CDZ Can you vote democrat and support the 2nd Amendment?

[Skull Pilot]

I got about a page and a half into this thread which is located in the so called "clean debate zone" when it struck me that the rules of "clean debate" have been tossed overboard, as that entire page and a half consisted of bald and naked character attacks, namecalling and straw men, followed by heaping dollops of confirmation bias.
However if anyone really does want to discuss the concept of liberals being okay with the 2A, I'll check back later.
I'm a liberal that owns guns and I am largely okay with the 2A.

In re your last sentence: Do you believe the 2nd allows for some gun controls, or not?

Any right can be denied via due process.

If you are convicted of a felony you cannot own a gun. Due process was followed.

That is the only restriction we need but it must be enforced

 

[LoneLaugher]

Well, that's what you get. You don't think I'd let someone like you have my name, do you?

You must be one of those people who find it necessary to lie on an anonymous forum. I'm the opposite.

Yeah OK

Next time avoid looking like an idiot and don't try to prove who you are.

Nobody cares anyway

Nobody? That's funny.

I didn't try to prove who I am, pal. I simply showed you that Dem's can be supportive of the 2nd Amendment. Wise up.

You didn't show anyone anything.

Of course I did. Could it be that you don't believe that the permit is mine?

Wouldn't it be funny if you, a bad ass tough guy conservative, don't have a carry permit....but I do?

Tell us that's crazy. Go ahead.

I have had a CCW permit since I was 21 but what good is taking a picture of a blacked out permit and what does it prove

Oh yeah it proves nothing at all

OK. So I believe you.

You don't believe me?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Q. Can you vote democrat and support the 2nd Amendment

A. Sure, I support regulated capitalism and reject lassiez faire / anti regulation capitalism; I support every sane, sober and lawful citizen the right to own, possess and have in his or her custody and control to defend their home or business. I do not support unregulated gun ownership.

we do not have unregulated gun ownership.

The fact that felons and the adjudicated mentally ill are not legally permitted to buy firearms is proof that we do not have unregulated gun ownership

True, and I did not write that we did have unregulated gun ownership. Which belies the claim that the 2nd A. shall not be infringed is in play. However, the regs. are not effective and something more needs to be done to prevent the mass amounts of gun violence in America.

The laws are not enforced that's the only problem with them

Casting blame as the sole cause of gun violence in America isn't convincing. Myriad issues are part of the causation:

1. The failure of the War on Drugs (and the fool who is now our AG, focusing on MJ enforcement and not enforcement of gun laws, is one prime example)
2. The NRA policy of no new gun laws, no way no how
3. People like you and others who see guns as a panacea and not a problem in reducing violence in America
4. The Republican Party using guns as a wedge issue and not seeking laws to mitigate gun violence in America.
5. The 2nd A. itself and the interpretation of it by using the weapons used in our revolutionary war by the Americans and the British*** with the firearms available to citizens of today.

List of infantry weapons in the American Revolution - Wikipedia

We have thousands of gun laws on the books or didn't you know that? So yes a very big part of the problem is lack of enforcement.

The NRA is a red herring. The NRA does nothing but legally advocate and lobby on behalf if its members

I never said guns are a panacea for anything. In fact I have said what my personal philosophy on gun ownership and concealed carry are many times here.

What new laws would mitigate violence?

If you want to hold the bill or rights valid to only what existed in the 18th century then you won't have a problem with the government monitoring all your computer activity because after all computers didn't exist then either.

If we have thousands of guns laws that don't work, what's wrong with working with The People to police themselves? You've read my arguments before, and always defaulted to the words in the 2nd A., too wit: "Shall not be infringed"

To repeat myself for the Nth time:

• Allow each state to require a license for a resident to own, possess or have in their custody and control a firearm, or not as each state decides;
• Require each firearm to be registered and insured within the confines of he state.
• Require every sale of a firearm to be sold to a licensed gun dealer, or, have a gun dealer broker the sale to a private person, who also needs to be licensed.
• For cause, every state can established the MQ's which qualify someone to be licensed to own, possess, etc. a firearm. Said license can be wither suspended or revoked for cause.
• An illegal transfer of a gun to an unlicensed individual, when proved in Court, said license shall be revoked for life.
• No one ever convicted of a crime of violence, domestic violence or other flaws of character, i.e. detained on a civil commitent as a danger to self or others, found to be an alcoholic or addicted to Schedule I drugs - as decided by the state, will not be eligible to be licensed.
• Possession of a gun without a license is a felony, and punishable by not less than 10 years on the St. Prison.

