Gun Control Laws Don't Work!

[quade 4]

Quote

What a scathingly factual and logical rebuttal!

Well, to be fair, your premise "Gun Control Laws Don't Work! " is neither factual nor logical.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[b1jercat 0]

Take away all the laws on the books now and work it out for yourself.
one example: take away the back ground check for buying a fire arm last year, and I grantee you x number of felons would be walking around with firearms today.

blues

jerry



Why do you keep posting this garbage?

[FliegendeWolf 0]

Quote

Quote

I think we've officially found JohnRich's cause.

I have many causes - this is but one of them. So what? Is there something wrong with fighting for what one thinks is right? Don't you have causes you care for, besides killing kittens? Do you have something worthwhile to contribute to this topic of discussion?

Out of curiosity, I ran a search on "gun or bullet" posted by JohnRich and came up with 202 hits, which is close to one-third (about 32%) of JohnRich's total post number of 636.

The point being? Well...the phrase "broken record" comes to mind.

A One that Isn't Cold is Scarcely a One at All

[Jimbo 0]

Check the number of firearm murders committed by previous felons. Then compare the number of felons who used legally purchased weapons. Violent criminals, I think, don't usually buy their guns over the counter, but rather in the back alley.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[b1jercat 0]

Ok my point is: even if the law keeps guns away from even one felon it works whether they murder anybody or not.

blues

jerry

[Jimbo 0]

Why?

What good has a gun law done if it hasn't prevented a murder or other act of violence?

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[FallRate 0]

There seems to be an element missing here. There are those that consider all gun laws either inherently good or bad. But a reasonable discussion would seem to require a specific law be cited. I believe that we should (do) have the right to own firearms, but that doesn't mean that I believe trying to keep firearms out of the hands of those with violent criminal histories is a bad idea. How this should be done makes for a better discussion. (IMO)

FallRate

[burbleflyer 0]

Quote

Quote

I train so that when the CRIMINAL has your wife and kids at gun point I HAVE the right to eliminate the threat.

And I train so that when I am confronted with a RABID BAT I can evade it effectively. Frankly, for the overwhelming majority of US Americans, the chances of either are pretty close to equal. Really. Not that violence doesn't happen, but it is publicized very effectively indeed.

These things are possible. When was the last time you practiced a fire drill in your home? That's probably a lot more likely an event to happen.

Wendy W.

You cant have it both ways.
Either the US is an extremely violent place with a "need for more gun control laws" or I am unlikely to be a victim of violent crime as you say and I dont need a gun to protect myself.
Which is it?

Is it a really violent place unlike Canada, or is it really safe and I will never need a gun?

[Nightingale 0]

all gun laws do is keep guns away from people who follow gun laws: Law Abiding Citizens.

Preventative laws don't affect felons, as felons don't follow laws.

[airdweller 0]

>Nah, the Canadians are just more easy-going and tolerant than Americans.

must be the weather

------------------------------------------------------
"From the mightiest pharaoh to the lowliest peasant,
who doesn't enjoy a good sit?" C. Montgomery Burns

[b1jercat 0]

Quote

Why?

What good has a gun law done if it hasn't prevented a murder or other act of violence?

-
Jim

Excuse me I'm not aware of any law that can prevent a murder or other act of violence.

blues

jerry

[b1jercat 0]

Quote

all gun laws do is keep guns away from people who follow gun laws: Law Abiding Citizens.

Preventative laws don't affect felons, as felons don't follow laws.

Pardon me, I don't know any Law abiding citizens who have not been able to own any firearm they chose. Preventive laws don't affect law abiding citizens either.

blues

jerry

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

Preventive laws don't affect law abiding citizens either.

They don't stop felons and other criminals from obtaining guns, either.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[Nightingale 0]

sure they affect law abiding citizens.

examples:

I can't just go out and buy a handgun. I have to wait while they do a background check on me. Two weeks or something like that. Sorry, if I'm buying a gun for protection, TODAY would be a good time.

