Do Journalists Think it’s Possible to Buy a Gun Without Using “Loopholes?” [VIDEO]

Previous Post
Next Post

This Week in Gun Rights is TTAG’s weekly roundup of legal, legislative and other news affecting guns, the gun business and gun owners’ rights. 

Is the Gun Control Quagmire Setting In?

The “tough on guns” political rhetoric hasn’t calmed down, but we’re starting to see the current administration pass the buck to Congress more often. Could this be a mark of reality setting in for the gun control-excited executive?

President Biden is appearing to resist the concept of gun control by executive action, despite VP Kamala’s raving to the contrary. It could be a sign that the judiciary is resistant enough to the concept, or the public is getting fed up enough, that the BidenHarris administration might have made the political calculation that it’s better to blame the Senate for stymying gun control than attempting to force through an executive action…and then get slapped down in court.

This isn’t to  say I don’t expect they’ll still try, quite the contrary. I highly expect that we’ll see the noose of import controls tightened on firearms, as we have seen with every presidency for at least the last 30 years.

NY Post: Mass Shooters Exploited “Loopholes”

In an AP article published by the New York Post, a list of mass shootings was produced along with descriptions of the vague situations in which the perpetrators acquired their firearms. Despite insisting that the killers somehow exploited a flawed system, the report actually referred instead to almost every legal way of acquiring a firearm as a “loophole.”

This is not only ignorance, but dangerous sophistry, as the more the populace is told that acquiring a gun through virtually any means represents a dangerous “loophole,” the easier it is to push to close these imaginary loops.

The ABA Supports Civil Rights, Unless You’re a Gun Owner

The American Bar Association, a volunteer association of lawyers which may or may not get most of its funding by tricking lawyers into believing membership is a prerequisite to practicing law, has decided, once again, to weigh in on the gun debate.

You might be wondering why a professional organization is expressing an opinion on an issue that divides Americans almost evenly down the middle. Well, me too. Still, the ABA’s president, Patricia Refo thought it a good idea to pressure the Senate to passing universal background checks, repeal the PLCAA, enact red flag confiscation, mandate “safe” firearm storage, and do something about…armed intimidation?

It boggles the mind why these institutions feel the need to lean in on issues that large portions of their members most assuredly don’t support.

Michael Bloomberg big brother
(AP Photo/Eric Risberg)

Gun Control Only Serves to Increase Costs for Lower Income Americans

As I’ve been reflecting on the new laws the anti-side has been pushing, I’ve realized the government, egged on by the gun control industry, has been pursuing a strategy of attacking the most popular, most effective firearms every couple decades. Think back to the “Saturday night special” ban in the GCA of 1968, to the import bans of ’89, to the assault weapon ban of ’94, and the continued import tightening each President has pursued for decades.

All it does is makes popular guns less affordable.

This is profoundly ironic as it does the most damage to America’s poor and working class, who are disproportionately the most likely to be victimized by violent criminals, and thus the most in need of an effective means of self defense.

We’re seeing this happen all over the country, with Illinois lawmakers attempting to double the costs of FOID cards, and double the amount of times a cardholder would have to apply.

Similarly, Delaware is considering banning magazines and requiring paid permits to purchase a handgun.

One thing these attempts have in common is they harm the average working American, pricing the disadvantaged out of gun ownership, all with no countervailing benefit to public safety.

bump fire stock ban
Dan Z for TTAG

City’s Bump Stock Ban Overturned

The Ohio Supreme Court handed Buckeye Firearms Foundation a win in a nigh-on three-year challenge to the city of Cincinnati’s “bump stock” ban. The court ruled that the ban was pre-empted by state law. With the tide seemingly turning in the federal fight over the bump stock ban and administrative overreach, this could either be a positive sign of things to come…or a tiny, meaningless blip.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. “The poors” dont need a gunm. Only the wealthy should have a firegunm as they commit less of the violent crimes.
    If you’ve not got the money to exercise a Constitutional Right you shouldn’t be living in America.

  2. You know what physical loopholes have historically been used for, right? It’s no wonder the “progressive” left wants to close and obstruct them.

    Also, as I say every time something like this comes up, freedom is a loophole.

  3. And as this article was being typed and posted Beijing Biden was announcing that he will be signing a package of Executive Orders on Thursday addressing gun control issues…

  4. They’re activists, not journalists.

    Also, they either never bought a gun before or they’re lying. It’s usually both. Grey areas in a law or ‘loopholes’ are something only authoritarians worry about.

  5. I dunno or care about what journalists say, think or do. I see one on my TV and they get clicked before they can open their lying piehole.

  6. It’s the same tactic being used to push the bogus global warming climate change. Regardless what weather event happens it supposedly validates climate change. Now with gun purchases it’s every sale has to be via some loophole. Both have the same goal … totalitarianism.

  7. The ABA is controlled by its liberal members, mostly from large liberal bastions like NYC, who outnumber the (remaining) conservative members by a significant margin. Hence they are in favor of more restrictions such as imposed in California and NY.

Comments are closed.