forgot password / register

reset password

register

patrick.net

 

#misc


#housing #investing #politics #random more»
778,686 comments by 11,494 users, 4 online now: APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE, errc, Quigley, Sniper
new post
« prev   misc   next »

5
3

Gun control doesn't work: Seattle imposes gun tax to fight "gun violence in 2016 ", murders double for first 5 months of 2017...

By Goran_K following x   2017 Jul 14, 3:18pm 1,590 views   34 comments   watch   quote     share  


Seattle City Councilman Tim Burgess introduced the tax in 2015. It puts a $25 tax on every firearm sold in the city and up to 5 cents per round of ammunition. The measure easily passed in Democrat controlled Seattle, and took effect January 1, 2016.

Comparing the first five months of 2017 with the same period before the gun tax went into effect, reports of shots fired are up 13 percent, the number of people injured in shootings climbed 37 percent and gun deaths doubled, according to crime statistics from the Seattle Police Department.

In selling his gun tax to the public, Burgess predicted it would generate between $300,000 and $500,000 annually. The money would be used to study the root causes of gun violence in hopes of reducing the costs to taxpayers. The tax has only generated slightly over $100,000.

Overall another failure for democrat/leftist/progressive politics.

To paraphrase Scott Adams, Republicans largely use guns for self-defense and sport and Democrats largely use them to rob and kill people.

1 rpanic01   ignore (0)   2017 Jul 14, 5:52pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

And instead of Dan responding in this thread he makes a new one that hardly any people can respond to.

2 Goran_K   ignore (1)   2017 Jul 14, 6:07pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

rpanic01 says

And instead of Dan responding in this thread he makes a new one that hardly any people can respond to.

What really?

3 Goran_K   ignore (1)   2017 Jul 14, 6:09pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Not only are murders up but rape is also up by 55% during the same period.

Gun control doesn't work.

4 BayArea   ignore (0)   2017 Jul 14, 6:17pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Gun laws are followed by those that don't commit gun crimes.

Criminals don't follow gun laws. So more gun laws don't reduce gun crimes.

It's a very simple concept but liberals don't subscribe to logic unfortunately.

5 WookieMan   ignore (0)   2017 Jul 14, 6:22pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

He's kind of banned most of the active users. So he has the perfect echo chamber of no echos. But everyone is stupid and we're creating Hitler by our stupid thoughts. Arguing our points is what would prevent a new Hitler according to Dan, but so many of us are banned. So the 2nd rising of Hitler is coming mark my words. I'm not banned myself, yet. Hopefully my stupid thought gets me in the club though.

Blacks is my reasoning.

73% white vs 13% black population wise (roughly).

73% of the population mainly just wants to kill itself. 13% of the population just wants to kill others. We can tax, ban and regulate this stuff all we want. There's clearly a problem with a good chunk of the left leaning population that just likes to fucking kill people. Compare the two links below:

Largely populated city with "african Americans"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._cities_with_large_African-American_populations

List of US cities by crime
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_crime_rate

Kind of funny how many (most) of the cities with high crime are high % african American.

Dan should be happy a bunch of uneducated red necks are killing themselves with "them guns." Less of a chance for Hitler to come back...

Take guns away and a new weapon will be used. It's highly unlikely in most cases anyway that anyone of societal value is killed by gun violence in the first place. So go ahead and take away guns when 95% (probably more) use them responsibly.

6 Quigley   ignore (1)   2017 Jul 14, 8:33pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

rpanic01 says

instead of Dan responding in this thread he makes a new one that hardly any people can respond t

Nobody even reads Dan's threads anymore! If they aren't already among the hideously long list of banned users, they know commenting will probably get them banned. Only simple adulation will appease the Dan-god!
So yah, he literally did it to himself! I couldn't have orchestrated a more apt punishment for his towering ego.

7 Fucking White Male   ignore (2)   2017 Jul 14, 8:42pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

The entire Seattle City Council desperately needs Mental Health services.

8 bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Jul 14, 8:47pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Goran_K says

Not only are murders up but rape is also up by 55% during the same period.

People are raping their guns? That's just sick.

9 bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Jul 14, 9:01pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

WookieMan says

a bunch of uneducated red necks are killing themselves with "them guns."

