Mike's Home Page

I think what we can learn from Waco is that Assault Motorcycles cause crime. You never see Minivan gangs killing each other. If we just ban motorcycles, we'll prevent this kind of motorcycle-related killing. And it's not as if anyone really needs a motorcycle. Remember: The motorcycle you own is the motorcycle most likely to kill you.

The Second Amendment has been misinterpreted. It says guns are permitted to a "well-regulated militia." That means trained citizen soldiers called into action for emergencies — because in colonial times every able-bodied man was required to be a member of the militia. It does not mean everyone with $50 and a driver's license is entitled to own a gun.
Wrong. Title 10 USC, Ch 13, Sec 311.

It would help if you actually understood what you were talking about before opening your ignorant yap.
Oh, you might also want to tell the Federal Government of this profound revelation you had.  Apparently, in the National Defense Act of 1916, they created the Civilian Marskmanship Program http://thecmp.org/cmp_sales/ for the purpose of selling SURPLUS BATTLE RIFLES to civilians for the purpose of ensuring they're trained in case of war...as members of the militia.

Every legal opinion for 200 years denied individual gun ownership was a right 

Cite, please.  You won't find any relevant (SCOTUS) rulings to that effect.  You're repeating bleats from Brady, et al, that are unsupported.
And even if so, so what?  For a long time, it was held legal for states to have official religions, ban pornography, and ban gays from marrying or even interacting. This isn't the 1790s.  Unless you want to go back to black people being slaves. (You probably do.)
— until the steady lobbying of the National Rifle Association created a climate that allowed a conservative U.S. Supreme Court in 2008 to strike down a handgun ban in the District of Columbia, and fuel the sense of entitlement of gun owners.
The same "conservative" court that upheld Roe v Wade and 0bamacare? Seek therapy, dude. You're paranoid and delusional.
You can't prevent mental illness. You can prevent humans from having easy access to tools they can use to harm other people.
Yes, that's worked so well in the UK that in 100 years has gone from similar gun laws to the US and 1/12 the murder rate, to very restrictive laws and better than 1/2 the murder rate.
Fun fact:  I don't need a gun to club your brains into goo.
But if you're obsessed with guns, you'd say something like:
Among the 24 most affluent nations of the world, the U.S. is the far and away leader in gun homicides. None of the other 23 affluent nations has a rate above 1 firearm death per 100,000 population.
Because somehow gun deaths are worse than drunk driving deaths?
One of us has an unhealthy obsession with guns.  It isn't me.
I'm talking about repealing or amending the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Sometime about the fifth grade, most of us learned that that process involves both Houses of Congress, and approval of 3/4 of the states.  If you think that is ever going to happen, you need to put down the medical marijuana.
The idea of 500 students in a college library or a dozen teachers in an elementary school pulling out guns to shoot a gunman is ludicrous. They would wind up shooting each other.
And yet in places where this is legal, this has not happened.  Where in your professional firearms training did you learn this?  You DO have professional training in this field you're masturbating about, right?  Right?
Gun freaks say if you take away their guns only outlaws will have guns. That's a chance worth taking. Because if we ban guns, eventually the tide will turn. It might take 10 years or 20 years. Hell, it might take 50 years. But if we make it illegal to own a handgun, eventually there will be no handguns.
I have functional guns from 1872 in my collection.  In the UK, criminals convert dummy and airsoft guns to fire bullets.  Once again, the gun freak (you), opens his ignorant yap about a subject without doing the faintest modicum of research. That's probably why you're in "reporting," the Special Olympics of writing. Real writers have to do research.
Let the hunters keep their rifles and shotguns; those weapons are ineffective tools in a mass shooting.

