Ted Cruz nails it on common sense gun control....

[Brain357]

Our worst mass shooter every had a clear record until he didn't. Allowing him access to weapons for mass killing sure was a mistake.

Why do you only look at mass shootings. Mass shootings account for a very small percentage of gun deaths in the US. The answer is you commies can go after the rights of the law abiding on emotion, not logic. So fuck you commie, no more compromise.

.

I look at it all. Our homicide rate is 4-5X higher than countries with strong gun control. How are your weak TX gun laws working? You own 4 of the 10 worst mass shootings. Shocking.

And what do our laws have to do with it? Those people didn't obey our laws or federal laws, did they? Laws have nothing to do with people who have a propensity to break them.

.

By international standards we have extremely weak laws.

By international standards we have a strong Constitution. Don't like it, LEAVE.

.

Yes we do. And the 2nd doesn't mean what you think.
The Supreme Court’s Worst Decision of My Tenure
District of Columbia v. Heller, which recognized an individual right to possess a firearm under the Constitution, is unquestionably the most clearly incorrect decision that the Supreme Court announced during my tenure on the bench.

 

[OKTexas]

You dumb fuck, it a matter of propensity to kill, not capacity. A person with the propensity doesn't need a gun to kill a lot a people, a vehicle will do.

.

Really? I've no fear of a vehicle when at a concert, or on the 3rd floor of a big building, or on my boat in the middle of the lake.. a vehicle is very limiting. If that was the main means of mass killing we'd have no problem limiting mass killings.

View attachment 279504
How many of these used an AR?

.

Looks like we have a huge problem. Here is a picture of UK mass shooters this year:

Feel free to move your ass to the UK then.

.

I'd rather help my country, thanks.

No you'd rather fuck up your country. We not some European shit hole. Stop trying to make us one.

.

 

[OKTexas]

Why do you only look at mass shootings. Mass shootings account for a very small percentage of gun deaths in the US. The answer is you commies can go after the rights of the law abiding on emotion, not logic. So fuck you commie, no more compromise.

.

I look at it all. Our homicide rate is 4-5X higher than countries with strong gun control. How are your weak TX gun laws working? You own 4 of the 10 worst mass shootings. Shocking.

And what do our laws have to do with it? Those people didn't obey our laws or federal laws, did they? Laws have nothing to do with people who have a propensity to break them.

.

By international standards we have extremely weak laws.

By international standards we have a strong Constitution. Don't like it, LEAVE.

.

Yes we do. And the 2nd doesn't mean what you think.
The Supreme Court’s Worst Decision of My Tenure
District of Columbia v. Heller, which recognized an individual right to possess a firearm under the Constitution, is unquestionably the most clearly incorrect decision that the Supreme Court announced during my tenure on the bench.

Actually it means exactly what I think. Show me one time in the Constitution where the founders conflated the meaning of the feds, States and the people, people are individuals. Stevens obviously can't read.

.

 

[Brain357]

Really? I've no fear of a vehicle when at a concert, or on the 3rd floor of a big building, or on my boat in the middle of the lake.. a vehicle is very limiting. If that was the main means of mass killing we'd have no problem limiting mass killings.

View attachment 279504
How many of these used an AR?

.

Looks like we have a huge problem. Here is a picture of UK mass shooters this year:

Feel free to move your ass to the UK then.

.

I'd rather help my country, thanks.

No you'd rather fuck up your country. We not some European shit hole. Stop trying to make us one.

.

Yes those shit holes with homicide rates a fraction of ours.

 

[Brain357]

I look at it all. Our homicide rate is 4-5X higher than countries with strong gun control. How are your weak TX gun laws working? You own 4 of the 10 worst mass shootings. Shocking.

And what do our laws have to do with it? Those people didn't obey our laws or federal laws, did they? Laws have nothing to do with people who have a propensity to break them.

.

By international standards we have extremely weak laws.

By international standards we have a strong Constitution. Don't like it, LEAVE.

.

Yes we do. And the 2nd doesn't mean what you think.
The Supreme Court’s Worst Decision of My Tenure
District of Columbia v. Heller, which recognized an individual right to possess a firearm under the Constitution, is unquestionably the most clearly incorrect decision that the Supreme Court announced during my tenure on the bench.

Actually it means exactly what I think. Show me one time in the Constitution where the founders conflated the meaning of the feds, States and the people, people are individuals. Stevens obviously can't read.

.

Show me where the constitution even mentions self defense.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...43ac66-5d11-11e8-b2b8-08a538d9dbd6_story.html

A search of Brigham Young University’s new online Corpus of Founding Era American English, with more than 95,000 texts and 138 million words, yields 281 instances of the phrase “bear arms.” BYU’s Corpus of Early Modern English, with 40,000 texts and close to 1.3 billion words, shows 1,572 instances of the phrase. Subtracting about 350 duplicate matches, that leaves about 1,500 separate occurrences of “bear arms” in the 17th and 18th centuries, and only a handful don’t refer to war, soldiering or organized, armed action. These databases confirm that the natural meaning of “bear arms” in the framers’ day was military.

 

[OKTexas]

View attachment 279504
How many of these used an AR?

.

Looks like we have a huge problem. Here is a picture of UK mass shooters this year:

Feel free to move your ass to the UK then.

.

I'd rather help my country, thanks.

No you'd rather fuck up your country. We not some European shit hole. Stop trying to make us one.

.

Yes those shit holes with homicide rates a fraction of ours.

Once again, move your ass there if you love them so much, you obviously hate it here.

.

 

[OKTexas]

And what do our laws have to do with it? Those people didn't obey our laws or federal laws, did they? Laws have nothing to do with people who have a propensity to break them.

.

By international standards we have extremely weak laws.

By international standards we have a strong Constitution. Don't like it, LEAVE.

.

Yes we do. And the 2nd doesn't mean what you think.
The Supreme Court’s Worst Decision of My Tenure
District of Columbia v. Heller, which recognized an individual right to possess a firearm under the Constitution, is unquestionably the most clearly incorrect decision that the Supreme Court announced during my tenure on the bench.

Actually it means exactly what I think. Show me one time in the Constitution where the founders conflated the meaning of the feds, States and the people, people are individuals. Stevens obviously can't read.

.

Show me where the constitution even mentions self defense.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...43ac66-5d11-11e8-b2b8-08a538d9dbd6_story.html

A search of Brigham Young University’s new online Corpus of Founding Era American English, with more than 95,000 texts and 138 million words, yields 281 instances of the phrase “bear arms.” BYU’s Corpus of Early Modern English, with 40,000 texts and close to 1.3 billion words, shows 1,572 instances of the phrase. Subtracting about 350 duplicate matches, that leaves about 1,500 separate occurrences of “bear arms” in the 17th and 18th centuries, and only a handful don’t refer to war, soldiering or organized, armed action. These databases confirm that the natural meaning of “bear arms” in the framers’ day was military.

If you have a right to life and liberty, you have a right to defend them with equal or greater force than those who would deprive you of them. Would you disarm the police?

And I call your dictionary with actual quotes form the founders.

