It Was Done on Tobacco. It Can Be Done on Guns.

[rightwinger]

Seems the additional training and background checks of CCP holders is working out

Why would you oppose it for all gun owners?

Again, what are the numbers of murders committed by legal gun owners vs the rest of society? Also again, I'll go with legal gun owners being the safest group, so they're not really the problem, are they?

I would doubt it

Gun owners are much more likely to kill a spouse, more likely to commit suicide more likely to shoot someone (that's a tough one aint it?)

It's already been posted in this thread that 93% of guns used in a crime were obtained illegally. That means legal gun owners are committing a very small percentage of gun related crimes, which means that they are, as I said, the safest group. Thus, they are not really the problem, are they? Why saddle law abiding, and quite safe, citizens with ever more regulations when the vast majority of gun crimes are committed by people with guns that are already illegally obtained?

Sorry..not buying it

http://www.newsweek.com/gun-control-where-criminals-get-weapons-412850

While criminals typically do not buy their guns at a store, all but a tiny fraction of the guns in circulation in the United States are first sold at retail by a gun dealer—including the guns that eventually end up in the hands of criminals.

That first retail sale was most likely legal, in that the clerk followed federal and state requirements for documentation, a background check and record-keeping. While there are scofflaw dealers who sometimes make under-the-counter deals, that is by no means the norm.

If a gun ends up in criminal use, it is usually after several more transactions. The average age of guns taken from Chicago gangs is over 11 years.

So what's your solution, dirt bag, outlawing the retail sale of guns?

Nope.....record the sale every time a gun changes hands
Just like cars

 

[bripat9643]

It's already been posted in this thread that 93% of guns used in a crime were obtained illegally. That means legal gun owners are committing a very small percentage of gun related crimes, which means that they are, as I said, the safest group. Thus, they are not really the problem, are they? Why saddle law abiding, and quite safe, citizens with ever more regulations when the vast majority of gun crimes are committed by people with guns that are already illegally obtained?

Sorry..not buying it

http://www.newsweek.com/gun-control-where-criminals-get-weapons-412850

While criminals typically do not buy their guns at a store, all but a tiny fraction of the guns in circulation in the United States are first sold at retail by a gun dealer—including the guns that eventually end up in the hands of criminals.

That first retail sale was most likely legal, in that the clerk followed federal and state requirements for documentation, a background check and record-keeping. While there are scofflaw dealers who sometimes make under-the-counter deals, that is by no means the norm.

If a gun ends up in criminal use, it is usually after several more transactions. The average age of guns taken from Chicago gangs is over 11 years.

So, IOW, the legal gun owner is not the problem, as I have been saying. Most gun crimes are committed by guns obtained illegally, which means there is already at least one law on the books against it being in that person's possession.

Not obtained illegally but obtained by a straw buyer or a gun sold so many times it is not traceable

The very venues protected by the NRA. The last thing they want is traceability of guns as they are sold

Which "venues" are those, douche bag?

Let's see..

Private sales
Straw purchases
"gifts" from relatives

Straw purchases are already against the law. Do you actually propose to make private sales and gifts illegal?

 

[bripat9643]

Again, what are the numbers of murders committed by legal gun owners vs the rest of society? Also again, I'll go with legal gun owners being the safest group, so they're not really the problem, are they?

I would doubt it

Gun owners are much more likely to kill a spouse, more likely to commit suicide more likely to shoot someone (that's a tough one aint it?)

It's already been posted in this thread that 93% of guns used in a crime were obtained illegally. That means legal gun owners are committing a very small percentage of gun related crimes, which means that they are, as I said, the safest group. Thus, they are not really the problem, are they? Why saddle law abiding, and quite safe, citizens with ever more regulations when the vast majority of gun crimes are committed by people with guns that are already illegally obtained?

Sorry..not buying it

http://www.newsweek.com/gun-control-where-criminals-get-weapons-412850

While criminals typically do not buy their guns at a store, all but a tiny fraction of the guns in circulation in the United States are first sold at retail by a gun dealer—including the guns that eventually end up in the hands of criminals.

That first retail sale was most likely legal, in that the clerk followed federal and state requirements for documentation, a background check and record-keeping. While there are scofflaw dealers who sometimes make under-the-counter deals, that is by no means the norm.