BWUAHAHAHAAHA!  You went full retard.  Never go full retard.
Your typical deer rifle has 3 times the muzzle energy of an "assault weapon" (please define what that is for me.  Go ahead) and about 10 times that of a handgun. But they're "ineffective."  Because nothing that can kill a bull elk could be useful for killing people.
This is an uphill battle. Despite daily front-page stories of shooting sprees and killings, Americans don't want to give up their guns. Over the past 10 years, the percentage of Americans who support stricter guns laws has dropped from 60 percent to 47 percent. In a recent survey, 73 percent of Americans oppose banning handguns.
Yup. You're kinda on the same page as the homophobes and abortion banners.  And the Klan.
We're coming for your guns. And someday, we'll take them.
Fascinating. So, if I have a gun, and you do not, how precisely do you propose to take it?
Oh, one more thing--300 million guns, average value of $500 each. Per that pesky 5th Amendment (which you should have learned about in fifth grade), you have pay for the private property you seize for public purposes.  Now, you'll be buying me a new house, given my collection, but more importantly, you'll be ponying up $150 BILLION dollars or more.  Good luck with that.  

Perhaps you should have studied 5th grade arithmetic, too, if you didn't want to look stupid.
Bleat harder, you whining little coward.  You're going to shit your panties on the internet, and that's all.
Please continue.  Your dickless rage amuses me.
Stop the insanity.  Put this paranoid, delusional, ignorant retard into a home.

Wishful Thinking Knows No Bounds
Oct 09, 201402:32AM

Category: Guns

There are always people who are convinced there is a rational, polite, gentle and civilized way to stop a violent sociopath from raping their eyesockets.

We call these sensitive souls "Morons."

They are the perfect demographic for this idiocy (a top pick among Kickstarter staff!  I always ask the staff of what's basically an auction site for advice on combat):


Now, there are several things wrong with this device.  First is that it's retarded.

What is your goal when assaulted?

Well, actually your goal is to avoid assault, but if you are assaulted, your goal is to stop said assault.

Now, as far as noise to scare off an attacker, you can do that by screaming. If it worked (it rarely does), you wouldn't need this.

Call the police?  Yup, 911 on any phone will do it.

So two thirds of its functions are already addressed. 

But wait! According to the article:

Given the capabilities of the Whistl, you wouldn’t want to set it off by mistake. To make sure this doesn’t happen, Lifeshel has put several safeguards in place. The buttons have to be pressed at the same time to be activated, and they’re touch-sensitive, meaning you shouldn’t be able to accidentally activate it in your pocket or backpack. If you did accidentally set it off, then all’s not lost, as the product’s developer has built in a 15-second grace period before the app contacts the police. Only the user can disable the alert via a pre-assigned security password or gesture.

So, whilst being attacked, or pending attack and hopefully running, you have to press several buttons at once.  Then it starts screaming on your behalf, and fifteen seconds later, it calls the cops.

And no one can shut it off!  Unless, of course, they smash it into the ground really hard. They will probably have your wallet inside of those 15 seconds, and the phone, which will just go sailing over the nearest anything. They may even have your life. Fifteen seconds is a LONG time in a fight, as anyone who's actually been in one (obviously not the white children of privilege who thought this was a good idea) can attest.

As to the 90 lumen strobe, welcome to 1995. The light I carry every day (about the size of a large Sharpie) strobes at over 300 lumen, and I have a slightly larger one at 960 lumen.  In the meantime, they also work as really good flashlights, and cost less than this POS.

Of course, if the attacker knocks you to the ground anyway, you can enjoy screaming in your ears and a strobe migraine while being raped or mugged.  It'll totally add to the experience. You'll be begging the thug to smash it to reduce your own distress.

Look, folks, this is simple:  If someone is trying to hurt you, your options are A: avoid being hurt by vacating the area, which assumes you have able privilege, or 2) find some way to hurt them enough they are dissuaded. Stern letters of protest, boycotts, and teaching thugs not to be thugs don't work.  If you don't believe this, I will be happy to prove it to you.  I will come and punch you in the face until you stop me.

They'll probably sell a bunch of these, and they'll prove as entirely useless as any other device that doesn't shoot bullets.

If the repeatedly proven fact that the more power a weapon disperses, the more effective a stopper it is, violates your sphincter control or tardbrain, go whine on the internet.  But you won't change reality, nor the mind of an attacker.