 

[Skull Pilot]

we do not have unregulated gun ownership.

The fact that felons and the adjudicated mentally ill are not legally permitted to buy firearms is proof that we do not have unregulated gun ownership

True, and I did not write that we did have unregulated gun ownership. Which belies the claim that the 2nd A. shall not be infringed is in play. However, the regs. are not effective and something more needs to be done to prevent the mass amounts of gun violence in America.

The laws are not enforced that's the only problem with them

Casting blame as the sole cause of gun violence in America isn't convincing. Myriad issues are part of the causation:

1. The failure of the War on Drugs (and the fool who is now our AG, focusing on MJ enforcement and not enforcement of gun laws, is one prime example)
2. The NRA policy of no new gun laws, no way no how
3. People like you and others who see guns as a panacea and not a problem in reducing violence in America
4. The Republican Party using guns as a wedge issue and not seeking laws to mitigate gun violence in America.
5. The 2nd A. itself and the interpretation of it by using the weapons used in our revolutionary war by the Americans and the British*** with the firearms available to citizens of today.

List of infantry weapons in the American Revolution - Wikipedia

We have thousands of gun laws on the books or didn't you know that? So yes a very big part of the problem is lack of enforcement.

The NRA is a red herring. The NRA does nothing but legally advocate and lobby on behalf if its members

I never said guns are a panacea for anything. In fact I have said what my personal philosophy on gun ownership and concealed carry are many times here.

What new laws would mitigate violence?

If you want to hold the bill or rights valid to only what existed in the 18th century then you won't have a problem with the government monitoring all your computer activity because after all computers didn't exist then either.

If we have thousands of guns laws that don't work, what's wrong with working with The People to police themselves? You've read my arguments before, and always defaulted to the words in the 2nd A., too wit: "Shall not be infringed"

To repeat myself for the Nth time:

• Allow each state to require a license for a resident to own, possess or have in their custody and control a firearm, or not as each state decides;
• Require each firearm to be registered and insured within the confines of he state.
• Require every sale of a firearm to be sold to a licensed gun dealer, or, have a gun dealer broker the sale to a private person, who also needs to be licensed.
• For cause, every state can established the MQ's which qualify someone to be licensed to own, possess, etc. a firearm. Said license can be wither suspended or revoked for cause.
• An illegal transfer of a gun to an unlicensed individual, when proved in Court, said license shall be revoked for life.
• No one ever convicted of a crime of violence, domestic violence or other flaws of character - as decided by the state, will not be eligible to be licensed.

There is no need for registration.
It is already illegal in many states to sell to anyone not legally eligible to own a firearm. But I really have no problem with all sales being mediated by an FFL dealer. I don't sell my guns but if I did I would have an FFL broker all sales even if it was to a family member just to cover my own ass.

And when you start getting into arbitrary shit like "flaws of character" I have to say no way. Criminal records are enough we don't need some asshole denying people their rights on arbitrary bullshit.

All that needs to be done is to enforce the prohibitions on the books already and we need mandatory jail time for any crime committed while in possession of a firearm to be lengthy sentences to be served without parole. IOW do something to target the actual criminals and not treat law abiding people as such.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Yeah OK

Next time avoid looking like an idiot and don't try to prove who you are.

Nobody cares anyway

Nobody? That's funny.

I didn't try to prove who I am, pal. I simply showed you that Dem's can be supportive of the 2nd Amendment. Wise up.

You didn't show anyone anything.

Of course I did. Could it be that you don't believe that the permit is mine?

Wouldn't it be funny if you, a bad ass tough guy conservative, don't have a carry permit....but I do?

Tell us that's crazy. Go ahead.

I have had a CCW permit since I was 21 but what good is taking a picture of a blacked out permit and what does it prove

Oh yeah it proves nothing at all

OK. So I believe you.

You don't believe me?

No why would I?

Anyone can say anything on the internet,

I don't know who you are( nor do I want to) so I have no reason to believe anything you say is true

 

[LoneLaugher]

Nobody? That's funny.

