Bruno's World (ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ)


Online Gun Sales

Buying a gun online is not as easy as the Left makes it out to be.  Just buying a gun is not all that easy in the first place.  A gun purchased online probably will cross state lines, which only adds to challenge.

Gun grabbers usually claim that all one has to do is order a firearm online, and it will be sent directly to your home, no questions asked.  Anyone who makes this claim is either lying, or very ignorant of what it takes to buy a gun online.  If it was that easy, gun sales would probably be much higher than they currently are.

All gun laws apply to buying a gun online, just the same as buying a gun in a store.  In one way, it is harder to buy a gun online as you have to make sure the gun you are buying is legal to own in the state you reside in.  A gun dealer in a brick and mortar shop will only carry guns that are legal in that state.

When you order a gun online, you have to select a licensed gun dealer in your state they can ship the gun to.  This gun dealer must have a valid FFL, and most online gun dealers will only ship to a dealer that they have in their database, that they have already verified as a valid FFL dealer.  Then they will ship it to the dealer you select.

Once it is shipped to the approved, licensed gun dealer, that is when the fun begins.  They will call you when it arrives, and arrange for you to pick it up.  First thing you will have to do is correctly fill out form 4473.  Then the dealer will call the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to approve the sale.  If you are not approved to buy the gun, it is shipped back to the online gun store.  If you are approved to buy the gun, you then pay a fee to the gun dealer who did the background check.  Unless you have a conceal carry permit, the three day (the normal wait time) waiting period kicks in.  Now you have to wait three working days, not including the day you buy the gun at the store, or the day you pick it up.

And then, maybe, you can take your new gun purchase home.

Other than all that, buying a gun online is easy.  And if you can order a gun online, and have it shipped directly to your home, you are probably committing many felonies, so don’t do it.


           Gun Show Law!


The Left, especially the main stream media, likes to invent terms out of thin air, apparently for dramatic effect, and to move forward their agenda.  One of the most popular, recently, is the term “Gun Show Loophole.”  What they are trying to say (and doing very badly…) is that a lot of guns are being bought/sold at gun shows without any federal background checks.  They will also claim you don’t even need any form of identification.

It is claimed, using the “gun show loophole,” just about anyone can enter a gun show, pay cash for a gun, without ID, without a federal background check, and just walk out the door with the gun.  The problem is almost everyone at a gun show is a licensed gun dealer, and is required to perform a federal background check for every gun purchase, with proper ID.

When you try to buy a gun from a licensed gun dealer, even at a gun show, you have to fill out an ATF form 4473 Firearms Transaction Record.  After that is completed, the dealer will call the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), and get federal approval for the sale of the gun.  Click on the link,, to see the form online.  It is SIX PAGES of pure federal government enjoyment!  Proper government photo ID is required to complete the sale, and the gun dealers usually charge a small fee for the background check, generally $20-30, which is in addition to the cost of the gun.  All other gun purchase laws still apply at gun shows, including a waiting period, if there is one, and selling guns across state lines.

Where a lot of people get confused is the PRIVATE sale of a gun.  This is where a person who isn’t a licensed gun dealer sells a gun from their private collection.  Generally a background check is not required for this kind of transaction.  And, despite what some people claim, this is not using a “loophole” in the law regarding private selling of guns.  By federal gun law, a private gun sale that does not cross state lines is perfectly LEGAL without a background check!  How can it be called a “loophole” if it is clearly defined by law as legal?

A lot of people will claim that a lot of these private type of gun sales are done at gun shows.  And it is true that SOME private sales of guns are done at gun shows.  If you go to a typical gun show, you could see attendees walking around the gun show, advertising a gun for sale.  And this sale can be considered a private sale, not requiring a background check.  Gun laws still apply to the sale, including not selling to a minor, and not to someone out of state, etc.  This should represent a small fraction of guns sold at a gun show.  Very few private sellers could afford the cost of a table at a gun show, and the cost of a table would wipe out most, if any, profits to be made.  All licensed dealers with tables at gun shows have to perform a background check on ALL gun sales.

A private gun sale can take place outside of a gun show, too.  Same laws apply.  And it is nearly impossible to buy a fully automatic weapon at a gun show, but that is for another blog.  Despite liberal/media hysteria, there are no gun show loopholes that need to be closed.  There are gun show LAWS, and they are doing just fine.


And They Were Elected??