"A free people ought not only to be armed, but disciplined..."
- George Washington, First Annual Address, to both House of Congress, January 8, 1790

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
- Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776

"I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, January 30, 1787

"What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. Let them take arms."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to James Madison, December 20, 1787

"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
- Thomas Jefferson, Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), 1774-1776

"A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks." - Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, August 19, 1785

"The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to to John Cartwright, 5 June 1824

"On every occasion [of Constitutional interpretation] let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying [to force] what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, [instead let us] conform to the probable one in which it was passed."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Johnson, 12 June 1823

"I enclose you a list of the killed, wounded, and captives of the enemy from the commencement of hostilities at Lexington in April, 1775, until November, 1777, since which there has been no event of any consequence ... I think that upon the whole it has been about one half the number lost by them, in some instances more, but in others less. This difference is ascribed to our superiority in taking aim when we fire; every soldier in our army having been intimate with his gun from his infancy."
- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Giovanni Fabbroni, June 8, 1778

“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

"To disarm the people...s the most effectual way to enslave them."
- George Mason, referencing advice given to the British Parliament by Pennsylvania governor Sir William Keith, The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adooption of the Federal Constitution, June 14, 1788

"I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers."
- George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788

"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops."
- Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787

"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of."
- James Madison, Federalist No. 46, January 29, 1788

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country."
- James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789

"...the ultimate authority, wherever the derivative may be found, resides in the people alone..."
- James Madison, Federalist No. 46, January 29, 1788

"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
- William Pitt (the Younger), Speech in the House of Commons, November 18, 1783

“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usuage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."
- Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.... The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun."
- Patrick Henry, Speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 5, 1778

"This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty.... The right of self defense is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction."
- St. George Tucker, Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England, 1803

"The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms, like law, discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The balance ofpower is the scale of peace. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside. And while a single nation refuses to lay them down, it is proper that all should keep them up. Horrid mischief would ensue were one-half the world deprived of the use of them; for while avarice and ambition have a place in the heart of man, the weak will become a prey to the strong. The history of every age and nation establishes these truths, and facts need but little arguments when they prove themselves."
- Thomas Paine, "Thoughts on Defensive War" in Pennsylvania Magazine, July 1775

"The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
- Samuel Adams, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention, 1788

"The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them."
- Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, 1833

"What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty .... Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins."
- Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, I Annals of Congress 750, August 17, 1789

"For it is a truth, which the experience of ages has attested, that the people are always most in danger when the means of injuring their rights are in the possession of those of whom they entertain the least suspicion."
- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 25, December 21, 1787

"If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair."
- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28

"f circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist."
- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28, January 10, 1788

"As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms."
- Tench Coxe, Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789

.

 

[FA_Q2]

I remember when less guns were supposed to as well.

That did not work out either. The truth is that gun control has almost no impact whatsoever on homicide rates. Ergo, you do not have the onus to pass more ineffectual legislation on the exercise of a protected right.

It doesn't? I don't see countries with strong gun control suffering regular mass shootings. They also have homicide rates a fraction of ours. When bad people have easy access to dangerous weapons it is a bad thing.

Yes, it does not and I have already posted extensive facts to you on this fact multiple times.

Those same nations see no change in homicide trends before and after major gun legislation passes.

Yes and the gun ownership rates in those countries were never extreme. They stopped the problem before it became a huge issue. Are you aware our police are shot and killed at a rate much higher than countries with strong gun control? They also shoot way more people. Every time a cop shoots his gun he's taken off the street, and they sure are removed when they get shot. You don't think cops removed from the streets leads to increased crime?

Which does not negate the simple fact that gun control measures did not have a measurable impact on actual homicides.

You must admit the capacity to kill goes down greatly in an absence of guns. Most 70 year old women aren't a real danger to most people unarmed. But with a gun they can kill anyone. Increasing the capacity to kill increases homicides and we have done that with weak gun laws.

And yet the facts show that statement is blatantly false.

You continue to ignore that reality. Simply stating does not make it so.

 

[FA_Q2]

Yes, it does not and I have already posted extensive facts to you on this fact multiple times.

Those same nations see no change in homicide trends before and after major gun legislation passes.

Yes and the gun ownership rates in those countries were never extreme. They stopped the problem before it became a huge issue. Are you aware our police are shot and killed at a rate much higher than countries with strong gun control? They also shoot way more people. Every time a cop shoots his gun he's taken off the street, and they sure are removed when they get shot. You don't think cops removed from the streets leads to increased crime?

Which does not negate the simple fact that gun control measure did not have a measurable impact on actual homicides.

They stayed quite low did they not? We wish we had their homicide rates. I would call that effective.

Gun Control – Just Facts

Ya, you would call that effective only because you are ignoring the actual data.

Again, guns weren't yet a huge problem, they killed it before it became a huge problem. If there were never that many guns, gun control can't have a huge effect.

IT. HAS. ZERO. MEASURABLE. EFFECT.

Not small. Not minuscule. None.

 

[2aguy]

Could be a good first step, but other stuff will be needed. Like making the owner responsible for what his gun is used for if he lends it to someone. Someone who gets his gun stolen is barred from ever buying guns again. Put a limit on how many bullet one can buy in a year. If you target shoot, maybe you could buy more rounds at the shooting range, but you'd have to shoot them all right there. Get rid of AR-15s and the like. No guns show sales, all sales need to go through a dealer. ...

My plan works.....yours does nothing....and the magic of my plan, it works without doing any of the silly things you want to do that do nothing to stop criminals or mass shooters...

I support a life sentence on any criminal who uses a gun for an actual gun crime..... and 30 years if a criminal is caught in possession of a gun, even if they are not using it at that moment for crime.

This will dry up gun crime over night. Criminals will stop using guns for robberies, rapes and murders.....and those who do will be gone forever......

Criminals will also stop walking around with guns in their pants......which is the leading cause of random gang shootings in our cities. if they are stopped by police, with a gun in their pants, they are gone for 30 years...they will stop carrying those guns, and random gang violence will end.

You implement this with two other things...

1) No More Bargaining Away the Gun Charge.........it must be against the law to bargain away a gun charge as part of a plea deal....this stops.

2) When a criminal is arrested for any crime, and booked in...they will be read the announcement that any use of a crime is a life sentence without parole, owning or carrying a gun as a felon is a 30 year sentence without parole....when they are released from custody...the same will be read to them again....when they meet their parole officer it will be read to them again.....the U.S. government will also buy and send out Public announcements on this policy on t.v. radio. and cable......

That is how you stop gun crime over night.

Mass shooters are different..... but with only 93 people killed in mass public shootings in 2018, they are not the major problem in gun crime.

The value in my plan......it actually targets the individuals actually using guns to commit crimes and murder people....

It does not require new background check laws, it does not require gun licensing, licensing gun owners, gun registration, new taxes, fees or regulations on guns...

By making gun crime a life sentence, criminals will stop using guns for crime and will stop carrying guns around for protection.....

Also....a nurse, with a legal gun, driving from Pennsylvania, to New Jersey, will not be considered a gun criminal.....that will end. Criminals with a record of crime, caught with a gun will get 30 years, no deals.....and criminals who use guns for actual crime...robbing the local store, rape, robbery, murder.....life without parole...

This, of course, eliminates the need for more gun control laws...we can already do this.....
Mass shooters

1) end gun free zones

2) get the media to stop covering mass shootings like it is the Oscars.....

3) We are already seeing this...get people who know these nuts to report these nuts....

4) Make sure the police who know these nuts arrest these nuts when they have the chance so they will pop on background checks....
What does each do to stop mass shooters....

1) keeps shooters from targeting people, since they target gun free zones.

2) The media not covering it like they are the criminal oscars deters copycats...just like they stopped covering teen suicides to stop the copycat effect

3) The only way to stop mass shooters, since they commit no other crime, is for family, coworkers and neighbors to report their violent behavior....the Odessa shooter should have felonies for the crimes he was committing but they didn't report his shooting his weapon from his front porch....

4) The Parkland shooter had 33 contacts with police and numerous contacts with police at his school.....due to Obama's "Promise Program" the police never arrested him for the felonies he committed....so he didn't pop on the background check..