I didn't try to prove who I am, pal. I simply showed you that Dem's can be supportive of the 2nd Amendment. Wise up.

You didn't show anyone anything.

Of course I did. Could it be that you don't believe that the permit is mine?

Wouldn't it be funny if you, a bad ass tough guy conservative, don't have a carry permit....but I do?

Tell us that's crazy. Go ahead.

I have had a CCW permit since I was 21 but what good is taking a picture of a blacked out permit and what does it prove

Oh yeah it proves nothing at all

OK. So I believe you.


You don't believe me?

No why would I?

Anyone can say anything on the internet,

I don't know who you are( nor do I want to) so I have no reason to believe anything you say is true

Hmm. You have issues.

Would you please post a picture of your CCW permit here without blacking out your personal info. I'd like to verify that you have one.

Thanks.

 

[Skull Pilot]

You didn't show anyone anything.

Of course I did. Could it be that you don't believe that the permit is mine?

Wouldn't it be funny if you, a bad ass tough guy conservative, don't have a carry permit....but I do?

Tell us that's crazy. Go ahead.

I have had a CCW permit since I was 21 but what good is taking a picture of a blacked out permit and what does it prove

Oh yeah it proves nothing at all

OK. So I believe you.


You don't believe me?

No why would I?

Anyone can say anything on the internet,

I don't know who you are( nor do I want to) so I have no reason to believe anything you say is true

Hmm. You have issues.

Would you please post a picture of your CCW permit here without blacking out your personal info. I'd like to verify that you have one.

Thanks.

Nope.

I really don't give a flying or any other kind of fuck if you believe I have a CCW permit or not

 

[Wry Catcher]

True, and I did not write that we did have unregulated gun ownership. Which belies the claim that the 2nd A. shall not be infringed is in play. However, the regs. are not effective and something more needs to be done to prevent the mass amounts of gun violence in America.

The laws are not enforced that's the only problem with them

Casting blame as the sole cause of gun violence in America isn't convincing. Myriad issues are part of the causation:

1. The failure of the War on Drugs (and the fool who is now our AG, focusing on MJ enforcement and not enforcement of gun laws, is one prime example)
2. The NRA policy of no new gun laws, no way no how
3. People like you and others who see guns as a panacea and not a problem in reducing violence in America
4. The Republican Party using guns as a wedge issue and not seeking laws to mitigate gun violence in America.
5. The 2nd A. itself and the interpretation of it by using the weapons used in our revolutionary war by the Americans and the British*** with the firearms available to citizens of today.

List of infantry weapons in the American Revolution - Wikipedia

We have thousands of gun laws on the books or didn't you know that? So yes a very big part of the problem is lack of enforcement.

The NRA is a red herring. The NRA does nothing but legally advocate and lobby on behalf if its members

I never said guns are a panacea for anything. In fact I have said what my personal philosophy on gun ownership and concealed carry are many times here.

What new laws would mitigate violence?

If you want to hold the bill or rights valid to only what existed in the 18th century then you won't have a problem with the government monitoring all your computer activity because after all computers didn't exist then either.

If we have thousands of guns laws that don't work, what's wrong with working with The People to police themselves? You've read my arguments before, and always defaulted to the words in the 2nd A., too wit: "Shall not be infringed"

To repeat myself for the Nth time:

• Allow each state to require a license for a resident to own, possess or have in their custody and control a firearm, or not as each state decides;
• Require each firearm to be registered and insured within the confines of he state.
• Require every sale of a firearm to be sold to a licensed gun dealer, or, have a gun dealer broker the sale to a private person, who also needs to be licensed.
• For cause, every state can established the MQ's which qualify someone to be licensed to own, possess, etc. a firearm. Said license can be wither suspended or revoked for cause.
• An illegal transfer of a gun to an unlicensed individual, when proved in Court, said license shall be revoked for life.
• No one ever convicted of a crime of violence, domestic violence or other flaws of character - as decided by the state, will not be eligible to be licensed.

There is no need for registration.
It is already illegal in many states to sell to anyone not legally eligible to own a firearm. But I really have no problem with all sales being mediated by an FFL dealer. I don't sell my guns but if I did I would have an FFL broker all sales even if it was to a family member just to cover my own ass.

And when you start getting into arbitrary shit like "flaws of character" I have to say no way. Criminal records are enough we don't need some asshole denying people their rights on arbitrary bullshit.