If a gun ends up in criminal use, it is usually after several more transactions. The average age of guns taken from Chicago gangs is over 11 years.

So what's your solution, dirt bag, outlawing the retail sale of guns?

Nope.....record the sale every time a gun changes hands
Just like cars

In other words, require every person in America to be a licensed gun dealer.

Fuck that.

 

[rightwinger]

Sorry..not buying it

http://www.newsweek.com/gun-control-where-criminals-get-weapons-412850

While criminals typically do not buy their guns at a store, all but a tiny fraction of the guns in circulation in the United States are first sold at retail by a gun dealer—including the guns that eventually end up in the hands of criminals.

That first retail sale was most likely legal, in that the clerk followed federal and state requirements for documentation, a background check and record-keeping. While there are scofflaw dealers who sometimes make under-the-counter deals, that is by no means the norm.

If a gun ends up in criminal use, it is usually after several more transactions. The average age of guns taken from Chicago gangs is over 11 years.

So, IOW, the legal gun owner is not the problem, as I have been saying. Most gun crimes are committed by guns obtained illegally, which means there is already at least one law on the books against it being in that person's possession.

Not obtained illegally but obtained by a straw buyer or a gun sold so many times it is not traceable

The very venues protected by the NRA. The last thing they want is traceability of guns as they are sold

Which "venues" are those, douche bag?

Let's see..

Private sales
Straw purchases
"gifts" from relatives

Straw purchases are already against the law. Do you actually propose to make private sales and gifts illegal?

But we have no way of enforcing it. We need to trace and record each transaction

 

[rightwinger]

I would doubt it

Gun owners are much more likely to kill a spouse, more likely to commit suicide more likely to shoot someone (that's a tough one aint it?)

It's already been posted in this thread that 93% of guns used in a crime were obtained illegally. That means legal gun owners are committing a very small percentage of gun related crimes, which means that they are, as I said, the safest group. Thus, they are not really the problem, are they? Why saddle law abiding, and quite safe, citizens with ever more regulations when the vast majority of gun crimes are committed by people with guns that are already illegally obtained?

Sorry..not buying it

http://www.newsweek.com/gun-control-where-criminals-get-weapons-412850

While criminals typically do not buy their guns at a store, all but a tiny fraction of the guns in circulation in the United States are first sold at retail by a gun dealer—including the guns that eventually end up in the hands of criminals.

That first retail sale was most likely legal, in that the clerk followed federal and state requirements for documentation, a background check and record-keeping. While there are scofflaw dealers who sometimes make under-the-counter deals, that is by no means the norm.

If a gun ends up in criminal use, it is usually after several more transactions. The average age of guns taken from Chicago gangs is over 11 years.

So what's your solution, dirt bag, outlawing the retail sale of guns?

Nope.....record the sale every time a gun changes hands
Just like cars

In other words, require every person in America to be a licensed gun dealer.

Fuck that.

Sell your gun, you verify the buyer is legal
Why would you want to sell to a fellow?

 

[bripat9643]

So, IOW, the legal gun owner is not the problem, as I have been saying. Most gun crimes are committed by guns obtained illegally, which means there is already at least one law on the books against it being in that person's possession.

Not obtained illegally but obtained by a straw buyer or a gun sold so many times it is not traceable

The very venues protected by the NRA. The last thing they want is traceability of guns as they are sold

Which "venues" are those, douche bag?

Let's see..

Private sales
Straw purchases
"gifts" from relatives

Straw purchases are already against the law. Do you actually propose to make private sales and gifts illegal?

But we have no way of enforcing it. We need to trace and record each transaction

Yeah, meaning register everyone's guns.

Go fuck yourself.

 

[bripat9643]

It's already been posted in this thread that 93% of guns used in a crime were obtained illegally. That means legal gun owners are committing a very small percentage of gun related crimes, which means that they are, as I said, the safest group. Thus, they are not really the problem, are they? Why saddle law abiding, and quite safe, citizens with ever more regulations when the vast majority of gun crimes are committed by people with guns that are already illegally obtained?