Truer than you thought. Look at the murder rate map. The good old boys sure do murder each other a lot. Blows your blacks theory all to shit. There are very few blacks in places like NM,AR,NV,OK but the rate is high. Lots of blacks WV,OH,NY,CT with a much lower rate.

http://demographicdata.org/crime-rates/crime-heat-map/murder-rate-map/

10 bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Jul 14, 9:04pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Quigley says

Nobody even reads Dan's threads anymore!

Proud to be one of dan's deplorables.

11 BlueSardine   ignore (3)   2017 Jul 14, 9:20pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Some people are attracted to echo chambers.
Maybe they yodeled too much in their younger years...

12 Fucking White Male   ignore (2)   2017 Jul 14, 9:26pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

bob2356 says

WookieMan says

a bunch of uneducated red necks are killing themselves with "them guns."

Truer than you thought. Look at the murder rate map. The good old boys sure do murder each other a lot. Blows your blacks theory all to shit. There are very few blacks in places like NM,AR,NV,OK but the rate is high. Lots of blacks WV,OH,NY,CT with a much lower rate.

http://demographicdata.org/crime-rates/crime-heat-map/murder-rate-map/

Wow, each time you say something stupid and I think you cant top it....you prove me wrong.

AR - 15% ~450,000
NV - 9.6% black - ~300,000(and a huge transient population thats probably not counted since its basically the pimp capital of the world and I've only ever seen 1 white pimp). Not to mention that NV is majority minority(thats right, only 49% white).
OKC - 7.4% ~300,000
NM - Hey you got me there. Not many blacks. But oh wait...27% non latino white. Damn Bob, wrong again.

Blows you theory all to shit.

13 WookieMan   ignore (0)   2017 Jul 14, 9:57pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

bob2356 says

Blows your blacks theory all to shit. There are very few blacks in places like NM,AR,NV,OK but the rate is high. Lots of blacks WV,OH,NY,CT with a much lower rate.

http://demographicdata.org/crime-rates/crime-heat-map/murder-rate-map/

I'm a little confused. You're sourcing the overall violent crime rate. Your own map correlates pretty accurately with the states (and district) that have the highest percentage of black population, along with the highest violent crime rate. 7 of the 10 state with the highest per capita violent crime rate (per your map) are in the top 10, percentage wise for african American population. So we're batting 70% on your own map where a larger percentage of the state is african American and the crime rate higher.

Murder_Rate

bob2356 says

There are very few blacks in places like NM,AR,NV,OK but the rate is high.

That's fine, but what is the racial profile of the crimes committed in these states? Overall crime is one thing (not racially organized). Let's say a state like NM has 1% blacks. Who says they aren't committing 95% of the violent crime making up your heat map? That does make a difference. I'm not saying that's what is happening, but your map doesn't illustrate that (at any level) and I'm too lazy to dig in more tonight.

14 WookieMan   ignore (0)   2017 Jul 14, 10:14pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Here's the heat map if anyone missed it. 7 out of 10 ain't bad. Georgia and NC round out the top 16 of most violent states. 9 out of the 10 states with the highest percentage of african Americans, account for 9 of the top 16 states for violent crime. Virginia is number 24. So out of 24 states, these 10 have the highest percentage of violent crime and the higher percentage of african American population. Race and violence just don't correlate though? Or do they? Give me time and I'd probably be able to fill in the gaps with other states that have large cities, with high percentages of african Americans that fill in the other 10-14 states or so.

15 FortWayne   ignore (1)   2017 Jul 14, 10:54pm   ↑ like (4)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Liberals always want to tax or ban something , they never learn from their mistakes. Keep doing same thing expecting different outcome, insanity

16 Booger   ignore (0)   2017 Jul 15, 7:00am   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Goran_K says

Burgess predicted it would generate between $300,000 and $500,000 annually. The tax has only generated slightly over $100,000.

That sounds about right for a typical new government thing.

17 bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Jul 16, 10:21pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote        

WookieMan says

Here's the heat map if anyone missed it. 7 out of 10 ain't bad. Georgia and NC round out the top 16 of most violent states. 9 out of the 10 states with the highest percentage of african Americans, account for 9 of the top 16 states for violent crime. Virginia is number 24. So out of 24 states, these 10 have the highest percentage of violent crime and the higher percentage of african American population.

