they move that inventory at.
@@lewis616 I doubt it, but it's possible. The only thing I can see changing the situation was that gun dealers were having trouble keeping guns in stock, so they might have been selling at gun shows less frequently. On the flip side, though, most gun owners are appalled at the idea of selling their own guns.
@@ixiairisborne1695 Nah, as someone already said its because commercial gun sellers have to do the check regardless of where they sell the gun, citizens don't have to regardless of where they sell it. The gun show has no effect on the check, just who the seller is.
Most of the sellers are gun stores, and you have to go through a background check. The loophole really is private sales regardless of venues. If you had run into someone at the gunshow who was a private person and wanted to purchase their gun, they wouldn't have needed a check. Same if you saw a local online listing for a firearm from a private person. Gun show loophole sounds better than private sale loophole though, so the name sticks.
if guns were this heavily regulated, illegal guns would come from china into mexico, than into america along with fentynal, meth, street heroin, cocaine, cheap labor etc.
How about I’ll trade you: once I’ve passed a more stringent licensing requirement and already own a bunch of guns, I get a TSA PreCheck-style express lane to buy guns as I want with no waiting period and reduced restrictions on common features. Because let’s be honest: the guy like me who’s already owned dozens of guns for decades responsibly isn’t who you need to worry about getting one more (he could use any other one in his possession for nefarious purposes if he was an actual threat anyway).
@@dmitrikaljuznoi1323 most of those countries only allow certain types of guns. Pistols are almost impossible to acquire and shotguns and bolt action, or self loading, rifles require lengthy screening processes for you to be allowed to own one. That means you can't own any flashy guns like a .50 cal desert eagle, or an L96 AWS. In the US you can just go to the gun store and pick up whatever gun you'd like to try out at the range. Personally I think that's awesome.
vox is wrong the constitution says so "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
the theorist 1 You do realize politicians make the laws, not the citizens. Guns have a MASSIVE lobby. You should be able to get a firearm to defend yourself, but some don‘t buy guns to defend themselves but to hurt others. With a licensing system every US citizen would be able to get a firearm except the people that want to take the freedom away. I don‘t see a problem there.
Benjamin Meusburger you also have to set up a time to meet with the licensing police officer in your town who asks you some questions, finger prints you, etc. (at least in MA). Could definitely see that deterring some people.
Particularly in countries like Australia, where you have to wait 2 months after applying to actually get it, so it can't be a spur of the moment or anger motivated reason, so it's perfect
Same system is implemented in Poland and now only 1% of poles are armed because this licences are getting harder and harder to obtain after each mass shooting this is very dangerous for gun owners if it got implemented you will lose your 2nd amendment in no time , btw I am polish so i know what I am talking about
This is what gun manufacturers fear! Will result in a reduction of sales, so can't have that! This is why they fight against it so hard $$$$$$$$$$$ over lives
I am an American, and like the Swiss system. By my understanding, ALL young adults are REQUIRED to undergo military basic training. It is at that time, if they show any signs of mental instability, they are banned from owning firearms. Everyone else ( the majority ) keep their military rifles at home with them.
@@RankinMsP What you will NEVER hear on the liberal controlled news is that 80% or more of the "firearms violence" is (1) gang related and (2) concentrated in the Democrat controlled cities. If one were to remove the homicides in 5 cities in America, our death per capita from firearms would be miniscule. Want to know what cities those are? I will let you do your own research on that. You might find it illuminating.
@@JugglesGrenades in Norway we like the swiss have the same system. But you cant buy a hand gun whit out a reason. Like a shouting club. If you feel scared you cant get a hand gun for safety. If tou whant a rifle ore a shotgun o You can only get one if you need one. Like hunting and shunting clubb. And we are stil having more.guns per person then the swiss and almost no killings buy guns. And miletery is mandetory.
@@jrnbrste5469 I never believed the problem is access to firearms. If someone could "magically" make all firearms disappear, criminals would use knives, clubs or whatever weapon is available. Where I live, I can legally carry my pistol, but businesses can put up a sign, saying they don't want concealed weapons in their store. I just break the law, and keep my pistol on me always. Having been a victim of violent crime, it's a trade off. I prefer NOT to be an easy victim again.
@@derp8184 no one trains with real guns at schools. They used to be and there was in fact less school shootings back when some American schools had "shooting clubs"
@@aolvaar8792 that's not a gunshow thing. That's a private transfer. You'll still need to go through a background check if you don't find a dealer doing that at a gunshow in those 30 states.
@@louisryan5815 There are "swap meet areas at gun shows, where individuals can sell, swap, barter, cash and carry, ….. GPXD used the totality word "always" and "everyone" Not true
@@aolvaar8792 ONLY ONLY ONLY if the seller is not a gun dealer. Just like I can buy a firearm from my neighbor or in the parking lot of a police department when transferring between two people who aren't dealers.
@@jamesscott6917 follow the thread, GPXD Quote " You are ALWAYS required to fill out a background check at gun shows." 21 states Do Not allow Non-FFL transfers.
@@pirate6616 No. Universal healthcare is not optional everyone has to use it. In the U.S there are around 100 million who use private insurance and are happy with it. Putting universal healthcare into place would force all of them to go on universal healthcare. Also the healthcare industry employs around a million people all of which would lose their jobs.
"Background checks" are just a different way of saying, 'government permission is required to exercise a right'. Criminals can aquire guns without a "check".
@@braydensurvivez on private property. You can’t drive on public roads where you can put others at risk until you prove you’re a capable and responsible driver. Same accountability should apply to guns.
@@remcinematography5307 background checks have been weaponized before to take weapons from vets as they are classed under the spectrum of mental instability by PTSD. Like the fact that murder is illegal and still can be done you can drive minus the legal part .
@@remcinematography5307 You can certainly drive on public roads without a license. You are required to have insurance too, but there's also uninsured motorist insurance.
Voting and gun ownership are constitutional right. Gun licencing and voter ID laws both raise constitutional issues. If you are against gun licensing, you should also be against voter ID laws. Take a stand but be consistent.
@@delphic464 you don't understand the meaning of consistency in this issue. The constitution mandates that the right to bear arms must be well regulated. Which means that there is a right to bear arms, but with strict government regulation to stop bad people from owning guns. And it is the right that's inconsistent. Republicans want to make it difficult to register to vote on the same day, and make lines longer, but want to make it possible to go to a store and get a gun within the hour. Take a stand but be consistent.
@@SuperJBgaming Not factual, sellers at gun shows all run background checks. You can have a private sale at a gun show or in the parking lot from someone you met on FB. Gun shows have nothing to do with private sales.
The explanation for that is pretty simple. If you hold a FFL or Federal Firearms License, you have to do a background check every time you transfer a gun. Here's how it works; If you're a FFL holder, every time you obtain a gun whether it be through trade, sale, whatever, you have to log it in to a log book. The ATF is the governing body for this and they will come to your place of residence or place of business (if you own a gun shop or something like that) and check your book and the guns in your possession to make sure everything you have is logged in properly. If one gun is missing in the book, or you aren't logging them in correctly you could loose your FFL. In that log book you need to write down the make, serial number (if one exists), name of the person you got the gun from, and date in which you obtained it. When the gun is sold or transferred to another person in any way, a background check of the person obtaining the gun must be done and the gun must be logged out. The normal situation at these gun shows is that those that have vendors and are selling guns have an FFL. All guns there have been logged into their book before the show. Once a gun is sold, traded or even given away, that gun must be transferred out of their books and a background check must be completed. The "loophole" that is always talked about is when some guy with no FFL decides to rent a vendor space at one of these shows to sell his guns. This is rare though because most gun owners do not have enough guns that they want to sell to justify renting a vendor space for a day. A non-FFL holder can legally do hand to hand sales if the person they are selling to is from the same state as they are and as long as it is not a handgun. Each state is different, but this is is the case in even the most conservative of states. Basically, most people with enough guns that they want to sell to justify renting a vendor space for a day are FFL holders and that is why you go to a gun show to buy a gun you have to do a background check. EDIT: I should also mention that getting an FFL is quite an in depth process. It takes months, with multiple background checks, and even a few in person interviews between yourself and ATF agents. Its not like its just some online check that anyone can obtain in an afternoon.
You have 50k American troops on your land. You might call them "allies" but they are occupation troops since 1945. Tell me why can't Germany have nuclear weapons despite having c. 90 million people and largest economy in Europe? Slaves in your own land. Certified german moment.
As someone who did a background check for all of my firearms, all of which I purchased at gun shows, I find the misinformation about the 'gun show loophole' that is spread EVERYWHERE to be incredibly frustrating to hear.
@@ralphlaguna5433 There isn't a loophole, what loophole would there be? Everyone has to pass a background check at a gun show. In fact everyone has to pass a background check in order to purchase a firearm. Period. It's that simple. If you are not passing a background check to purchase a firearm you are breaking the law. It's really that simple. Please, explain to me what the loophole is.
In europe we have licsensing systems, police interveiw you to see if your mentally there, you have mandatory training, defentily doesnt solve all gun crime but why not try that out?
With the way things are going in America, being a pirate dont sound too bad. It's better than sitting around waiting for a stimulus check that may or may not come.
That mysterious "black market" where guns just appear our of nowhere and our government is powerless to stop it serves as a pretty convenient cop out for conservative dipshits.
"German is not advocating for a minority report situation" German literally IS advocating for a minority report situation. and Im sorry, but making the process more difficult for law abiding citizens to get a gun (that we living in America have the right to do) because the FBI and other government workers aren't doing their jobs properly is foul to every degree.