Sorry..not buying it

http://www.newsweek.com/gun-control-where-criminals-get-weapons-412850

While criminals typically do not buy their guns at a store, all but a tiny fraction of the guns in circulation in the United States are first sold at retail by a gun dealer—including the guns that eventually end up in the hands of criminals.

That first retail sale was most likely legal, in that the clerk followed federal and state requirements for documentation, a background check and record-keeping. While there are scofflaw dealers who sometimes make under-the-counter deals, that is by no means the norm.

If a gun ends up in criminal use, it is usually after several more transactions. The average age of guns taken from Chicago gangs is over 11 years.

So what's your solution, dirt bag, outlawing the retail sale of guns?

Nope.....record the sale every time a gun changes hands
Just like cars

In other words, require every person in America to be a licensed gun dealer.

Fuck that.

Sell your gun, you verify the buyer is legal
Why would you want to sell to a fellow?

We don't need to to turn every person in the USA into a license gun dealer. That's an idea only totalitarian assholes like you would approve of.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Ian Gurvitz On Why He Wrote "Welcome to "Dumbfuckistan"
Thank god racism is dead lol...

And the secular extremist bigotry of your article is the epitome of leftwing self righteous arrogance that led leftists to slaughter over 200 million people in the last 150 years, far more than all religious wars added up together.

 

[hadit]

Again, what are the numbers of murders committed by legal gun owners vs the rest of society? Also again, I'll go with legal gun owners being the safest group, so they're not really the problem, are they?

I would doubt it

Gun owners are much more likely to kill a spouse, more likely to commit suicide more likely to shoot someone (that's a tough one aint it?)

It's already been posted in this thread that 93% of guns used in a crime were obtained illegally. That means legal gun owners are committing a very small percentage of gun related crimes, which means that they are, as I said, the safest group. Thus, they are not really the problem, are they? Why saddle law abiding, and quite safe, citizens with ever more regulations when the vast majority of gun crimes are committed by people with guns that are already illegally obtained?

Sorry..not buying it

http://www.newsweek.com/gun-control-where-criminals-get-weapons-412850

While criminals typically do not buy their guns at a store, all but a tiny fraction of the guns in circulation in the United States are first sold at retail by a gun dealer—including the guns that eventually end up in the hands of criminals.

That first retail sale was most likely legal, in that the clerk followed federal and state requirements for documentation, a background check and record-keeping. While there are scofflaw dealers who sometimes make under-the-counter deals, that is by no means the norm.

If a gun ends up in criminal use, it is usually after several more transactions. The average age of guns taken from Chicago gangs is over 11 years.

So, IOW, the legal gun owner is not the problem, as I have been saying. Most gun crimes are committed by guns obtained illegally, which means there is already at least one law on the books against it being in that person's possession.

Not obtained illegally but obtained by a straw buyer or a gun sold so many times it is not traceable

The very venues protected by the NRA. The last thing they want is traceability of guns as they are sold

That is simply not true.

 

[Andylusion]

Again, what are the numbers of murders committed by legal gun owners vs the rest of society? Also again, I'll go with legal gun owners being the safest group, so they're not really the problem, are they?

I would doubt it

Gun owners are much more likely to kill a spouse, more likely to commit suicide more likely to shoot someone (that's a tough one aint it?)

It's already been posted in this thread that 93% of guns used in a crime were obtained illegally. That means legal gun owners are committing a very small percentage of gun related crimes, which means that they are, as I said, the safest group. Thus, they are not really the problem, are they? Why saddle law abiding, and quite safe, citizens with ever more regulations when the vast majority of gun crimes are committed by people with guns that are already illegally obtained?

Sorry..not buying it

http://www.newsweek.com/gun-control-where-criminals-get-weapons-412850

While criminals typically do not buy their guns at a store, all but a tiny fraction of the guns in circulation in the United States are first sold at retail by a gun dealer—including the guns that eventually end up in the hands of criminals.

That first retail sale was most likely legal, in that the clerk followed federal and state requirements for documentation, a background check and record-keeping. While there are scofflaw dealers who sometimes make under-the-counter deals, that is by no means the norm.

If a gun ends up in criminal use, it is usually after several more transactions. The average age of guns taken from Chicago gangs is over 11 years.

