Hawaii proves gun control laws don't stop criminals....felon, with 10 convictions, living on an island...gets guns easily.

[2aguy]

You accusing me of wanting something does not make it so dumb ass.

And you not answering the question, an easy question, shows you don't want people to know what you really think.

 

[Crepitus]

Hawaii proves gun control laws don't stop criminals....felon, with 10 convictions, living on an island...gets guns easily.​

Oh, well that's sucks.

I guess we'll just hafta confiscate them all then.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

And laws against robbery don’t stop all robberies. We still have laws.

you’re welcome

Which amendment to the Constitition protects the right to rob? Take all the time you need.

 

[colfax_m]

This story exemplifies why we need a gun registry and mandatory registration. We need to know how these guns went from legal owners to illegal owners.

 

[2aguy]

This story exemplifies why we need a gun registry and mandatory registration. We need to know how these guns went from legal owners to illegal owners.

Hey...dipshit....he was a felon....he could not legally buy, own or carry a gun.....could not pass a background check.

Do you understand that under the law he would not have to register his illegal gun?

Do you understand that?

Registration would not stop this criminal...it would not stop any criminal...they do not register their illegal guns and, again, they do not have to register their illegal guns....

Do you understand that?

As with many other 5th amendment cases, felons and others prohibited from possessing firearms could not be compelled to incriminate themselves through registration.[3][4] The National Firearms Act was amended after Haynes to make it apply only to those who could lawfully possess a firearm. This eliminated prosecution of prohibited persons, such as criminals, and cured the self-incrimination problem.

Haynes v. United States - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The only reason you want gun registration is to know where the guns are when you get the power to confiscate them.....you don't care about criminals with guns...which is why you and the democrat party keep releasing known, gun felons over and over again...

 

[2aguy]

This story exemplifies why we need a gun registry and mandatory registration. We need to know how these guns went from legal owners to illegal own

We need to know how these guns went from legal owners to illegal owners.


We already know.....criminals steal the guns from homes, cars or gun stores, or they use straw buyers who can pass any background check.

We can already arrest the criminals who can't own, buy or carry guns, and we can already arrest straw buyers who sell guns to criminals.....

Registration doesn't do anything....except allow you to confiscate guns when you get the power to do so...

 

[colfax_m]

We need to know how these guns went from legal owners to illegal owners.


We already know.....criminals steal the guns from homes, cars or gun stores, or they use straw buyers who can pass any background check.

We can already arrest the criminals who can't own, buy or carry guns, and we can already arrest straw buyers who sell guns to criminals.....

Registration doesn't do anything....except allow you to confiscate guns when you get the power to do so...

So every single gun in the possession of a criminal is stolen?

Proof?

 

[colfax_m]

Do you understand that under the law he would not have to register his illegal gun?

Of course I don’t expect him to register his gun. But someone would have registered that gun and when it shows up in his house, you go to the last owner and find out who they gave it to.

 

[2aguy]

So every single gun in the possession of a criminal is stolen?

Proof?

What part of straw buyer did you not understand? These individuals can pass any background check, buy guns and sell or give them to criminals...this is already against the law, we don't need to register guns to catch them....we catch them the same way we catch drug dealers....you catch a criminal, and get them to tell you where the illegal gun came from....

No registration necessary since criminals can't buy, own or carry guns in the first place.

 

[2aguy]

Of course I don’t expect him to register his gun. But someone would have registered that gun and when it shows up in his house, you go to the last owner and find out who they gave it to.

The average street life of a gun? 11 years.........

In Opinion: Gun control—where do criminals get their weapons?

But while a majority of owners obtain their guns in transactions that are documented and for the most part legal, the same is not true for criminals.

A transaction can be illegal for several reasons, but of particular interest are transactions that involve disqualified individuals—those banned from purchase or possession due to criminal record, age, adjudicated mental illness, illegal alien status or some other reason.

Convicted felons, teenagers and other people who are legally barred from possession would ordinarily be blocked from purchasing a gun from a gun store, because they would fail the background check or lack the permit or license required by some states.

Anyone providing the gun in such transactions would be culpable if they had reason to know that the buyer was disqualified, if they were acting as a straw purchaser or if they violated state regulations pertaining to such private transactions.