I can't go out and buy an automatic weapon. They're completely illegal. Nevermind I just want to see what it would do on a range.

[FallRate 0]

Quote

Preventative laws don't affect felons, as felons don't follow laws.

True. But take for example a specific gun law which prohibits the possession of a firearm by a person previously convicted of violent crime. This law would not prevent that person from possessing a firearm. It would however provide the grounds to take the firearm away from that person. While this is a "gun control" law, it is quite different than laws which seek to ban all gun ownership in an effort to prevent prior felons (or would-be felons) from possessing guns. There are laws which apply to just about everything. The point is that placing all laws that pertain to firearms into one group is a bit myopic, and does not help to foster a meaningful debate.

FallRate

[Nightingale 0]

if you've committed a felony, you give up some of your rights. the right to bear arms should be one of them.

what I object to is the gun laws prohibiting regular citizens from carrying or even owning handguns.

[FallRate 0]

Exactly! That's why instead of just saying "gun laws", it seems best that we identify specific laws.

FallRate

[cvfd1399 0]

I can't go out and buy an automatic weapon. They're completely illegal.***

Not true if you find the fully auto gun you want get your 200$ NFA letter and pay to have it transferred and pay for the gun you can have any fully auto firearm you want made or imported prior to i think 1985? I am not correcting you just letting you know it is your right to have them. The only good they are is for 1.Investment 2. To waste alot of money blowing up things at the range.

[Nightingale 0]

made or imported PRIOR TO 1985. What if I want one that was made last week? I'm a law abiding citizen with no interest other than as a collector. why can't I buy one?

[akarunway 1]

In Fla. last I checked you can get a dealer license, pretty easy as long as no convictions(can own full autos) and concealed firearm permit is easy. You can buy anthing you want at a gun show w/ no problem, shit, check the classified in the papers and they'll deliver them to your home. I love Fla.

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[Nightingale 0]

I live in california.

[akarunway 1]

Me too. But not for long

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[cvfd1399 0]

I was close it was 1986. No new fully auto arms have been into the U.S. legally for civilian use since then.

It has been unlawful since 1934 (The National Firearms Act) for civilians to own machine guns without special permission from the U.S. Treasury Department. Machine guns are subject to a $200 tax every time their ownership changes from one federally registered owner to another, and each new weapon is subject to a manufacturing tax when it is made, and it must be registered with the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) in its National Firearms Registry.

To become a registered owner, a complete FBI background investigation is conducted, checking for any criminal history or tendencies toward violence, and an application must be submitted to the BATF including two sets of fingerprints, a recent photo, a sworn affidavit that transfer of the NFA firearm is of "reasonable necessity," and that sale to and possession of the weapon by the applicant "would be consistent with public safety." The application form also requires the signature of a chief law enforcement officer with jurisdiction in the applicant's residence.

Since the Firearms Owners' Protection Act of May 19, 1986, ownership of newly manufactured machine guns has been prohibited to civilians. Machine guns which were manufactured prior to the Act's passage are regulated under the National Firearms Act, but those manufactured after the ban cannot ordinarily be sold to or owned by civilians.

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Check the number of firearm murders committed by previous felons. Then compare the number of felons who used legally purchased weapons. Violent criminals, I think, don't usually buy their guns over the counter, but rather in the back alley.

-
Jim

So how would you recommend keeping guns away from felons and the insane, given that the current set of laws are so easily circumvented that they aren't doing the job?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[sdgregory 0]

I say make it mandatory that every citizen upon reaching 18 take a firearm safety course and a tactical weapons use course and be required to carry a firearm, nonconcealed.

Then if a person committs and is convicted of a VIOLENT felony or misdemeanor (sp? - too lazy to look it up today) must wear a tattoo on their forehead. Those people shall not be allowed to carry a firearm at all.

Now if every lawabiding citizen is carrying a firearm and has the training to use them and every VIOLENT criminal has an identifying mark. I think VIOLENT criminals will think twice about starting anything.