@@ratofvengence I forget which shooter off the top of my head, but its one mentioned in the video. They did a background check...but they called the wrong place and found nothing on the guy, if they did their job properly and called the correct place they would have found crime on the shooter.
@@TheProdigalCatholic But that isn't the way it normally goes down. There's nothing stopping anyone easily obtaining firearms at short notice, and too many clowns are walking around with one. That's why you have a 3rd world homicide rate.
@@laurenthomas9305 The solution herein proposed is neither comprehensive nor reasonable. Licensing is not a "solution" because it simply addresses "impulse" purchasers, and only when you become initially licensed. Once issued, it no longer impacts the "impulse" purchaser, who may now "impulse" purchase to their hearts content. If the present background check system were better designed, managed and implemented, such that it was more regularly updated and with data from those various sources mentioned, it would accomplish the same thing as the licensing without the added wait time. I should add, that while the wait time could, in theory, temporarily keep guns out of the hands of individuals with criminal intent, for a short time, who have yet to prove themselves criminal, it is OVERWHELMINGLY more likely to temporarily keep guns out of the hands of responsible citizens who may be harmed as a result of them having to WAIT to receive a license for their firearm. A woman separated from an abusive spouse for example, may be in need of a firearm for her protection in a matter of days. Make her wait 3 weeks and it could cost her life. A new family moves into a rough neighborhood, robberies and burglaries are regular occurrences. They decide the situation is dangerous enough to warrant purchasing a firearm for the first time in their lives, for purely defensive purposes. They are forced to wait 3 weeks. Week 2 their house is broken into and they are shot and killed. There are two sides to this "wait time" nonsense. There are more law-abiding citizens than criminals, so "wait times" would disproportionately impact the ability of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves, over criminals obtaining arms to commit crimes.
You can't talk about licensing without discussing the decades of abuse by the issuing authorities. Chicago passed a law requiring permits - then simply decided to stop accepting permit applications. DC did the same. NYC requires permits, but makes the process prohibitively expensive and time consuming, and then forbade you from taking the gun out of your apartment except to a handful of approved shooting ranges. Gun owners simply don't trust that governments will administer a licensing system in anything like as fair manner - because they've seen exactly that.
Exactly! Gun owners don't trust the government with this type of regulatory authority because there is a history of abuse. There are also countless public officials and politicians who are openly anti-gun. Gun owners are not at all unreasonable for rejecting proposals like this, because historically the people pitching these ideas (looking at you, Vox) are holding knives behind their backs.
Yes, this is happening right now with applications to builds suppressors being denied in mass "because the applicant's already have the parts to build it" (And the ATF knows this how)?
Isn't that unconstitutional ? The courts have long understood that if regulations are so strict as to bar people from their rights, then they should be struck down.
You really hit the nail on the head with this comment, I wouldn't have a problem with this system if authorities actually wanted to make a fair system. But they would almost certainly abuse a system like this and make it nearly impossible to get a firearm and already do in some places.
3:28 right here is the problem, this time last year in New York the State would have considered you “dangerous” for not wearing a mask. Who decides who is potentially “dangerous”?
99% of shootings that are criminal in nature, the person committing the crime doesn’t legally purchase the weapon. That’s your problem! The criminals don’t have harsh enough punishment! Selling the guns or using the guns illegally that needs to be addressed with the some ferocity.
We used to have a law called OPERATION EXILE that cracked down on illegal gun possession for felons. It worked but was repeated because it put too many blacks in jail.
The government knows if they didn't keep crime running high they would loose power and money so they flood our country with criminals let them out of prisons so they will go commit more crime to put fear in the public who then turns around and says please masters save us then they say only if you give up your rights and submit to what we tell you. We have let them turn us into a weak country.
In some states, private (non-licensed) individuals sell firearms at gun shows. I've never seen it happen in Michigan but, I haven't been to very many shows, only about three since I live less than a mile from a major gun shop.
Not true about Gun Shows.. every one I have been to is dealer only. I did hear about one that had a "Private Sale" area, but they still required a dealer to run the check. (it was part of the "fee" the seller paid to sell there)
It depends on the states laws and the show rules. Some are without any oversight while others run a bg check then make you pick up the weapon from an ffl. Its all over the place
@@anthonyperotti151 You're right about the FFLs, however what I'm referring to is the weird patchwork that is state & municipal law about whether or not background checks have to be done by individual sellers at gun shows. Some states and municipalities tack on additional requirements saying you have to do a background check, then transfer it to an FFL, and pick it up (where you have to go through another check). Others let any individual seller go without any checks at all. Its a really annoying patchwork, especially if youre a collector.
@@sanninjiraiya Gun Shows are restricted to dealers. Because FEDERAL law says that selling more than a very small number of guns a year makes you an illegal dealer. (hard time, don't drop soap style pen) It is not "good business" for the gun shows to have to worry about illegal sales going on in their show. FAR FAR too much legit money to be made.
@@redwolfexr not all gun shows are limited like that though. Several Ive been to in the Deep South have allowed/facillitated private sales. Which again, is great if youre trying to collect some of the triple action Daewoo imports from the 90s. Its less ideal from a public safety angle. Different states have different rules that are sometimes stricter than the federal laws or add additional regulations.
@@mikebutlermedia4211 and if they did, they would be breaking the law .....so how is making something a law that is already a law going to make a safer America
It's dismaying how many people react to violations of individual rights of honest, peaceful people by seeking to violate the individual rights of honest, peaceful people.
@@davidgrover5996Correct me if I'm wrong but the 2nd Amendment doesn't give the right to own a gun, 14th amendment is all about equal protection clause (don't see how that helps your case) 4th and 5th is more about due process so...
robotc 123, Oddly enough you are right. However is it because you understand it is because the 2nd protects the rights to own, acquire, and use Arms? It doesn’t grant that right. The 14th is about Due Process which Licensure violates as well as equal protection. The 4th and 5th are about property and and legal guarantees of and to every citizen will and have come int conflict with licensure schemes in court. Edit for typo.
@@morningstarxs7848 The Second absolutely gives us the individual right to carry a firearm unconnected to service in a militia. Supreme Court > Your opinions
@@LB-uw8nq except, they aren't wrong 0:30 *unlicensed dealer* isn't a gun show distributor. per fed law, you can legally sell any of your guns without an FFL to another private citizen without running a background check.
Three things need to be addressed before licensing is acceptable: 1) Cost: The licensing needs to be free, otherwise it becomes a de facto screen to exclude people with lower incomes from firearm purchases. 2) Transparency: Every citizen must be able to easily know why they were denied a license and appeal a denial. 3) Expediency: Authorities over licensing must be adequately staffed to administer all parts of the licensing process, otherwise licensing can be used as a de facto ban on gun ownership.
Not only that, but what are the downstream consequences of attaching licensing to constitutional rights? There is nothing inherently different in that regard between the 2nd amendment vs the 1st. Or the 5th, or the 19th, or the 13th. Will we need a license now to "plead the 5th"? What about for women being able to vote? No form of gun control will work without an amendment.
Here we go again with the gun show loop-hole. It is not a real thing. All vendors at gun shows and must and do give background checks. Stop acting like they don’t
If you sell firearms for a living you need a Federal firearms license and must do background checks on all firearms sales. That’s 99% of the vendors at gun shows. There’s a very small amount of people at gun shows who are selling there personal collection they are not required to do a background check.
Not entirely true. In FL, you can, without a background check, transfer a firearm between family members or in a private sale. However, the major gun show here in FL (Florida Gun Shows) requires all vendors, even non FFL vendors, to do a background check for all firearms transactions.
thank you, people don’t even bother to research stuff. it’s literally a federal law to get a background check, and there are few situations the transfer of a gun to another person is aloud
If one of the main points of the 2nd ammendment is to defend against a tyrannical government, then forcing citizens to go through a government controlled course and be on a government controlled licensing list to get one defeats the entire fuxking purpose. I'm sure we'd all be safer under the watchful eye of a benevolent big brother, issue is he's not benevolent.
Well the government can already confiscate your guns if they think someone is “dangerous”. The police can take any property without any charges. Licensing won’t enable something that’s already there.
In my opinion, the police or the troops should come to call every American citizen at their home to see if they have guns there and then the police or the troops can take them away from them and then destroyed all the guns. The Second Amendment should be repealed, because it is very irrelevant to America's deadly gun culture which will lead to an inexcusable reality.
@Jim boswell Surviellanc The more guns are there; the higher crime rate continues. Peacekeeping troops can be warranted to take all the criminals’ guns and other weapons and send them to prison.
Yes, I am from Germany and I never saw a real gun here or even know someone who could have a gun (except of the police or military). And I think this is a lot better and more save than if normal people would have guns.
Ok let me clarify here: 1. There are “Gun Dealers” and “Private Sellers”. In every State “gun dealers” must do background check for every sale (gun shows included). “Private Sellers” in MOST States, can sell to other people from the SAME State a firearm without a background check. So I’m from NJ and can’t buy a gun from “Private Seller” in NY..... Its THAT FREAKING SIMPLE TO UNDERSTAND! (This is the least restrictive version BTW because some states have a universal background check system and licensing. 2. A licensing system has clearly been shown to reduce gun sales regardless of who wants to buy them and for what reason. It clearly is and has been used as a way to discourage the public in general from buying firearms. This is true in NJ, NY, MA, CA & DC as a bureaucratic tax to stop people from applying for licenses. - It costs more $, It takes hours of paperwork, it takes multiple trips to police departments, it sometimes takes days off of work, it usually takes weeks or months, and in NJ it even has an expiration date and must be done for every purchase of a firearm. The 2nd Amendment is a RIGHT, not a privilege. I am actually for a National Licensing System, but not if it is overly burdensome and abused by the government to limit and dissuade people from their right to own firearms, & eventually used to forcefully confiscate firearms certain politicians don’t like.