Boy. The way you talk one would never guess we already have the FULLEST JAILS IN THE WORLD! And despite that we still have homicide rates 4-5 times higher than countries with strong gun control. Oh and have you noticed many mass killers are first time offenders? But they sure kill a lot of people really fast when they have a semi auto rifle with large capacity magazines...

Moron......when you let violent, repeat gun offenders out over and over again it doesn't matter how full the prison is on a temporary basis....you moron.

It isn't gun control, you dope....it is culture.....

Number of mass public shootings in 2018.....12.... 12 individuals out of over 320 million.

Total killed in all 12 shootings? 93.

Knives are used to murder people over 1,500 times a year....

Cars killed over 38,000

Pools over 3,500

Again..you have no point.

U.S. vs U.K. - Crime/Murder - iGeek

• If you look at the (the blue line): Each time the UK enacted or stiffened their gun control laws, they saw an increase in murder rates. Each new law, had no positive (and some negative) impact or an increase in murder rates. (Crime trends are even worse). (In the 1950’s they outlawed conceal and carry, in the 80’s it was shotguns, and in the late 90’s it was all pistols). So regardless of whether the UK has fewer murders than the US for cultural reasons, we know that gun control didn’t help the UK’s murder rate.
• Next if you look at the (the red line): I overlaid (and adjusted) the U.S. murder rates with major gun control events. After JFK was shot, states and eventually the Fed (1968) passed all sorts of gun control laws — and what happened to our murder rates? They doubled from around 5 to 10 per 100K over the next decade, and they hovered there, despite all sorts of state and federal revisions, or more laws (30,000 different state/local/federal gun control laws were passed in total). There was no significant positive effects, and some observable negative ones in the U.S. due to our gun control laws.
• Then in the late 80’s Florida passed “Must Issue” conceal and carry and castle doctrine laws were passed, and their crime/murder rates started falling noticeably. Many other states (in the South and Midwest) followed suit, with the same effects in their state murder rates, and eventually enough of those added up to start impacting the federal murder rates noticeably. Then the federal assault weapon ban expired — and if gun control worked, you’d expect an upward spike in murders, but murders trended down. Adding gun control had no positive effects, and removing them had no significant negative effects, in the U.S.!. So if you have the choice of tyranny or liberty, and there's no benefit to tyranny: opt for liberty.
• -----

Something important to know is that the U.K. ONS distorts their numbers for political reasons. While the rest of the world measures murder rates as people who are killed, the ONS does two things to cheat:

1. They exclude Scotland and North Ireland from their counting: I guess when they are murdered, it isn’t as important to ONS as if Britons die. While that is only about 10% of the total population of the UK, it is significantly more of their crimes and murders.
2. They only count murders where someone is charged with a crime. (Only between 1/2 and 3/4ths of all murders are counted).
3. ----
4. n the U.S. Blacks are 1/7th the population, but over 1/2 of all our murders, and Latino’s are about the same 15% of the population and are responsible for over half the rest of murders.England has virtually no blacks or latino’s (<3%). So if we correct for those demographic differences (or just compare a subset — the U.S.’s white murder rate to the UK’s white murder rate), we find that in the bright red trend line, that the U.S. has a lower murder rate than the U.K.
   
   Racist:Now around this time, people that can’t handle the facts or truth, start trying to distract by claiming either I’m racist, or this data is racist. But data is not making judgements, it’s just facts.
   
   The problem isn’t racial in America, but it is cultural.
   
   
   Black immigrants don’t have the same murder rates as Black Americans.
   
   
   And if you dive into the groups, you find rural blacks (and whites and latinos) have lower murder rates than inner cities. It’s also not income or income equality based since rural poor have lower murder rates than urban poor -- and many richer countries have more murders/crime than many poorer ones. It's about failures of the inner city gang culture.
   
   So facts are facts. In the U.S. we have a lower white murder rate (but higher black murder rate) than the U.K.
   
   
   And white’s in America have higher gun ownership rates than blacks (or than whites in the U.K.) — so we know that gun control doesn’t help murder rates for whites. At least across these two countries.
   
   And the reason for differences among blacks in the two countries is easily explained by gang culture in the U.S.

Conclusion

Anyone vaguely informed on gun control issues knows is that the U.S. does not have a gun problem.

• Whites and Asian are highly responsible with guns, and have a lower murder rate than almost all of Europe and the OECD countries. We have a very specific problem: democrats, blacks and latino gang-members drag our murder and crime rates averages up.
• The UK has a higher white murder rate, but they use clubs and knives rather than guns. Since I’m pretty sure most people don’t want to be stabbed or beaten to death, the important factor is whether you’re murdered or not (not the tool the murderer uses), right?

Another thing gun-controller advocates either don’t realize (or do, and lie about) is as bad as the U.S. is at murders or violent crime -- the UK is worse despite their gun control. England alone has something like 600 murdersby knife per year (and 26,370 knife crimes). Compare that to only 1,500 for the U.S., with over 5 times the population. Home invasion robberies, aggravated assault, violent rape, and stabbings are worse in the UK than in the U.S. And that's BEFORE you correct for race and gang crimes.

 

[2aguy]

Could be a good first step, but other stuff will be needed. Like making the owner responsible for what his gun is used for if he lends it to someone. Someone who gets his gun stolen is barred from ever buying guns again. Put a limit on how many bullet one can buy in a year. If you target shoot, maybe you could buy more rounds at the shooting range, but you'd have to shoot them all right there. Get rid of AR-15s and the like. No guns show sales, all sales need to go through a dealer. ...

My plan works.....yours does nothing....and the magic of my plan, it works without doing any of the silly things you want to do that do nothing to stop criminals or mass shooters...

I support a life sentence on any criminal who uses a gun for an actual gun crime..... and 30 years if a criminal is caught in possession of a gun, even if they are not using it at that moment for crime.

This will dry up gun crime over night. Criminals will stop using guns for robberies, rapes and murders.....and those who do will be gone forever......

Criminals will also stop walking around with guns in their pants......which is the leading cause of random gang shootings in our cities. if they are stopped by police, with a gun in their pants, they are gone for 30 years...they will stop carrying those guns, and random gang violence will end.

You implement this with two other things...

1) No More Bargaining Away the Gun Charge.........it must be against the law to bargain away a gun charge as part of a plea deal....this stops.

2) When a criminal is arrested for any crime, and booked in...they will be read the announcement that any use of a crime is a life sentence without parole, owning or carrying a gun as a felon is a 30 year sentence without parole....when they are released from custody...the same will be read to them again....when they meet their parole officer it will be read to them again.....the U.S. government will also buy and send out Public announcements on this policy on t.v. radio. and cable......

That is how you stop gun crime over night.

Mass shooters are different..... but with only 93 people killed in mass public shootings in 2018, they are not the major problem in gun crime.

The value in my plan......it actually targets the individuals actually using guns to commit crimes and murder people....

It does not require new background check laws, it does not require gun licensing, licensing gun owners, gun registration, new taxes, fees or regulations on guns...

By making gun crime a life sentence, criminals will stop using guns for crime and will stop carrying guns around for protection.....

Also....a nurse, with a legal gun, driving from Pennsylvania, to New Jersey, will not be considered a gun criminal.....that will end. Criminals with a record of crime, caught with a gun will get 30 years, no deals.....and criminals who use guns for actual crime...robbing the local store, rape, robbery, murder.....life without parole...

This, of course, eliminates the need for more gun control laws...we can already do this.....
Mass shooters

1) end gun free zones

2) get the media to stop covering mass shootings like it is the Oscars.....

3) We are already seeing this...get people who know these nuts to report these nuts....

