U.S. Police Chiefs Call For Background Checks For All Gun Purchases

[Rustic]

The dumb shits can't prove the dangerous people who were stopped at the store from buying a gun all went out and bought guns anyway, and this frustrates them into making really stupid statements.

Your pussy hurts obviously, your not thinking right get some Motrin.

Then go hide...

Bigger fish to fry

 

[The Rabbi]

In 2010, there were about 72,000 dangerous people stopped from buying a gun because of background checks.

Did some of them still get guns? Most likely. That in no way invalidates the fact that many thousands, probably most, did not. And that means way less dangerous people got guns because of background checks than would have acquired them without background checks. We know for certain all 72,000 of those dangerous people would have bought guns in 2010 if there were no background checks.

This does not seem to penetrate the skulls of retards, so I am done wasting my time here.

Your very first sentence is a lie. There were 72000 people denied at shops. Even you admit many of them were overturned on appeal. Also not counted are people who had their record cleaned up and re-applied and passed. That of course would be counted as a separate transaction. And then there were people who were denied but got their guns via staw purchase and illegal purchase from other criminals.
You continue to post a misleading graph, equating background checks with fewer homicide deaths. Since many things can and do account for fewer homicide deaths it is simpl a lie to attribute it to background checks. You might as well attribute it to the removal of the 5 day waiting period that occurred at the same time.
I am glad you are done repeating lies and falsehood and I hope you realize your ass has been thoroughly kicked here.

 

[Contumacious]

The fascists don't see it as a Constitutional right - its a lot easier to fuck with people if they are disarmed.



.

Another NRA ad. OBAMA IS GOING TO TAKE AWAY YOUR GUNS!

I know he is. reason I am looking for black market contacts.


.

OBAMAZ CUMMIN FER YER GUNZ! BUY MOAR!

If Obama is coming for your guns, he better hurry. We've been hearing this for seven years now.


Don't worry. The guns and ammo lobby has another ad campaign already in the works: HILEREEZ CUMMIN FER YER GUNZ! BUY MOAR!


You rubes really piss me off. You've been hoarding and driving up the cost of guns and ammo for seven fucking years.

Assholes.

Mr Scumbag, Sir:


ALL THE LAWS THAT ADOLF NEEDED TO TYRANNIZE GERMANS WERE ADOPTED PRIOR TO HIS ELECTION BY THE BISMARCK AND WEIMAR ADMINISTRATIONS.



STUDY , LEARN AND DON'T REPEAT THE MISTAKES.


.

Hey, dipshit. What's with the obsession with the Godwin fallacy?

A lot of countries have enacted strict gun control, and they haven't gone nazi, dumbass.

Study, learn. Stop parroting the same stupid fallacies.

Yo fucktard. What the obsession with REFUSING TO LEARN FROM HISTORY?

How can you trust a government which confiscates firearms and prevent its citizens from defending their lives?

Racism/ethnic genocide is only ONE aspect of nazism.


Study, learn. Stop parroting the same stupid fallacies

 

[g5000]

Yo fucktard. What the obsession with REFUSING TO LEARN FROM HISTORY?

There's more than Germany history of the period 1920 to 1945, idiot.

There's a whole planet of history, including several nations which have strict gun control which did not suddenly turn all Nazi.

I can't help you any further, dipshit. There are just too many logical fallacies in every one of your sentences for me to bother with.

 

[Rustic]

Yo fucktard. What the obsession with REFUSING TO LEARN FROM HISTORY?

There's more than Germany history of the period 1920 to 1945, idiot.

There's a whole planet of history, including several nations which have strict gun control which did not suddenly turn all Nazi.

I can't help you any further, dipshit. There are just too many logical fallacies in every one of your sentences for me to bother with.

More gun control laws can never work...

 

[whitehall]

The correct title is the "international association of chiefs of police" IACP. The U.N. has a foot in the door in the organization and members of foreign police departments are on the board. You can be a chief of police with three officers and belong to the organization. One thing you have to remember about Chiefs of Police is that they not elected and they owe their jobs to the whims of the unverified village, town or city council that appointed them. On the other hand Sheriffs are elected and responsible to the people.