Rights come from our creator and are imparted to us at birth. Getting a license to do something that our creator gave us a right to do in the first place makes the licensor into a false God. Thou shall have no other Gods before me. Exodus 20:3 The license turns a right into a privilege and is thus a blasphemy and idolatry ! A godless nation cannot remain free folks !!
@Robert McKinley I don't think it even matters on what God you worship. Your rights as a human extend to being able to defend yourself with anything you can get your hands on.
@@robertmckinley7688 >Imagine assuming U.S. Rights are supposed to be divinely imparted also who in the world was claiming the U.S. was a good in the first place, I expect bible-patting here but at least slightly applicable Bible patting
I live in New Zealand which has a high level of firearm ownership. We have always had a licensing process for firearm ownership. It works well, but no system is perfect.
Zack McClean pretty sure the government should help you with that as long as you prove that you are in danger. We should vote for an universal enchanting system tbh
Oh no, I had to do a little bit of paperwork that in the long run is only the slightest of inconveniences. What’s a tragedy! What a violation of my supposed right I have to just own whatever weapons I want and to do whatever I want with them! Harumph, I say!
@@Bloggartattempting to stand between the people and their right, and then license that right back to them, couldn’t be a more clear form of infringement. Infringement isn’t just prohibition. Infringement is also hinderance.
@@beanbean2128 if it was a private seller then that's one thing, if it was a dealer, then they broke the law. I'm guessing it was a private seller which doesn't have to give a background check.
@@caiden7800 Guns shows have nothing to do with mass shootings. Good fact to know is that less than 1% of mass shooters obtain the firearm from a gun show.
@@Jessetheoutdoorman more than 80% of all gun murders, including 'mass' type shootings are gang/drug related in the inner cities with illegally obtained weapons. This won't even make a dent in that number. There are about 100,000,000 legal owners/operators responsible for about 2000 murders a year. Think of two circles in a Venn diagram. The illegal owners/operators do nearly all the killing while a tiny fraction of a huge number of people the rest. The rate of legal owners who commit murder is like 1 in 50,000. That means a full Yankee stadium of legal owners would produce a single murderer. This 'licensing' system, which will increase cost and time, and difficulty for the legal owners is restricting rights of millions to hopefully reduce this number. Unfortunately for this theory, the places that have relaxed licensing rules haven't seen increases in murders and have seen crime decrease.
@@HerewardWake Not if we look at the data from other countries like switzerland, way laxer gun laws and almost no shootings at all, its not the guns that is the problem it is the people who has access to guns.
imo the license system is perfect as a pro2A. In the United States to have a car, a machine that also kills people, you have to have a license. this makes so much sense to me
The problem with this is that cars are not an enumerated right. I’m also against the idea of a national gun registry, which is required in order for this system to work, primarily because I don’t trust the government to safely protect this information from leaks and bad actors from within the government.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Watching Vox as a foreigner be like
"The measuring system we're not talking about:
This is a meter"
@@theintrepid7583 whoooosh
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 Spot on.
A metric spot. On.
Metre
Metric is taught in all American schools
As a Canadian tradesman I say it honestly depends on the job. Metric is nice for tiny machining and manufacturing and stuff. Imperial is good for building houses and in Canada ya gotta know both and I like imperial more
Why is "unlicensed dealer" even a category?!
They buy guns for a normal price and sell it without a check with a higher one for profit. The manufacturer sells more guns and the middle man makes some money too. No complaints from the state
@@FMSkyLoL that's the problem though, they saw money and policy stopped there. Here, whether you buy or are gifted a gun, you need a license and getting one of those is a drama and a half.
They pretty much made up a category, private sales do happen but they are almost always between friends and family. And the gun show loophole doesn't exist.
There is no such thing as "an unlicensed dealer." Seriously. A dealer, by definition, is licensed by the Federal Government. If someone is buying and selling guns as a business but has not federal license to do so, they care committing a felony.
Isaac W YAY someone with sense
Hey it's not our fault, and i thought our logo was cool...
FBI
It is. They’re just jealous.
@@BikieMC Wut
It is. They just don't appreciate it or anything else you do. They just sit back and say bad about you.
The logo is ight
But it's very outdated, least compared to current government logos
Lol dude
It's sad that the Vox videos resurface after years and are still just as relevant because the issues are not yet resolved.
Why not just dearm the population ban gun sells completely
Fr
Very true and it is not just Vox, it is any other informational video from any news channel or other channel.
My thoughts exactly.
True. Every time I see a recommended vídeo of Vox from many years ago, I question myself what tragedy happened recently.
“People who haven’t done anything bad yet but may do something bad in the future” aka every human
Helicarriers from Captain America Winter Soldier lol
This doesn't make any sense. Your statement indirectly says no human has ever done anything wrong.
@@Chris.Pontius key word is may. Obviously the majority of people will never do these horrible acts, but if you look at things like the milgram shock experiments, Stanford prison experiment, or even historical atrocities like the Holocaust and Abu Ghraib, it’s proven that the majority of humans have the potential to do bad things. It just needs to be drawn out of them. I was only commenting on that.
@@Chris.Pontius at some point in time, they had done nothing wrong, that is their point.
So, yeah, do what other countries do instead then
America: Says thing.
Europeans in the comments: *Our time is now*
Or.... NOW
Or NOW!
Whoops, did you mean The Entire World?
I WAS CHOSEN BY HEAVEN, SAY MY NAME WHEN YOU PRAY, TO THE SKYYY!! SEE CAROLUS RISE!!
Why americans think that every non american is european?
It’s almost as if criminals don’t follow the law. Huh, who would’ve thought?
And yet criminal law is still a viable system of managing violence.
@@nathanlevesque7812 Yeah, criminal law is supposed to stop criminals, not hinder law abiding citizens. Police could probably catch more criminals if they just indiscriminately scooped people up and then released people that were proven innocent, but I think people would have a problem with that.
@@Nanofuture87 What you described would violate several human rights. Whereas the measures discussed in the video represent a minor inconvenience at most. Vehicle registration is not "hindering" law abiding citizens anymore than that. Both make crime more manageable.
@@nathanlevesque7812 The measures discussed in the video would turn a human right into a privilege and get people killed.
@@Nanofuture87 No, to all of that. Guns are not a human right, no matter what your backwards country enshrined into law. Neither are swords, grenades, flamethrowers, bows, or laser cannons. Weapons are possessions. The only rights that relate to them are those of property in general.
Owning a gun is no more a right and no less privilege than owning a car. Regulating both saves lives. That's why America is this massive outlier of ridiculously high gun death rates, compared to every other 'developed' nation on Earth.
Every person or dealer with an FFL is Federally required to run a NICS background check on every firearms sale. Also, 21 states currently require the same background check to be done even on private gun sales. Meaning if someone wants to sell their gun to their neighbor, they're suppose to go to a shop and have the same NICS background check done to legally complete the sale. I find for some reason the "we must have universal background checks now!" crowd rarely knows anything about this.
Came here to say this glad I'm not the only one who knows...
"the air force failed to send his domestic abuse conventions to the FBI"
*excuse me but did you say the air force*
Yea the military has its own court system FYI it’s called JAG
Yep, sounds like someone didnt do thier job. Why would someone take my rights away for someone who didn't do their job?
@@alejandrocavazos1400 bruh what rights. KAREN alerrrt
@@walikazmi7613 Right to own arms?
@@walikazmi7613 Umm, it's called the 2nd amendment. The right to "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed". Like it says SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
Why not make murder illegal? Problem solved
Dude this is such a smart idea!
Original joke! Comedy Genius! Certainly never heard that tired out ad hominem before!
@@124085 Hominem*
Yes,I suggest a purge every Wednesday.
Murder is illegal in many states. Abortion is murder.
This sounds great. Gun licenses should also expire, so license holders are checked again when they apply for an extension.
Zed Vee this already happens in almost every state it’s just not mandatory. I leave in Ga I’ve had my license for about five years
that is how everything works in the rest of the world i think
Can’t buy a gun without a background check at a gun show. Private sale is different. The law already states that you cannot sell to someone who couldn’t pass a background check. At least it does in Texas
They do every 6 years in MA.
@@poeticsim9469 So what you're saying is ENFORCED gun expiration law?
“The current universal background system is flawed” because some government employee failed at their job to update information to a database.
Solution: more government employees to fail at their job.
Typical throw more money at a problem so it goes away.
Most accurate comment I’ve read in a long time
@@Luca-sz5uy Those countries:
1 - Don't have as many people
2 - Don't have as many guns
3 - Don't have as many cultural differences between citizens
4 - Don't have a right to own a gun
@@kravan50631. Has no bearing on this
2. Has no bearing on this
3. Has no impact whatsoever about gun laws
4. Has no bearing on this
Try again buddy
“And if that won’t work. Use more guns”
-Engineer
I solve practical problems
For instance, how am I gonna stop some big mean Mother-Hubbard from tearin' me a structurally superfluous new behind?
200th like
modern problems require outdated solutions.
😂
to quote Homer Simpson: "TWO WEEKS!? But I'm angry now!"
Probably fist fight is another solution.
MechaMicro
Knife... People just use different means.
Gun buy back, Bans... All been shown not to reduced homicides.
@@Robert-cu9bm then how come the US has a homicide rate of 5.3, while not a single other developed country has more than 2?
Even the safest of all 50 US states (NH with a rate of 1.0) is less safe than:
Slovenia, ireland, taiwan, australia, netherlands, new zealand, poland, portugal, spain, greece, italy, austria, czech republic, switzerland, south korea, china, norway, oman, indonesia, singapore, hongkong, japan and about 20 other states and territories.