4) Make sure the police who know these nuts arrest these nuts when they have the chance so they will pop on background checks....
What does each do to stop mass shooters....

1) keeps shooters from targeting people, since they target gun free zones.

2) The media not covering it like they are the criminal oscars deters copycats...just like they stopped covering teen suicides to stop the copycat effect

3) The only way to stop mass shooters, since they commit no other crime, is for family, coworkers and neighbors to report their violent behavior....the Odessa shooter should have felonies for the crimes he was committing but they didn't report his shooting his weapon from his front porch....

4) The Parkland shooter had 33 contacts with police and numerous contacts with police at his school.....due to Obama's "Promise Program" the police never arrested him for the felonies he committed....so he didn't pop on the background check..

Boy. The way you talk one would never guess we already have the FULLEST JAILS IN THE WORLD! And despite that we still have homicide rates 4-5 times higher than countries with strong gun control. Oh and have you noticed many mass killers are first time offenders? But they sure kill a lot of people really fast when they have a semi auto rifle with large capacity magazines...

It isn't the gun or the magazine...it is the free time the killer has in the gun free zone you guys created.

Gilroy.... rifle.... 3 dead.

Russian Polytechnic school shooting....5 shot, pump action, tube fed shotgun...20 dead, 40 injured.

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

Large-Capacity Magazines and the Casualty Counts in Mass Shootings: The Plausibility of Linkages by Gary Kleck :: SSRN

I.

Do bans on large-capacity magazines (LCMs) for semiautomatic firearms have significant potential for reducing the number of deaths and injuries in mass shootings?
========
In sum, in nearly all LCM-involved mass shootings, the time it takes to reload a detachable magazine is no greater than the average time between shots that the shooter takes anyway when not reloading.

Consequently, there is no affirmative evidence that reloading detachable magazines slows mass shooters’ rates of fire, and thus no affirmative evidence that the number of victims who could escape the killers due to additional pauses in the shooting is increased by the shooter’s need to change magazines.
==========
The most common rationale for an effect of LCM use is that they allow mass killers to fire many rounds without reloading.
LCMs are used is less than 1/3 of 1% of mass shootings.
News accounts of 23 shootings in which more than six people were killed or wounded and LCMs were used, occurring in the U.S. in 1994-2013, were examined.
There was only one incident in which the shooter may have been stopped by bystander intervention when he tried to reload.
In all of these 23 incidents the shooter possessed either multiple guns or multiple magazines, meaning that the shooter, even if denied LCMs, could have continued firing without significant interruption by either switching loaded guns or by changing smaller loaded magazines with only a 2-4 second delay for each magazine change.
Finally, the data indicate that mass shooters maintain slow enough rates of fire such that the time needed to reload would not increase the time between shots and thus the time available for prospective victims to escape.

--------

We did not employ the oft-used definition of “mass murder” as a homicide in which four or more victims were killed, because most of these involve just four to six victims (Duwe 2007), which could therefore have involved as few as six rounds fired, a number that shooters using even ordinary revolvers are capable of firing without reloading.

LCMs obviously cannot help shooters who fire no more rounds than could be fired without LCMs, so the inclusion of “nonaffectable” cases with only four to six victims would dilute the sample, reducing the percent of sample incidents in which an LCM might have affected the number of casualties.

Further, had we studied only homicides with four or more dead victims, drawn from the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports, we would have missed cases in which huge numbers of people were shot, and huge numbers of rounds were fired, but three or fewer of the victims died.


For example, in one widely publicized shooting carried out in Los Angeles on February 28, 1997, two bank robbers shot a total of 18 people - surely a mass shooting by any reasonable standard (Table 1).

Yet, because none of the people they shot died, this incident would not qualify as a mass murder (or even murder of any kind).

Exclusion of such incidents would bias the sample against the proposition that LCM use increases the number of victims by excluding incidents with large numbers of victims. We also excluded shootings in which more than six persons were shot over the entire course of the incident but shootings occurred in multiple locations with no more than six people shot in any one of the locations, and substantial periods of time intervened between episodes of shooting. An example is the series of killings committed by Rodrick Dantzler on July 7, 2011.

Once eligible incidents were identified, we searched through news accounts for details related to whether the use of LCMs could have influenced the casualty counts.

Specifically, we searched for

(1) the number of magazines in the shooter’s immediate possession,

(2) the capacity of the largest magazine,

(3) the number of guns in the shooter’s immediate possession during the incident,

(4) the types of guns possessed,

(5) whether the shooter reloaded during the incident,

(6) the number of rounds fired,

(7) the duration of the shooting from the first shot fired to the last, and (8) whether anyone intervened to stop the shooter.

Findings How Many Mass Shootings were Committed Using LCMs?

We identified 23 total incidents in which more than six people were shot at a single time and place in the U.S. from 1994 through 2013 and that were known to involve use of any magazines with capacities over ten rounds.


Table 1 summarizes key details of the LCMinvolved mass shootings relevant to the issues addressed in this paper.

(Table 1 about here) What fraction of all mass shootings involve LCMs?

There is no comprehensive listing of all mass shootings available for the entire 1994-2013 period, but the most extensive one currently available is at the Shootingtracker.com website, which only began its coverage in 2013.

-----


-----
The offenders in LCM-involved mass shootings were also known to have reloaded during 14 of the 23 (61%) incidents with magazine holding over 10 rounds.

The shooters were known to have not reloaded in another two of these 20 incidents and it could not be determined if they reloaded in the remaining seven incidents.

Thus, even if the shooters had been denied LCMs, we know that most of them definitely would have been able to reload smaller detachable magazines without interference from bystanders since they in fact did change magazines.

The fact that this percentage is less than 100% should not, however, be interpreted to mean that the shooters were unable to reload in the other nine incidents.

It is possible that the shooters could also have reloaded in many of these nine shootings, but chose not to do so, or did not need to do so in order to fire all the rounds they wanted to fire. This is consistent with the fact that there has been at most only one mass shootings in twenty years in which reloading a semiautomatic firearm might have been blocked by bystanders intervening and thereby stopping the shooter from doing all the shooting he wanted to do. All we know is that in two incidents the shooter did not reload, and news accounts of seven other incidents did not mention whether the offender reloaded.

----

For example, a story in the Hartford Courant about the Sandy Hook elementary school killings in 2012 was headlined “Shooter Paused, and Six Escaped,” the text asserting that as many as six children may have survived because the shooter paused to reload (December 23, 2012). ''

The author of the story, however, went on to concede that this was just a speculation by an unnamed source, and that it was also possible that some children simply escaped when the killer was shooting other children.

There was no reliable evidence that the pauses were due to the shooter reloading, rather than his guns jamming or the shooter simply choosing to pause his shooting while his gun was still loaded.

The plausibility of the “victims escape” rationale depends on the average rates of fire that shooters in mass shootings typically maintain.

If they fire very fast, the 2-4 seconds it takes to change box-type detachable magazines could produce a slowing of the rate of fire that the shooters otherwise would have maintained without the magazine changes, increasing the average time between rounds fired and potentially allowing more victims to escape during the betweenshot intervals.

On the other hand, if mass shooters fire their guns with the average interval between shots lasting more than 2-4 seconds, the pauses due to additional magazine changes would be no longer than the pauses the shooter typically took between shots even when not reloading.

In that case, there would be no more opportunity for potential victims to escape than there would have been without the additional magazine changes

 

[2aguy]

Could be a good first step, but other stuff will be needed. Like making the owner responsible for what his gun is used for if he lends it to someone. Someone who gets his gun stolen is barred from ever buying guns again. Put a limit on how many bullet one can buy in a year. If you target shoot, maybe you could buy more rounds at the shooting range, but you'd have to shoot them all right there. Get rid of AR-15s and the like. No guns show sales, all sales need to go through a dealer. ...