Most “gun grabbers” usually have no clue what they are talking about.  Most would fail a basic test on firearms.  But then most of them would fail a basic test on the US Constitution.  Yet these are the people that know better than the rest of us.  And these are politicians!  And, oddly enough, all are Democrats!

This is just a small sampling:


“This right here has the ability with a .30-caliber clip to disperse with 30 bullets within half a second. Thirty magazine clip in half a second.” - California State Sen. Kevin de Leon (D-Los Angeles)

[Anyone know what a “magazine clip” is?]


“We need to ban the massacre of machine gun magazines, and we need comprehensive background checks.” - Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney (D-NY)

[Massacre… of machine gun magazines??]


"An AR-15 is not for hunting, it’s for killing." - Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL)

[Isn't killing the whole point of hunting?]


"I believe it is a shoulder thing that goes up." - Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY)

[um… no]


"I will tell you these are ammunition --there bullets -- so the people who have those now they are going to shoot them, and so if you ban -- if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot, and there won't be any more available." - Congresswoman Diana DeGette (D-CO)

[Maybe she was thinking of a clip.]


"If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them, Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in, I would have done it." - Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)

[And the award for the scariest woman in Congress goes to…]


Some days you just feel tired all over.


Muskets vs Printing Press

What if we put common sense controls on the first amendment?  Why does the thinking sometimes applied to the second amendment never apply to the first amendment?  The “logic” used by the left to attack the second amendment never goes both ways.  But why not?

The left, and I include socialists, Marxists, progressives, liberals, and communists in that mix, seem to think that the second amendment is outdated, and what the framers of the Constitution originally intended no longer applies to a modern society.  But they usually only apply this kind of thinking to the second amendment, and never to the first amendment.

The left falsely claim that the framers of the Constitution meant for the second amendment to be about hunting.  Then why didn’t they say, “…the right to keep and bear arms for hunting shall not be infringed?”  It would not seem that hunting was a real issue back in the 18th century.  Almost every one hunted, to some degree, or another, back in the day.  Did the “right” to go hunting really need to be protected in the Bill of Rights, now, or then?

They also claim that since they only had muskets at the time of writing the Constitution, that is what the framers were referring to in the second amendment.  They could not have ever imagined the high-tech weapons we have today.  Why then, like hunting, didn’t they say that the right to keep and bear MUSKETS shall not be infringed?  The founding fathers of the United States were brilliant thinkers, and certainly had the future in mind when they drafted the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution.

The final goal is to not just abolish the second amendment, but guns as well.  To quote California  Senator Dianne Feinstein, “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them, Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in, I would have done it."  And that is just one quote of an endless stream from the left on total gun confiscation.

The left would certainly object if this kind of thinking was applied to the parts of the first amendment.  And there would be outrage if you tried that with ‘abortion control’ (see below).

The first amendment in the Bill of Rights guarantees “freedom of the press.”  Should that phrasing be taking literally?  Does it really refer to the “printing press?”  Does the first amendment only apply to newspapers that are actually printed on a press as it was done in the 18th century?  The founding fathers certainly could not have envisioned computers, the Internet, or other high technology.  Does the first amendment also apply to radio, and television?  If one uses the logic of the left, then freedom of the press should only apply to words printed on a press, and nothing else.

The first amendment also guarantees freedom of religion.  Is it possible that the framers meant anything more than Judeo-Christian types of religions?  Should all other religions be banned?  I doubt the writers of the Constitution would have seen the need to ban Satanism.

Freedom of speech is also guaranteed, but conservative speakers are sometimes banned from speaking on college campuses.  When the Tea Party tried to speak out, and protest Obama when he was in the White House, they were attacked by the IRS.  Trump supporters are physically attacked by those on the left.  Social media shuts down accounts of people who dare to differ from what they deem “acceptable.”  People lose their jobs for having opinions said to be “politically incorrect.”

The second amendment is not about hunting.  The second amendment does not just mean muskets.  It is about the right to keep, and bear arms.  Should we form a militia with unarmed citizens?


