40% statistic about guns being obtained without a background check is as old as... 1994?

National Institute of Justice ^

[bryan999]

"The predominant sources of guns, unsurprisingly, were stores (60 percent). Other important sources included family members and acquaintances. The 3 percent of respondents who indicated that they obtained guns "through the mail" (which is illegal for all but FFLs) may have misremembered or may have referred to a mail-order purchase arranged through an FFL.

"The average gun obtained in 1993 and 1994 was worth $392 at the time of transfer, with little difference between handguns and long guns. Fewer than 1 in 20 guns acquired during those 2 years were valued at less than $100.

"Fifty-seven percent of firearms were obtained from stores, pawnshops, or other sources that the respondents were certain to have been federally licensed firearm dealers. Some respondents were not sure about whether the source was an FFL. Others indicated that the source was an FFL but then reported that the transaction was a trade rather than a cash sale or that the source was an acquaintance or family member. If those cases are included, the propor- tion increases to 64 percent.

"We conclude that approximately 60 percent of gun acquisitions involved an FFL and hence were subject to Federal regulations on such matters as out-of-State sales, criminal history checks, and recordkeeping. A some what higher percentage of handgun acquisitions than long gun acquisitions involved FFLs. The remaining acquisitions, amounting to about 2 million per year, were off-the-books transfers in the secondary market."

[bryan999]

So this study is nearly 20 YEARS OLD...??

The liberals in the government and the media are using this rather old stat to destroy the "Gun Show Loophole" and to push so-called "univeral background checks". Shouldn't conservatives be demanding a more up-to-date statistic here...??

[G Larry]

“a nationally representative telephone survey in 1994 on private own- ership and use of firearms by American adults”

And what would YOU tell a PHONE SURVEY regarding your guns?!?!?

It’s quite easy to believe anything from those STUPID ENOUGH TO ANSWER.

[Travis McGee]

[CIDKauf]

I couldn’t agree more. The last time I gave out any correct information to someone calling me, was about 40 years ago. Don’t trust that whoever is calling you is who they say they are.

[Hodar]

It’s likely quite higher.

When you buy a NEW gun - yup, it’s going to be registered. If you buy a USED gun at a gun dealer; chances are that it’s going to be registered too.

But, if you buy a gun through the local paper, as part of work-in-trade, or an estate sale - it’s just cash, and a handshake.

[Yo-Yo]

But, if you buy a gun through the local paper, as part of work-in-trade, or an estate sale - it’s just cash, and a handshake.

Which is the basis of the so-called "gun show loophole."

If the government is worried about the types of guns it's citizens own, I say that is the intent of the Second Amendment.

[Chainmail]

The greatest danger to the 2nd Amendment is the so-called NICS: it was passed as an innocuous "instant check" to verify that the person buying a handgun was not a felon or a drug user or a mental patient. As soon as it was passed, it was ramped up to include all guns, then it was changed more to add people convicted of domestic violence, then modified to include anyone even accused (falsely or not) of domestic violence, now they include misdemeanors that could be rated as felonies now.

"Closing the gunshow loophole" or criminalizing private sales, soldifies the final part of a national licensing system in which government strictly controls who may or may not purchase a firearm. There are no methods to see what may be on your record, there are no methods I am aware of to correct errors. I have had my own purchases delayed for days supposedly because I held a security clearance but there's no way of really knowing. It just says "delayed".

Once this objective is achieved, there is nothing to stop the government from denying anyone the right to purchase for any reason. We will be powerless.

This has been the real objective all along.

[bryan999]

I find it absurd that their talking point is from 20 year stat, based on a bunch of stuff people said in phone calls. If it’s so obviously higher, then why don’t the libs prove it with updated data? What’s up with this...?

[WildHighlander57]

Did approval come through before the three days were up?

Did you hear nothing back at all, even though three days had passed?

If there is no response from them after three days, then the sale can go through.

[Chainmail]

Lately it’s been coming through after an hour or two. The thing that jumped out at me was how the system kept growing and how impenetrable it is to the average Joe. No doubt in my mind this system is design to control, restrict, then eliminate gun ownership.

[G Larry]

“Registered”???

You might be confusing “registered” with the paperwork you complete for the background check.
The store keeps that.
The government doesn’t get it.

Some states have you “register” but not yours or mine.

[bryan999]

Meanwhile, there are some people skeptical of the 40% statistic:

http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2013/01/the-bogus-claim-that-40-of-gun-sales.html#comments

I think the stat is bogus and is certainly outdated.. and contrary to what was posted above, I think it’s much less these days. But we shall see... . . .