Yes! You are responsible if they are stolen. We can then pass the 'you are responsible for wearing that short skirt law right after'....

This outlines how asinine these ideas are - you want to make the victim legally liable for what the criminal does. That is beyond idiotic.

Then you go on with utterly banning the most popular guns in the US because they are used in a minuscule fraction of the gun deaths. And a limit on bullets? LOL. You realize many avid gun shooters actually make their own?

This is born out of ignorance around actual gun use and ownership.

Miniscule doesn't even capture it....

18 million AR-15s in the U.S....

3 were used in mass public shootings this year...

What the death count for 3 public shootings?

There were 4 rifle attacks this year.....44 killed.

Virginia Tech.....2 pistols....32 killed in one shooting...so obviously rifles are not as deadly as pistols...according to your logic.

2 pistols killed more people at Virginia Tech than any of the rifle attacks except for Vegas....where the guy had to shoot into a tightly packed crowd of over 22,000 people from a concealed, fortified, position.....

Lawnmowers kill more people every single year than 4 rifle attacks in mass public shootings....you must want them banned too...right?

How about 12 mass public shootings? 93.

Knives kill over 1,500 every single year....

Bare hands over 400 people.

Lawnmowers, over 75

cars....over 38,000

 

[2aguy]

For crying out loud

We have 2.5 million in prison right now. More than anywhere in the world
It is NOT working!

Remember when more guns was going to solve all our crime problems? Strangely it hasn't....

I remember when less guns were supposed to as well.

That did not work out either. The truth is that gun control has almost no impact whatsoever on homicide rates. Ergo, you do not have the onus to pass more ineffectual legislation on the exercise of a protected right.

It doesn't? I don't see countries with strong gun control suffering regular mass shootings. They also have homicide rates a fraction of ours. When bad people have easy access to dangerous weapons it is a bad thing.

Yes, it does not and I have already posted extensive facts to you on this fact multiple times.

Those same nations see no change in homicide trends before and after major gun legislation passes.

Why are we the only nation that suffers regular mass shootings? It is foolish to not assume it is easy access to guns. Even angry children get guns.

We have a longer history of the welfare state destroying our families......Europe suffered the effects of feudalism....and 2 World Wars....and it set back their social advancement.....we didn't have the destruction they had.....and they also murdered 12 million innocent men, women and children.....which outnumbers our total of people killed by criminals.....

 

[2aguy]

For crying out loud

We have 2.5 million in prison right now. More than anywhere in the world
It is NOT working!

Remember when more guns was going to solve all our crime problems? Strangely it hasn't....

I remember when less guns were supposed to as well.

That did not work out either. The truth is that gun control has almost no impact whatsoever on homicide rates. Ergo, you do not have the onus to pass more ineffectual legislation on the exercise of a protected right.

It doesn't? I don't see countries with strong gun control suffering regular mass shootings. They also have homicide rates a fraction of ours. When bad people have easy access to dangerous weapons it is a bad thing.

Yes, it does not and I have already posted extensive facts to you on this fact multiple times.

Those same nations see no change in homicide trends before and after major gun legislation passes.

Yes and the gun ownership rates in those countries were never extreme. They stopped the problem before it became a huge issue. Are you aware our police are shot and killed at a rate much higher than countries with strong gun control? They also shoot way more people. Every time a cop shoots his gun he's taken off the street, and they sure are removed when they get shot. You don't think cops removed from the streets leads to increased crime?

Wrong...... they had gun ownership before World War 2, registered and confiscated guns even thought their gun murder rates were low.....then, they used those registration lists to disarm the people, and then murdered 12 million of them in gas chambers and with government controlled guns......

What leads to increased crime are democrat judges, politicians and prosecutors who keep letting repeat gun offenders out of jail on Bond, often without requiring a cash bond, and out of prison on short sentences...when they decide to prosecute at all...

Democrats frown on targeting gang databases with 'red flag' laws

Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee amended the measure during a Wednesday mark-up to authorize the federal government to issue extreme risk protection orders in some instances, but they rejected an amendment that would have red-flagged anyone who law enforcement lists as a gang member.

“The majority of violent crime, including gun violence, in the United States is linked to gangs,” Rep. Ken Buck, a Colorado Republican who sponsored the amendment, said Wednesday. “My amendment is quite simple. It would allow the issuance of a red flag order against anyone whose name appears in a gang database if there was probable cause to include that individual in the database.”

Democrats objected with reasons that sounded very familiar to Republicans.

CWB Chicago: Man fatally shot one victim, wounded another while free on recognizance bond and electronic monitoring, prosecutors say

It’s been 18 months since Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart warned that he was “alarmed” by the number of accused gun offenders who were being released on their own recognizance, sometimes with electronic monitoring.

“This needs to get fixed quick,” Dart told the Sun-Times in Feb. 2018.

It hasn’t been fixed.

Yesterday, 18-year-old Antwane Lashley was in bond court, accused of shooting a man to death on Aug. 23. Prosecutors say he also shot and seriously wounded a woman at the same time. Lashley has been free on his own recognizance with electronic monitoring since prosecutors charged him with possessing a handgun illegally this spring.

Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle wasted no time criticizing Dart’s concerns last year.

“I believe it is our responsibility to keep these matters in context and not contribute to sensationalizing them,” Preckwinkle told Dart in a letter days later.

As recently as Friday, Preckwinkle called concerns about people committing violent crimes while free on affordable bail, a “fear tactic.” She has also defended easy bail conditions for gun possession. Some people who live in less-safe neighborhoods feel the need to carry guns for their own protection, she says.

A gun, freedom, then a murder
Around 7:30 p.m. on May 20th, cops in Humboldt Park saw Antwane Lashley walking quickly on the 3800 block of West Chicago. He saw police nearby and began running, holding his right pocket as he fled, a police spokesperson said last night.

Lashley took a handgun out of his pocket, threw it, and kept running, the spokesperson said. Officers caught him nearby while other cops retrieved the gun he allegedly threw.

Prosecutors charged Lashley with felony aggravated unlawful use of a weapon. He appeared in court the next afternoon and was set free on his own recognizance with an order to go onto electronic monitoring, according to court records.

Then, last Friday, Neal Sumrell and a woman were sitting in a car on the 4200 block of West Iowa in Humboldt Park. Around 8:15 p.m., someone walked up to their vehicle and opened fire. Sumrell, 34, was shot seven times in the upper body. He died. The woman tried to run away, police said. She was shot three times throughout her body, but managed to survive.

Lashley—on juvenile probation for aggravated battery causing great bodily harm—was arrested at his home Thursday evening, just one block from the murder scene. Police say he’s the gunman who killed Sumrell and injured the 28-year-old woman who tried to run away.

Prosecutors yesterday charged Lashley with first-degree murder, attempted first-degree murder, and aggravated battery by discharging a firearm. Judge Mary Marubio ordered him held without bail.

“Victims deserve better,” said Anthony Guglielmi, the police department’s chief communications officer early Sunday. “We are going to continue to be the voice for those who have been silenced by gun violence.”

Not the first
Lashley is hardly the first person to be accused of killing or trying to kill someone while free on the county's affordable bail program. Among similar cases reported by CWBChicago:

In May 2018, Daryl Williams was charged with fatally shooting a man in the back of the head. He was free on a recognizance bond at the time while awaiting trial for allegedly possessing a stolen firearm the previous November.

In June of last year, Carnell Morris was charged with being an armed habitual criminal after police said they found a gun in his car. He posted a $1,000 bond. Six months later, while awaiting trial for the gun case, Morris was charged with attempted murder after he allegedly shot a 51-year-old man.