All that needs to be done is to enforce the prohibitions on the books already and we need mandatory jail time for any crime committed while in possession of a firearm to be lengthy sentences to be served without parole. IOW do something to target the actual criminals and not treat law abiding people as such.

By flaws of character I did not meant to infer arbitrary sanctions, facts like Driving under the influence of Alcohol or other drugs, detained as a danger to him/her self or others (5150), making criminal threats, simple battery, drunk in public (647ff), dishonorable or bad conduct discharge are examples of the flaws I considered.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

I got about a page and a half into this thread which is located in the so called "clean debate zone" when it struck me that the rules of "clean debate" have been tossed overboard, as that entire page and a half consisted of bald and naked character attacks, namecalling and straw men, followed by heaping dollops of confirmation bias.
However if anyone really does want to discuss the concept of liberals being okay with the 2A, I'll check back later.
I'm a liberal that owns guns and I am largely okay with the 2A.

In re your last sentence: Do you believe the 2nd allows for some gun controls, or not?

I believe in gun regulation the way I believe in FIRE regulations.
Fire can warm your home, cook your food, forge tools or it can burn down factories and villages, sometimes with the villagers still in them, so we need FIRE regulations to insure that FIRE is properly used, yes?
We have motor vehicle regulations for the same reasons.
I am not in favor of a giant morass of regulations but basic common sense is always appreciated.

 

[Wry Catcher]

True, and I did not write that we did have unregulated gun ownership. Which belies the claim that the 2nd A. shall not be infringed is in play. However, the regs. are not effective and something more needs to be done to prevent the mass amounts of gun violence in America.

The laws are not enforced that's the only problem with them

Casting blame as the sole cause of gun violence in America isn't convincing. Myriad issues are part of the causation:

1. The failure of the War on Drugs (and the fool who is now our AG, focusing on MJ enforcement and not enforcement of gun laws, is one prime example)
2. The NRA policy of no new gun laws, no way no how
3. People like you and others who see guns as a panacea and not a problem in reducing violence in America
4. The Republican Party using guns as a wedge issue and not seeking laws to mitigate gun violence in America.
5. The 2nd A. itself and the interpretation of it by using the weapons used in our revolutionary war by the Americans and the British*** with the firearms available to citizens of today.

List of infantry weapons in the American Revolution - Wikipedia

We have thousands of gun laws on the books or didn't you know that? So yes a very big part of the problem is lack of enforcement.

The NRA is a red herring. The NRA does nothing but legally advocate and lobby on behalf if its members

I never said guns are a panacea for anything. In fact I have said what my personal philosophy on gun ownership and concealed carry are many times here.

What new laws would mitigate violence?

If you want to hold the bill or rights valid to only what existed in the 18th century then you won't have a problem with the government monitoring all your computer activity because after all computers didn't exist then either.

If we have thousands of guns laws that don't work, what's wrong with working with The People to police themselves? You've read my arguments before, and always defaulted to the words in the 2nd A., too wit: "Shall not be infringed"

To repeat myself for the Nth time:

• Allow each state to require a license for a resident to own, possess or have in their custody and control a firearm, or not as each state decides;
• Require each firearm to be registered and insured within the confines of he state.
• Require every sale of a firearm to be sold to a licensed gun dealer, or, have a gun dealer broker the sale to a private person, who also needs to be licensed.
• For cause, every state can established the MQ's which qualify someone to be licensed to own, possess, etc. a firearm. Said license can be wither suspended or revoked for cause.
• An illegal transfer of a gun to an unlicensed individual, when proved in Court, said license shall be revoked for life.
• No one ever convicted of a crime of violence, domestic violence or other flaws of character - as decided by the state, will not be eligible to be licensed.

There is no need for registration.
It is already illegal in many states to sell to anyone not legally eligible to own a firearm. But I really have no problem with all sales being mediated by an FFL dealer. I don't sell my guns but if I did I would have an FFL broker all sales even if it was to a family member just to cover my own ass.

And when you start getting into arbitrary shit like "flaws of character" I have to say no way. Criminal records are enough we don't need some asshole denying people their rights on arbitrary bullshit.

All that needs to be done is to enforce the prohibitions on the books already and we need mandatory jail time for any crime committed while in possession of a firearm to be lengthy sentences to be served without parole. IOW do something to target the actual criminals and not treat law abiding people as such.

