36.8% – friends or family
20.9% – off the street
9.6% – from the black market
18.5% – pawnshops, flea markets, victims or burglaries
9% – don’t know
4.4% – refused to answer.

Additionally, closing the gun show loophole has an unintended consequence. As proposed, a citizen wishing to sell an older firearm will be forced to obtain a criminal background report on a prospective buyer. The additional cost, effort and time will cause most to forego the fuss, keep the used gun and buy a new one. Such a law will greatly reduce used gun availability, steering buyers to new guns instead. It’s a politically inspired bonanza for gun manufacturers. Additionally, because only a tiny fraction of privately sold guns are used in crimes, such a law won’t make us significantly safer. Closing the gun show loophole is another expensive violation of the 2nd Amendment that won’t accomplish much.

Let’s be honest about the “loophole.” It’s strictly a political issue promoted by Bloomberg. He’s a dwarf politician with a billion dollars and he desperately wants to play with grown-up politicians. He got away with this outrageous and inaccurate campaign because most journalists helped him. They didn’t check his facts.

There is no such thing as a gun show loophole. What he is talking about has absolutely nothing to do with gun shows. It’s disingenuous.

What he is really talking about is ending private sales. Currently, if you own a gun, you can sell it to someone else without paperwork or a background check. That’s it. Sometimes, this just so happens to happen at gun shows.

There’s absolutely nothing special in the law about gun shows. It just happens to be a convenient place for an individual to sell a firearm and get a better price than he would get from a shop.

If Gallardo wants to end private sales, he should just say so instead of yammering on gun shows.

Also, the second half of this article is filler. A volunteer for a gun safety organization supports safe gun ownership. Wow.

Her brother’s killer didn’t even buy his gun at a gun show, so I am not even sure of the relevance. I suppose the author is trying to implicitly tie this to the recent and unfortunate Tucson shooting.

…so was the seller in that instance, who broke the law, arrested for this crime?

I’m sure that if police departments regularly did stings like that and arrested and prosecuted the sellers who ignored the law (that you cannot sell a firearm to someone you know or reasonably suspect is a prohibited person), then the incidence of such sales would be reduced – and you’d get the one who were willing to break that law off the street and likely unable themselves to ever again legally possess a firearm.

Please enforce the existing laws before you go asking for new ones.