Just three months ago, repeat gun offender Antawan Smith was charged with murdering a 15-year-old. He was free on a $6,000 deposit bond while awaiting trial for allegedly being an armed habitual criminal.

In Delaware, 71% of gun charges are dropped

From 2012 to 2014, more than 11,700 felony weapon charges were filed in Delaware, and in most cases, the weapon was a gun. Yet, 71 percent of those charges disappeared before trials began.

==========

Top cop laments violence as 66 shot, 5 fatally, over long Fourth of July weekend


Between last Wednesday and Friday, 42 people were charged with felony gun-related offenses, he said, but only 15 remain in custody.


That lack of accountability for gun offenders has damaged the Police Department’s relationship with the communities most beset by violence, Johnson said, making victims of crimes less likely to cooperate with officers.
-----
“It’s not about mass incarceration. It’s not about having quotas. But when somebody has a demonstrated track record of being a violent gun offender, that should say something to the judges who are making decisions about bail. They shouldn’t be out on the street,” Lightfoot said. “We can’t keep our communities safe if people just keep cycling through the system because what that says to them is, I can do whatever I want, I can carry whatever I want, I can shoot up a crowd and I’m going to be back on the street. How does that make sense? It doesn’t.”
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/07/criminal_justice_reform_comes_home_to_roost.html
=======

CWB Chicago: You Be The Judge: We give you the case details. You try to guess their bail amount.

McKay was sentenced to four years for robbery in 2008; two years for aggravated unlawful use of a weapon (firearm) in 2010; seven years for being a felon in possession of a weapon (firearm) in 2012; and three years for possession of fentanyl in 2016.
-----
For McKay, who has two gun convictions and a robbery conviction, Willis set bail at….$5,000. McKay will need to put down a 10% deposit of $500 to go free. Willis also ordered him to go on electronic monitoring if he is released.

Some details that Willis did not know:
• McKay’s 2008 robbery conviction involved an armed carjacking. Prosecutors reduced the charge to “ordinary” robbery as part of a plea deal.• In 2012, McKay’s second gun case also included allegations that he fired the weapon. Prosecutors dropped the weapon discharge count and seven other weapons charges in a plea deal.• The 2016 drug possession charge started as allegations of manufacture-delivery of fentanyl, but, again, prosecutors pleaded that down to possession.

========
Detroit 911: Thousands in crisis left waiting for Detroit police

A 7 Action News investigation reveals that, over a 20-month period, 650 priority one calls took more than 60 minutes to receive a response. The calls include reports of active shootings, rapes in progress, felonious assaults, armed robberies, armed attacks from the mentally ill and suicides in progress.

=========

Under DA Krasner, more gun-possession cases get court diversionary program

In June 2018, Maalik Jackson-Wallace was arrested on a Frankford street and charged with carrying a concealed gun without a license and a gram of marijuana. It was his first arrest.

The Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office recommended the Frankford man for a court diversionary program called Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition (ARD) that put him on two years’ probation. His record could have been expunged if he had successfully completed the program.

But Jackson-Wallace, 24, was arrested again on gun-possession charges in March in Bridesburg. He was released from jail after a judge granted a defense motion for unsecured bail. And on June 13, he was arrested a third time — charged with murder in a shooting two days earlier in Frankford that killed a 26-year-old man.

Jackson-Wallace’s case has been cited by some on social media as an example of how they say District Attorney Larry Krasner’s policies are too lenient and lead to gun violence.



In fact, statistics obtained from the DA’s Office show that in 2018, Krasner’s first year in office, 78 gun-possession cases were placed in the ARD program — compared with just 12 such diversions in gun-possession cases the previous year, 11 in 2016, 14 in 2015. and 10 in 2014.

============

Officials Address 'Vicious Cycle' Of I-Bond Violations After Violent Weekend

Many of the gun offenders arrested by Chicago police over the weekend walked out of jail on bond, without having to pay a dime.

As of Monday morning, 19 people had been arrested on gun-related charges. By Monday afternoon, 11 were back on the street, some with prior gun offenses.

“We know who a lot of these people are,” Chicago Police Supt. Eddie Johnson said. “And how do we know that? Because we keep arresting them over and over and over and over and over again. And it’s just a vicious cycle.”

In a tweet Sunday night, a Chicago police spokesperson criticized the practice of letting gun offenders out on Individual Recognizance Bonds or “I-Bonds.”
-----

The tweet said, in part, “Letting gun offenders out on I-Bonds shows there is absolutely no repercussion for carrying illegal guns In Chicago.”
-----
In a statement, an office representative said since the beginning of this year, 72% of gun related cases received monetary bail or no bond.
==================
http://www.cwbchicago.com/2019/05/man-connected-to-whitney-young-high.html

The man who is charged with driving the carjacked SUV of a Whitney Young High School teacher this week is on probation for possessing a handgun—a probation term that was cut in half just three weeks ago by a Cook County judge.

The CPD arrest report that documents the capture of Nicholas Williams on Tuesday says cops and federal agents found Williams “in possession” of a loaded 9-millimeter handgun with a defaced serial number. But, a source with knowledge of the case told CWBChicago tonight that the gun was “ditched” and weapons charges could not be approved.

The Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office did not immediately respond to an after-hours email seeking comment.

Court records show that in Aug. 2017 Williams was charged with felony unlawful use of a weapon for allegedly carrying a handgun in the front of his waistband during a traffic stop on the West Side. Police said in a report that the gun had been reported stolen one month earlier.

A grand jury returned a 12 felony count true bill against Williams. But the Cook County State’s Attorney dropped all charges on May 3, 2018.

Five months after that case was dropped, Williams was charged with a new set of eight weapons felonies for allegedly carrying a handgun in the front of his waistband while riding his bike on the West Side.

----

Last month, Judge Maria Kuriakos-Ciesil sentenced Williams to two year’s probation, 30 hours of community service and 175 days time served in the case.

His attorneys asked for a reduced sentence and, on April 29th, Kuriakos-Ciesil granted the motion by reducing Williams’ punishment to one year of TASC probation and 30 hours of community service.

-------------------------
14 year old shot two men, released without bond or home confinement...


Cook County, IL: 14-Year-Old Charged With Shooting Two, Freed Without Supervision - The Truth About Guns

Welcome to Cook County, Illinois, where crime often has no meaningful consequences. Between a State’s Attorney’s Office reluctant to file charges and judges who mollycoddles defendants, Chicagoland has become the modern Wild West.

Case in point: a 14-year-old who (reportedly) shot and tried to kill two in a nice uptown neighborhood was released by a judge Friday to his parent with no bond – not even electronic home monitoring.


The Cook County judge claims the police failed to bring this suspected would-be gang killer (pictured above, right) in front of a judge quickly enough. So the judge, in order to penalize the police, released the kid without conditions other than to report to court next week.

Of course, the judge is really only penalizing the community as the accused certainly missed his calling as a choir boy.

The police, on the other hand, said they had concerns about the young man’s safety. Police released images of the suspects to the media in an effort to identify them and the media published them.