The importance of the informal (undocumented) market in supplying criminals is suggested by the results of inmate surveys and data gleaned from guns confiscated by the police.

A national survey of inmates of state prisons found that just 10 percent of youthful (age 18-40) male respondents who admitted to having a gun at the time of their arrest had obtained it from a gun store. The other 90 percent obtained them through a variety of off-the-book means: for example, as gifts or sharing arrangements with fellow gang members.

Similarly, an ongoing study of how Chicago gang members get their guns has found that only a trivial percentage obtainedthem by direct purchase from a store.
(This essentially means they did not personally buy the gun...they used a straw buyer who buys the gun legally....)

To the extent that gun dealers are implicated in supplying dangerous people, it is more so by accommodating straw purchasers and traffickers than in selling directly to customers they know to be disqualified.
The supply chain of guns to crime

While criminals typically do not buy their guns at a store, all but a tiny fraction of the guns in circulation in the United States are first sold at retail by a gun dealer—including the guns thateventually end up in the hands of criminals.

That first retail sale was most likely legal, in that the clerk followed federal and state requirements for documentation, a background check and record-keeping. While there are scofflaw dealers who sometimes make under-the-counter deals, that is by no means the norm.

If a gun ends up in criminal use, it is usually after several more transactions.


The average age of guns taken from Chicago gangs is over 11 years.

The gun at that point has been diverted from legal commerce. In this respect, the supply chain for guns is similar to the supply chain for other products that have a large legal market but are subject to diversion.

 

[colfax_m]

What part of straw buyer did you not understand? These individuals can pass any background check, buy guns and sell or give them to criminals...this is already against the law, we don't need to register guns to catch them....we catch them the same way we catch drug dealers....you catch a criminal, and get them to tell you where the illegal gun came from....

No registration necessary since criminals can't buy, own or carry guns in the first place.

Straw purchasing may be against the law but it may as well not be given how difficult it is to prosecute.

A gun registry makes it far easier to prosecute. That’s the purpose.

 

[colfax_m]

The average street life of a gun? 11 years.........

Good article that reinforces my point. Movement of guns from owner to owner needs to be better tracked and that’s the purpose of a registry.

 

[2aguy]

Straw purchasing may be against the law but it may as well not be given how difficult it is to prosecute.

A gun registry makes it far easier to prosecute. That’s the purpose.

It isn't difficult to prosecute.......you don't understand the issue...it is very easy to prosecute...they just don't want to......

You pull this out of your ass and think you are making a rational comment...you aren't......

Democrat party prosecutors and judges constantly release straw buyers, under charge them or give them light sentences....

The problem isn't guns...it isn't gun owners......the problem is democrat party prosecutors and judges who keep releasing violent gun felons no matter how many illegal gun convictions they have.....

You just want to confiscate guns...and to do that you need to register them first.

America Should Be Prosecuting Straw Purchasers, Not Gun Dealers | National Review

Wisconsin isn’t alone in its nonchalance. California normally treats straw purchases as misdemeanors or minor infractions. Even as the people of Baltimore suffer horrific levels of violence, Maryland classifies the crime as a misdemeanor, too. Straw buying is a felony in progressive Connecticut, albeit one in the second-least-serious order of felonies. It is classified as a serious crime in Illinois (Class 2 felony), but police rarely (meaning “almost never”) go after the nephews and girlfriends with clean records who provide Chicago’s diverse and sundry gangsters with their weapons. In Delaware, it’s a Class F felony, like forging a check. In Oregon, it’s a misdemeanor.

--------

I visited Chicago a few years back to write about the city’s gang-driven murder problem, and a retired police official told me that the nature of the people making straw purchases — young relatives, girlfriends who may or may not have been facing the threat of physical violence, grandmothers, etc. — made prosecuting those cases unattractive.

In most of those cases, the authorities emphatically should put the straw purchasers in prison for as long as possible. Throw a few gangsters’ grandmothers behind bars for 20 years and see if that gets anybody’s attention. In the case of the young women suborned into breaking the law, that should be just another charge to put on the main offender.

 

[2aguy]

Good article that reinforces my point. Movement of guns from owner to owner needs to be better tracked and that’s the purpose of a registry.

11 years on the street.......you are an idiot........