Read the map information next time. Locations where murder and non-negligent manslaughter occurs. The following interactive heatmap shows murder and non-negligent manslaughter rates for all states It's the murder rate map not the violent crime map.

So 10 out of 24 correlate and 14 out of 24 don't. OMG, be still my beating heart. A whole 10 out of 24. What ever happened to
WookieMan says

Blacks is my reasoning.

Maybe we should overlay the murder rate map with a gun ownership map.

But wait, doesn't levels of high gun ownership make you safer? What happened here?

Fucking White Male says

AR - 15% ~450,000

NV - 9.6% black - ~300,000(and a huge transient population thats probably not counted since its basically the pimp capital of the world and I've only ever seen 1 white pimp). Not to mention that NV is majority minority(thats right, only 49% white).

OKC - 7.4% ~300,000

NM - Hey you got me there. Not many blacks. But oh wait...27% non latino white. Damn Bob, wrong again.

Where do you get your bullshit numbers. AZ is 4% not 15%. You said
WookieMan says

Blacks is my reasoning.

So make up your mind. Is it blacks, or minorities that aren't black, or latino's, or transients, or pimps, or men from outer space or what? How can I be wrong when you haven't made up your mind what you are saying yet.

18 Rew   ignore (0)   2017 Jul 16, 10:28pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

bob2356 says

But wait, doesn't levels of high gun ownership make you safer? What happened here?

Pay no attention to my logical conundrum! I will paint the facts as I see it. Basically more armed white people is the solution. NO! WE ARE NOT SCARED! You shut up snowflake.

MAGA.

;)

19 bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Jul 16, 10:48pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Rew says

bob2356 says

But wait, doesn't levels of high gun ownership make you safer? What happened here?

Pay no attention to my logical conundrum! I will paint the facts as I see it. Basically more armed white people is the solution. NO! WE ARE NOT SCARED! You shut up snowflake.

MAGA.

;)

There is no logic in the gun debate. I'm not for gun control. I used to be a NRA member. But that was back before the NRA became nothing but a lobby for the gun manufacturers. The NRA actually used to be in favor of restrictions on gun ownership.

Any gun owner should have no problem with a simple back round check before buying and gun registration. The criminals are buying from some one. Why are there people perfectly legally picking up 15 or 20 handguns at a time unquestioned? Why is it that someone not mentally competent to cash their own SS check is competent to buy a gun (a fine example of MAGA in action).

The manufacturers have done a stupendous job brainwashing gun owners into believing anything that would in any way hinder gun sales to anyone is gun control.

20 Rew   ignore (0)   2017 Jul 16, 10:52pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Wish I could like your post twice. The opening paragraph is me as well.

21 Goran_K   ignore (1)   2017 Jul 17, 8:31am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

bob2356 says

Any gun owner should have no problem with a simple back round check before buying and gun registration. The criminals are buying from some one. Why are there people perfectly legally picking up 15 or 20 handguns at a time unquestioned? Why is it that someone not mentally competent to cash their own SS check is competent to buy a gun (a fine example of MAGA in action).

I agree with background checks (and have for a long while), but I do not agree with gun registration. Gun registration can be, and has been used before, as a means towards confiscations. Gun registration goes against the intended purpose of the 2nd amendment.

The problem is, the gun grabber contingent doesn't really care about gun safety, they only care about confiscation, and they've admitted this publicly without much consequence from the people who claim "we just want reasonable regulations." Many of them want to do away with the 2nd amendment altogether, and had it not been for Heller vs DC, they might have succeeded (God bless Scalia).

The truth is, there is no correlation between increased gun ownership, and increased crime ALONE.

99% of gun crime is always associated with one of the following; gang activity, drug crime, and mental illness, and half of all gun homicides during the commission of a crime are committed by one race. A law abiding legal gun owner accounts for extremely low amounts of gun crime, comparable to any Western European country.