The Chicago mainstream media refer to the accused as a “boy.” Even though this “boy”reportedly shot one man in the back, abdomen, buttocks and groin and the other in the head.
===========

16 year old shooter released on 10,000 bond.....Cuomo's Raise the age bill for family court let this shooter go free on bail...

https://www.dailywire.com/news/44304/case-16-year-old-accused-shooting-bronx-street-hank-berrien

Bronx Supreme Court Justice John Collins made Garcia’s release contingent on either $10,000 bail or $25,000 bond, he made bail and he was freed. As The New York Post explains, “The law already guarantees that he can’t be held in a jail that also houses adults — and if convicted, his sentencing judge would have to take his age into account.”
--------
On Monday, prosecutor Daniel Defilippi indicated he would try to stop the case from being transferred to Family Court. Assemblywoman Nicole Malliotakis, referring to the case as a “prime example” of the problems with the Raise the Age bill, said, “One of the things we brought up during debate was how this encourages gang recruitment. Gangs can recruit young people to do dirty work because they won’t be treated the same when caught.
------
Residents of the neighborhood acknowledged that the neighborhood has become a frightening place to live; one said, “We don’t go out. We don’t go to the park. I keep my kids in the house. We’re scared.” Another commented, “People don’t feel safe. People shooting in the street like that? No one is safe.” A third commented of the young girl, “She is lucky. Like an angel is watching over her because she was really close.”

”DC Won’t Allow Concealed Carry, But Takes It Easy On Armed, Violent Criminals

The problems stem from the city’s Youth Rehabilitation Act, legislation implemented in the 1980s to provide leniency to criminal offenders under the age of 22, even violent ones, with murder convictions being the only exception. It allows judges to disregard mandatory minimums meant to dissuade criminals, often to disastrous effects. The homicide rate spiked by 54 percent in the District in 2015, and 22 of the murderers were previously sentenced for crimes under the Youth Rehabilitation Act, according to an investigation by The Washington Post.

A man released on probation in 2015 under the law was involved in the July shooting death of Deeniquia Dodds, a transgender man. Just over 120 people previously sentenced under the Youth Rehabilitation Act have subsequently been convicted of murder since 2010.

“I knew they were going to let me off easy,” Tavon Pinkney, an 18-year old convicted of homicide in 2015, told The Washington Post regarding his previous sentencing under the youth law. “Nothing changed … They just gave me the Youth Act and let me go right back out there. They ain’t really care.”

Study: Chicago homicides spiked due to ACLU police decree

Cassell and Fowles have studied the spike of homicides in Chicago in 2016. Through multiple regression analysis and other tools, they conclude that an ACLU consent decree triggered a sharp reduction in stop and frisks by the Chicago Police Department, which in turn caused homicides to spike. In other words, what Chicago police officers call the“ACLU effect” is real. That effect was more homicides and shootings.

-------

Detailed regression analysis of the homicide (and related shooting) data strongly supports what visual observation suggests. Using monthly data from 2012 through 2016, we are able to control for such factors as temperature, homicides in other parts of Illinois, 9-1-1 calls (as a measure of police-citizen cooperation), and arrests for various types of crimes.


Even controlling for these factors, our equations indicate that the steep decline in stop and frisks was strongly linked, at high levels of statistical significance, to the sharp increase in homicides (and other shooting crimes) in 2016.

Cassell and Fowles then searched for other possible factors that might be responsible for the Chicago homicide spike. None fit the data as well as the decline in stop and frisks.

Cassell and Fowles quantified the costs of the decline in stop and frisks in human and financial terms.


They found that, because of fewer stop and frisks in 2016, a conservative estimate is that approximately 236 additional homicides and 1115 additional shootings occurred during that year.


A reasonable estimate of the social costs associated with these additional homicides and shootings is about $1,500,000,000. And these costs are heavily concentrated in Chicago’s African-American and Hispanic communities.
Dart sees 'alarming' rise in gun defendants freed on electronic monitoring

Judges have treated felony gun charges in a dramatically different way since the reforms were implemented, according to data from the sheriff's office.

Over a nearly four-month period in 2016, judges gave out cash-based bonds in nearly 96 percent of felony gun cases and released just 2 percent on electronic monitors. In the 10 weeks after the bond order took effect in September, though, the number of cash-based bonds for gun cases plummeted to about 40 percent, while those freed on the electronic bracelets jumped to 22 percent.

The amount set for bonds also sharply fell on average, from nearly $134,000 in 2016 to almost $22,000 in 2017, according to the analysis.

By contrast, judges also boosted how often they ordered no bond for those charged with felony gun offenses, to more than 9 percent in 2017, compared with no cases at all in 2016, the analysis showed.

---------------

Dart, along with Preckwinkle and other elected county officials, has been a vocal opponent of the cash-bond system in which judges require defendants to put down money to secure their release from jail while awaiting trial.

Critics say the system unfairly punishes the poor and that defendants charged with violent offenses who sometimes have easy access to cash because of gang ties can be back out on the street within days.

In July, as part of the reform push, Chief Judge Timothy Evans announced that judges would be required to set bail only in amounts that defendants could afford to pay in an effort to ensure that people charged with nonviolent crimes weren’t languishing in jail simply because they didn’t have the cash, sometimes only a few hundred dollars, to post for bond.

======The democrat prosecutor let this monster loose.......

But Democrat State’s Attorney Julia Reitz cut a deal to let Robbie Patton, a sociopathic predator who will never contribute anything but sewage and sadness to our society, avoid serving hard time for attempted murder.

It’s true. Bad guys in prison don’t victimize the innocent. Florida had proven success with 10-20-Life sentencing enhancements for the use of a firearmwhile committing a violent crime. A court struck down the law in 2016. Under the law, Florida’s firearmviolent crime rate plummeted to the lowest levels in the Sunshine State’s recorded history.


----------

John Boch: Lock Them Up! - The Truth About Guns

When you lock up violent criminals, you prevent them from victimizing other innocents. Crime in America dipped almost 50%after America abandoned “soft on crime” attitudes of the 1970s. Of course, many soft-on-crime politicians like Reitz have once more taken a love to “diversion” programs. And that’s how we get Robbie Patton (above), a local crime celebrity of sorts.

In 2015, he had an altercation at a Champaign Steak ‘n Shake restaurant commonly frequented by my friends and me. While none of us were enjoying a milkshake or steakburger at 5:30pm, Robbie was.

Robbie found himself in an altercation inside the restaurant. He felt one of his friends had been “disrespected”, so little Robbie went outside. He waited for the other group to emerge, pulled out of gun and tried to kill those other people.

He missed, and fled the scene with an Illinois State Trooper in hot pursuit. After a short, high-speed chase in a stolen car, Robbie crashed and escaped on foot.

Cops caught up with him. Local prosecutor Julia Reitz then went soft on little Robbie. She let him go to “boot camp”, even though that sentencing option is not supposed to be available for violent offenders. And squeezing off a bunch of shots at other people, trying to kill them, pretty much fits the bill as a violent crime.

After serving eight months on an eight-year sentence, Robbie returned to the streets of Champaign-Urbana. In less than two days, cops arrested him again for drugs and who knows what else. Not even three weeks after that, he’s illegally got agun. When someone “disrespects” another one of Robbie’s friends, guess what he does? He pulls out the gun and fires shots at those he believes responsible.




He misses his intended targets, but in the busy University of Illinois campustown district, his errant, not-so-late-night rounds found four innocent people within a block or two. George Korchev, the recent nursing school graduate due to start his career as a registered nurse at a hospital in Libertyville, IL, the following Monday morning, was struck and killed a blockaway from one of Robbie’s bullets.

----------

Democrats lower sentences in California...for gun criminals


California Democrats hate the gun, not the gunman – Orange County Register

Now that Democrats have supermajorities in the California state Legislature, they’ve rolled into Sacramento with a zest for lowering the state’s prison population and have interpreted St. Augustine’s words of wisdom to mean, “Hate the gun, not the gunman.”

I say this because, once they finally took a break from preaching about the benefits of stricter gun control, the state Senate voted to loosen sentencing guidelines for criminals convicted of gun crimes.