Eighty percent of illegal guns recovered in Michigan have been on the street for at least three years. The average time between a firearm being stolen and turning up in a criminal context — what police call the “time to crime” — is a long 13 years.

Editorial: How to get illegal guns off the streets


You guys don't care about criminals....which is why you don't care how many times actual criminals are released by democrats over and over again......

Catching the straw buyers isn't a problem...you assholes letting them out is the problem...

 

[2aguy]

Good article that reinforces my point. Movement of guns from owner to owner needs to be better tracked and that’s the purpose of a registry.

You guys don't care about actual criminals......sell that crap to biden voters...

Canada Tried Registering Long Guns -- And Gave Up

The law passed and starting in 1998 Canadians were required to have a license to own firearms and register their weapons with the government. According to Canadian researcher (and gun enthusiast) Gary Mauser, the Canada Firearms Center quickly rose to 600 employees and the cost of the effort climbed past $600 million. In 2002 Canada’s auditor general released a report saying initial cost estimates of $2 million (Canadian) had increased to $1 billion as the government tried to register the estimated 15 million guns owned by Canada’s 34 million residents.

The registry was plagued with complications like duplicate serial numbers and millions of incomplete records, Mauser reports. One person managed to register a soldering gun, demonstrating the lack of precise standards. And overshadowing the effort was the suspicion of misplaced effort: Pistols were used in 66% of gun homicides in 2011, yet they represent about 6% of the guns in Canada. Legal long guns were used in 11% of killings that year, according to Statistics Canada, while illegal weapons like sawed-off shotguns and machine guns, which by definition cannot be registered, were used in another 12%.

So the government was spending the bulk of its money — about $17 million of the Firearms Center’s $82 million annual budget — trying to register long guns when the statistics showed they weren’t the problem.

There was also the question of how registering guns was supposed to reduce crime and suicide in the first place. From 1997 to 2005, only 13% of the guns used in homicides were registered. Police studies in Canada estimated that 2-16% of guns used in crimes were stolen from legal owners and thus potentially in the registry. The bulk of the guns, Canadian officials concluded, were unregistered weapons imported illegally from the U.S. by criminal gangs.

Finally in 2011, conservatives led by Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper voted to abolish the long-gun registry and destroy all its records. Liberals argued the law had contributed to the decline in gun homicides since it was passed. But Mauser notes that gun homicides have actually been rising in recent years, from 151 in 1999 to 173 in 2009, as violent criminal gangs use guns in their drug turf wars and other disputes. As in the U.S., most gun homicides in Canada are committed by young males, many of them with criminal records. In the majority of homicides involving young males, the victim and the killer are know each other.


As to solving crimes....it doesn't...
10 Myths About The Long Gun Registry

Myth #4: Police investigations are aided by the registry.
Doubtful. Information contained in the registry is incomplete and unreliable. Due to the inaccuracy of the information, it cannot be used as evidence in court and the government has yet to prove that it has been a contributing factor in any investigation. Another factor is the dismal compliance rate (estimated at only 50%) for licensing and registration which further renders the registry useless. Some senior police officers have stated as such: “The law registering firearms has neither deterred these crimes nor helped us solve any of them. None of the guns we know to have been used were registered ... the money could be more effectively used for security against terrorism as well as a host of other public safety initiatives.” Former Toronto Police Chief Julian Fantino, January 2003.


-----

https://www.quora.com/In-countries-...olved-at-least-in-part-by-use-of-the-registry



Tracking physical objects that are easily transferred with a database is non-trivial problem. Guns that are stolen, loaned, or lost disappear from the registry. The data is has to be manually entered and input mistakes will both leak guns and generate false positive results.

Registries don’t solve straw-purchases. If someone goes through all of the steps to register a gun and simply gives it to a criminal that gun becomes unregistered. Assuming the gun is ever recovered you could theoretically try and prosecute the person who transferred the gun to the criminal, but you aren’t solving the crime you were trying to. Remember that people will prostitute themselves or even their children for drugs, so how much deterrence is there in a maybe-get-a-few-years for straw purchasing?

Registries are expensive. Canada’s registry was pitched as costing the taxpayer $2 million and the rest of the costs were to be payed for with registration fees. It was subject to massive cost overruns that were not being met by registrations fees. When the program was audited in 2002 the program was expected to cost over $1 billion and that the fee revenue was only expected to be $140 million.

