Law Gun and Gun Control News/Discussion

[Rational Poster]

Earlier you mentioned how BGCs were just an exercise . . . what makes you believe the data behind a local registry would be any better/more valid? Not every person participating in a private sale will submit data to update the registry. While a registry might have owner info, it would likely be 2-3 owners behind.

Many local law enforcement agencies won't be able to enforce it due to a lack of staff and other priorities.

I mean that seems like a pretty silly excuse to avoid any measures to try to solve the problem. It's an entirely different data set. One is just collecting the data on ownership and the trail of ownership. While a background check is multifaceted and somewhat intangible data point requiring a lot more effort.

Failing to adhere to local registry requirements would obviously be a crime of negligence.

 

[spamking]

I mean that seems like a pretty silly excuse to avoid any measures to try to solve the problem.

Not wanting to be subjected to yet more ridiculous, emotionally charged gun control isn't silly, or an excuse. Personally, I'm fed up with folks who want to shove more regulations down our throats and expect us to just take it.

I'm simply saying it won't solve anything. All it will do is require folks to jump through more useless hoops.

It's an entirely different data set. One is just collecting the data on ownership and the trail of ownership. While a background check is multifaceted and somewhat intangible data point requiring a lot more effort.

How does that really matter here? The report I linked to earlier discusses the various issues with the current NICs system. Thinking a registry would be managed any better or have any more reliable data is pretty naïve.

There have already been cases where local registry data was made public. I'm fine with people knowing I own firearms, but I don't want anyone to have access to a comprehensive list of what I have.

Failing to adhere to local registry requirements would obviously be a crime of negligence.

Which wouldn't be helpful in preventing anything because it wouldn't be discovered until well after the fact in most cases where a firearm was used in a crime.

 

[Rational Poster]

Not wanting to be subjected to yet more ridiculous, emotionally charged gun control isn't silly, or an excuse. Personally, I'm fed up with folks who want to shove more regulations down our throats and expect us to just take it.

I'm simply saying it won't solve anything. All it will do is require folks to jump through more useless hoops.



How does that really matter here? The report I linked to earlier discusses the various issues with the current NICs system. Thinking a registry would be managed any better or have any more reliable data is pretty naïve.

There have already been cases where local registry data was made public. I'm fine with people knowing I own firearms, but I don't want anyone to have access to a comprehensive list of what I have.



Which wouldn't be helpful in preventing anything because it wouldn't be discovered until well after the fact in most cases where a firearm was used in a crime.

So just stop having this dishonest conversation with me. Admit you are emotionally attached to your hobby and you don't have an honest intention to work on a solution or even entertain a solution.

 

[spamking]

So just stop having this dishonest conversation with me. Admit you are emotionally attached to your hobby and you don't have an honest intention to work on a solution or even entertain a solution.

How am I being dishonest? The 2A community has suggested several solutions to address gun violence, but gun control folks immediately disagree because it doesn't involve caving to their demands.

So no, I will most definitely not entertain solutions that involve more hoops, infringements or speculation.

 

[spamking]

 

[Rational Poster]

How am I being dishonest? The 2A community has suggested several solutions to address gun violence, but gun control folks immediately disagree because it doesn't involve caving to their demands.

So no, I will most definitely not entertain solutions that involve more hoops, infringements or speculation.

What's the 2A solution to limit the flow of legally purchased firearms ending up being used in gun crimes then lmao?

 

[spamking]

What's the 2A solution to limit the flow of legally purchased firearms ending up being used in gun crimes then lmao?

Ha. You would pick the one where trying to account for stupidity and irresponsible people is involved.

 

[Rational Poster]

Ha. You would pick the one where trying to account for stupidity and irresponsible people is involved.

I picked the one that has been the topic of conversation the entire time?

 

[spamking]

I picked the one that has been the topic of conversation the entire time?

Topic of our conversation sure . . . overall there are a LOT more parts to that puzzle.

 

[Belaya Smert]

Yeah gun theft was up, but the data confirmed that they still make up a minority of guns found used in crime.