What's your take on this:

SCOTUS Guts 2nd Amend. By Refusing To Hear Semi-Auto Ban Case

"Today the Supreme Court let stand the Fourth Circuit’s holding in Kolbe v. Hogan that semi-automatic rifles are not constitutionally protected “arms,” and in doing so declared the Second Amendment guarantees only a second-class right."

See more in the link above.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Any right can be denied via due process.

If you are convicted of a felony you cannot own a gun. Due process was followed.

That is the only restriction we need but it must be enforced

No rights are ever absolute either, it is impossible to allow 100% absolute leeway with any rights.
You can't scream "FIRE!" in a crowded theater and then claim your right to free speech.
Guns are power, guns are heavy responsibility, therefore access to that power demands responsibility, but I am certain that it is possible to preserve American's rights to own guns while requiring demonstration of responsibility.

We levy these requirements on people all the time. A crane operator should not be denied the right to employment however one must demonstrate that they are FIT TO BE a crane operator before being allowed to climb into the cab. Therefore only UNFIT crane operators should be kept away from the cab.

It just boils down to whether someone is fit to own firearms. The questions of their criminal background and mental stability are reasonable. No, it's not a guarantee that crazy folks or crooks won't get their hands on guns but it's a help.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

With what exceptions?

I don't want to use the word "exceptions" because that word leads us all into the "infringement" portion of the 2A, and that argument is used as a blunt instrument to mute reasonable debate.
That said, guns are powerful devices and the exercise of power demands responsibility and fitness, therefore it is reasonable to demand demonstrations of both in the exercise of that right.

A lawmaker is deemed fit or unfit to hold office, yes?
A driver is deemed fit or unfit to hold a driver's license.
A lawyer is deemed fit or unfit to hold a J.D. and is disbarred if they fail to demonstrate fitness to practice before the bar.
Without such requirements, we strip away the veneer of civilization.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

I don't want "Democrats" or "liberals" to be the ones crafting responsible legislation that covers the 2A.
I want PEOPLE, people from all corners of the spectrum, to work together to craft such legislation.
The NRA deems any and all legislation to be an attack on the amendment, and until we can work past that impasse, it is impossible for conservatives and liberals to even have a sane conversation on the subject.

Guns are here to stay, folks. There's 320 million of them out there, thus it is IMPOSSIBLE to make them just go away. So we're going to have to learn to live civilly amongst those 320 million guns.

 

[Wry Catcher]

With what exceptions?

I don't want to use the word "exceptions" because that word leads us all into the "infringement" portion of the 2A, and that argument is used as a blunt instrument to mute reasonable debate.
That said, guns are powerful devices and the exercise of power demands responsibility and fitness, therefore it is reasonable to demand demonstrations of both in the exercise of that right.

A lawmaker is deemed fit or unfit to hold office, yes?
A driver is deemed fit or unfit to hold a driver's license.
A lawyer is deemed fit or unfit to hold a J.D. and is disbarred if they fail to demonstrate fitness to practice before the bar.
Without such requirements, we strip away the veneer of civilization.

Well stated! However, the devil is in the details.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I don't want "Democrats" or "liberals" to be the ones crafting responsible legislation that covers the 2A.
I want PEOPLE, people from all corners of the spectrum, to work together to craft such legislation.
The NRA deems any and all legislation to be an attack on the amendment, and until we can work past that impasse, it is impossible for conservatives and liberals to even have a sane conversation on the subject.

Guns are here to stay, folks. There's 320 million of them out there, thus it is IMPOSSIBLE to make them just go away. So we're going to have to learn to live civilly amongst those 320 million guns.

As more and more mass murders of innocent civilians make headlines, living civilly is very unlikely. As long as we continue to experience stress when boarding a plane, going to a sporting event or concert, or even going into a public building to do one's civic duty as a jurist, we well continue to be reminded that we do not live in a civil society.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Of course I did. Could it be that you don't believe that the permit is mine?

Wouldn't it be funny if you, a bad ass tough guy conservative, don't have a carry permit....but I do?

Tell us that's crazy. Go ahead.

I have had a CCW permit since I was 21 but what good is taking a picture of a blacked out permit and what does it prove

Oh yeah it proves nothing at all

OK. So I believe you.