Common Sense Abortion Control

Hillary Clinton has often stated that owning guns is a constitutional right.  Clinton has also said that even though it is a right, owing guns is subject to reasonable measures of control.  There are certain measures of control on the first amendment, they will say.  You can’t yell FIRE in a crowded theater is one example they will always give is as a form of control on freedom of speech, as it presents a “clear and present danger.”  While generally understood by most people, one could get picky, and ask what can one yell in a theater that isn’t crowded?  And what does one yell if the theater is actually on fire, regardless if the theater is crowded, or not?  They are always saying that we need to close the “gun show loophole,” that doesn’t actually exist.  The “online line gun buying loophole” that they also want to close, but doesn’t exist either.  All the left wants is more, and more gun control, ignoring the part of the Bill of Rights that says the right to keep, and bear arms shall not be infringed.    The problem of the left, and democrats, is that the effort for more “common sense” gun control never ends.  And will never end until complete gun confiscation is achieved.  The long term plan is to tax, and regulate guns out of existence.

Hillary Clinton, and many others are also quick to point out that a woman’s right to an abortion is a constitutional right, even though the word “abortion” is not in the US Constitution.  The left usually says that the US Supreme Court, with their 1973 decision on Roe vs Wade, meant that abortions are a constitutional right.  And, if, just for the sake of argument, they are correct in saying that abortions are a constitutional right, then that should mean that abortions are subject to common sense controls, the same as guns.

The first abortion control measure that should be considered is a waiting period to get an abortion.  Apparently, any woman can walk into an abortion clinic, and get an abortion.  Shouldn’t there be a three day waiting period to get an abortion?  What most people don’t understand about the three day waiting period for guns is that the day you purchase your gun, and they day you pick up your gun, are not included in the three day waiting period.  If you buy a gun on a Monday, the three day waiting period will be Tuesday through Thursday, and then you can pick up your gun on Friday.  Shouldn’t there be a “three day” waiting period to get an abortion, which is really five days?

When you try to buy a gun, you have to pass a background check with the federal government.  At the gun store, you have to fill out a form 4473, created by the ATF, which asks certain questions like if you are a fugitive, illegal alien, convicted felon, drug addict, or guilty of misdemeanor domestic battery charge.  It also asks if you have ever been declared mentally unfit, or been in a mental institution.  It will also ask if you are a US citizen, and if you have ever been accused of stalking someone.  The form 4473 is also need your current address, race, social security number, height and weight, gender, and so on.  You will also need a valid government ID to go along with the form.  Once you fill out that form, the gun seller will call the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), and wait for approval before you can buy a gun.  Why don’t women trying to get an abortion have to fill out a form like 4473 to get approval first?  Why does one need to fill out a form, and get federal government approval to exercise one’s second amendment right, but no form/approval is needed for what is said to be a constitutional right like abortion?  Should women be required to have a sonogram/ultrasound performed before getting an abortion?  Should a woman be required to view the images, and then wait three (read: FIVE days) before betting an abortion?

Currently, you have to be 18 years old to buy a long gun in the United States, and 21 years old to buy a hand gun.  And there are efforts right now to raise the minimum age to buy ANY gun in the United States to 21 years old.  Should this kind of control be applied to abortions as well?  Should we make it so that a woman has to be 18 years of age to get a legal abortion?  Or should we just make it 21 years of age to get an abortion?  A person under the age of 18 cannot buy a gun legally in the US.  Should we make it illegal for a girl under the age of 18 to get an abortion?  Or at the very least, get her parent’s consent to the abortion, and report a possible crime of rape to the police?  If someone with a gunshot shows up at a hospital, it is required for the hospital to call the police.  If a girl, who is a minor, shows up pregnant at a hospital, or clinic, it should be mandatory to call the police, and report it.  Shouldn’t HIPPA laws apply to gunshot victims, as well as pregnant girls?

Currently, taxpayers shell out over a half billion dollars to provide for abortions.  Try and take this money away, and there will be outrage!  How much in taxpayers dollars goes to help people with their second amendment rights?  The answer is zero!  Hundreds of millions of dollars are spent helping people exercise their alleged constitutional right to an abortion, but nothing is spent helping people exercise their second amendment rights.  If we are going to spend millions of tax payer dollars to help people get an abortion, then we should provide the same amount to help people buy guns.

Hundreds of thousands of abortions are performed every year in the United States.  Margaret Sanger is credited with starting the birth control movement, and was a strong proponent of abortions.  Margaret Sanger is considered a hero among the pro-choice movement.  What is rarely, if ever, mentioned is that she was a hard core racist, and eugenicist.   To finish with a quote from Margaret Sanger in a letter written on 12/19/1939, to Dr. Clarence Gamble:

We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population.”