Would it not be better to make sure that stolen guns make up a majority of guns used in crime if you actually have an honest intention of reducing gun crime?

Here's a breakdown of the numbers showing where state and federal prisoners who possessed a firearm during the offense for which they are serving time got their guns:

• 10.1 percent obtained the gun by purchase or trade from a retail source. 7.5 percent from a gun store, 1.6 percent from a pawn shop, 0.4 percent from a flea market, and 0.8 percent from a gun show.
• 25.3 percent got the gun by purchasing, renting or borrowing it from a family friend, or receiving it as a gift.
• 43.2 percent obtained the firearm off the street or from an underground market source

The fact that about 90 percent of firearms possessed by prisoners during the commission of crimes were not purchased or traded at legal retail sources could be used to inform the debate over gun control efforts, which often target legal gun owners and purchasers by restricting the availability of guns from legal sources or by attempting to outlaw possession of certain types of guns



You were saying….

 

[Rational Poster]

Topic of our conversation sure . . . overall there are a LOT more parts to that puzzle.

Well if you want to talk about a different topic with someone else feel free. If you want to stay on topic and provide a response to the question, also feel free.

 

[Rational Poster]

Here's a breakdown of the numbers showing where state and federal prisoners who possessed a firearm during the offense for which they are serving time got their guns:

• 10.1 percent obtained the gun by purchase or trade from a retail source. 7.5 percent from a gun store, 1.6 percent from a pawn shop, 0.4 percent from a flea market, and 0.8 percent from a gun show.
• 25.3 percent got the gun by purchasing, renting or borrowing it from a family friend, or receiving it as a gift.
• 43.2 percent obtained the firearm off the street or from an underground market source

The fact that about 90 percent of firearms possessed by prisoners during the commission of crimes were not purchased or traded at legal retail sources could be used to inform the debate over gun control efforts, which often target legal gun owners and purchasers by restricting the availability of guns from legal sources or by attempting to outlaw possession of certain types of guns



You were saying….

Yeah, that's exactly what I was saying, the majority of guns used in crimes were legally purchased at one point and it's the aftermarket trade that's the issue. Even the guns "obtained from the street" were at one point legally purchased.

Even if the 43% "obtained from the street" guns were 100% stolen, that is still not a majority of the problem.

 

[spamking]

Well if you want to talk about a different topic with someone else feel free. If you want to stay on topic and provide a response to the question, also feel free.

It's all the same topic.

The 2A solution to your question is to apply strict punishment for gun-related crimes. No pleas. No 3 strikes and your out stuff. If you're involved in a violent crime and use a firearm you get severely punished. No bail. Nothing.

 

[Rational Poster]

It's all the same topic.

The 2A solution to your question is to apply strict punishment for gun-related crimes. No pleas. No 3 strikes and your out stuff. If you're involved in a violent crime and use a firearm you get severely punished. No bail. Nothing.

No it's not, do you have any solution for the flow of legal arms to the criminal market?

 

[spamking]

No it's not, do you have any solution for the flow of legal arms to the criminal market?

I provided one. It's just not one you like.

Causing more issues (i.e. a registry) for others isn't a solution.

 

[Rational Poster]

I provided one. It's just not one you like.

Causing more issues (i.e. a registry) for others isn't a solution.

No you didn't actually.

 

[spamking]

No you didn't actually.

If that's how you see it then I guess we're done and can move on. Because that's the same answer you'll get if you ask again.

 

[spamking]

 

[Rational Poster]

If that's how you see it then I guess we're done and can move on. Because that's the same answer you'll get if you ask again.

Policing the end user harsher doesn't deal with the negligent and intentional crimes going on in between.

Punishment for gun crimes are already incredibly harsh and carry mandatory sentences in most states.

 

[spamking]

Policing the end user harsher doesn't deal with the negligent and intentional crimes going on in between.

It's a much better place to start. Where intentional negligence is proven folks should be punished accordingly. Which I believe does in fact happen now.

Punishment for gun crimes are already incredibly harsh and carry mandatory sentences in most states.

Yet folks still get released on bail and early as well as offered pleas.