"If I could have banned them all – ‘Mr. and Mrs. America turn in your guns’ – I would have!” - Diane Feinstein (D), 1995, shortly after the passage of the "assault weapons ban"

22 Goran_K   ignore (1)   2017 Jul 17, 8:33am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

FortWayne says

Liberals always want to tax or ban something , they never learn from their mistakes. Keep doing same thing expecting different outcome, insanity

If gun control worked, Chicago wouldn't be a warzone, and San Francisco and Oakland would be peaceful metros without any gun crime.

23 bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Jul 17, 9:00am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Goran_K says

I agree with background checks (and have for a long while), but I do not agree with gun registration. Gun registration can be, and has been used before, as a means towards confiscations. Gun registration goes against the intended purpose of the 2nd amendment.

How do you connect those dots? Where does the second amendment mention registration? When have registrations been used to confiscate a law abiding citizen's gun anywhere in the history of the US? Want to back that fairy tale up? I'll be waiting.

Goran_K says

99% of gun crime is always associated with one of the following; gang activity, drug crime, and mental illness, and half of all gun homicides during the commission of a crime are committed by one race. A law abiding legal gun owner accounts for extremely low amounts of gun crime, comparable to any Western European country.

How do you suppose gang bangers, druggies, and the mentally ill get their guns? Some of those law abiding legal gun owners are buying guns to sell to them. If we tracked where the guns went and prosecuted anyone who's gun ended up in a crime then there wouldn't be problem would there?

24 Goran_K   ignore (1)   2017 Jul 17, 9:21am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

bob2356 says

How do you connect those dots? Where does the second amendment mention registration? When have registrations been used to confiscate a law abiding citizen's gun anywhere in the history of the US? Want to back that fairy tale up? I'll be waiting.

It hasn't happened in the US because the NRA-ILA has fought to preserve private ownership of arms, and it paid dividends in Heller vs DC which should guarantee private arms ownership for at least the next generation (passed by a 5-4 vote).

But for countries who do not have a 2nd amendment, it has gone badly for private gun ownership. That's what gun grabbers want here

I'll quote from gun grabber Pete Shields, past president of the Brady Campaign.

"The first problem is to slow down the number of handguns being produced and sold in this country. The second problem is to get handguns registered. The final problem is to make possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition -- except for the military, police, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs and licensed gun collectors -- totally illegal."

That was what he stated was his purpose for helping get New York's handgun registration scheme passed. He went on to point out the success of Great Britain registration lists which were eventually used for the confiscation of every handgun and every semi-automatic long gun in the country.

I'll also point out Australia. Handguns in Australia had been registered since the 1930s, but most Australian states had only imposed long gun registration in the two decades preceding the confiscation. Civil liberties activists who raised concerns that registration lists could be used for confiscation were sneered at as paranoid extremists (kind of like you're doing now).

Well, we all know what happened next. Force gun buybacks (paid confiscations), and then the forced confiscations by law enforcement.

bob2356 says

How do you suppose gang bangers, druggies, and the mentally ill get their guns? Some of those law abiding legal gun owners are buying guns to sell to them. If we tracked where the guns went and prosecuted anyone who's gun ended up in a crime then there wouldn't be problem would there?

That's complete bullshit. Prove your case though, if you can. Show me the crime stats for illegally transferred weapons in the United States. Use the FBI, CDC, or any federal database you can find to back your point. I'll go ahead and predict you won't find numbers that support your case because legal gun owners aren't selling their guns to criminals. That's such a ridiculous point. First off that weapon has a serial number associated with it. Secondly, that serial number is associated with a DROS. All guns are. Thirdly, the penalty for illegally transferring a gun is 10 years in prison. You think a LEGAL law abiding gun owner is going to risk 10 years in prison to sell a $400 Glock?

Like I said, ridiculous and ignorant argument based on nothing but someone's imagination.

Gang bangers and druggies get their guns primarily through theft or illegally imported arms that come across the border (which could be solved if the leftist progressives would actually get on board with border security). Remember Fast and Furious? Even Obama and Eric Place Holder know that the border is a major thoroughfare of illegal arms. Secure the border, and the amount of illegal firearms in the U.S would seriously decrease just like it did in Israel when they built their West Bank barrier to prevent trafficking of terrorist acts and arms.