Cars Like Guns

People wonder why we don’t treat gun ownership the same way we treat vehicle ownership.  The argument is one has to register a car with the government, purchase mandatory insurance, and get a license from the government to operate a vehicle on public roads.  This is all in the interest of safety, accountability, and, somehow, to prevent vehicle theft.  People who want gun control also want guns to be treated in the same way.  The problem with this logic is that people who believe in gun control never think this all the way through.  I will give into the gun controllers if we treat guns EXACTLY the way we treat cars.

The first point to consider is how old one needs to be to buy a car (or a truck).  Not to drive a car, but to OWN a car.  Is there a state, or federal law, that says one has to be a certain age just to BUY a car?  There are laws, state and federal, that say you have to be a certain age to buy a gun.  And the laws vary depending on WHAT age you are required to be to buy a gun.  Generally, you had to be 18 years old to buy a long gun (rifle/shotgun), and 21 years old to buy a handgun.  Right now, the federal/state/local politicians are trying to raise the minimum age to buy ANY gun to 21 years old.  On a side note, it may be a conflict of the law to serve in the military, and carry, and possible use a gun in combat if the service member is under the age of 21.  The question now is do we raise the minimum age to owning a car to 21 years old?

Most states (all?) have a driving age of 16 years.  Usually, when a student is 15 years old, they will take a class at school called “Drivers Ed.”  The school provides a car, and an instructor for the student to learn how to drive a vehicle.  Once that is completed, the student is given a learner’s permit, and can then drive a vehicle with a licensed driver in the passenger’s seat.  At the age of 16, they can then take a practical test to obtain their driver’s license.  If they pass the test, they receive their driver’s license, and, if they have insurance, can legally drive a vehicle on their own.  Would our public education system provide the same for would be gun owners?  Are schools going to provide classroom learning, with qualified NRA instructors, on how to operate a gun?  Once students pass the classroom phase of gun training, will they obtain a learner’s permit to use a gun, with a licensed gun owner beside them?  Will schools then provide “Gun Ed” classes where the students are given a gun, and ammo, by the school to practice with, with an instructor?  Once a student passes the classroom, and practical training, will the student be allowed to take a state test to obtain a gun license at 16 years of age?  Once the student passes all requirements of the state they live in, can they now own, carry, and use a gun on their own, as they can with a vehicle?  Not likely, I am thinking.

What is great about a driver’s license, is that it is accepted in all other states.  You can drive your legally owned vehicle, with your valid driver’s license in any state, provided you abide by the laws of the state you are driving in.  With guns, state laws vary greatly, and are not forced to recognize a conceal carry permit issued in another state, unlike a driver’s license.  You can even be arrested, and charged with a felony if you cross a state line that does not recognize your states conceal carry permit, and you are carrying a legally owned fire arm.  If there is national reciprocity for driver’s licenses, then there should be national reciprocity for conceal carry permits.

Cars are registered with the government to collect a tax.  Car registration has nothing to do with making it easier to find a stolen car.  Cars are stolen all the time, and never recovered.  Cars have never been confiscated by national governments under the guise of “buy back” programs.  In the United States, cars are bought from  private dealers, so it is impossible for the government “buy back” something they never sold in the first place.  No three day waiting period to buy a car.  No need to fill out a form to get government approval to buy a car.  Do laws exist on how close to a school a car dealer can, or cannot, operate?  You need to secure a license plate to a vehicle to drive it on a public street, but you can loan your vehicle to anyone you like, as long as they have a valid license.  You can still buy/own a car even if you have committed a felony, or even a misdemeanor.

The only reason to register a gun is to track it in case the government wants to implement a gun “buy back,” which is a nice way of saying “confiscate.”  If we are to treat guns, and cars the same, then we need to place a three day waiting period on buying a car, and fill out a form to get government approval on said purchase.  Being a felon will mean being denied in buying a car.  Being charged with MISDEMEANOR domestic abuse will result in having your guns confiscated by the police, and being denied the right to buy any new guns.  Will car owners have their cars taken by the government if they are charged with domestic battery, and will they be forbidden from buying another car?  Felons are not even allowed to hold a gun.  Will felons then also not be allowed to even be in a car, regardless if they are driving, or not?  If a valid license plate is secured to a gun, can it be loaned out to anyone with a valid gun license?

Two final thoughts:

“…shall not be infringed,” is actually in the Constitution.

"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth, and keystone under independence." - George Washington



There are currently no blog comments.