LIE: 40 Percent of Guns Lack Background Checks

Houston_Gun_Show_at_the_George_R._Brown_Convention_Center
English: Houston Gun show at the George R. Bro...
English: Houston Gun show at the George R. Brown Convention Center Español: “Houston Gun Show” en el Centro de Convenciones George R. Brown (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Claim: 40% of guns sales lack background checks.

The liberal left keeps repeating this claim but is it really true.

Remarks by the President and the Vice President on Gun Violence | The White House (Jan 16, 2013)

The law already requires licensed gun dealers to run background checks, and over the last 14 years that’s kept 1.5 million of the wrong people from getting their hands on a gun.  But it’s hard to enforce that law when as many as 40 percent of all gun purchases are conducted without a background check.  That’s not safe.  That’s not smart.  It’s not fair to responsible gun buyers or sellers.

This was parroted by news outlets and organizations all across the country and by Vice President Biden on January 17 to the U.S. Conference of Mayors. Now let’s look at where this figure comes from.

The stale claim that 40 percent of gun sales lack background checks – The Washington Post

The White House says the figure comes from a 1997 Institute of Justice report, written by Philip Cook of Duke University and Jens Ludwig of the University of Chicago. This study is based on data collected from a survey in 1994, just the Brady law requirements for background checks was coming into effect. (In fact, the questions concerned purchases in 1993 and 1994, while Brady law went into effect in early 1994.) In other words, this is a really old figure.

The data is available for researchers to explore at the Interuniversity consortium on political and social research (ICPSR) at the University of Michigan. Digging deeper, we find that the survey sample was just 251 people. (The survey was done by telephone, using a random-digit-dial method, with a response rate of 50 percent.) With this sample size, the 95 percent confidence interval will be plus or minus 6 percentage points.

So the data is older than the NICS check system. The question was “did you buy a gun from a licensed gun dealer?”. Why are they using this figure to show the percentage of background checks today. It would be like going to 1930 and asking people if they bought their car from a dealer or individual then using that to show the percentage that wore seat belts. Seat belts were not even offered in cars in America until 1949.

The 95% confidence interval was +/- 6 points so the number could have just as easily been rounded down to 30% as it was up to 40. The lasted estimate published for the number of guns bought at gun shows was 3.9%. Let us just go by liberal logic for a second. If the same numbers hold true today as they did in 1993-1994 when the survey was conducted then the actual number of guns that are sold with no background check is 1.17 to 1.56 percent, not 40 percent. Add on top of that, some states have mandatory background checks at gun shows already. This would lower the figure. Take into account that many of these are people buying guns for their spouses, children or other family members and the figure gets even lower.

Now why are they trying to close the non-existent “gun show loophole”. How would it even work? How would they even know if you had sold your personal property without tracking the guns themselves. That’s right, the whole point of the universal background check system is gun registration. So you can believe Obama or not when he said he would not be coming for your guns.

 

Prime Suspect in Boston Bombing Being Deported

Boston bombing suspect ordered deported after Obama meets with Saudi minister – National Immigration Reform | Examiner.com

The Saudi National, Abdul al-Harbi, who has been questioned after the Boston Marathon bombing, is being immediately deported on “national security grounds.”

With the investigation in its infancy, why would a prime suspect be sent out of the country only to have them slip through our fingers. Looks like someone is calling in a favor if you asked me.

Manufactured Crisis Over Sequester

another administration email that seemed to show at least one agency has been instructed to make sure the cuts are as painful as President Obama promised they would be.

It looks like Obama is going to have his Sequestergedon even if he has to manufacture it himself.

Last week, immigration officials confirmed they were releasing immigrants awaiting deportation from their detention centers in order to save money, and this week top officials said they were already seeing long lines at airports because of cuts in screenings.

However, the day after the sequester took effect the US government posted over 400 job vacancies. A few days before the DHS signed a new contract for $50 million for new uniforms.

US Citizens Have No Right to a Trial if Suspected of Terrorism

Holder: Yep, Obama could kill Americans on U.S. soil | The Ticket – Yahoo! News

President Barack Obama has the legal authority to unleash deadly force—such as drone strikes—against Americans on U.S. soil without first putting them on trial, Attorney General Eric Holder wrote in a letter released Tuesday.

 

We have been waiting and now we have the answer. My only question is why did it take so long for Eric Holder to answer the question. Obama can target Americans on US soil, not on a battlefield, on the belief that they are terrorists. Makes you sort of cringe considering the last fiasco about trying to label returning vets, pro-lifers, and Evangelical Christians as terrorists.

Related Posts: