New NY Gun law to pass today. Run for the hills!! lol

[Uncensored2008]

It's people who are unhinged like this that are prime examples of the type of people who shouldn't be allowed to possess a deadly weapon.

Actually it's people like you who should not be allowed near deadly items such as cars (the #1 instrument of HOMICIDE in the USA) or golf clubs.

LOL, it's fun to make up stats!! Weeeee!

Don't be such a mindless fuckwad. If you act stupid, people will assume you're a leftist.

Motor Vehicle Accidents and Fatalities - The 2012 Statistical Abstract - U.S. Census Bureau

 

[RDD_1210]

Actually it's people like you who should not be allowed near deadly items such as cars (the #1 instrument of HOMICIDE in the USA) or golf clubs.

LOL, it's fun to make up stats!! Weeeee!

Don't be such a mindless fuckwad. If you act stupid, people will assume you're a leftist.

Motor Vehicle Accidents and Fatalities - The 2012 Statistical Abstract - U.S. Census Bureau

Weird, first you were talking about homicides, but then you linked to an accident report. Do you not understand the difference between an accident and a murder?

Speaking of acting stupid...please tell us more.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Weird, first you were talking about homicides, but then you linked to an accident report. Do you not understand the difference between an accident and a murder?

Speaking of acting stupid...please tell us more.

Now we know why you're a leftist...

{[g/dl means grams per deciliter. A motor vehicle crash is considered to be alcohol-impaired if at least one driver involved in the crash is determined to have had a BAC of .08 g/dL or higher. Thus, any fatality that occurs in an alcohol-impaired crash is considered an alcohol-impaired-driving fatality. The term “alcohol-impaired” does not indicate that a crash or fatality was caused by the presence of alcohol. A person is considered to be legally impaired with a BAC of .08 g/dl or more]}

 

[RDD_1210]

Weird, first you were talking about homicides, but then you linked to an accident report. Do you not understand the difference between an accident and a murder?

Speaking of acting stupid...please tell us more.

Now we know why you're a leftist...

{[g/dl means grams per deciliter. A motor vehicle crash is considered to be alcohol-impaired if at least one driver involved in the crash is determined to have had a BAC of .08 g/dL or higher. Thus, any fatality that occurs in an alcohol-impaired crash is considered an alcohol-impaired-driving fatality. The term “alcohol-impaired” does not indicate that a crash or fatality was caused by the presence of alcohol. A person is considered to be legally impaired with a BAC of .08 g/dl or more]}

Which part of that shows the data with the number of murders using an automobile?

 

[Katzndogz]

Criminals speak out on gun control is the same thing as violence control.

SEE IT: A Massachusetts man is savagely beaten outside pizza shop in Greenwich Village - NY Daily News

A Brooklyn man has been charged with attempted murder in the beating of 24-year-old Kevin McCarron, who was stomped and pummeled with a tire iron, baseball bat and blackjack by a gang on MacDougal St. early Sunday, police and witnesses said.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Which part of that shows the data with the number of murders using an automobile?

You're too stupid to grasp that most vehicular homicide is based on alcohol..

No wonder you're an Obamabot.

 

[Dubya]

Funny thing about that map. There is no discernible pattern between restrictive gun policy and crime rates. Texas has a crime rate on par with California. Texas is very gun friendly, California is not. Colorado has a relatively lower rate for the country, and they are very gun friendly. Meanwhile, D.C. is extremely restrictive when it comes to guns and they have the highest rate. Maryland is not very gun friendly, and they have a relatively high rate. West Virginia is a very gun friendly state, and their rate is relatively low.

You don't see because you don't want to see. Look at the northeast from NY, NJ and northward. There isn't much area there, but there are hugh amounts of people until you get all way up north. They tend to vote for Democrats and all those states have low homicide rates. Now, look at the old Confederate States of America, where everyone is so pro gun! They lead the country in homicides.

Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine have some of the highest gun ownership rates, and some of the least restrictions on guns in the country. For example, Vermont requires no gun registration at all - and has one of the lowest violent crime rates of any state in the country.

You can pick a jungle like DC, but Maryland has Baltimore and California has LA, San Diego, Oakland and many large cities with problems. The more you get into the upper plains, the less homicides. Illinois has it's Chicago and Missouri it's Saint Louis. The obvious pattern are states with very large cities.

There is clearly much more of a correlation between population density and crime rate than gun laws and crime rate.

NYC brought it's murder rate down by getting guns off the streets. The cops there will pat somebody down, if they suspect they have a gun. That might not be possible in large cities with easy access to guns. When states have laws that require waiting periods and background checks, it keeps guns out of the wrong hands.

There are many reasons why NYC's crime rate has gone down since the 80s - and "getting guns off the streets" is only a very small part of it.