This product is crap.

An Old Snark, Reposted
Sep 07, 201401:39AM

Category: Guns



Handgun testing law misfires

State finding many cheap models pass, continue being sold



September 3, 2001

SACRAMENTO -- A tough new handgun safety test designed to pinch the supply of cheap, disposable Saturday night specials doesn't appear to be pushing many guns to the sidelines.


"A bullshit, unconstitutional, bureaucratic goatfuck designed to make being in the legitimate business of selling firearms a dicey financial proposition isn't working the way we planned."


Through its first eight months, nearly 600 handgun models have passed the punishing firing and drop tests, according to a list compiled by the state Department of Justice.


"Guess what we found?  Guns are actually safe to use!"


The total includes an unknown but significant number of models that are only cosmetically different from each other -- a chrome rather than blue-steel finish, for example. But it also includes at least 12 guns manufactured by so-called Ring of Fire companies, a cluster of Southern California manufacturers who have been accused of flooding the nation with inexpensive handguns.


"These people, who we have dubbed with a moniker in a move that would get us called bigots if we applied one to any other group, are actually manufacturing guns poor minorities can afford.  As liberals, this outrages us."


The legislation that required the safety tests originally was aimed at the Ring of Fire, firms such as Bryco Arms of Costa Mesa, Davis Industries of Chino and Phoenix Arms of Ontario.


"We tried to put several small businesses out of operation, and put their employees on the street, because we care about people."


"They tried to make the test so tough that those guns wouldn't survive, but it obviously hasn't worked," said Bruce Cavanaugh of San Diego, a former president of the California Firearms Dealers Association.


"We're smarter than they are on the subject of firearms, because we're engineers and they're paranoid, hoplophobic, illiterate freaks."


It's unknown how many guns have failed the tests. Private laboratories that do the testing are not required to report failures to the state, although most apparently do. Manufacturers also can, and do, resubmit weapons that wash out initially.


"The test is fair!"


Attorney General Bill Lockyer publicly accused at least one manufacturer of attempting to manipulate the tests, and others are known to be carefully selecting ammunition to improve their guns' prospects.


"They're actually allowed to specify manufacturer's recommendations!  That's almost like a car manufacturer specifying a fuel!"


Gun enthusiasts, dealers and manufacturers say the new law has done little more than create another expensive, annoying paper drill that has had almost no impact on the availability of cheap handguns in the state.


"Change the name of the organization, and Sarah Brady is still a frothing freak."


As a result, just two years after the handgun measure was celebrated as another major gun-control breakthrough in California, all involved in the debate are discussing a major overhaul.


"We want to get rid of it because it's pointless."  "We want to change it so you can't pass it!"


"We are very concerned about some of the guns that are on the (approved) list and some of the loopholes that we overlooked," said Luis Tolley of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, which sponsored the legislation.


"We are concerned that people are still selling guns.  All lies aside, that's why we're here.  No one should have guns except the Kennedys and our bodyguards. Whenever we get proven to be raving idiots, we claim someone exploited a 'loophole,' kinda like that loophole in the Constitution that allows them to say bad things about us."


Said Chuck Michel, a San Pedro attorney for the California Rifle and Pistol Association, "There is a fix-it bill pending because they recognize there are a lot of problems."


"I'm being misquoted to make it sound as if I support this idiocy."


But Tolley and others say the number of guns on the list also reflects design improvements inspired by the law.


"To save face, we'll claim that any perceived good is our doing, even on guns designed thirty years ago."


The Brady Campaign, formerly Handgun Control, had been pushing for at least three years for legislation to curb production and sales of inexpensive, easily concealed handguns.


"How dare poor people in bad neighborhoods where the cops are loathe to go, defend themselves instead!"


Such a law proved difficult to draft, and the gun-control movement ultimately settled for Senate Bill 15, which passed amid the post-Columbine fever of 1999. The measure decreed a series of safety tests, although supporters offered little evidence that many people were being killed or injured because handguns were poorly made.