And that is your Nr 1 safest state with the lowest homicide rate by faaaar!
Hungry for lead?
@@DesertCoyotes most of those countries (except the east asian ones) have just as diverse populations. Montana on the other hand has less than 1% black people, virtually no latinos, no big cities and very liberal gun laws. Yet still has about double the homicide rate of the worst developed countries.
All those safer countries are very diverse: there are asian, european, middle eastern ones. Rich and poor, more and less developed, thinly and densely populated ones, more and less religious ones. But the one thing they all have in common, is stricter gun laws than the US.
3:41 Massachusetts out here lookin like a pistol doe
I never noticed that untill now.
Wow
I'll never unsee that now.
Ironically that's where Smith & Wesson's headquarters is located. 😂
Let's require a background check to enter Massachusetts
The 2nd Amendment isn’t for hunting or target shooting.
Technically, government agents can be targets
Except it wasn't explicitly written for self defense either, it was written for defense against the government, and I am sorry but you little handgun isn't stopping any tyrant. It is more worth it making it harder for safe individuals to own a gun and also making it harder for dangerous individuals to own a gun then making it easier for everyone to own a gun.
@@pyrinikos3477 Afghanistan dudes in flip flops would like a word.
@@pyrinikos3477 Taliban forced USA out of Afghanistan with only rifles and improvised explosives and some modern technology from the soviet occupation era.
Background checks are required at gun shows. and has been required for years
Imagine vox not knowing about guns. I've never bought from a booth without having a background run.
@@flopus7 As private security I worked gun shows for several years and purchased a gun at one of them. I was not able to leave with and had to pick it up at the vendors brick and mortar store, after the background check was completed. It has been that way for years.
@@adamchelate3498 im agreeing with you
Depends on the state but I think they were mostly talking about private sellers
The first thing they do is ask for a ccw license , I don’t get it
I thought this was going to be something innovative and interesting but instead it really hit us with the
"you'd have to take this thing called a 'firearm safety course' and get a little card that says you have a 'license'"
I can't believe I never really noticed that the stuff America is lobbying for or considering drastic measures are the same things that I've been doing in my country for years.
@pow Rice A total ban just has the problem you mentioned yourself: then they will just go and get illegal guns. Gun owning shouldn't be illegal. But getting a gun should be troublesome enough so that only people who are actually enthusiastic about guns will get them, but not too hard that it would be just easier to buy from the black market.
Getting illegal guns is another problem from this problem. Neither solutions will stop from someone getting guns illegally. To stop that, needs another solution
Ban guns then criminals are the only people that can get them think that through buddy
@@eljerc5894 Not necessarily when some people think it's an unfair fight and buy guns illegally just in case.
Well, those are drastic measures to be fair, its state monopoly on violence
Im in california, background checks for every purchase , yet guns still end up in criminal hands.
Vwtroy troy who could have guessed!
"Fast and Furious" brought to you thanks to obama and holder!
you have to have a background check for every gun purchase across the country... even at a gun show or an online purchase. You will never regulate personal sales because your never going to know who owns what to begin with, so "universal background checks" is just a feel good fairy tale that will become a registration... another fantasy unless you go door to door looking to see who has what and finally it ends with a confiscation.
they conveniently chose to turn a blind eye to the Chicago statistics as well, which is in one of their "more safe" license required states on that list.
they don't understand that regulating the law abiding citizens just takes the weapons out of their hands but does not deter those who would use it for crime.
And what happens when the government decides to revoke the license?
Now you have a database of gunowners.
I have brought a lot of guns at gun-shows they still background check
exactly most people believe everything they hear on the news and from politicians
If the people that want to restrict guns more would just go buy a gun themselves they would instantly change their mind.
It's Vox, people come here for the comments, not the facts.
Because you go to known sellers with licenses. A lot don't have them and don't abide by the background check law. You can also buy a gun privately from literally anyone with a gun and not have to go through a check either.
That's good but it still doesn't prove wrong the point of the video with licensing
Tbh, I don't think that most gun safety advocates actually think that universal background checks will have a huge effect on gun homicides. Rather, it's more of a symbolic gesture to get the people who have historically been unwilling budge on these measures to do literally _anything_ preventative in that vein. I'm sure licensing is in fact a better and more effective path, but it's also moving the post, which will likely make the 2nd Amendment people jumpy
Yea in Poland same idea was proposed and after that we lost our gun rights in no time now only 1% of poles are armed and each time there is mass shooting in Europe this licences getting harder and harder to obtain
@rpbsjy I completely agree
If it's presented to people like this, I think most people will be on board. It's really just the next step from background checks, which most people, including those who are self-affirmed NRA members support. It's doing SOMETHING, rather than sitting on your hands. Is it enough? Probably not, but sitting around and waiting for a perfect solution isn't getting us anywhere, so let's take that reasonable next step and see what happens.
@@HallowqueenCrafting I would love to share your optimism, but we live in a country that did nothing after a grown man walked into an elementary school and shot children. I agree that this video presents a more _logical_ and effective course of action, but that doesn't mean the ignorant or self serving people who are resisting change won't try to spin it into something far more nefarious
@@YouCallThataKnife253 yeah but it's just hypothetical talk anyway. No reason to be cynic where you don't have to be. We are discussing in a YT comment thread, it's not like this video itself or these comments will change what people in power do, but it potentially has its own effect by getting more people talking about it, agreeing to such ideas or getting into discussions etc. If the polls are even partially true, most people are already on board. With us humans, everything takes time and/or initiative. So let's stay positive at least so that we ourselves still remain ready to speak up and potentially do something where it COULD have an impact (i dunno call/write to your senat, sign a petition, demonstrations etc) instead of hopelessly giving up on everything we don't have a direct impact on. Cheers :)
A man walks into a gun shop and sees that the clerk is a Tyrannosaurus Rex.
He asks, "What's with the small arms?"
Rex says “razor sharp teeth were on sale on Amazon”
Just made my day!
This is lame but hilarious
Ba dum tssssss
No.
In Czech republic, we have almost most firearms per capita in earope, righ after swiss i think... but near zero gun violence. All thanks to licensing
Ok so let's get the candidates to talk about this instead of background checks in the next debate...
Good luck with that
@@CapyMartinBara you mean in a democracy the politicians are not representing the will of their electorate? The horror!
@@CapyMartinBara thanks. Lol
You'll have to clear that w the DNC, and you already know how they feel about substitute single issue debates. They wouldn't want to insult their donors!
🤧
Why do you guys keep interviewing your own employees
Frrrr
@R. Schowiada71 I know right. So ignorant.
To answer your question, it was more of an artistic choice I take sometimes with rhetorical questions. I use it to make them dry statements, as if I was exhausted rather than genuinely confused. It'd only need a question mark if it was an enquiry. Does that answer your question?
Because they can't find enough people with real facts putside of their clique.
@@anthonyg8680 Gotta scare people into hating guns somehow. Remember, if we banned guns, all violence would disapear.
Well, Dave Chapelle suggested having every black person go out and apply for gun licences. Things will move really quickly from there.
its actually a good idea
I agree, too.
There's been numerous cases of black children in open carry states (ie, where they are allowed to carry real guns in public) being shot dead by police just for holding toy guns, so in reality, no black person is going to apply for a gun licence, as it would just get them killed!
@@lilaclizard4504 It could also get them not killed, is the thing.
@@ironraccoon3536 Guns can't stop bullets only shoot them.
“Shall not be infringed.”
2nd amendment doesn't cover people with mental illnesses or fugitives so licensing isn't infringing on the 2nd amendment. Try again.
@@roadtrain_ Explain
@@Hater_Ultima look up the 2nd amendment on the constitution's website, then check section 2.4. I'll quote:
"The Court did clarify, however, that nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of firearms, among other presumptively lawful regulations."
This makes licensing constitutional, for you are imposing conditions and qualifications on the buyer. It also makes denying felons or the mentally ill constitutional.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State
@@roadtrain_ A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed
i dont see that part
Isn't that how it's done almost everywhere in the world?
Yeah, that's how it's done almost everywhere in the world
And in many places in the world, you simply can't get a gun, period. It is simple and it works.
In the civilized world, yes.
James Wong And in the places you can get one, they are actually used for hunting or as a hobby, not to do mass shootings or rob someone.
I thought they had a license thing that wasn't working but not that there isn't one lol
3:42 The state of Massachusetts looks like a gun
Whoa. Don't think I can unsee that. Thanks for reminding me.
That means we need to get rid of it
You become what you use
The whole state needs a background check 😅
@@Spodie before they do background check, it need to go through licensing check.
"Shooting guns is kinda fun."
-Vox 2019
I mean it actually is.
Living in Austria, not owning a gun or owners-license (but a handling license so i can shoot at a shooting range with a rented weapon)..
haven't done it in years because ammo is expensive but it is fun
It’s not kinda fun it’s really fun
@@stalkinjaguar8854 Some people find it fun
@@trollolololololol2361 Shooting guns are fun. Almost all the people in my life who I have known to have shot a gun, regardless of political stance or opinion of guns, thought that it was real fun.
It is very fun also when hunting
Who come here after elementary school carnage in Texas. Deeply condolence to those children and their family.
@@unknownunknown7882 Did you not listen to the part of the video where they said instant background checks don’t work on their own?
@@unknownunknown7882 Wow. Scared to even talk about the carnage guns cause!
texas pack
@@BitterKatze Nothing, including confiscation, will end evil.
@@thethirdman225 This is about the decay of our culture. The gun didn't do it.