I don't know how much of this discussion you tried to follow, but I pointed out that in rural areas people owning guns and transporting them around wasn't a problem. The homicide problem is the street gangs in cities, around 60%. Laws could be made by rational people to make it very difficult for them to get their hands on a gun. You can make laws in a way that even allows a good citizen to have registered assault weapons, but this nonsense of thinking that any change in gun laws is hurting someone's rights is ridiculous. We can't have a open market for guns in America and not get a lot of people killed. We are killing off at least 12,000 people per year with our existing laws, if you count the extra casualties in Mexico.

I gave an easy comparison for NYC. All these right-wingers were saying how bad NYC was, so I posted a map of states because it was visible and told them to compare NY to their state. One insisted on NYC and posted data, but mentioned he was from Virginia and the rate was about the same as NY. It just so happens that NYC has a population slightly over the state of Virginia, so I told him to make per capita comparison, which is easy in this case because the populations are about the same. All he had to do was source how many homicides per year Virginia has, but he wouldn't continue that thought.

Those blue states like NJ, NY, CT, RI and MA make it hard to purchase guns. There is 69 electoral votes in that small geographic area. The states of LA, ARK, MISS, ALA, GA, SC and NC have 68 electoral votes, so the population has to be roughly the same and the people are spread over a large geographic area. I'm sure it's easier to purchase guns in those southern states and I'm also sure there are more homicides in those states than the northern states. The issue then becomes why?

 

[RDD_1210]

Which part of that shows the data with the number of murders using an automobile?

You're too stupid to grasp that most vehicular homicide is based on alcohol..

No wonder you're an Obamabot.

So no proof of anything that you're claiming. Got it.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Laws could be made by rational people to make it very difficult for them to get their hands on a gun.

And that is where you are wrong. No law has ever made it difficult for people to get their hands on heroin, prostitutes, alcohol, abortion services, or gay sex. And no law to date has ever stopped a person from getting their hand on a gun.

 

[Oldguy]

No. It's a rifle or shotgun which accepts a detachable magazine AND one other feature.

For instance, a semi-automatic rifle or shotgun with any kind of internal magazine, such as a tube underneath the barrel or in the stock, is perfectly legal in all cases. One with a detachable magazine and at least one of the following would now be considered as an assault weapon:

a folding or telescoping stock
a pistol grip
a bayonet mount
a flash suppressor or barrel threaded to receive one
a grenade launcher
a thumbhole stock
a second handgrip or protruding grip to be held by the non-firing hand

I own several semi's in various calibres and none of mine would be illegal in New York. How many do you have which would be? At one time, I owned an M-1 Carbine with a folding stock and a pistol grip. It would be. It would also have been classified as an assault weapon under the old federal law.

Yes, you're right.

Even so, this is insanely draconian.

Draconian? That's a powerful word with a specific meaning: Cruel, severe, with great severity.

What on EARTH is draconian about this?

If you want to see what draconian gun laws look like, I'll invite you to bring a gun with you as we tour Mexico.

 

[Oldguy]

So my deer hunting rifle with a SCOPE is now an assault rifle. You fail ******* miserably to see the big picture. It's absolutely flabbergasting.

Probably not. Does your deer rifle have a detachable magazine and one of the other characteristics I listed above?

ps: I first mis-typed and wrote a folding or telescoping SIGHT. My most recent post corrects that to a folding or telescoping STOCK.

I have wrist issues. It has a thumb hole stock and a detachable mag. So there I am.

If you live in New York, you can still use your guns. You'll just have to register them. So what? Owners of fully automatic weapons have been doing that for decades and nobody has come to get theirs yet.

 

[Inthemiddle]

The issue then becomes why?

Well, it must be the one thing that is different about those two regions. Geography. Clearly, geography is the problem. Proximity to the Tropics causes murder. We should outlaw the Tropics. Hurry. Move along quickly. We don't want another Sandy Hook to happen. We have to do something.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I don't know how much of this discussion you tried to follow, but I pointed out that in rural areas people owning guns and transporting them around wasn't a problem. The homicide problem is the street gangs in cities, around 60%.

Most alcohol related deaths occur in urban population centers as well.

Maybe you fascists could reinstate prohibition, but only in cities?

Laws could be made by rational people to make it very difficult for them to get their hands on a gun.

You mean that laws could be made by leftist hacks that make it very difficult for law abiding citizens to legally obtain guns, thus ensuring that the criminal elements are the only armed contingent.

Leftists, seeking rational gun control, just like Mexico has.

You can make laws in a way that even allows a good citizen to have registered assault weapons, but this nonsense of thinking that any change in gun laws is hurting someone's rights is ridiculous. We can't have a open market for guns in America and not get a lot of people killed. We are killing off at least 12,000 people per year with our existing laws, if you count the extra casualties in Mexico.

Comrade, you were very angry earlier when I pointed out that vehicular homicide utterly dwarfs gun homicide. You threw yourself down, stomped your feet and held your breath. (Edit: It was RDD rather than you who threw a tantrum. All you Commies look alike.)