 

[2aguy]

Furthermore, a criminal turned away by a licensed dealer can always steal a gun, buy one from someone who does not run background checks, or ask someone with a clean record to buy one for him.

None of you rubes has shown all 80,000 did or do.

Given these realities, it is not surprising that a 2000 study by criminologists Philip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig found no evidence that the Brady Act had an impact on homicide rates.

A 15 year old study, eh?

The Brady Act was enacted in 1993.

the study was done in 2000...7 years after Brady...it did nothing to stop criminals from getting guns...they don't go through background checks...only normal gun owners do...the normal people not committing gun crimes.

 

[2aguy]

The fascists don't see it as a Constitutional right - its a lot easier to fuck with people if they are disarmed.



.

Another NRA ad. OBAMA IS GOING TO TAKE AWAY YOUR GUNS!

I know he is. reason I am looking for black market contacts.


.

OBAMAZ CUMMIN FER YER GUNZ! BUY MOAR!

If Obama is coming for your guns, he better hurry. We've been hearing this for seven years now.


Don't worry. The guns and ammo lobby has another ad campaign already in the works: HILEREEZ CUMMIN FER YER GUNZ! BUY MOAR!


You rubes really piss me off. You've been hoarding and driving up the cost of guns and ammo for seven fucking years.

Assholes.

Mr Scumbag, Sir:


ALL THE LAWS THAT ADOLF NEEDED TO TYRANNIZE GERMANS WERE ADOPTED PRIOR TO HIS ELECTION BY THE BISMARCK AND WEIMAR ADMINISTRATIONS.



STUDY , LEARN AND DON'T REPEAT THE MISTAKES.


.

Hey, dipshit. What's with the obsession with the Godwin fallacy?

A lot of countries have enacted strict gun control, and they haven't gone nazi, dumbass.

Study, learn. Stop parroting the same stupid fallacies.

it took Germany 20 years to go bad.....and they enacted gun control...in particular gun registration long before the nazis came along....and then the nazis used those registration records to disarm their victims...

 

[2aguy]

And entirely meaningless.

Very effective. Prevents about 80,000 fugitives and felons and the like from buying a gun every year.

You'd know that if you read the topic.

To save time, see post 207.

Your claim has been refuted. The BGC prevents nothing. Not a single crime has been prevented by BGCs.

80,000 felons and fugitives and other undesirables are prevented from buying a gun every year. Only a retard would believe that means background checks are ineffective.

Seriously. You have to literally be mentally retarded.

And none of you have shown they all were able to buy guns after being denied.

Not one of you.

You havent shown any felons were prevented from buying guns. Not a single one. Logic is not your gig.

I have shown 80,000 a year are. I can't help it if you are too stupid to accept it.

No..you have shown 80,000 law abiding gun owners who were denied initial approval...not violent criminals...they then had to clear up the paperwork and then got their gun...the criminals never submitted to background checks and got their guns right away.

 

[2aguy]

I remember one "fugitive" i a place I worked. She came in Christmas eve to buy a gun as a gift for her mom. Not only was she denied but police arrested her because she had some unpaid parking tickets and the judge issued a bench warrant that she knew nothing about.
Yeah, some "fugitive."

Exactly...there was another story that I posted...a man in his 70s was trying to buy a gun for his wife...he filled out the form and submitted the background check....and got arrested and is facing a felony...why? This 70 year old man forgot that he had a misdemeanor conviction from when he was in his 20s...he was arrested for disturbing the peace for fighting with his brother in his front lawn...and having forgotten the incident he checked the box that said he did not have any misdemeanors or felonies.....

again..real criminals do not get background checks done....those 80,000 are not real criminals the majority are normal citizens who are mistaken for felons.....and then they have to clear up the clerical error and then they got their gun.....

Your anti gun extremist site is lying to you...

 

[2aguy]

"Felony indictment or conviction".

"Fugitive".

"State law prohibition".

These are the people being denied the purchase of a gun. Only a retard would be opposed to that.

Only a retard would post as you do.
Many of those felonies are decades old and people have been responsible citizens ever since. Real criminals know they are prohibited so dont even bother to attempt a purchase through a dealer. Instead they buy from private sellers

"Instead they buy from private sellers".