So what's your solution, dirt bag, outlawing the retail sale of guns?

Nope.....record the sale every time a gun changes hands
Just like cars

Great idea. Perfectly wonderful. Of course this requires that all people obey your law of requiring them to record the sales.

Now, if people were going to obey that law, they likely would obey all the laws, and we wouldn't need to record all sales to begin with.

The whole problem with you people on the left, who can't seem to think outside your mythical box.... people are not going to record the sales.

Simply not going to do it. Since they are not going to do it.... what is the point of making your dumb law?

My relative picked up a 9mm 8 round pistol.... at a rest stop. Literally he met a guy, said meet me at x stop... he showed up, he gave him some bills, he gave him the gun.... and they were gone.

Do you think either of them, is going to "record the sale"? You made it a law blaw blaw blaw! Yeah, just like pot is illegal according to the law. That worked like a charm, didn't it?

And my relative is a ex-military that fought in Iraq. If he isn't going to follow your stupid law, why do you think scum criminals, rapist, drug dealers, gang bangers and thugs are going to follow your dumb law?

GROW UP. Pry your head, out of your butt, and learn something. Every regulation, every law, every control, not going to work. Period. NOT GOING TO WORK.

If it even could work, then we should have won the war on drugs 50 years ago.

 

[Andylusion]

It's already been posted in this thread that 93% of guns used in a crime were obtained illegally. That means legal gun owners are committing a very small percentage of gun related crimes, which means that they are, as I said, the safest group. Thus, they are not really the problem, are they? Why saddle law abiding, and quite safe, citizens with ever more regulations when the vast majority of gun crimes are committed by people with guns that are already illegally obtained?

Sorry..not buying it

http://www.newsweek.com/gun-control-where-criminals-get-weapons-412850

While criminals typically do not buy their guns at a store, all but a tiny fraction of the guns in circulation in the United States are first sold at retail by a gun dealer—including the guns that eventually end up in the hands of criminals.

That first retail sale was most likely legal, in that the clerk followed federal and state requirements for documentation, a background check and record-keeping. While there are scofflaw dealers who sometimes make under-the-counter deals, that is by no means the norm.

If a gun ends up in criminal use, it is usually after several more transactions. The average age of guns taken from Chicago gangs is over 11 years.

So what's your solution, dirt bag, outlawing the retail sale of guns?

Nope.....record the sale every time a gun changes hands
Just like cars

In other words, require every person in America to be a licensed gun dealer.

Fuck that.

Sell your gun, you verify the buyer is legal
Why would you want to sell to a fellow?

Yeah, it's my job to determine if someone who wants to buy my gun, has a criminal history?

Do you check every time you sell a car, to see if the person has a driving record? No? Why not? Don't you care? It's your job to run a background check!

Every time you donate money to charity, are you checking to make sure they are not funding Islamists?

Every time you buy food, are you checking to see if they are engaged in embezzlement?

Every time you open a bank account, or credit card account, are you checking to see if the bank is engaged in fraud?

Don't you care? It's your job to check everything.

You people are hypocrites. No I am not going to check someone if they show up at my house with $300 to buy my pistol. No, I don't care. Sucks to be you. When you stop being a hypocrite, I'll stop not caring. Since you'll never stop being a hypocrite, you can save your fake moral superiority.

 

[Lakhota]

Well, another gun massacre will prompt another gun debate.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

By Dennis A. Henigan

The American people can overcome the gun lobby, but only if we confront, and expose, three myths that have long dominated the gun debate and given the politicians a ready excuse for inaction.

First, we must not let the opponents of reform get away with the empty bromide that "guns don't kill people, people kill people." Does any rational person really believe that the Sandy Hook killer could have murdered twenty-seven people in minutes with a knife or a baseball bat? Guns enable people to kill, more effectively and efficiently than any other widely available weapon.

Second, we must challenge the idea that no law can prevent violent people from getting guns. This canard is refuted by the experience of every other western industrialized nation. Their violent crime rates are comparable to ours. But their homicide rates are exponentially lower because their strong gun laws make it harder for violent individuals to get guns.