I'll give you a chance to redeem yourself, of the homicides each year commuted by a firearm, what percentage are perpetrated by the legal owner of the gun used?

I gave an easy comparison for NYC. All these right-wingers were saying how bad NYC was, so I posted a map of states because it was visible and told them to compare NY to their state. One insisted on NYC and posted data, but mentioned he was from Virginia and the rate was about the same as NY. It just so happens that NYC has a population slightly over the state of Virginia, so I told him to make per capita comparison, which is easy in this case because the populations are about the same. All he had to do was source how many homicides per year Virginia has, but he wouldn't continue that thought.

NY state is pretty high on the violence list, but NY City is even higher.

Those blue states like NJ, NY, CT, RI and MA make it hard to purchase guns.

Yet Newark has the highest gun homicide rate in the nation, with 32.84 murders per 100,000 people.

https://www.policymap.com/city-crime-rates/new-york-city-crime-statistics/index.html

What you fascists do, is ensure only violent criminals will be armed.

I assume most of you make your living knocking off liquor stores and carjacking people.

I mean, that's your goal, right? To disarm your intended victims? It's Obama's goal - that is without question.

 

[Uncensored2008]

So no proof of anything that you're claiming. Got it.

Well, none other than the US Bureau of Statistics, that was already linked for you....

ROFL

**** but you're stupid...

 

[RDD_1210]

Laws could be made by rational people to make it very difficult for them to get their hands on a gun.

And that is where you are wrong. No law has ever made it difficult for people to get their hands on heroin, prostitutes, alcohol, abortion services, or gay sex. And no law to date has ever stopped a person from getting their hand on a gun.

No law in this country. Certainly have been laws in plenty of other countries that have worked at preventing guns from getting in to peoples hands. We could certainly examine those countries and learn something from them.

 

[RDD_1210]

So no proof of anything that you're claiming. Got it.

Well, none other than the US Bureau of Statistics, that was already linked for you....

ROFL

**** but you're stupid...

Accidents, not murders. Big Difference.

**** you're slow.

 

[Uncensored2008]

If you live in New York, you can still use your guns. You'll just have to register them. So what? Owners of fully automatic weapons have been doing that for decades and nobody has come to get theirs yet.

More leftist lies.

Fully automatic weapons are illegal, with a federal waiver required to own one.

{Due to a 1968 change in the law, it is unlawful for any federally licensed manufacturer, importer, dealer or collector to sell or deliver a machine gun except as specifically authorized by the Attorney General “consistent with public safety and necessity.” This provision does not apply if the recipient is another federally licensed manufacturer, importer, dealer or collector, or a research organization designated by the Attorney General.18 The Attorney General has delegated enforcement of this provision to ATF. As a result, ATF regulations require a manufacturer, importer, or dealer selling or delivering a machine gun to a member of the public to first obtain from the recipient a sworn statement stating the reasons why there is a reasonable necessity for such person to acquire the machine gun, and that such person’s receipt or possession of the machine gun would be consistent with public safety.19}

Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence ? Gun Law Information Experts

 

[Uncensored2008]

No law in this country. Certainly have been laws in plenty of other countries that have worked at preventing guns from getting in to peoples hands. We could certainly examine those countries and learn something from them.

Yes, I notice that you closely examine the Khmer Rouge and Stalin's USSR to model your idea of a perfect America after.

Who do you hold in highest esteem, Kim Jong Il, or Idi Amin?

 

[Inthemiddle]

No law in this country. Certainly have been laws in plenty of other countries that have worked at preventing guns from getting in to peoples hands. We could certainly examine those countries and learn something from them.

Name one country that has eliminated violent crime.

 

[Oldguy]

If you live in New York, you can still use your guns. You'll just have to register them. So what? Owners of fully automatic weapons have been doing that for decades and nobody has come to get theirs yet.

More leftist lies.

Fully automatic weapons are illegal, with a federal waiver required to own one.

{Due to a 1968 change in the law, it is unlawful for any federally licensed manufacturer, importer, dealer or collector to sell or deliver a machine gun except as specifically authorized by the Attorney General “consistent with public safety and necessity.” This provision does not apply if the recipient is another federally licensed manufacturer, importer, dealer or collector, or a research organization designated by the Attorney General.18 The Attorney General has delegated enforcement of this provision to ATF. As a result, ATF regulations require a manufacturer, importer, or dealer selling or delivering a machine gun to a member of the public to first obtain from the recipient a sworn statement stating the reasons why there is a reasonable necessity for such person to acquire the machine gun, and that such person’s receipt or possession of the machine gun would be consistent with public safety.19}

Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence ? Gun Law Information Experts

Yeah, so? You can still own them, you just have to jump through a few hoops.

I never said you could own one without any regulations at all, did I?