"We like dead children as a political statement.  The fact that we know nothing about firearms doesn't stop us from being relevant in this case, except among engineers, shooters, weapon designers, corporate board members and other alleged 'professionals.'"


To pass, three versions of each model must fire 600 rounds with no more than six malfunctions. Each gun is then dropped a little over 3 feet onto a concrete pad from six directions with the hammer cocked and the safety off. All three must withstand the exercise without discharging.


"We set up a military spec testing lab, and the bastards beat us!"


Although the legislation was signed in late 1999, it did not take effect until Jan. 1 of this year. Since then, the test results have not followed any pattern, those involved say.


"We have no idea what we are actually doing, except pissing in these people's Wheaties."


"I've seen what people think is a cheaply made handgun, just because it's low-cost, and it worked quite well. And I've seen a very expensive gun that most police would be happy to carry that failed," said Mike Shanahan, who does gun testing for Truesdail Laboratories of Tustin.


"Beretta are crap regardless of how much you pay for them, and people who don't waste time on mirror polishes and hookers to get generals to buy their product can turn out a basic model cheaply.  Either that, or the test doesn't work.  Or both."


Dean Wilkerson, who operates a testing lab in Van Nuys, said "it's the luck of the draw" with a lot of handguns.


"I wanted to get a soundbite into this article."


"I have failed some high-quality guns," Wilkerson said. "You've got to shoot three handguns, 600 rounds each, and two of them passed with no malfunctions at all, and the third one failed because it has seven malfunctions."


"I can make an oxymoronic statement about a bad test, and admit that randomness IS a factor."


Wilkerson said he has tested a lot of Ring of Fire models. While some failed, more than a few passed, he said.


"We say 'Ring of Fire,' because if we said, 'Darktown' or 'Beanerville' people would recognize that we're racist."


"They passed with no problem, and there are higher quality guns that didn't pass," Wilkerson said.


"'Higher quality' being a paraphrase for 'only available to rich white cybergeeks in the valley who can plunk down seven bills large for two pounds of metal.'"


Aaron Davis of Davis Industries said the company had no trouble getting its 12 models, representing four guns, passed and placed on the state list.


"Investment casting and CNC milling cut production costs.  SWEEEET!"


The guns, derringers ranging from .22 caliber to .38 caliber, passed on the first attempt, Davis said. The guns sell for $100 to $125. The .38-caliber model was redesigned to strengthen the trigger before the tests.


"We're happy to sell cheap, useful defensive tools without a lot of hype, and I'm laughing up my sleeve at these fools."


"I don't personally like (the tests), but we will try to do whatever they want us to do," Davis said.


"Hey, my stuff is STILL cheaper than those imports with the fancy names."


In February, Attorney General Lockyer publicly berated Phoenix Arms for allegedly attempting to maneuver some of its guns through the process by halting a test and restarting it with a new set of weapons, and by submitting a specific brand of ammunition. The handgun in question, however, later passed. Company officials declined to comment.


"That's as bad as insisting an engine only use 10-W30 oil.  The nerve!"


"We have seen some models where they are trying with this ammo and then they switch," said Randy Rossi, who heads the attorney general's firearms division. "They stop the test and try with another ammo, and then they stop the test and they try with a third ammo.


"Can you imagine if GM were to try different brands and gauges of tires to see which worked best, depending on the track weather that day?"


"We want to know of those situations where a gun is maybe so frail that even the manufacturer has to be very selective as to what ammunition will work well."


"We'll flunk Colt because a 1911 won't feed hollowpoints, even though we're more rabidly against hollowpoints than some other ammo, even though the military has never had a problem with it in 80 years, just because it's an excuse to fuck with them."


In early talks on potential changes, the Brady Campaign and the Attorney General's Office say they want to require labs to report all failures. They also say the state should have clear authority to randomly test a sample, perhaps 10 percent to 15 percent, of handguns that pass.


"We'll make it ten times as expensive!  A hundred!  We'll show you!  Nyaah! Nyaah!  Nyaah!"