Why am I watching this I'm irish
I'm African and really actually should be watching this because of all the racism. And also because why not.
@@davidlayne8359 stay away from us ye Yanks
James Scully we’re coming.
@@macthedog4729 Haha.
Don't worry the British will be coming back.
@@randomstuff9005 . . . No they won't lol
I just went to a gun show a few weeks ago and saw first hand that I could NOT buy a gun without a background check...
It's not impossible, it's just that virtually everyone at the show to sell guns is a dealer, using the show as another avenue to move their inventory. They're required to do background checks regardless of where they move that inventory at.
@@lewis616 I doubt it, but it's possible. The only thing I can see changing the situation was that gun dealers were having trouble keeping guns in stock, so they might have been selling at gun shows less frequently. On the flip side, though, most gun owners are appalled at the idea of selling their own guns.
@@ixiairisborne1695 Nah, as someone already said its because commercial gun sellers have to do the check regardless of where they sell the gun, citizens don't have to regardless of where they sell it. The gun show has no effect on the check, just who the seller is.
Most of the sellers are gun stores, and you have to go through a background check. The loophole really is private sales regardless of venues. If you had run into someone at the gunshow who was a private person and wanted to purchase their gun, they wouldn't have needed a check. Same if you saw a local online listing for a firearm from a private person. Gun show loophole sounds better than private sale loophole though, so the name sticks.
@@lewis616 no
America: adds universal background checks
Criminal: illegally buys one
if guns were this heavily regulated, illegal guns would come from china into mexico, than into america along with fentynal, meth, street heroin, cocaine, cheap labor etc.
@@trollpolice You're ignoring the guns the US government sends to Mexico, to be illegally sold (fast and furious). :)
@@trollpolice they are highly regulated doesn't do anything exceot put good people in danger of prosecution
@@TheMattTrakker Shhhh, we're not supposed to talk about that.
Trollol Police Mexican cartels already get a majority of their guns from Russia, and South America.
How about I’ll trade you: once I’ve passed a more stringent licensing requirement and already own a bunch of guns, I get a TSA PreCheck-style express lane to buy guns as I want with no waiting period and reduced restrictions on common features. Because let’s be honest: the guy like me who’s already owned dozens of guns for decades responsibly isn’t who you need to worry about getting one more (he could use any other one in his possession for nefarious purposes if he was an actual threat anyway).
Europeans: *Wait, you guys have guns?*
Eh... Kinda no. Serbia, Montenegro, Finland, Norway, Switzerland. All of those plus more have one of the highest gun per capita stats
Mexicans: No... But yes
KONO DIO DA!
Switzerland: *”am I a joke to you?”*
@@dmitrikaljuznoi1323 Guns are illegal in Norway unless ypu count hunting weapons
@@dmitrikaljuznoi1323 most of those countries only allow certain types of guns. Pistols are almost impossible to acquire and shotguns and bolt action, or self loading, rifles require lengthy screening processes for you to be allowed to own one. That means you can't own any flashy guns like a .50 cal desert eagle, or an L96 AWS. In the US you can just go to the gun store and pick up whatever gun you'd like to try out at the range. Personally I think that's awesome.
The one and only solution, possibly the final solution is the full legalization of
PRIVATELY
OWNED
RECREATIONAL
NUKES
Is that intentional?
Yes it is.
you too? 🤙
All in favor?
Aye
"The Air Force failed to send his domestic abuse convictions to the FBI"
And we all know innocent citizens should be punished for the government's failure.
So government f's up, and it's up to the people to pay for those mistakes?
@@tonycj7860 people already paid for the mistakes i.e the 26 church goers and all other mass shootings
@@atheist28403 we're not punishing you by making you get a license
@@KaiTungNg yes... yes you are... that is a punishment for everyone
fun fact of the day: criminals don't follow laws.
No joke
Did you even watch through the whole video?
"the solution no one is talking about" except the rest of the world.
Then again it's a problem the rest of the world doesn't have.
@@justaguy6216 it's a problem the rest of the world already solved.
@@Oscar1618033 Hence they don't need to talk about the solutions anymore.
@@justaguy6216 What is the purpose of your comment
@@RKKPvP Shitposting really
Vox:
Americans: Sounds long and expensive
@@bilqisconway Karens are some of the most pro-gun control people out there. Moms Demand Action is basically nothing but Karens.
bilqisconway box is all wrong here
vox is wrong the constitution says so "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
@@bilqisconwaythey wouldn't have a problem passing a system like what they said if 66 or 75 or 96 percent agree as they said.
the theorist 1 You do realize politicians make the laws, not the citizens. Guns have a MASSIVE lobby. You should be able to get a firearm to defend yourself, but some don‘t buy guns to defend themselves but to hurt others. With a licensing system every US citizen would be able to get a firearm except the people that want to take the freedom away. I don‘t see a problem there.
Filling out a form ->80% of people will instantly loose interest to buy a gun ;-)
Benjamin Meusburger you also have to set up a time to meet with the licensing police officer in your town who asks you some questions, finger prints you, etc. (at least in MA). Could definitely see that deterring some people.
You already have to fill out a form to buy a gun from a store ;-)
Particularly in countries like Australia, where you have to wait 2 months after applying to actually get it, so it can't be a spur of the moment or anger motivated reason, so it's perfect
Same system is implemented in Poland and now only 1% of poles are armed because this licences are getting harder and harder to obtain after each mass shooting this is very dangerous for gun owners if it got implemented you will lose your 2nd amendment in no time , btw I am polish so i know what I am talking about
This is what gun manufacturers fear! Will result in a reduction of sales, so can't have that!
This is why they fight against it so hard $$$$$$$$$$$ over lives
More guns mean less crime, and more freedom
more guns less crime? you sure mate?
@@FirstnameLastname-ix4pg
I'll take the risks of freedom over the safety of the prison any time.
Or solving the cause of these kind of problems. Though I do agree on guns.
In Switzerland we have a licensing process for firearms. It works greatly and we‘re still 4th worldwide of most privat owned firearms :D
I am an American, and like the Swiss system. By my understanding, ALL young adults are REQUIRED to undergo military basic training. It is at that time, if they show any signs of mental instability, they are banned from owning firearms. Everyone else ( the majority ) keep their military rifles at home with them.
You are also sensible people, mostly...
In the Yew Ess of A however...
@@RankinMsP What you will NEVER hear on the liberal controlled news is that 80% or more of the "firearms violence" is (1) gang related and (2) concentrated in the Democrat controlled cities. If one were to remove the homicides in 5 cities in America, our death per capita from firearms would be miniscule. Want to know what cities those are? I will let you do your own research on that. You might find it illuminating.
@@JugglesGrenades in Norway we like the swiss have the same system. But you cant buy a hand gun whit out a reason. Like a shouting club.
If you feel scared you cant get a hand gun for safety.
If tou whant a rifle ore a shotgun o
You can only get one if you need one. Like hunting and shunting clubb. And we are stil having more.guns per person then the swiss and almost no killings buy guns. And miletery is mandetory.
@@jrnbrste5469 I never believed the problem is access to firearms. If someone could "magically" make all firearms disappear, criminals would use knives, clubs or whatever weapon is available. Where I live, I can legally carry my pistol, but businesses can put up a sign, saying they don't want concealed weapons in their store. I just break the law, and keep my pistol on me always. Having been a victim of violent crime, it's a trade off. I prefer NOT to be an easy victim again.
1:10 "Shooting guns is kind of fun". Haven't heard something more American than that!
you know there are olympic events that involve gun's right?
@@joshuaijaola2145 and they train at school? hmm now school shootings make sense
i mean its not wrong
@@derp8184 no one trains with real guns at schools. They used to be and there was in fact less school shootings back when some American schools had "shooting clubs"
I mean come on guns are cool
You are always required to fill out a background check at gunshows. I was at a gun show the other day and everyone was filling them out
Maybe in your State, but in About 30 States allow Cash and carry, for private transfer.
@@aolvaar8792 that's not a gunshow thing. That's a private transfer. You'll still need to go through a background check if you don't find a dealer doing that at a gunshow in those 30 states.
@@louisryan5815 There are "swap meet areas at gun shows, where individuals can sell, swap, barter, cash and carry, …..
GPXD used the totality word "always" and "everyone"
Not true
@@aolvaar8792 ONLY ONLY ONLY if the seller is not a gun dealer. Just like I can buy a firearm from my neighbor or in the parking lot of a police department when transferring between two people who aren't dealers.
@@jamesscott6917 follow the thread, GPXD Quote " You are ALWAYS required to fill out a background check at gun shows."
21 states Do Not allow Non-FFL transfers.
Any restriction of the individual right to self defense is complicity with the attacker.
“The FBI databases its outdated as their logo”. 😂
thats not even true though
It’s not though, Vox is 100% lying
Shots fired, amr
Not to mention they are criminals themselves.
Nah the FBI is too busy spying on Lolicon and weeb looking for Loli-Related Activity.
Or we can continue to blame video games, or Obama, or Hillary’s emails...
Manny Manhattan Music that’s probably what we’re gonna do tbh
Yes definitely do that
Or rap music - or rock music
Mario cart is the largest reason of car crashes
or
people who only go to church sundays and forget god in the week xD
United States: *Breathes*
Literally everyone: HAHAHAHAHAHA free healthcare.
"Free"
“Free”
Better than what Americans have
DamnUA-camLetsYouHaveANameAsLongAsFiftyCharacters nah I’d rather not have public healthcare I believe it’s a commodity and not a right
@@pirate6616 No. Universal healthcare is not optional everyone has to use it. In the U.S there are around 100 million who use private insurance and are happy with it. Putting universal healthcare into place would force all of them to go on universal healthcare. Also the healthcare industry employs around a million people all of which would lose their jobs.
