Monday, November 18, 2013

Anti-Rights Propaganda diquised as "News" by David Codrea

David Codrea does a good job of showing how anti-rights propaganda is pushed by "real journalists".

Invoking Lee Harvey Oswald to produce a calculated emotional effect while showing total disregard for laws on the books, “reporter” Dan Freedman of the Hearst Washington Bureau made his case for so-called “universal background checks” Saturday in a “gun control” propaganda piece presented as straight news.

“Online gun purchases as easy as Oswald's mail order,” Freedman’s headline read.

“Lee Harvey Oswald assassinated President John F. Kennedy on Nov. 22, 1963, with a mail-order Mannlicher-Carcano 6.5mm bolt-action rifle, for which he paid $19.95 plus shipping and handling,” Freedman wrote, making sure to add for desired effect that “Oswald mailed his money order with a coupon torn from an ad in the National Rifle Association's American Rifleman magazine.”
Were Freedman to make good on his assertions and demonstrate the equivalency he would have readers believe exists, he would next demonstrate how he can “buy” a gun online and have it shipped to him through the mail. But he knows he can’t because that would be against the law.
What he’s trying to do is create and manipulate emotional reactions to establish a false equivalency for internet gun sales involving private individuals. Except those don’t happen.

What can happen -- in states that allow private sales -- is that someone who wants to sell a gun can make that known on a website, the same as can be done with newspaper classified ads, as in this “for sale” notice for a scoped rifle appearing in one of Hearst’s Texas holdings.

In the cases of both print and internet ads leading up to a potential private sale, it is then up to an interested party to contact the seller, arrange for a physical meeting and negotiate and complete the transaction. As much as Freedman would have readers believe otherwise, buyers can’t just complete an internet form, make payment online and sit back and wait for delivery. To represent that as being “as easy as Oswald’s mail order” is, candidly, a lie.
“But U.S. law generally does not extend to sales within state borders,” Freedman argues, trying to make the case for more federal restrictions. “Those are governed by state laws -- if they exist.”

Again, that is patently false. Federal law prohibits selling a gun to a “prohibited person” and it prohibits transferring a gun to a person from another state without going through a licensed dealer.

“Any person may sell a firearm to an unlicensed resident of the State where he resides as long as he does not know or have reasonable cause to believe the person is prohibited from receiving or possessing firearms under Federal law,” ATF advises [provided it is permitted under state law]. “Under Federal law, an unlicensed individual is prohibited from transferring a firearm to an individual who does not reside in the State where the transferee resides. Generally, for a person to lawfully transfer a firearm to an unlicensed person who resides out of State, the firearm must be shipped to a Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL) within the recipient’s State of residence.”

More at Gun Rights Examiner here

1 comment:

Wireless.Phil said...

Cleveland settles federal lawsuit over confiscated gun; owner to get his .38 Taurus back

Plain Dealer - 3 hours ago