Dragonfly garden,
It happens in parking lots and people leaving guns in their cars when they go to the gym.
“It happens in places where gun carriers are forced to disarm and criminals are watching.”
Must be why I never hear about that since we don’t have open carry and to get a concealed carry permit in NYS one has to prove a special need.
We don’t hear about guns stolen from cars much here either. That is probably because there are very few places here that we cannot carry a gun so people don’t leave them in the car, they carry them.
Oh gee, thats comforting @-)
It is for me since I’m usually carrying one 
That is not reassuring.
And people come into offices here with weapons without the knowledge of the occupants. This is not comfortable.
^ That is why a whole swath of the country is off limits to H & I to retire to (among other reasons.)
And then leave them on the back of the toilet in the men’s room, as has happened more than once.
All firearms transactions should require background checks, private or other wise. The criteria should be consistent and enforced regardless of how the transaction occurs.
I am curious to know how emilybee defines what a gun nut is?
Anyone who doesn’t hold her extreme views on guns is my guess @GreatKid
Her views are not in the least extreme.
“I am curious to know how emilybee defines what a gun nut is?”
Those who believes any regulation is a violation of their 2nd Amendment rights (except for the mentally ill which they seem to have no problem with infringements of their rights.)
I am an anti-gun rights nut and proud to be. I believe no one other than law enforcement (and even then I’m not 100% on board given the many times they use their weapons to kill unarmed people for no other reason then they are black) should be allowed to carry a firearm on their person. Even in most parts of the UK police do not carry a firearm except in special circumstances.
^ I define that as extreme
Fine by me. I certainly don’t mind.
I don’t see that as too burdensome. Seems like a small price to pay for tightening up what is really a major loophole.
I do see it as too burdensome. It would add time and unnecessary expense.
Of course it would, but everything has to be considered in terms of cost/benefit.
Dragonflygarden, opposing universal background checks is extreme.
[More than 90% of Americans support background checks, poll says](More than 90% of Americans support background checks, poll says)
That includes a huge majority of gun owners.
This is not a small problem. 40% of gun sales are by unlicensed sellers.
You might also want to consider the burdensomeness of being killed by a gun which was sold to someone without a background check. Just for balance.
x-posted JustOneDad
Consider the time and expense to fall in the category of the real cost of business, or in this case, the real cost of gun ownership. Another $50 on top of a $500 gun isn’t unreasonable to start closing up this massive loophole. It also helps support gun dealers.