CDZ Another attempt. What does registering guns for law abiding gun owners do to stop criminals

[2aguy]

Actually Candy the stats prove exactly the opposite of what you just claimed they do. We have FAR more legally owned guns at this time that any time in our history, and yet gun violence is actually at historic lows nation wide.

Assuming I disagreed with any of that; we’d still have the most gun deaths of any developed nation. Thanks for confirming what I said though; we have the most guns and the most violence. I wonder what the prize is?
Oh yeah, almost predictable rampage killings.

Cities with draconian gun laws that actually violate the COTUS while at the same time having higher than average gun crime rates PROVE conclusively that doing away with the 2nd Amendment would not reduce gun crime. Because crimnals do not care if they have a right to own a gun or not.

After notching 30K gun deaths over and over and prescribing nothing except thoughts and prayers…it may be time to try something different than breaking out the hymnals. I’m for mandatory minimums and locking up criminals for a long, long time. Another law on the books helps.

I am not sure what part of this you are not getting, it is already illegal to murder people. Taking away the 2nd Amendment isn't going to make someone who is intent on murder say 'oops I don't have a right to own a gun, guess I'll let this person live"

I was answering the question. There are probably other answers that were better. One benefit is that violating gun registry laws enhances the sentence.

Imagine if I proposed to you "If we did away with the first Amendment, that would solve the issue of people calling each other names, we'll just make it illegal to do so"

I would imagine your response would be to laugh at me. I would HOPE it would be.

hilarious.

Our violence has nothing to do with gun ownership....as was pointed out by me and DandyDonovan, as more Americans not only own guns, but carry them, our gun crime rate did not go up, it went down, our gun murder rate did not go up, it went down...so you have no point that is accurate.....

And there you go...mixing suicide up in gun murder to get the 30,000 gun deaths a year...showing that you are not going to debate this honestly since guns have nothing to do with suicide...as you have been shown over and over again, from research, and from actual statistics on suicide from countries with extreme gun control...so, honest discussion isn't what you are interested in since the facts, the reality and the truth do not support anything you believe about guns in this country....

I was answering the question. There are probably other answers that were better. One benefit is that violating gun registry laws enhances the sentence.

And you are wrong on this too......criminals, felons, caught with illegal guns cannot be prosecuted for not registering their illegal guns....the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Haynes v United States......states that a felon does not have to register an illegal gun because that would violate their 5th Amendment protection against self incrimination....

There is no reason to register guns...none. The only reason to do it is to know which law abiding citizens have them so when the anti gunners have power, they can confiscate them....that is the only reason.

Your paranoia is hilarious.

What paranoia? Oregon, New York, California....have all enacted laws that make it illegal to own various makes and models of gun....in particular the unconstitutional ban on scary looking rifles..... Britain, Germany, France, Australia.....have all enacted gun confiscation.....

 

[2aguy]

I was answering the question. There are probably other answers that were better. One benefit is that violating gun registry laws enhances the sentence.



hilarious.

No it doesn't , as has been pointed out to you repeatedly, prosecutors bargain cases down all the time, and the first thing to go is any crime enhancer.

It is already an "enhancer" if you rob a store with a gun, so adding the enhancer "using a unregistered gun" means nothing. In fact it means less than nothing because if the first thing bargained away is the gun charge, ,why would the NEW charge not also be bargained away ? It would be. Absolutely, positively.

Ok.

It’s pointless pointing out the obvious time and again when you fundamentally keep addressing another topic.

Yes...the facts show you are wrong....the truth shows you are wrong, the reality shows you are wrong....so now you deflect and try to ignore the valid points made by DandyDonovan

The fact is that nations without the 2nd Amendment don’t have as many gun deaths as we do. If more guns made us safer, we’d have almost no gun deaths. Instead we have, by far, the most. Clearly the 2nd Amendment is the cause. Those are the facts.

Now back to the spin-fest.