Additionally, the Brady Campaign wants to allow recalling firearms later found to have problems, and it would like to see weapons tested with a standard, or recommended, ammunition.


"Every autoloader has to use wadcutters so we can make them fail, and every revolver has to use overloaded +Ps so the primers unseat and jam.  THAT'S what we call a 'fair' test!"


"I don't really think we know, unless we have the ability to randomly test and receive reports from the laboratories, of instances where a specific model has tried and failed, tried and failed, tried and failed, tried and passed," Rossi said.


"If the lab isn't giving us the results we want, we'll rig the test until we do get them.  Now THAT'S science!"


"But this is a very tricky balancing act because we do not want to discourage manufacturers from submitting their firearms, improving their firearms and then having the public benefit from those improvements."


"Obligatory sop to fairness for the semiliterate masses."


Dealers and gun-rights groups such as the National Rifle Association want dealers to be able to resell used guns that are not on the approved list.

Such guns can be sold by private parties if dealers process the transactions.


"They actually want to abide by the commerce provisions of the Constitution. Those bastards!"


The attorney general has told dealers they can conduct consignment sales of unlisted guns, although the law is unclear on the subject.


"We haven't found a way to say 'no' that even OUR Supreme Court won't throw out on its ear."


Used handguns historically have accounted for a significant slice of dealers' sales and their profit margin is much higher than that for new guns.


"They keep dealers in business.  And no gun dealer actually has a family to feed."


"They managed to create a monster," said Louis Baldridge, owner of the El Cajon Gun Exchange. "It has not accomplished what they hoped to accomplish, unless they wanted to make life more difficult for dealers."


"We have to have a token piece of real reporting in here or we'll get nailed for libel."


Copyright 2001 Union-Tribune Publishing Co.


"So extremist, even the Village Voice looks right wing."


Now THAT is Customer Service
Oct 25, 201309:37AM

Category: Guns
Dear Franklin Armory: I have one of your case tumblers, about two years old. I'd estimate less than 200 hours runtime and 10,000 rounds tumbled. One of the motor bearings has worn out. Is a replacement bearing or a motor assembly available? Thanks Mike 
Mr. Williamson,
Thank you for your purchase of our case tumbler. I apologize for the issue you are having with this item. We do not stock replacement parts for this item, however, I have entered an order to send you a replacement tumbler. Please allow our warehouse 3-5 business days for shipment from our facility.
We appreciate your interest in our products!
Thank you,
Tina Schneider
Customer Service Specialist
Battenfeld Technologies, Inc.

Dear Frankford Arsenal: I have one of your case tumblers, about two years old. I'd estimate less than 200 hours runtime and 10,000 rounds tumbled. One of the motor bearings has worn out. Is a replacement bearing or a motor assembly available?



Mr. Williamson, Thank you for your purchase of our case tumbler. I apologize for the issue you are having with this item. We do not stock replacement parts for this item, however, I have entered an order to send you a replacement tumbler. Please allow our warehouse 3-5 business days for shipment from our facility. We appreciate your interest in our products! 

Thank you,

Tina Schneider

Customer Service Specialist

Battenfeld Technologies, Inc.

EDITED because I was a dumbass and got the company name wrong.

"Parade" Rifles
Oct 22, 201303:10PM

Category: Guns

Gah.  All over the auction sites and every gun show is some fucking "Parade" rifle or bayonet that's so-called because it's chromed.

It's usually some third rate piece of shit, invariably pitted and worn, with chrome on top of the pitting and marks.  Frequently there are pieces missing.  There are often scour lines where the original crisp machining has been blurred by someone's buffing wheel.

The proper way to describe one of these would be something like this:  "Used, crappy, old bolt ation rifle.  Some gap-toothed, slack-jawed, white trash, inbred yokel did a piss poor job of chrome plating it because he'd sucked down too much shine boiled off in the radiator of Pappy's '32 Ford, so his already sub-par brain approached genuine retardation and he thought this was a clever thing to do.  It's probably safe to shoot but we don't guarantee it.  Fifty bucks and it's yours."