"Background checks" are just a different way of saying, 'government permission is required to exercise a right'. Criminals can aquire guns without a "check".
So there shouldn’t be drivers license tests right ?
@@remcinematography5307 u can drive a car without a license
@@braydensurvivez on private property. You can’t drive on public roads where you can put others at risk until you prove you’re a capable and responsible driver. Same accountability should apply to guns.
@@remcinematography5307 background checks have been weaponized before to take weapons from vets as they are classed under the spectrum of mental instability by PTSD. Like the fact that murder is illegal and still can be done you can drive minus the legal part .
@@remcinematography5307 You can certainly drive on public roads without a license. You are required to have insurance too, but there's also uninsured motorist insurance.
Yet implementing a voter ID system is too burdensome for Americans. Hmm.
Voting and gun ownership are constitutional right. Gun licencing and voter ID laws both raise constitutional issues. If you are against gun licensing, you should also be against voter ID laws. Take a stand but be consistent.
@@delphic464 wait man, people are allowed to make sense in the youtube comments!!??!? 👍👍👍
@@delphic464 False equivalence. The consequence of granting one person who shouldn't have the right is very different in each case.
@@delphic464 you don't understand the meaning of consistency in this issue. The constitution mandates that the right to bear arms must be well regulated. Which means that there is a right to bear arms, but with strict government regulation to stop bad people from owning guns.
And it is the right that's inconsistent. Republicans want to make it difficult to register to vote on the same day, and make lines longer, but want to make it possible to go to a store and get a gun within the hour. Take a stand but be consistent.
@@delphic464 Simply present an ID for both. There's your consistency.
I’ve never met a gun show vendor who doesn’t do a background check .....
Kevin Cifuentes I know right? I’m from Cali and they always told me they had to do a backround.
@@MarcoGarcia-lg5tl That's probably the issue, go to Missouri or Texas and Gun Shows might be more lax on doing background checks
@@SuperJBgaming Not factual, sellers at gun shows all run background checks. You can have a private sale at a gun show or in the parking lot from someone you met on FB. Gun shows have nothing to do with private sales.
@@SuperJBgaming In Missouri you are required to do a background check!
The explanation for that is pretty simple. If you hold a FFL or Federal Firearms License, you have to do a background check every time you transfer a gun.
Here's how it works; If you're a FFL holder, every time you obtain a gun whether it be through trade, sale, whatever, you have to log it in to a log book. The ATF is the governing body for this and they will come to your place of residence or place of business (if you own a gun shop or something like that) and check your book and the guns in your possession to make sure everything you have is logged in properly. If one gun is missing in the book, or you aren't logging them in correctly you could loose your FFL. In that log book you need to write down the make, serial number (if one exists), name of the person you got the gun from, and date in which you obtained it. When the gun is sold or transferred to another person in any way, a background check of the person obtaining the gun must be done and the gun must be logged out.
The normal situation at these gun shows is that those that have vendors and are selling guns have an FFL. All guns there have been logged into their book before the show. Once a gun is sold, traded or even given away, that gun must be transferred out of their books and a background check must be completed.
The "loophole" that is always talked about is when some guy with no FFL decides to rent a vendor space at one of these shows to sell his guns. This is rare though because most gun owners do not have enough guns that they want to sell to justify renting a vendor space for a day. A non-FFL holder can legally do hand to hand sales if the person they are selling to is from the same state as they are and as long as it is not a handgun. Each state is different, but this is is the case in even the most conservative of states.
Basically, most people with enough guns that they want to sell to justify renting a vendor space for a day are FFL holders and that is why you go to a gun show to buy a gun you have to do a background check.
EDIT: I should also mention that getting an FFL is quite an in depth process. It takes months, with multiple background checks, and even a few in person interviews between yourself and ATF agents. Its not like its just some online check that anyone can obtain in an afternoon.
Take a shot every time you hear “background check”
With a gun?
Gewel ✔ no, a shot of alcahol
dud boothwas great`!
That wasn’t fun I’m writing this as a ghost
Rather fire a shot😅
As a german citizen, i can confirm that this is a certified US moment.
Fr I’m getting sick of these shootings
@@iq_monster2755 well, yea can’t disagree on that one
@@iq_monster2755 cry more
@@jhh600 what kind of response is that? Do you have no morals?
You have 50k American troops on your land. You might call them "allies" but they are occupation troops since 1945. Tell me why can't Germany have nuclear weapons despite having c. 90 million people and largest economy in Europe? Slaves in your own land. Certified german moment.
As someone who did a background check for all of my firearms, all of which I purchased at gun shows, I find the misinformation about the 'gun show loophole' that is spread EVERYWHERE to be incredibly frustrating to hear.
@@ralphlaguna5433 There isn't a loophole, what loophole would there be? Everyone has to pass a background check at a gun show. In fact everyone has to pass a background check in order to purchase a firearm. Period. It's that simple. If you are not passing a background check to purchase a firearm you are breaking the law. It's really that simple.
Please, explain to me what the loophole is.
@@reezethevampire it depends on the state. They are pointing out that this is not federal law
@@samuelehrhardt3732 You are just wrong. Yes, it is a federal law that you get a federal background check whenever you purchase a firearm.
@@reezethevampire no, dude. Look it up. It’s state by state, federal law only requires this for licensed gun stores
@@samuelehrhardt3732 Right and if it isn't a licensed gun store it doesn't have a license to sell meaning it is illegal.
Some times I wonder why I care about others country’s problems
Your strength is your empathy.
Where r u ?
Lol same. Anyway the US is sort of a role model for a lot of people so what happens there could replicate in other countries
It's not really a problem unless you watch far left news which is 95% of source
Albraa Tahani-Mazen I am from Norway 🇳🇴
I have been to many gun shows and the background checks are just as strict as buying it from a gun store
22% of the people buying guns are not subject to background checks
you mean just as laughable ?
@david edwards Well what law do you propose we create that criminals will follow?
so not where near sufficient, I see.
Never been to a gun show where there weren't people sitting at a table, filling out background checks
In europe we have licsensing systems, police interveiw you to see if your mentally there, you have mandatory training, defentily doesnt solve all gun crime but why not try that out?
no thanks
@@Castigar48 why not? American or european?
@Haroldclifford-i1u well we already need licenses and tax for certain forms of firearms...so not needed because we already have them
"Cause shooting guns are kinda fun"
Spoken like a true American
Edit:thats alot a likes
Try it it’s awesome
I’m an American but still
its true though
Bruh I get scared by shooting a bb gun imagine a real one
@@Josue.e closest thing ive gotten to a gun is a bb gun their kinda nice to shoot with
I shot clay disks this summer from a hunting shotgun. It was really fun. And I'm from Europe.
I lost all my guns in a boating accident
Why did you have so many guns in your boat? Are you a pirate?
With the way things are going in America, being a pirate dont sound too bad. It's better than sitting around waiting for a stimulus check that may or may not come.
ARRR
Ain’t this place a geographical oddity?
That’s better than losing all your boats in a gunning accident.
That’s a great idea! Criminals are also required to do this when they purchase guns from the black market.
That mysterious "black market" where guns just appear our of nowhere and our government is powerless to stop it serves as a pretty convenient cop out for conservative dipshits.
Or just steal them
@@stix409 lol are you saying there isn't 100,000s of stolen guns being sold to criminals?
@@dudeguy8287 lol no. But you conservatards generally know just about nothing about this mysterious "black market" that you love bringing up.
@@stix409
Lol oooo good one!
"German is not advocating for a minority report situation"
German literally IS advocating for a minority report situation.
and Im sorry, but making the process more difficult for law abiding citizens to get a gun (that we living in America have the right to do) because the FBI and other government workers aren't doing their jobs properly is foul to every degree.
How are they not doing their jobs properly when there is ZERO requirement for ANY checks at all for private gun sales in most states?
@@ratofvengence I forget which shooter off the top of my head, but its one mentioned in the video. They did a background check...but they called the wrong place and found nothing on the guy, if they did their job properly and called the correct place they would have found crime on the shooter.
@@TheProdigalCatholic But that isn't the way it normally goes down. There's nothing stopping anyone easily obtaining firearms at short notice, and too many clowns are walking around with one. That's why you have a 3rd world homicide rate.
let's see how US, in the future years, is NOT going to implement it :|
Exactly. Give the US a comprehensive and reasonable solution to help reduce any major epidemic, and it will immediately be tossed in the trash.
Nikpick100 because it makes too much sense and there’s data to support it
@@laurenthomas9305
The solution herein proposed is neither comprehensive nor reasonable.
Licensing is not a "solution" because it simply addresses "impulse" purchasers, and only when you become initially licensed. Once issued, it no longer impacts the "impulse" purchaser, who may now "impulse" purchase to their hearts content. If the present background check system were better designed, managed and implemented, such that it was more regularly updated and with data from those various sources mentioned, it would accomplish the same thing as the licensing without the added wait time.
I should add, that while the wait time could, in theory, temporarily keep guns out of the hands of individuals with criminal intent, for a short time, who have yet to prove themselves criminal, it is OVERWHELMINGLY more likely to temporarily keep guns out of the hands of responsible citizens who may be harmed as a result of them having to WAIT to receive a license for their firearm. A woman separated from an abusive spouse for example, may be in need of a firearm for her protection in a matter of days. Make her wait 3 weeks and it could cost her life. A new family moves into a rough neighborhood, robberies and burglaries are regular occurrences. They decide the situation is dangerous enough to warrant purchasing a firearm for the first time in their lives, for purely defensive purposes. They are forced to wait 3 weeks. Week 2 their house is broken into and they are shot and killed.