TA-DAAAA! That is EXACTLY what this topic is about! Holy FUCK!!!

The police chiefs want private sellers to do background checks. They want that loophole closed.

And you have never shown that all 80,000 go on to buy from a private seller.

You just IMAGINE all of them do, with ZERO evidence to support your fantasy.

you really are not very bright......criminals buy their guns from straw purchasers...who pass the background check then sell the gun to criminals...or they steal them....

 

[2aguy]

[
Checking the Logic of Background Checks

According to a 2004 report by the Justice Department's inspector general, the most common reason the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) chooses not to pursue these cases is that the buyer does not seem to pose a threat. "The special agents we spoke with generally commented that they do not consider the vast majority of NICS referral subjects a danger to the public," the report said, "because the prohibiting factors are often minor or based on incidents that occurred many years in the past."

The ATF's handling of NICS referrals reflects two facts commonly ignored by background-check enthusiasts. First, the criteria for stripping people of their Second Amendment rights are absurdly (and unfairly) broad, sweeping pot growers, hubcap thieves, and guys who got into a bar fight 20 years ago together with violent predators. Second, criminals generally do not buy their weapons in gun stores.

Even in surveys conducted before the Brady Act, only a fifth of state prisoners who had used guns to commit crimes said they bought them from licensed dealers. In a 2004 survey, the share was just one-tenth.


Furthermore, a criminal turned away by a licensed dealer can always steal a gun, buy one from someone who does not run background checks, or ask someone with a clean record to buy one for him. Obama is therefore doubly wrong to equate blocking sales through NICS with preventing "dangerous people" from "getting their hands on a gun."

Given these realities, it is not surprising that a 2000 study by criminologists Philip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig found no evidence that the Brady Act had an impact on homicide rates. But according to supporters of expanded background checks, the problem is that the Brady Act did not go far enough.

One difficulty with that argument: As Cook and Ludwig note, most people who use guns to commit crimes—including almost all mass shooters—could have passed a background check. But what about the rest? Would they be thwarted by a broader screening requirement?

Probably not. Forcing private sellers at gun shows to arrange background checks with the help of licensed dealers is relatively straightforward. But in that 2004 inmate survey, less than 2 percent of respondents said they had bought weapons at gun shows or flea markets.

 

[2aguy]

And more from the link....

Three sources accounted for almost nine out of 10 crime guns: "friends or family" (40 percent), "the street" (38 percent), and theft (10 percent). It is hard to see how any notional background check requirement, even one applying to all private transfers, can reasonably be expected to have a significant impact on these sources. As usual with gun control, the attempt to enforce such a requirement would impose costs and uncertain legal risks on law-abiding gun owners while leaving criminals free to go about their business.

 

[2aguy]

And another researcher....

John Lott: 'No Real Scientific Evidence' Background Checks Reduce Crime -

According to Lott, of the 76,142 background checks denials in 2010, many were cleared up after the “initial” denial, 44 were prosecuted, and “only 13 [people] were convicted of illegally trying to purchase a gun when they were prohibited from doing so.” And the 13 who were convicted were people “with relatively trivial records from years earlier that didn’t realize their offense was covered” by a background check when they went to buy a gun: “hardly what one would call dangerous criminals.”

 

[2aguy]

In 2010, there were about 72,000 dangerous people stopped from buying a gun because of background checks.

Did some of them still get guns? Most likely. That in no way invalidates the fact that many thousands, probably most, did not. And that means way less dangerous people got guns because of background checks than would have acquired them without background checks. We know for certain all 72,000 of those dangerous people would have bought guns in 2010 if there were no background checks.

This does not seem to penetrate the skulls of retards, so I am done wasting my time here.

law abiding people and scofflaws,are not dangerous criminals...and those stopped were stopped the same way normal people end up on no fly lists...the government screws up their information.......

 

[Contumacious]

Yo fucktard. What the obsession with REFUSING TO LEARN FROM HISTORY?

There's more than Germany history of the period 1920 to 1945, idiot.

