9thIDdoc
Gold Member
- Aug 8, 2011
- 7,956
- 3,114
- 325
By your logic it is Ok to pass laws that punish the law-abiding and aid the criminal.
Attention, gun control supporters:
- Thread starter daveman
- Start date
By your logic it is Ok to pass laws that punish the law-abiding and aid the criminal.
jillian
Princess
well, if certain types of weapons are available only for military use, i'm pretty sure the average person can't get one.
and, just to point out reality, the last bunch of mass killings were carried out with legal weapons.
jillian
Princess
how are you being "punished" if you can't have a military weapon? or a clip that holds 30 rounds of ammo?
TNHarley
Diamond Member
- Sep 27, 2012
- 100,747
- 64,495
- 2,605
Well evidently! More gun laws are not going to help, considering the criminals are the problem! Criminals dont follow the law. New laws and regulations will be ignored by the ones that are the problem.
NYcarbineer
Diamond Member
Because symbolism saves lives
Just like a lefty to have government do something even if it is nothing
The problem is that you think the problem is the weapon... And you think that you protect the public more by reducing their ability to protect themselves... Yep, big mommy government will do it better for you...
Tragedies will ALWAYS happen.. you cannot legislate them away... If you want more done in background checks were more things about mental illness are checked.. all well and good.. but that would have done NOTHING here... this whacko was going to kill no matter what... could have been a car speeding into a playground, could have been an explosive device, could have been fire, could have been anything... it is a horrible thing that happened, but we're not going to rid the world of horrible things
You're an idiot, because I never said I supported it.
The American people will support because they won't stand for nothing being done.
DiamondDave
Army Vet
Because symbolism saves lives
Just like a lefty to have government do something even if it is nothing
The problem is that you think the problem is the weapon... And you think that you protect the public more by reducing their ability to protect themselves... Yep, big mommy government will do it better for you...
Tragedies will ALWAYS happen.. you cannot legislate them away... If you want more done in background checks were more things about mental illness are checked.. all well and good.. but that would have done NOTHING here... this whacko was going to kill no matter what... could have been a car speeding into a playground, could have been an explosive device, could have been fire, could have been anything... it is a horrible thing that happened, but we're not going to rid the world of horrible things
You're an idiot, because I never said I supported it.
The American people will support because they won't stand for nothing being done.
And hence why the government is supposed to protect against this tyranny of hysteria...
Finding out more info on the background and whole story of the whacko that did this is a good thing.. fine tuning the process to screen individuals with mental illness from getting weapons could be improved.. BUT NONE OF THAT WOULD HAVE HELPED THIS.. so instead many will ride the hysteria wave and people will call for laws that hurt more than they can ever help
We, as a country, have fallen into this uninformed reactionary crap too often... people screaming for tax increases on others... people screaming for more of their shit to be taken care of by anyone but themselves... this reaction we are seeing toward guns would be like people calling for making box cutters (and every blade sharper and bigger) and private flying lessons illegal after 9/11
Well.. IMHO it is about time the government made a statement of 'calm the **** down, sit the **** down, and stop thinking your government can stop every bad thing from happening'
AmericanFirst
Gold Member
- Dec 17, 2009
- 12,204
- 1,062
- 175
You will never get a rational answer from the left, they are stupid.
daveman
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #48
Not noticeably.
http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/6.1/gun_facts_6_1_screen.pdf
Myth: The 1994 (former) Federal Assault Weapons Ban was effective
Fact: “We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation’s recent drop in gun violence.”382
Fact: The ban covered only 1.39% of the models of firearms on the market, so the banÂ’s effectiveness was automatically limited.
Fact: “The ban has failed to reduce the average number of victims per gun murder incident or multiple gunshot wound victims.”383
Fact: “The public safety benefits of the 1994 ban have not yet been demonstrated.”384
Fact: “The ban triggered speculative price increases and ramped-up production of the banned firearms.”385
Fact: “The ban … ramped-up production of the banned firearms prior to the law’s implementation”386 and thus increased the total supply over the following decade.Fact: The Brady Campaign claims that “After the 1994 ban, there were 18% fewer ‘assault weapons’ traced to crime in the first eight months of 1995 than were traced in the same period in 1994.” However they failed to note (and these are mentioned in the NIJ study) that:
Fact: “We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation’s recent drop in gun violence.”382
Fact: The ban covered only 1.39% of the models of firearms on the market, so the banÂ’s effectiveness was automatically limited.
Fact: “The ban has failed to reduce the average number of victims per gun murder incident or multiple gunshot wound victims.”383
Fact: “The public safety benefits of the 1994 ban have not yet been demonstrated.”384
Fact: “The ban triggered speculative price increases and ramped-up production of the banned firearms.”385
Fact: “The ban … ramped-up production of the banned firearms prior to the law’s implementation”386 and thus increased the total supply over the following decade.Fact: The Brady Campaign claims that “After the 1994 ban, there were 18% fewer ‘assault weapons’ traced to crime in the first eight months of 1995 than were traced in the same period in 1994.” However they failed to note (and these are mentioned in the NIJ study) that:
1. “Assault weapons” traces were minimal before the ban (due to their infrequent use in crimes), so an 18% change enters the realm of statistical irrelevancy.