There are two sides to this "wait time" nonsense. There are more law-abiding citizens than criminals, so "wait times" would disproportionately impact the ability of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves, over criminals obtaining arms to commit crimes.
Let's not and keep our rights, thank you. It won't "fix" anything anyway.
There wont be gun control.
Deal with it.
Only in America: Hey hon, I’m at Walmart. You know.. just buying apricots and a Glock .45..
Don't forget to pick up some extra ammo and clip for the kids hun XD
I guess you don't know that Walmart doesn't sell handguns or handgun ammunition. You have to cross the street for that.
@@KengCheong 😶
Not anymore
Yeah....WalMart is changing that...
You can't talk about licensing without discussing the decades of abuse by the issuing authorities.
Chicago passed a law requiring permits - then simply decided to stop accepting permit applications. DC did the same.
NYC requires permits, but makes the process prohibitively expensive and time consuming, and then forbade you from taking the gun out of your apartment except to a handful of approved shooting ranges.
Gun owners simply don't trust that governments will administer a licensing system in anything like as fair manner - because they've seen exactly that.
Exactly! Gun owners don't trust the government with this type of regulatory authority because there is a history of abuse. There are also countless public officials and politicians who are openly anti-gun. Gun owners are not at all unreasonable for rejecting proposals like this, because historically the people pitching these ideas (looking at you, Vox) are holding knives behind their backs.
Yes, this is happening right now with applications to builds suppressors being denied in mass "because the applicant's already have the parts to build it" (And the ATF knows this how)?
Isn't that unconstitutional ? The courts have long understood that if regulations are so strict as to bar people from their rights, then they should be struck down.
@@TheOsamaBahama Unless it's guns.
You really hit the nail on the head with this comment, I wouldn't have a problem with this system if authorities actually wanted to make a fair system. But they would almost certainly abuse a system like this and make it nearly impossible to get a firearm and already do in some places.
3:28 right here is the problem, this time last year in New York the State would have considered you “dangerous” for not wearing a mask. Who decides who is potentially “dangerous”?
Only because you actually were !
The first part of the video is false, when CJ buys a gun in GTA San Andreas, he is never background checked.
This is the quality journalism we've been looking for
Beautiful Aircraft on the background m8
The whole video is false
I know right ? You can also buy warheads and explosive devices in GTA San Andreas!!! Without permission?
yeah, he even cheats
If you’re buying a gun at a gun show there’s a background check.
The video talks about how even the background check is flawed so it doesn't really change anything.
The video itself is flawed lad.
@@rae1557 So the State police and the FBI database are not good enough?
@@Kingsman4101 not a US citizen so I wouldn't know exactly but so far it doesn't look very promising.
Rashed Abdu Trust me, the FBI knows more then Vox does
Unlicensed dealer at a gun show... So just a private seller, the dealers still need to do the background checks.
That's right. All gun dealers are required to do background checks already, regardless if they are at a gun store or a gun show
Even if that's true, it's not effective enough. Although the media loves to mention gun shows.
Thank You.
That is the current law. You can't buy a gun without a background check even from gun shows.
@@blitzwaffe It's true, and has been for YEARS!! Also, most states do NOT allow private sales!!!!
99% of shootings that are criminal in nature, the person committing the crime doesn’t legally purchase the weapon. That’s your problem! The criminals don’t have harsh enough punishment! Selling the guns or using the guns illegally that needs to be addressed with the some ferocity.
We used to have a law called OPERATION EXILE that cracked down on illegal gun possession for felons. It worked but was repeated because it put too many blacks in jail.
The government knows if they didn't keep crime running high they would loose power and money so they flood our country with criminals let them out of prisons so they will go commit more crime to put fear in the public who then turns around and says please masters save us then they say only if you give up your rights and submit to what we tell you.
We have let them turn us into a weak country.
The USA which is the greatest country on earth, has 25% of the world's prisoner population.
I had a background check in a gun show. Las Vegas
I think VOX just lumped gun shows and private dealers together for some reason.
In some states, private (non-licensed) individuals sell firearms at gun shows. I've never seen it happen in Michigan but, I haven't been to very many shows, only about three since I live less than a mile from a major gun shop.
I'm non-american, what do you buy a gun for? What's the point?
@@grandmat2561 self defense,hunting,and sport
same thing at Virginia gun show sales .. background check is manditory
Not true about Gun Shows.. every one I have been to is dealer only.
I did hear about one that had a "Private Sale" area, but they still required a dealer to run the check. (it was part of the "fee" the seller paid to sell there)
It depends on the states laws and the show rules. Some are without any oversight while others run a bg check then make you pick up the weapon from an ffl. Its all over the place
@@sanninjiraiya if you pick up a firearm from any ffl...a background check is performed by federal law. State law doesn’t apply
@@anthonyperotti151 You're right about the FFLs, however what I'm referring to is the weird patchwork that is state & municipal law about whether or not background checks have to be done by individual sellers at gun shows. Some states and municipalities tack on additional requirements saying you have to do a background check, then transfer it to an FFL, and pick it up (where you have to go through another check). Others let any individual seller go without any checks at all. Its a really annoying patchwork, especially if youre a collector.
@@sanninjiraiya Gun Shows are restricted to dealers. Because FEDERAL law says that selling more than a very small number of guns a year makes you an illegal dealer. (hard time, don't drop soap style pen)
It is not "good business" for the gun shows to have to worry about illegal sales going on in their show. FAR FAR too much legit money to be made.
@@redwolfexr not all gun shows are limited like that though. Several Ive been to in the Deep South have allowed/facillitated private sales. Which again, is great if youre trying to collect some of the triple action Daewoo imports from the 90s. Its less ideal from a public safety angle. Different states have different rules that are sometimes stricter than the federal laws or add additional regulations.
Please go try to buy a gun at a gun show without a background from a booth. and record it secretly.
i doubt they would get one lol
@@seamuscary7895 You are correct. No dealer would risk losing his license by selling illegally.
@@mikebutlermedia4211 and if they did, they would be breaking the law .....so how is making something a law that is already a law going to make a safer America
@@Eeebz100 because leftism my friend, leftism
@Robert Slackware Eric Holder belongs in prison for that (among other things).
It's dismaying how many people react to violations of individual rights of honest, peaceful people by seeking to violate the individual rights of honest, peaceful people.
Ok so the gun show loophole has been completely debunked
how so?
@@BMac420 because they can't find one of these mass shootings in decades from such a loophole
@@esmith9005 so? does that mean it isnt possible or doesnt exist?
gun show loopholes i mean not mass murders caused by gunshow loopholes
@@BMac420 It doesn't exist. A person has to go through a background check to purchase a gun at a gun show.
Sooooo basically switch to the Canadian system? Got it.
LEGIT_ELITE, Licensure violates the 2nd, 4th, 5th, 14th, Amendments, the Presumption of Innocence, and the 1986 Firearm Owners "Protection "Act.
@@davidgrover5996Correct me if I'm wrong but the 2nd Amendment doesn't give the right to own a gun, 14th amendment is all about equal protection clause (don't see how that helps your case) 4th and 5th is more about due process so...
robotc 123, Oddly enough you are right. However is it because you understand it is because the 2nd protects the rights to own, acquire, and use Arms? It doesn’t grant that right.
The 14th is about Due Process which Licensure violates as well as equal protection.
The 4th and 5th are about property and and legal guarantees of and to every citizen will and have come int conflict with licensure schemes in court.
Edit for typo.
lionitist, That is what I just wrote.
@@morningstarxs7848 The Second absolutely gives us the individual right to carry a firearm unconnected to service in a militia.
Supreme Court > Your opinions
In Texas gun show distributers are required to do a background check. only private sales dont
so? the premise of this video is that universal / instant background checks don't work.
If it was worth noting, it is also worth pointing out it was wrong.
@@LB-uw8nq except, they aren't wrong 0:30 *unlicensed dealer* isn't a gun show distributor. per fed law, you can legally sell any of your guns without an FFL to another private citizen without running a background check.
@@razordaze not at any gun shows you can't
I thought you got a free gun when you entered Texas. Very disappointed now.
Three things need to be addressed before licensing is acceptable:
1) Cost: The licensing needs to be free, otherwise it becomes a de facto screen to exclude people with lower incomes from firearm purchases. 2) Transparency: Every citizen must be able to easily know why they were denied a license and appeal a denial. 3) Expediency: Authorities over licensing must be adequately staffed to administer all parts of the licensing process, otherwise licensing can be used as a de facto ban on gun ownership.
Not only that, but what are the downstream consequences of attaching licensing to constitutional rights? There is nothing inherently different in that regard between the 2nd amendment vs the 1st. Or the 5th, or the 19th, or the 13th. Will we need a license now to "plead the 5th"? What about for women being able to vote?
No form of gun control will work without an amendment.
@@atheren_zethereso, uh....let's go ahead and get a bill wrote up, and take it to vote?
Here we go again with the gun show loop-hole. It is not a real thing. All vendors at gun shows and must and do give background checks. Stop acting like they don’t
I think it depends on the state.
If you sell firearms for a living you need a Federal firearms license and must do background checks on all firearms sales. That’s 99% of the vendors at gun shows. There’s a very small amount of people at gun shows who are selling there personal collection they are not required to do a background check.
OverAchiever 4 absolutely right.....
Not entirely true. In FL, you can, without a background check, transfer a firearm between family members or in a private sale. However, the major gun show here in FL (Florida Gun Shows) requires all vendors, even non FFL vendors, to do a background check for all firearms transactions.