Instead, the seller usually tries to tack $50-$100 onto the top Blue Book value.  But ask him for any reference to a "Turkish/Austrian/Spanish/Italian Parade rifle" that was chromed historically, and he can't find one,  because they almost never really existed.

There are so many of these things, and they are all so badly done in the same fashion, I have to wonder if somewhere in Appalachia was some proto-Meth head who did nothing but take old Mausers and dip then in chrome as an excuse to snort the acid fumes out of the tank.  Or did he just have an equally brain-damaged brother who did cut-rate autobody work and thought it would be cool to toss them into the tank along with the bumpers?

Add these to the list of people to assassinate if time travel ever becomes possible.  Those poor old rifles have seen enough battles and rebuilds across Eurasia without being roofied with brake cleaner and raped with chromium sulfate.

Mass Shooters on Military Bases
Sep 17, 201301:41AM

Category: Guns

From comments in another thread, regarding, "But the commanders know better than you, and don't want troops armed when they have no need of a weapon":

Retired military. My service is a matter of public record on my site, Wikipedia, and the dozens of people on Baen's Bar who've met me personally.

A rational person would observe that the military members at WNY did, in fact, need weapons this morning, and did not have them.

Will there be potential incidents if troops are armed all the time? Likely. Those have to be balanced against ongoing, increasing threats.

It seems unlikely there'd be more violence at a stateside base, than in the war zone where everyone is under severe stress. The number of incidents there is few. So we can expect there to be fewer here.

There could be some incidents of weapon loss or theft, but the cost/benefit analysis makes those really unimportant overall. They'd be less significant than losses from police evidence lockers.

Keep in mind all those troops and personnel are unarmed from home to duty and back again. A simple surveillance will provide all kinds of terror targets, as was done in Europe during the Cold War.

Also, it is impossible to secure against such threats. You cannot disassemble and cavity search every vehicle and person entering. Any response must contain a reactive component. A reactive component requires armed force in the immediate area to the hostile.

If only the military could find a large number of people trained with weapons to be on hand to respond...

"But Mike, we've kept making ourselves more and more helpless, and we're still getting attacked!  What can we do?"

"Stop being pussies."

Sarcasm aside, if you can't trust an officer or NCO with a sidearm, as every Barney Fife cop in America is trusted, then either we need better recruiting standards, or you need therapy. I'm betting on the latter.

If there were statistically an armed NCO in every duty section, there'd be a lot less of this, because the shooters don't want to die until AFTER the make their statement.

Consider also that anyone working on base, or living off base, is guaranteed to be defenseless from home to gate and back.  Easy pickings for some future terrorist (and this is an easy prediction, because it happened several times in Europe during the Cold War).

An "Armed Force" actually needs to be, you know, an ARMED FORCE. 

False Arguments For Gun Control
Sep 16, 201301:26AM

Category: Guns

"Guns can kill" is a completely dishonest argument. Alcohol kills, and people under the influence of alcohol kill, more people than guns, even with the laws on the books. Alcohol serves no valid non-medical purpose in society. If it's about saving life, we should be pushing to ban booze...which was tried disastrously.

AIDS spread by gay men kills more people than guns. Would it be unreasonable to require blood tests before engaging in such behavior?  Nor does society as a whole particularly benefit from unsafe sex outside of wedlock.

"People die" is a completely invalid and dishonest justification for restricting rights, and SCOTUS says so. Such arguments were tried for booze, for porn, for AIDS, for any number of things.

So I won't even entertain such arguments.

However, I can argue that if we assume that all guns magically disappeared, and none of those dead were killed in some other fashion, it would still take 1000 years of so-called "gun deaths" to equal the body count the Nazis managed in under a decade.

So against the possibility that the US just might be ruled by some murderous nutjob some time in the next 750 years, I will not only keep all my guns, I will seek more, and I will seek bigger guns that shoot more bullets.

For the children.