Mexico has more....they have one gun store, run by the military. You had to lump in suicides in a dishonest way to increase your number.....you have no intention of dealing with the actual number of gun murders.....10,982 in 2017....of those 70-80% of the victims are criminals, not normal people, it is as high as 90% in Chicago...of the rest of the victims the majority are friends and family of the criminals caught up in the crossfire....of those shootings, the majority take place in democrat party controlled cities, in tiny, tiny areas, often just a few blocks out of an entire city......

Meanwhile, law abiding gun owners use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to stop criminals..rapes, robberies and murders that do not happen, lives saved, lives not ruined, because normal people own and carry guns.....

You have to lie about the gun stats to make your point, you have to ignore the lives saved with guns to make your point....more lives saved with guns than criminals take using guns......

Britain banned guns...their gun murder rate went up, then returned to normal.....we have more guns now and our gun murder rate went down 49%.....and actual research shows that normal people carrying guns does not increase the homicide rate...so none of your arguments are based in actual data, facts, truth or reality.....you have nothing but a fear and hatred of guns and their owners.......

 

[DandyDonovan]

I was answering the question. There are probably other answers that were better. One benefit is that violating gun registry laws enhances the sentence.



hilarious.

No it doesn't , as has been pointed out to you repeatedly, prosecutors bargain cases down all the time, and the first thing to go is any crime enhancer.

It is already an "enhancer" if you rob a store with a gun, so adding the enhancer "using a unregistered gun" means nothing. In fact it means less than nothing because if the first thing bargained away is the gun charge, ,why would the NEW charge not also be bargained away ? It would be. Absolutely, positively.

Ok.

It’s pointless pointing out the obvious time and again when you fundamentally keep addressing another topic.

Yes...the facts show you are wrong....the truth shows you are wrong, the reality shows you are wrong....so now you deflect and try to ignore the valid points made by DandyDonovan

The fact is that nations without the 2nd Amendment don’t have as many gun deaths as we do. If more guns made us safer, we’d have almost no gun deaths. Instead we have, by far, the most. Clearly the 2nd Amendment is the cause. Those are the facts.

Now back to the spin-fest.

The fact is , I don't care how many gun deaths there are in the US, I still have my 2nd Amendment rights.

Would you like your right to free speech taken away because "countries without free speech have less deahts?"

 

[2aguy]

I was answering the question. There are probably other answers that were better. One benefit is that violating gun registry laws enhances the sentence.



hilarious.

No it doesn't , as has been pointed out to you repeatedly, prosecutors bargain cases down all the time, and the first thing to go is any crime enhancer.

It is already an "enhancer" if you rob a store with a gun, so adding the enhancer "using a unregistered gun" means nothing. In fact it means less than nothing because if the first thing bargained away is the gun charge, ,why would the NEW charge not also be bargained away ? It would be. Absolutely, positively.

Ok.

It’s pointless pointing out the obvious time and again when you fundamentally keep addressing another topic.

Yes...the facts show you are wrong....the truth shows you are wrong, the reality shows you are wrong....so now you deflect and try to ignore the valid points made by DandyDonovan

The fact is that nations without the 2nd Amendment don’t have as many gun deaths as we do. If more guns made us safer, we’d have almost no gun deaths. Instead we have, by far, the most. Clearly the 2nd Amendment is the cause. Those are the facts.

Now back to the spin-fest.

The fact is , I don't care how many gun deaths there are in the US, I still have my 2nd Amendment rights.

Would you like your right to free speech taken away because "countries without free speech have less deahts?"

Or how about 4th Amendment Rights against search and seizure....in Japan, the police can search you whenever they want for whatever reason they want, and that includes 2 home visits a year...... would Candy be willing to face that because Japan has less crime than the United States.....would Candy like the police to be able to just kick in doors whenever they wanted to, because it would make us safer? The random beat cop could simply stop you, frisk you, enter your home at will, and search your home for drugs, guns and anything else the government banned? That would make us safer.....