25 KimJongUn   ignore (0)   2017 Jul 17, 11:55am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

bob2356 says

How do you suppose gang bangers, druggies, and the mentally ill get their guns? Some of those law abiding legal gun owners are buying guns to sell to them. If we tracked where the guns went and prosecuted anyone who's gun ended up in a crime then there wouldn't be problem would there?

Bullshit: they mostly steal them. Often from LE officers leaving their weapons in their cars.

26 Goran_K   ignore (1)   2017 Jul 17, 11:58am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Straw Man says

Bullshit: they mostly steal them. Often from LE officers leaving their weapons in their cars.

I don't know how anyone could believe that legal gun owners are regularly risking 10 years in Federal prison to sell a DROS'd $499 MSRP handgun for $250 - $300 on the black market.

27 KimJongUn   ignore (0)   2017 Jul 17, 12:09pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Goran_K says

regularly risking 10 years in Federal prison to sell a DROS'd $499 MSRP handgun for $250 - $300 on the black market.

Yeah, that's an interesting "business model".

28 Goran_K   ignore (1)   2017 Jul 17, 4:07pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Straw Man says

Yeah, that's an interesting "business model".

93% of guns used in crimes are obtained illegally (i.e - stolen, imported illegally, not DROS'd).
Source: BATF 1999

Since the peak of the War on Drugs, gun crime has dropped dramatically, while gun ownership has grown exponentially.

29 FortWayne   ignore (1)   2017 Jul 17, 5:32pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Gun ownership is a right, not a privilege.

30 komputodo   ignore (0)   2017 Jul 17, 6:14pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

WookieMan says

Dan should be happy a bunch of uneducated red necks are killing themselves with "them guns." Less of a chance for Hitler to come back...

Unless he's afeared of a black hitler. He's got a lot on his plate right now with climate change and the end of the world, trump embarrassing him on the world stage, and the utterly distasteful chore of carrying around iwogs jock.

31 bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Jul 17, 6:30pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

Goran_K says

bob2356 says

How do you connect those dots? Where does the second amendment mention registration? When have registrations been used to confiscate a law abiding citizen's gun anywhere in the history of the US? Want to back that fairy tale up? I'll be waiting.

It hasn't happened in the US because the NRA-ILA has fought to preserve private ownership of arms, and it paid dividends in Heller vs DC which should guarantee private arms ownership for at least the next generation (passed by a 5-4 vote).

But for countries who do not have a 2nd amendment, it has gone badly for private gun ownership. That's what gun grabbers want here

How utterly ridiculous. You tin foil hat is far to tight. Legal gun purchasers already are known, they have a back round check. The DROS list is maintained by the department of justice. As you said so yourself. You can't have it both ways no matter how much you want to. What isn't known is where their guns go to down the road. Which is information that is prohibited from being collected by law.

Goran_K says

bob2356 says

How do you suppose gang bangers, druggies, and the mentally ill get their guns? Some of those law abiding legal gun owners are buying guns to sell to them. If we tracked where the guns went and prosecuted anyone who's gun ended up in a crime then there wouldn't be problem would there?

That's complete bullshit. Prove your case though, if you can. Show me the crime stats for illegally transferred weapons in the United States

Why don't you prove your case they aren't What is illegally transferred? Why did you say illegally except as a bullshit strawman argument. Want to define illegally? Go ahead. Almost every state's laws say you may not KNOWINGLY transfer guns to someone prohibited from buying them. But they don't require anyone other than gun dealers to ask. If the seller doesn't volunteer he is a criminal when you sell him a gun then it's perfectly legal.

c=1427112#comment-1427112">Goran_K says

Gang bangers and druggies get their guns primarily through theft or illegally imported arms that come across the border

Really? That's not what a bunch of different studies and researchers found out. You want to put up statistics that are different or anything, absolutely anything, other than it's true because I believe it should be true?
http://www.newsweek.com/gun-control-where-criminals-get-weapons-412850
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/guns/procon/guns.html
https://townhall.com/columnists/brucebialosky/2016/08/28/untitled-n2210220
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/09/150916162916.htm
http://hotair.com/archives/2015/09/05/shocking-study-criminals-generally-dont-buy-guns-legally-at-gun-shops/
http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/oct/05/joe-scarborough/msnbcs-joe-scarborough-tiny-fraction-crimes-commit/

32 Goran_K   ignore (1)   2017 Jul 18, 8:46am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

bob2356 says

How utterly ridiculous. You tin foil hat is far to tight.