A Word on Subject Matter
Apr 27, 201307:08PM

Category: Guns

California has a ban on 30 round standard capacity magazines (which they dishonestly call "high capacity").

But, if you have a an AR15 in .50 Beowulf caliber, then that same magazine holds 10 rounds, and is a 10 round magazine.  Even if you could put 30 rounds into it in 5.56mm.  So, call it a ".50 Beowulf magazine," and it's legal.  Call it an "AR15 magazine" and it's not. Even if it's the same magazine.

If you are not a professional in this field, and pass a law, we who are professionals will find a way around it, and will.

Because fuck you, that's why.

Opinion on Polls
Apr 18, 201309:54AM

Category: Guns


I have been asked for an opinion on the above poll, showing "90% of Americans support background checks," and how I would respond to people who cite it. It also asks what people think of armed guards in school, and how effective they think it would be.

The question shown is simplistic and without context, and is a straw man.

Would it matter? 90% of Americans used to support slavery. 90% used to support bans on "pornography" that included the Kama Sutra. It's nice that they have a poll. I have a Constitution. wink

And what untrained amateurs think of security protocols is uninteresting to me.

Also, there ARE background checks at gun shows, so the question is irrelevant. EXACTLY THE SAME LAWS apply at a gun show as apply outside a gun show. There is no such thing as a "gun show loophole." Just because a dealer sets up at an event hall, doesn't exempt him from NICS checks and Forms 4473, anymore than it exempts him from sales tax.

Speaking of which, when are we closing the "garage sale loophole" that lets people sell things without paying sales or income tax? (Trick question. Technically, you're supposed to collect and pay sales tax on garage sales in most states, and you are certainly required to either pay income tax or file to show depreciation of the used goods.) See how this works? Lie that something happens, claim said imaginary happening is a loophole, call for changes "for the chiiiiiildren!" Take a poll. Pretend it matters.

Yes, a private citizen, NOT ENGAGED IN BUSINESS can sell personal property, even a gun, without a license. This has ALWAYS been true. If you change that, then you cannot complain if at some point they start requiring official drive searches for kiddie porn before selling personal computers, or actually send agents around to collect sales tax from your garage sale. Or, they may start raiding and shutting down farms for selling "unlicensed milk." (Does that sound familar? Because it happens.) If you give the government power, they are going to take it. Once they have it, you can't complain about it, because you gave it to them.

I have made such sales myself, btw. Usually of antique Spanish or Smith & Wesson revolvers from my collection, usually logged into a book and logged back out, since I have a license to collect (which offers me some specific benefits as far as shipping and receiving).

But any FFL selling guns must do a NICS check on EVERY sale, no matter where it takes place, and there are already strict legal limits on WHERE they can conduct said sales (for example, they must be within state). And no wholesaler or manufacturer will sell to anyone who does not have an FFL, because legally they can't. That FFL is necessary to get inventory.

There is simply no possible way to operate a gun business without licenses and NICS checks without running afoul of the law, and rapidly getting noticed.

And by the way, there are ATF agents at most gun shows. Some of them are shopping for personal or duty weapons. Some are resolving legal inquiries from dealers. And some are acting in capacity as enforcement. 

As far as "guns sold on the internet," they either must go through an FFL, or be sold face to face, if private, much like they were when such ads were placed in newspapers. So the question here is: Why do you hate the internet?  Why do you hate modern communication?

Can someone make a sale to someone illicit anyway? Yes. You know what we call those people?  Criminals. And guess what?  THEY DID THAT ANYWAY, and will do it anyway. That's what it means to be a criminal.

But when they drag your ass away for selling or possessing unlicensed milk that wasn't properly pasteurized, etc, "for the children," don't expect any sympathy.  When they jail you for tax evasion over the "Garage sale loophole," no sympathy.  It's what you voted for and wanted.  

Nor can you ever complain about TSA, who checks travelers to "keep us safe" and "protect the children."  If it prevents just one bomb, won't it be worth it?

And next time, try having a clue what you're talking about before engaging in debate.