No gun recovered. If no gun was recovered at the scene of the crime then your registry isn’t even theoretically helping, let alone providing a practical tool. You need a world where criminals meticulously register their guns and leave them at the crime scene for a registry to start to become useful.

Say I have a registered gun, and a known associate of mine was shot and killed. Ballistics is able to determine that my known associate was killed with the same make and model as the gun I registered. A registry doesn’t prove that my gun was used, or that I was the one doing the shooting. I was a suspect as soon as we said “known associate” and the police will then being looking for motive and checking for my alibi.


Bullet tracking..

Maryland scraps gun "fingerprint" database after 15 failed years
Millions of dollars later, Maryland has officially decided that its 15-year effort to store and catalog the "fingerprints" of thousands of handguns was a failure.

Since 2000, the state required that gun manufacturers fire every handgun to be sold here and send the spent bullet casing to authorities. The idea was to build a database of "ballistic fingerprints" to help solve future crimes.

But the system — plagued by technological problems — never solved a single case. Now the hundreds of thousands of accumulated casings could be sold for scrap.

"Obviously, I'm disappointed," said former Gov. Parris N. Glendening, a Democrat whose administration pushed for the database to fulfill a campaign promise. "It's a little unfortunate, in that logic and common sense suggest that it would be a good crime-fighting tool."

The database "was a waste," said Frank Sloane, owner of Pasadena Gun & Pawn in Anne Arundel County. "There's things that they could have done that would have made sense. This didn't make any sense."

 

[BULLDOG]

Hey...dipshit....he was a felon....he could not legally buy, own or carry a gun.....could not pass a background check.

Do you understand that under the law he would not have to register his illegal gun?

Do you understand that?

Registration would not stop this criminal...it would not stop any criminal...they do not register their illegal guns and, again, they do not have to register their illegal guns....

Do you understand that?

As with many other 5th amendment cases, felons and others prohibited from possessing firearms could not be compelled to incriminate themselves through registration.[3][4] The National Firearms Act was amended after Haynes to make it apply only to those who could lawfully possess a firearm. This eliminated prosecution of prohibited persons, such as criminals, and cured the self-incrimination problem.

Haynes v. United States - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The only reason you want gun registration is to know where the guns are when you get the power to confiscate them.....you don't care about criminals with guns...which is why you and the democrat party keep releasing known, gun felons over and over again...

Background checks would prevent otherwise honest gun owners from selling to someone who can't legally own a gun. What kind of idiot doesn't think that is a good idea?

 

[2aguy]

Background checks would prevent otherwise honest gun owners from selling to someone who can't legally own a gun. What kind of idiot doesn't think that is a good idea?

And having been asked about a background check system that did not involve gun registration....you refused to support it....because you don't actually care about stopping criminals....you want gun registration and background checks would give you the ability to demand gun registration.......


What kind of idiot supports a political party that keeps releasing known, repeat gun offenders...offenders with long records of gun crime.......you and the democrat keep releasing actual criminals, and then demand that normal gun owners give you gun registration....

 

[BULLDOG]

And having been asked about a background check system that did not involve gun registration....you refused to support it....because you don't actually care about stopping criminals....you want gun registration and background checks would give you the ability to demand gun registration.......


What kind of idiot supports a political party that keeps releasing known, repeat gun offenders...offenders with long records of gun crime.......you and the democrat keep releasing actual criminals, and then demand that normal gun owners give you gun registration....

I'll take a look at your question about a political party releasing prisoners as soon as I finish looking up why Trump approved releasing 500 taliban prisoners. Many of whom are active in Afghanistan right now.

Just to be clear on your question, though, when did any political party receive authority to release prisoners? Other than presidents, and governors who can release specific prisoners, I thought the judges made those decisions. Many of those judges were appointed by right wingers.

 

[M14 Shooter]

And laws against robbery don’t stop all robberies. We still have laws.

You -do- understand the difference here, right?

 

[M14 Shooter]

I guess that whole “well-regulated militia” thing confuses you

Ah.
You are ignorant of the fact that the right to keep and bear arms doe snot in any way depend on a person's relationship with the militia.
How can this be?