I show you TWO western countries where gun registration lead to direct confiscation and you say I "have a tin foil hat" on? Talk about ignoring evidence.

bob2356 says

Why don't you prove your case they aren't What is illegally transferred?

That's not how a debate works. This is how it works.

Bob: "Criminals get the majority of their guns from straw purchases or illegally transferred guns from legal owners."

Me: "Okay show me the stats for legal gun owners transferring guns to criminals (aka straw purchases)".

Bob: "Okay, I'll go to FBI, CDC, DEA, ATF and find those stats for you."

What you DON'T do is go, "PROVE ME WRONG!" That's ridiculous. That would mean any clown could say something retarded like "Guns kill 10 million people a day!", and then could lay back and say "Prove me wrong!" That onus and work is on YOU to prove your OWN point. Not the opposition.

bob2356 says

Really? That's not what a bunch of different studies and researchers found out.

Uh, this is from one of YOUR links that you posted.

Numerous studies conducted by academic researchers and by the federal government have shown that criminals do not use legal markets to obtain guns.

Lots of criminals who are playing the game at a level that will involve shooting people already have extensive records and wouldn’t pass even the most cursory background check if they tried to purchase a gun legally. (And contrary to popular liberal belief, there are virtually no legal gun sales taking place which don’t require a background check aside from family or estate purchases.)

Instead, the people we should actually be trying to stop are buying their guns on the black market. They get them from friends and criminal associates. Most of those interviewed even distrusted so called internet sales on guns because they feared they were sting operations and they’d wind up trying to buy one from an ATF agent. In other words, passing more laws to hamper the sales of guns through normal, legal means is only going to impede people who tend to follow the law in the first place. I know… I know… knock you over with a feather.

Strangely, the closing footnotes of the linked study still seem to wind up at the wrong destination after producing so much good work.

They concluded that since criminals do not hold guns long, “disrupting” the supply chain would have a positive effect on criminal gun use. That seems like a safe conclusion driven more by common sense than any evidence from an expensive academic study. But how this “disruption” can be achieved is not spelled out or suggested.

I absolutely agree that “disrupting the supply chain” of guns passing into the hands of criminals is a wonderful idea. Of course, you’re not going to do that by closing down gun shops or shutting down gun shows or putting more restrictions on legal sales to law abiding citizens. You could, however, enforce our existing laws and aggressively channel the necessary resources into law enforcement to root out and eliminate the suppliers who are selling black market weapons to drug dealers and killers. But I suppose that makes too much sense to bother with, eh?

It points out, quite accurately, that registration does NOTHING to deter crime because criminals illegally obtain the weapons anyway, then when they are done with the guns, they discard them. So the only thing you will get is basically the guy the criminal stole the gun from. If it was a straw purchase, the background check and DROS would be tied to a name anyway, and straw purchase laws already exist.

So what exactly is gained from gun registration except a database with which the government can use to take your guns away?

That's literally from a link YOU posted, which entirely HELPS MY POINT and proves your point wrong on many fronts (doesn't help deter crime, only hurts law abiding citizens, etc). Good job Bob.

33 Quigley   ignore (1)   2017 Jul 20, 10:36am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/07/20/study-concealed-carry-see-record-surge-led-women-blacks/

So here's proof that more armed citizens at least CORRELATES with less violent crime! And don't give me the "I hate Breitbart" shit. They are pulling from a government statistics bureau!

34 Goran_K   ignore (1)   2017 Jul 20, 11:15am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote        

PCGyver says

Guess I'm not a liberal then.

True classical liberals are often Pro 2A.

Leftist/progressives are vehemently anti-2A.


Comment as anon_d6777 or log in at top of page:

users   about   suggestions   source code   contact  
topics   best comments   comment jail   old posts by year  
10 reasons it's a terrible time to buy  
8 groups who lie about the housing market  
37 bogus arguments about housing  
get a free bumper sticker:

top   bottom   home