You don't believe me?

No why would I?

Anyone can say anything on the internet,

I don't know who you are( nor do I want to) so I have no reason to believe anything you say is true

Hmm. You have issues.

Would you please post a picture of your CCW permit here without blacking out your personal info. I'd like to verify that you have one.

Thanks.

Nope.

I really don't give a flying or any other kind of fuck if you believe I have a CCW permit or not

Of course you do. Why lie?

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

As more and more mass murders of innocent civilians make headlines, living civilly is very unlikely. As long as we continue to experience stress when boarding a plane, going to a sporting event or concert, or even going into a public building to do one's civic duty as a jurist, we well continue to be reminded that we do not live in a civil society.

We don't have a choice, because as I said, the guns are not going to just disappear.
We have no choice BUT to learn, and in order for that to happen, we must be willing to make reasoned compromise.
Too many liberals seem to function under some fantasy notion that we can just confiscate all the guns.
Good luck, let me know when the DEA manages to "confiscate all the drugs".
$1.5 Tn and forty years later and there's now more drugs than ever.
That's the size and scope of the issue, thus many liberals are going to have to accept that America is a land of guns and gun owners, who are constitutionally protected.
Too many conservatives have enjoyed a smug reliance on a congressional lobby group that presents a position of non-negotiation, paranoia and dog whistle fundamentalism. The NRA used to be a gun SAFETY organization, I remember when it was.
Well, we're talking gun safety, it would be nice if the NRA climbed down off their high horse, because extremism just invites more extremist backlash.
I do not want extremist backlash, I do not want to be criminalized for owning a firearm.
Most sensible liberals don't want or even expect any kind of confiscation program but for those who do, they should know it will NEVER EVER work no matter how hard they try.

 

[Wry Catcher]

As more and more mass murders of innocent civilians make headlines, living civilly is very unlikely. As long as we continue to experience stress when boarding a plane, going to a sporting event or concert, or even going into a public building to do one's civic duty as a jurist, we well continue to be reminded that we do not live in a civil society.

We don't have a choice, because as I said, the guns are not going to just disappear.
We have no choice BUT to learn, and in order for that to happen, we must be willing to make reasoned compromise.
Too many liberals seem to function under some fantasy notion that we can just confiscate all the guns.
Good luck, let me know when the DEA manages to "confiscate all the drugs".
$1.5 Tn and forty years later and there's now more drugs than ever.
That's the size and scope of the issue, thus many liberals are going to have to accept that America is a land of guns and gun owners, who are constitutionally protected.
Too many conservatives have enjoyed a smug reliance on a congressional lobby group that presents a position of non-negotiation, paranoia and dog whistle fundamentalism. The NRA used to be a gun SAFETY organization, I remember when it was.
Well, we're talking gun safety, it would be nice if the NRA climbed down off their high horse, because extremism just invites more extremist backlash.
I do not want extremist backlash, I do not want to be criminalized for owning a firearm.
Most sensible liberals don't want or even expect any kind of confiscation program but for those who do, they should know it will NEVER EVER work no matter how hard they try.

I've never advocated general confiscation, anyone who has taken US History understands prohibition exacerbated a problem - the same black market in alcohol then and MJ now would created more gun problems for law enforcement.

 

[francoHFW]

You would have a hard time finding a Democrat who didn't support the Second Amendment but it doesn't mean they want to arm right wing idiots with automatic weapons and RPGs LOL

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

I've never advocated general confiscation, anyone who has taken US History understands prohibition exacerbated a problem - the same black market in alcohol then and MJ now would created more gun problems for law enforcement.

---Well the real reason why some liberals still seem to cling to the idea is because they are "failed liberals" who
can't seem to grasp realities like program costs, just for starters.
It really would cost almost 200 billion dollars to locate and confiscate all 320 million firearms by the time all was said and done, because you would have to create an entire department to do it.
And even then, don't forget that talented machinists learn how to become gunsmiths and they don't suddenly forget their craft.
So you would still have a complete undeground black market for weapons, and all that black market cash? Guess where that would wind up? Wall Street, same as the DRUG CASH does.
The current 440 billion dollars in drug cash that streams unmolested through Wall Street is perhaps the biggest reason why drugs are illegal but we're still drowning in the stuff anyway. Wall Street is addicted to drug cash.