Third, we must not accept the notion that our Constitution condemns us to the continued slaughter of our children. It is true that the Supreme Court has expanded gun rights in recent years; it is equally true that the Court has insisted that the right allows for reasonable restrictions. In his opinion in the Heller Second Amendment case, Justice Scalia listed restrictions on "dangerous and unusual weapons" among the kinds of gun laws that are still "presumptively lawful." Assault weapons that fire scores of rounds without reloading surely are "dangerous and unusual."

The tobacco control movement overcame some equally powerful mythology to fundamentally alter American attitudes toward tobacco products. The tobacco industry's effort to sow confusion and uncertainty about the link between smoking and disease eventually was exposed as a fraud. The entrenched view that smoking was simply a bad habit that individuals can choose to break was destroyed by evidence that the tobacco companies knew that nicotine was powerfully addictive and engineered their cigarettes to ensure that people got hooked and stayed hooked. The assumption that smoking harms only the smoker was contradicted by the overwhelming evidence of the danger of second-hand smoke.

Once these myths were exposed, attitudes changed, policies changed and we started saving countless lives. Since youth smoking peaked in the mid-1990s, smoking rates have fallen by about three-fourths among 8th graders, two-thirds among 10th graders and half among 12th graders. A sea change has occurred on the tobacco issue.

Similarly fundamental change can come to the gun issue as well. The myths about gun control, however, still have a hold on too many of our political leaders and their constituents. We will hear them repeated again and again in the coming weeks of intense debate. Every time we hear them, we must respond and we must persuade.

There is too much at stake to be silent.

More: Dennis A. Henigan: It Was Done on Tobacco. It Can Be Done on Guns

It can be done on guns .. and will be done on guns under the influence of an evolved American population.

 

[Lakhota]

By Dennis A. Henigan

The American people can overcome the gun lobby, but only if we confront, and expose, three myths that have long dominated the gun debate and given the politicians a ready excuse for inaction.

First, we must not let the opponents of reform get away with the empty bromide that "guns don't kill people, people kill people." Does any rational person really believe that the Sandy Hook killer could have murdered twenty-seven people in minutes with a knife or a baseball bat? Guns enable people to kill, more effectively and efficiently than any other widely available weapon.

Second, we must challenge the idea that no law can prevent violent people from getting guns. This canard is refuted by the experience of every other western industrialized nation. Their violent crime rates are comparable to ours. But their homicide rates are exponentially lower because their strong gun laws make it harder for violent individuals to get guns.

Third, we must not accept the notion that our Constitution condemns us to the continued slaughter of our children. It is true that the Supreme Court has expanded gun rights in recent years; it is equally true that the Court has insisted that the right allows for reasonable restrictions. In his opinion in the Heller Second Amendment case, Justice Scalia listed restrictions on "dangerous and unusual weapons" among the kinds of gun laws that are still "presumptively lawful." Assault weapons that fire scores of rounds without reloading surely are "dangerous and unusual."

The tobacco control movement overcame some equally powerful mythology to fundamentally alter American attitudes toward tobacco products. The tobacco industry's effort to sow confusion and uncertainty about the link between smoking and disease eventually was exposed as a fraud. The entrenched view that smoking was simply a bad habit that individuals can choose to break was destroyed by evidence that the tobacco companies knew that nicotine was powerfully addictive and engineered their cigarettes to ensure that people got hooked and stayed hooked. The assumption that smoking harms only the smoker was contradicted by the overwhelming evidence of the danger of second-hand smoke.

Once these myths were exposed, attitudes changed, policies changed and we started saving countless lives. Since youth smoking peaked in the mid-1990s, smoking rates have fallen by about three-fourths among 8th graders, two-thirds among 10th graders and half among 12th graders. A sea change has occurred on the tobacco issue.

Similarly fundamental change can come to the gun issue as well. The myths about gun control, however, still have a hold on too many of our political leaders and their constituents. We will hear them repeated again and again in the coming weeks of intense debate. Every time we hear them, we must respond and we must persuade.

There is too much at stake to be silent.

More: Dennis A. Henigan: It Was Done on Tobacco. It Can Be Done on Guns

It can be done on guns .. and will be done on guns under the influence of an evolved American population.

Amen! It's just a matter of time...