There's a whole planet of history, including several nations which have strict gun control which did not suddenly turn all Nazi.

I can't help you any further, dipshit. There are just too many logical fallacies in every one of your sentences for me to bother with.

My point precisely.


The Bismarck administration began in 1871.


His paternalistic fascist policies caused havoc 50 years later.


So , no fascistic policies may not cause immediate damage .Disarming the populace places them in peril if a scumbag decides to perpetrate an evil deed



Historical facts show that the former soviet union slaughtered 9 million people, PolPot in Cambodia 125,000, Clinton 90 in Waco, Tx including 20 children. Argentina 30,000 disappeared; 3,000 in Chile, etc. etc, etc


I can't help you further, you may be in to deep.


.

 

[JimH52]

I remember one "fugitive" i a place I worked. She came in Christmas eve to buy a gun as a gift for her mom. Not only was she denied but police arrested her because she had some unpaid parking tickets and the judge issued a bench warrant that she knew nothing about.
Yeah, some "fugitive."

Exactly...there was another story that I posted...a man in his 70s was trying to buy a gun for his wife...he filled out the form and submitted the background check....and got arrested and is facing a felony...why? This 70 year old man forgot that he had a misdemeanor conviction from when he was in his 20s...he was arrested for disturbing the peace for fighting with his brother in his front lawn...and having forgotten the incident he checked the box that said he did not have any misdemeanors or felonies.....

again..real criminals do not get background checks done....those 80,000 are not real criminals the majority are normal citizens who are mistaken for felons.....and then they have to clear up the clerical error and then they got their gun.....

Your anti gun extremist site is lying to you...

Provide a link for that dear little story.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"U.S. Police Chiefs Call For Background Checks For All Gun Purchases"

Which comports with current Second Amendment jurisprudence.

Some may not like that fact, some may not accept that fact, but it is a fact of Constitutional law nonetheless.

 

[The Rabbi]

"U.S. Police Chiefs Call For Background Checks For All Gun Purchases"

Which comports with current Second Amendment jurisprudence.

Some may not like that fact, some may not accept that fact, but it is a fact of Constitutional law nonetheless.

How does that "comport with 2A jurisprudence"? And so what?

 

[Weatherman2020]

This is a no-brainer, this is the simplest thing in the world."

CHICAGO, Oct 26 (Reuters) - Police chiefs from across the United States called on Monday for universal background checks for firearms purchases, saying opinion polls consistently show that most Americans support such restrictions.

The proliferation of firearms is one of the factors behind a rise in homicide rates in many U.S. cities this year, according to senior law enforcement officials at the International Association of Chiefs of Police conference in Chicago.

Acknowledging the power of the gun lobby and the reluctance of Congress to enact stricter gun laws, the police chiefs told a news conference they were not anti-gun but wanted to keep weapons out of the hands of people with criminal backgrounds.

Current rules on background checks apply to licensed dealers, but up to 40 percent of firearms sales involve private parties or gun shows and do not require checks, the chiefs said.

"This is a no-brainer, this is the simplest thing in the world," Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy said. "It troubles me all the time."

Backing the effort is an alliance of organizations representing police chiefs and executives, such as the Major Cities Chiefs Association and groups representing women, Hispanic and African-American law enforcement executives and police chiefs, as well as campus law enforcement administrators.

McCarthy said he was passionate about the issue after four years on the job in Chicago, which has more shootings and killings than other big cities like New York and Los Angeles and where police seize illegal guns at a much higher rate.

The police leaders called for expansion of background checks to cover all gun purchases and for a stronger background check system to ensure all agencies share the same records including criminal and mental health backgrounds.

More: U.S. Police Chiefs Call For Background Checks For All Gun Purchases

So, the question becomes: Who knows best - the NRA gun nutters or U.S. police chiefs? I'm guessing that "the Major Cities Chiefs Association and groups representing women, Hispanic and African-American law enforcement executives and police chiefs, as well as campus law enforcement administrators" know best.

"according to senior law enforcement officials at the International Association of Chiefs of Police conference in Chicago.". And only city named was Leftard Chicago. Leftards need to figure out why low crime cities don't have significant gun crimes. And it ain't gun control.