Currently, California law requires anyone who uses a gun while committing a felony to have their sentence increased by 10 years or more in prison — on top of the normal criminal penalty. If enacted, Senate Bill 620 would eliminate that mandate.

The bill, which passed on a 22-14 party-line vote, with support only from Democrats, now heads to the state Assembly for consideration.

Republicans and the National Rifle Association have vowed to campaign against it.

 

[2aguy]

For crying out loud

We have 2.5 million in prison right now. More than anywhere in the world
It is NOT working!

Remember when more guns was going to solve all our crime problems? Strangely it hasn't....

I remember when less guns were supposed to as well.

That did not work out either. The truth is that gun control has almost no impact whatsoever on homicide rates. Ergo, you do not have the onus to pass more ineffectual legislation on the exercise of a protected right.

It doesn't? I don't see countries with strong gun control suffering regular mass shootings. They also have homicide rates a fraction of ours. When bad people have easy access to dangerous weapons it is a bad thing.

Yes, it does not and I have already posted extensive facts to you on this fact multiple times.

Those same nations see no change in homicide trends before and after major gun legislation passes.

Why are we the only nation that suffers regular mass shootings? It is foolish to not assume it is easy access to guns. Even angry children get guns.

Wrong, the average age of mass shooters is in the 30s. So they are not children...you dope...

And Britain can't control the increasing flow of illegal guns into their country.....they are going to experience gun crime and their people won't be able to stop it.

 

[2aguy]

For crying out loud

We have 2.5 million in prison right now. More than anywhere in the world
It is NOT working!

Remember when more guns was going to solve all our crime problems? Strangely it hasn't....

I remember when less guns were supposed to as well.

That did not work out either. The truth is that gun control has almost no impact whatsoever on homicide rates. Ergo, you do not have the onus to pass more ineffectual legislation on the exercise of a protected right.

It doesn't? I don't see countries with strong gun control suffering regular mass shootings. They also have homicide rates a fraction of ours. When bad people have easy access to dangerous weapons it is a bad thing.

Yet all your commie bullshit is aimed at good people, not the bad ones, go fucking figure.

.

Our worst mass shooter every had a clear record until he didn't. Allowing him access to weapons for mass killing sure was a mistake.

actually, no, they didn't.....Parkland kid had 32 interactions with the police, not even including the crimes he committed at school.....and the obama "Promise Program" kept him from being arrested....the Texas Church shooter should have failed the background check, but the Air Force didn't put in his records....so you are wrong, again.

 

[2aguy]

Yes, it does not and I have already posted extensive facts to you on this fact multiple times.

Those same nations see no change in homicide trends before and after major gun legislation passes.

Yes and the gun ownership rates in those countries were never extreme. They stopped the problem before it became a huge issue. Are you aware our police are shot and killed at a rate much higher than countries with strong gun control? They also shoot way more people. Every time a cop shoots his gun he's taken off the street, and they sure are removed when they get shot. You don't think cops removed from the streets leads to increased crime?

Which does not negate the simple fact that gun control measures did not have a measurable impact on actual homicides.

You must admit the capacity to kill goes down greatly in an absence of guns. Most 70 year old women aren't a real danger to most people unarmed. But with a gun they can kill anyone. Increasing the capacity to kill increases homicides and we have done that with weak gun laws.

You dumb fuck, it a matter of propensity to kill, not capacity. A person with the propensity doesn't need a gun to kill a lot a people, a vehicle will do.

.

Really? I've no fear of a vehicle when at a concert, or on the 3rd floor of a big building, or on my boat in the middle of the lake.. a vehicle is very limiting. If that was the main means of mass killing we'd have no problem limiting mass killings.

Moron.....

Nice, France, rental truck.... 86 killed, 435 injured in 5 minutes of driving....more killing than any of our mass public shooters.

 

[pknopp]

I remember when less guns were supposed to as well.

That did not work out either. The truth is that gun control has almost no impact whatsoever on homicide rates. Ergo, you do not have the onus to pass more ineffectual legislation on the exercise of a protected right.

It doesn't? I don't see countries with strong gun control suffering regular mass shootings. They also have homicide rates a fraction of ours. When bad people have easy access to dangerous weapons it is a bad thing.

Yet all your commie bullshit is aimed at good people, not the bad ones, go fucking figure.

.

Our worst mass shooter every had a clear record until he didn't. Allowing him access to weapons for mass killing sure was a mistake.

Why do you only look at mass shootings. Mass shootings account for a very small percentage of gun deaths in the US. The answer is you commies can go after the rights of the law abiding on emotion, not logic. So fuck you commie, no more compromise.

.

I look at it all. Our homicide rate is 4-5X higher than countries with strong gun control. How are your weak TX gun laws working? You own 4 of the 10 worst mass shootings. Shocking.

IMO it has to start at the top. We have one of the most violent governments on Earth. It's odd how much discussion there is around the violence of the people but not the government.

 

[2aguy]

Yet all your commie bullshit is aimed at good people, not the bad ones, go fucking figure.

.

Our worst mass shooter every had a clear record until he didn't. Allowing him access to weapons for mass killing sure was a mistake.

Why do you only look at mass shootings. Mass shootings account for a very small percentage of gun deaths in the US. The answer is you commies can go after the rights of the law abiding on emotion, not logic. So fuck you commie, no more compromise.

.

I look at it all. Our homicide rate is 4-5X higher than countries with strong gun control. How are your weak TX gun laws working? You own 4 of the 10 worst mass shootings. Shocking.

And what do our laws have to do with it? Those people didn't obey our laws or federal laws, did they? Laws have nothing to do with people who have a propensity to break them.

.

By international standards we have extremely weak laws.

No......we have strong laws, ignored by the democrat party politicians, judges and prosecutors.....they let violent, repeat gun offenders out of prison over and over again...

 

[2aguy]

And what do our laws have to do with it? Those people didn't obey our laws or federal laws, did they? Laws have nothing to do with people who have a propensity to break them.

.

By international standards we have extremely weak laws.

By international standards we have a strong Constitution. Don't like it, LEAVE.

.

Yes we do. And the 2nd doesn't mean what you think.
The Supreme Court’s Worst Decision of My Tenure
District of Columbia v. Heller, which recognized an individual right to possess a firearm under the Constitution, is unquestionably the most clearly incorrect decision that the Supreme Court announced during my tenure on the bench.

Actually it means exactly what I think. Show me one time in the Constitution where the founders conflated the meaning of the feds, States and the people, people are individuals. Stevens obviously can't read.

.

Show me where the constitution even mentions self defense.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...43ac66-5d11-11e8-b2b8-08a538d9dbd6_story.html

A search of Brigham Young University’s new online Corpus of Founding Era American English, with more than 95,000 texts and 138 million words, yields 281 instances of the phrase “bear arms.” BYU’s Corpus of Early Modern English, with 40,000 texts and close to 1.3 billion words, shows 1,572 instances of the phrase. Subtracting about 350 duplicate matches, that leaves about 1,500 separate occurrences of “bear arms” in the 17th and 18th centuries, and only a handful don’t refer to war, soldiering or organized, armed action. These databases confirm that the natural meaning of “bear arms” in the framers’ day was military.

Wrong, asshat....."Bear Arms" are you even more nuts than we thought....

Heller.......

n Muscarello v. United States, 524 U. S. 125 (1998), in the course of analyzing the meaning of “carries a firearm” in a federal criminal statute, JUSTICE GINSBURG wrote that “urely a most familiar meaning is, as the Constitution’s Second Amendment . . . indicate: ‘wear, bear, or carry . . . upon the person or in the clothing or in a pocket, for the purpose . . . of being armed and ready for offensive or defensive action in a case of conflict with another person.’” I