 

[BlackAsCoal]

By Dennis A. Henigan

The American people can overcome the gun lobby, but only if we confront, and expose, three myths that have long dominated the gun debate and given the politicians a ready excuse for inaction.

First, we must not let the opponents of reform get away with the empty bromide that "guns don't kill people, people kill people." Does any rational person really believe that the Sandy Hook killer could have murdered twenty-seven people in minutes with a knife or a baseball bat? Guns enable people to kill, more effectively and efficiently than any other widely available weapon.

Second, we must challenge the idea that no law can prevent violent people from getting guns. This canard is refuted by the experience of every other western industrialized nation. Their violent crime rates are comparable to ours. But their homicide rates are exponentially lower because their strong gun laws make it harder for violent individuals to get guns.

Third, we must not accept the notion that our Constitution condemns us to the continued slaughter of our children. It is true that the Supreme Court has expanded gun rights in recent years; it is equally true that the Court has insisted that the right allows for reasonable restrictions. In his opinion in the Heller Second Amendment case, Justice Scalia listed restrictions on "dangerous and unusual weapons" among the kinds of gun laws that are still "presumptively lawful." Assault weapons that fire scores of rounds without reloading surely are "dangerous and unusual."

The tobacco control movement overcame some equally powerful mythology to fundamentally alter American attitudes toward tobacco products. The tobacco industry's effort to sow confusion and uncertainty about the link between smoking and disease eventually was exposed as a fraud. The entrenched view that smoking was simply a bad habit that individuals can choose to break was destroyed by evidence that the tobacco companies knew that nicotine was powerfully addictive and engineered their cigarettes to ensure that people got hooked and stayed hooked. The assumption that smoking harms only the smoker was contradicted by the overwhelming evidence of the danger of second-hand smoke.

Once these myths were exposed, attitudes changed, policies changed and we started saving countless lives. Since youth smoking peaked in the mid-1990s, smoking rates have fallen by about three-fourths among 8th graders, two-thirds among 10th graders and half among 12th graders. A sea change has occurred on the tobacco issue.

Similarly fundamental change can come to the gun issue as well. The myths about gun control, however, still have a hold on too many of our political leaders and their constituents. We will hear them repeated again and again in the coming weeks of intense debate. Every time we hear them, we must respond and we must persuade.

There is too much at stake to be silent.

More: Dennis A. Henigan: It Was Done on Tobacco. It Can Be Done on Guns

It can be done on guns .. and will be done on guns under the influence of an evolved American population.

Amen! It's just a matter of time...

That is absolutely true.

What many on the right can't understand or just won't accept is that society is dynamic, not static. The state of being of any society is dictated by the people who live in it, not by those who used to.

Even the Founders knew this. Jefferson thought the Constitution should be re-written every 19 years to free future societies to make law that conforms to what is best for that society. We no longer need standing armies.

The bottom line is that it won't be the Constitution that decides the future of guns in America .. it will be the Supreme Court, reflective of the society it exists in. That Supreme Court will be chosen by American presidents elected by a far more enlightened population with far less influence by republicans and the right .. who wish that time would stand still.

The good news is that the time I speak of is not far off.

 

[Slyhunter]

Well, another gun massacre will prompt another gun debate.

Orlando. Another Massacre. Another Muslim perp. I got an idea forbid Muslims from purchasing guns.
That'll work.

 

[Rustic]

Well, another gun massacre will prompt another gun debate.

 

[SuperDemocrat]

We have not banned smoking...only made is socially unacceptable and inconvenient

We are slowly doing the same thing with guns as the number or households owning guns has dropped significantly

Who says the left ain't fascist? What other ideology went out there and made some XYZ act socially uneaccptable to the point where no one wants to do it anymore. Just tell gunowners that guns are dangerous and people who own them are crazy and dangerous. That should created a lot of peer pressure on people so that they no longer want to buy guns.

Since gun ownership is down why complain about how many guns are in the U.S.?

 

[Slyhunter]

Ban Muslims.
/End thread.

 

[Chuz Life]

It's so funny how leftards think a guy (or gal) who is hell bent on MURDER is going to be discouraged by a ban on their weapon or weapons of choice.

Apparently, In the leftards minds, the only reason that laws don't stop crime is because we don't have enough of them (laws) or they are not worded right.