Brendon Cintas well yeah. You wouldn’t need a background check if you are giving a firearm to a close relative. It wouldn’t make sense
if you buy a gun at a gun show you still have to do a background check
thank you, people don’t even bother to research stuff. it’s literally a federal law to get a background check, and there are few situations the transfer of a gun to another person is aloud
illa corp then that would be person to person as he said.
@@djbdyckfbsgsg9176 You mean *allowed* and theyre talking about deals that go down in the parking lot etc. Do SoME rESeaRcH
@Bob Bobbington wrong, they often cite sources directly implying they actually do want you to look it up
You don’t have to....it’s perfectly legal for a gun deal without a background check to take place
Something tells me that no one at Vox has ever been to either a gun store or a gun show.
Hmm really, I wonder what?
That's like saying, you know nothing about the moon because you've never been on the moon.....anyone can study a STORE.
WhAat? I thought you need to know about something before you give your opinion.
Of course, they just push Bloomberg gun agenda.
That's like giving "facts" to a gun builder from a person who just was told about an ar 15
If one of the main points of the 2nd ammendment is to defend against a tyrannical government, then forcing citizens to go through a government controlled course and be on a government controlled licensing list to get one defeats the entire fuxking purpose. I'm sure we'd all be safer under the watchful eye of a benevolent big brother, issue is he's not benevolent.
2:13 sounds like the air force's needs to get their stuff right. sounds like the government failed.
The military did not report the information TO the appropriate gov't agency. One of the rare occasions that the FEDS didn't mess up
yeah but, but MORE GUBERMINT!!!!
* Laughs in European *
Milo The Dilophosaurus Britain and numerous other European nations survived both wars without capture.....
*laughs in Asian*
@Milo The Dilophosaurus don't forget it was the Soviets that killed the most german soilders
@@rn-zu5ld dont forget the vast swathe of military equipment was american lend lease.
Ya, you guys can have that 50% income tax, we're good.
Licensing systems can allow for confiscation
It doesn't just allow for it... it's the necessary first step in any gun confiscation scheme.
Well the government can already confiscate your guns if they think someone is “dangerous”. The police can take any property without any charges. Licensing won’t enable something that’s already there.
How will your life be worse off without a projectile-based weapon?
100 years later america :
'The gun solution we're still not talking about'
?
In my opinion, the police or the troops should come to call every American citizen at their home to see if they have guns there and then the police or the troops can take them away from them and then destroyed all the guns. The Second Amendment should be repealed, because it is very irrelevant to America's deadly gun culture which will lead to an inexcusable reality.
@@thetruthsetsyoufree1492 but if they take my gun than how am I to protect my family from criminals who don't care about the law.?
@Jim boswell Surviellanc The more guns are there; the higher crime rate continues.
Peacekeeping troops can be warranted to take all the criminals’ guns and other weapons and send them to prison.
@@thetruthsetsyoufree1492 Asking for Civil War, Mate
I imagine these videos must seem really weird to non-Americans.
Nah, the weirdest ones are about the US's relation to the metric system and roundabouts.
Yeah especially on healthcare
Yes, I am from Germany and I never saw a real gun here or even know someone who could have a gun (except of the police or military). And I think this is a lot better and more save than if normal people would have guns.
@@delfink4333 WhAT dO yOU MeAn i ShoUldN'T HAvE A gUn, WhAT aBoUT My FrEedOm?
@@pedrovilasgomes9144 Guns are liberating to an extent
'Murica: Mass shoutings will never be stopped
Corona: Hold my beer!
Murica, one of the biggest and most powerful countries in the world.
oof, and yet we stand to lose 200k people to the virus
Arizona actually had a shooting a few months ago at an outdoor mall
Nora Adora well the federal government did as much as it could. The majority was up to the state and local governments.
@@c.i.a.932 as much as it wanted to*
Ok let me clarify here:
1. There are “Gun Dealers” and “Private Sellers”. In every State “gun dealers” must do background check for every sale (gun shows included). “Private Sellers” in MOST States, can sell to other people from the SAME State a firearm without a background check. So I’m from NJ and can’t buy a gun from “Private Seller” in NY..... Its THAT FREAKING SIMPLE TO UNDERSTAND! (This is the least restrictive version BTW because some states have a universal background check system and licensing.
2. A licensing system has clearly been shown to reduce gun sales regardless of who wants to buy them and for what reason. It clearly is and has been used as a way to discourage the public in general from buying firearms. This is true in NJ, NY, MA, CA & DC as a bureaucratic tax to stop people from applying for licenses.
- It costs more $, It takes hours of paperwork, it takes multiple trips to police departments, it sometimes takes days off of work, it usually takes weeks or months, and in NJ it even has an expiration date and must be done for every purchase of a firearm.
The 2nd Amendment is a RIGHT, not a privilege. I am actually for a National Licensing System, but not if it is overly burdensome and abused by the government to limit and dissuade people from their right to own firearms, & eventually used to forcefully confiscate firearms certain politicians don’t like.
You know the problem is that American homosapiens have much too easy access to projectiles, right?
Rights come from our creator and are imparted to us at birth. Getting a license to do something that our creator gave us a right to do in the first place makes the licensor into a false God. Thou shall have no other Gods before me. Exodus 20:3 The license turns a right into a privilege and is thus a blasphemy and idolatry ! A godless nation cannot remain free folks !!
@Robert McKinley I don't think it even matters on what God you worship. Your rights as a human extend to being able to defend yourself with anything you can get your hands on.
Robert McKinley treaty of tripoli
@@robertmckinley7688
>Imagine assuming U.S. Rights are supposed to be divinely imparted
also who in the world was claiming the U.S. was a good in the first place, I expect bible-patting here but at least slightly applicable Bible patting
I live in New Zealand which has a high level of firearm ownership. We have always had a licensing process for firearm ownership. It works well, but no system is perfect.
That system is not able to work here in America because Owning a Firearm is a Constitutional Right
Just get a diamond chest plate with Projectile Projection V
I used to be an adventurer like you.
Look at Mr. 1% here, assuming I have enough diamond to build an enchanting table and a chest plate, a humble carrot farmer like myself.
Zack McClean u could abuse villagers. Or cheat. But that is bad.
Zack McClean pretty sure the government should help you with that as long as you prove that you are in danger.
We should vote for an universal enchanting system tbh
But it only goes up to IV...
Dave Chappelle already found the solution...
it really will work
The 2nd Amendment is for black people too. They arguably need it more than most groups.
Five thousand dollars
It's sad to think that that would probably work.
The “unlicensed dealer” is so that your grandpa can give you his old shotgun without having to do paperwork
Oh no, I had to do a little bit of paperwork that in the long run is only the slightest of inconveniences. What’s a tragedy! What a violation of my supposed right I have to just own whatever weapons I want and to do whatever I want with them! Harumph, I say!
WolfsbaneFilms go find a safe place buddy ;)
Sharkslayer Fishing what
Yeah every person that listens to this video is picturing some shady gun shop that doesn't have an FFL sealing guns to criminals.
@@jamesmartian5051 Sounds like someone's offended.
Y'all don't understand shall not be infringed
You don't understand what infringement is
@@Bloggartattempting to stand between the people and their right, and then license that right back to them, couldn’t be a more clear form of infringement. Infringement isn’t just prohibition. Infringement is also hinderance.
People do have to go through background checks at gunshows
@@beanbean2128 no you didn't
@@Ghanemq8 i literally went to a gun and knife show June 6th of last year in Bridgeton missouri and didn't get background checked but ok
@@beanbean2128 if it was a private seller then that's one thing, if it was a dealer, then they broke the law. I'm guessing it was a private seller which doesn't have to give a background check.
Who can get a table at gun shows varies by state. In Colorado, you have to be an FFL.
@@beanbean2128 Modern warfare kiddie spotted. No you did not find an M13 at a gunshow.
So many untrue "facts" in this video-_-
what exactly isn't true?
@@caiden7800 Guns shows have nothing to do with mass shootings. Good fact to know is that less than 1% of mass shooters obtain the firearm from a gun show.
Good ol vox. Wanting to help big government take our rights.
@@Jessetheoutdoorman more than 80% of all gun murders, including 'mass' type shootings are gang/drug related in the inner cities with illegally obtained weapons. This won't even make a dent in that number.
There are about 100,000,000 legal owners/operators responsible for about 2000 murders a year. Think of two circles in a Venn diagram. The illegal owners/operators do nearly all the killing while a tiny fraction of a huge number of people the rest. The rate of legal owners who commit murder is like 1 in 50,000. That means a full Yankee stadium of legal owners would produce a single murderer. This 'licensing' system, which will increase cost and time, and difficulty for the legal owners is restricting rights of millions to hopefully reduce this number.
Unfortunately for this theory, the places that have relaxed licensing rules haven't seen increases in murders and have seen crime decrease.
@@BillyJoe71 they are not
This person who is also dangerous but doesn’t have a record includes everyone.
Joe T true, guns are inherently dangerous
@@ParistonHxH Everything is inherently dangerous.
@@HerewardWake Not if we look at the data from other countries like switzerland, way laxer gun laws and almost no shootings at all, its not the guns that is the problem it is the people who has access to guns.
@@daniellassander link to that data plz
Irene Ostendarp Actually yes. We can’t regulate it effectively at all so yeah. That’s why hammers aren’t regulated.
imo the license system is perfect as a pro2A. In the United States to have a car, a machine that also kills people, you have to have a license. this makes so much sense to me
Facts
The problem with this is that cars are not an enumerated right. I’m also against the idea of a national gun registry, which is required in order for this system to work, primarily because I don’t trust the government to safely protect this information from leaks and bad actors from within the government.