2. Fewer “assault weapons” were available to criminals because collectors bought-up the available supply before the ban.
2. Fewer “assault weapons” were available to criminals because collectors bought-up the available supply before the ban.
Tuatara
Gold Member
Criminals do not obey the law. That's why they are called criminals. Gun Control is not an overnight solution. It would take years and the cooperation of all to eliminate the vast amount of guns available out there. Will it completely eliminate gun related crimes? Of course not. No one has even pretended to have that answer. Look at every other country with gun Control and check out their stats surrounding gun related deaths against the US's. If you believe it is not because of the easy availibilty of firearms then I would like to hear another rational idea. And don't go down the Lack of Morality or No God issue because the US has more Christians per capita so those reasons actually disprove that assertion..
But I find it odd that the overwhelming majority that support the NRA are Christians.
But I find it odd that the overwhelming majority that support the NRA are Christians.
Last edited:
tjvh
Senior Member
- May 10, 2012
- 6,893
- 919
- 48
Again... Gun control isn't about controlling criminal acts, it's about controlling people.
cutter
Gold Member
- Oct 17, 2010
- 1,909
- 503
- 130
Why not use the death penalty for any illegal gun use not? Oh that's right, you wouldn't want to kill any democrats. You want the death penalty for possession, not use.
daveman
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #56
And now for some REAL facts.
Sources of Guns Used in Crimes – FBI Report : Buy A Gun Day
FBI reports:
According to the 1997 Survey of State Prison Inmates, among those possessing a gun, the source of the gun was from –
According to the 1997 Survey of State Prison Inmates, among those possessing a gun, the source of the gun was from –
- a flea market or gun show for fewer than 2%
- a retail store or pawnshop for about 12%
- family, friends, a street buy, or an illegal source for 80%
More real facts: http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/6.1/gun_facts_6_1_screen.pdf
Myth: The United States is the source of 90% of drug syndicate guns in Mexico
Fact: This is an often misquoted data point from the BATFE, who said 90% of the firearms that have been interdicted in transport to Mexico or recovered in Mexico came from the United States. Thus the 90% number includes only the firearms American and Mexican police stop in transport.42
Fact: The original 90% number was derived from the number of firearms successfully traced, not the total number of firearms criminally used. For 2007-2008, Mexican officials recovered approximately 29,000 firearms from crime scenes and asked for BATFE traces of 11,000. Of those, the BATFE could trace roughly 6,000 of which 5,114 were confirmed to have come from the United States. Thus, 83% of the crime guns recovered in Mexico have not been or cannot be traced to America and the real number is most likely 17%.43
Fact: Mexican drug syndicates can buy guns anywhere. For the relatively underpowered civilian rifles coming from the United States, drug runners would pay between 300% and 400% above the market price. Thus they can and are buying guns around the world.44
Fact: Mexican drug cartels – with a $40 billion in annual revenues – have military armament that includes hand grenades, grenade launchers, armor-piercing munitions, antitank rockets and assault rifles smuggled in from Central American countries.45 These are infantry weapons bought from around the world and not civilian rifles from the United States.
Fact: This is an often misquoted data point from the BATFE, who said 90% of the firearms that have been interdicted in transport to Mexico or recovered in Mexico came from the United States. Thus the 90% number includes only the firearms American and Mexican police stop in transport.42
Fact: The original 90% number was derived from the number of firearms successfully traced, not the total number of firearms criminally used. For 2007-2008, Mexican officials recovered approximately 29,000 firearms from crime scenes and asked for BATFE traces of 11,000. Of those, the BATFE could trace roughly 6,000 of which 5,114 were confirmed to have come from the United States. Thus, 83% of the crime guns recovered in Mexico have not been or cannot be traced to America and the real number is most likely 17%.43
Fact: Mexican drug syndicates can buy guns anywhere. For the relatively underpowered civilian rifles coming from the United States, drug runners would pay between 300% and 400% above the market price. Thus they can and are buying guns around the world.44
Fact: Mexican drug cartels – with a $40 billion in annual revenues – have military armament that includes hand grenades, grenade launchers, armor-piercing munitions, antitank rockets and assault rifles smuggled in from Central American countries.45 These are infantry weapons bought from around the world and not civilian rifles from the United States.
Lakhota
Diamond Member
NYcarbineer
Diamond Member
If it's illegal to possess a handgun in NY without a permit, and possessing one can get you a prison term,
how is that a law that only impacts law-abiding citizens?
GuyPinestra
Senior Member
- Jan 29, 2012
- 6,905
- 673
- 48
I've been asking this question in all these gun control threads but I can't seem to get a straight answer.
What is the operational difference between your 'assault weapon' and my semi-auto deer rifle?
Thanks in advance...
Criminals, as in legal criminals? Gun control is very simple at this point and I fully support measures to do this with gun control.
: Stop all private sales via gun swap meets et al
: Stop all firearm sales of ammo and firearms via internet
: Make it mandatory once a firearm purchase is made the owner must supply proof of keeping it in a safe place, via gun safes
: No one needs an ak or the like, this one is controversy I know.
None of the above effects the second amendment -so who and why would argue? Those with common sense anyways.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
Liberals FREAK OUT Over MAGA Sheriff SEIZING BALLOTS As DEMOCRATS BEG Supreme Court To STOP HIM!
- Started by Doc7505
- Replies: 13
-
HSS survey on drug and alcohol use.- Started by Woodznutz
- Replies: 8
-
-
-
Elite UK Schools in the Middle East Have Started Offering Lessons... on Wife-Beating
- Started by Hollie
- Replies: 4
