Why anti gun people are so angry.....

[ChrisL]

See here is my point. While making a childish comment he calls me infantile. Oh boy. And I'm not even anti gun.

I think everyone really needs to chill though. Some of the nicest people I know are gun owners and the same can be said for anti gun people. Discuss things in a civil manner.

You are vile. The reason why I call you names is because you are a dishonest hack piece of crap with an agenda. You ignore data and links provided to you. You outright lie. YOU claim you are not anti-gun yet post anti-gun rhetoric in EVERY single gun thread. You are a liar and a traitor to the American people. I hate you. That's why I call YOU names. A lying dishonest sack of crap is all you are. YOU have earned every single name I've called you.

And again the angry gun nut. Thanks for proving my point.

Angry anti gun nut is YOU. You want to leave women defenseless against rapists who may even murder them, and even go so far as to say that women can fight off a rapist and that men are NOT stronger than women. You are a piece of shit.

This is part of the problem gun grabbers are facing. Women are the number one driving force behind gun control...conversely, the number one fastest growing segment of gun owners are women.

LAS VEGAS — The gun world is not just a man’s world anymore.

Women are buying more guns, hunting and participating in the shooting sports more than ever, according to a study released Wednesday by the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

“We’re changing the industry,” said Lucretia Free, publisher of The American Woman Shooter.

In 2001, there were 1.8 million female hunters in the country. In 2013, there were 3.3 million female hunters, an 85 percent increase in the dozen years, according to the study released last week at the shooting sports organization’s annual SHOT (Shooting, Hunting and Outdoors Trade) Show in Las Vegas.

In 2001, there were 3.3 million female target shooters in the country. In 2013, that number had grown to 5.4 million, or increased by 60 percent.

And those numbers don’t include the number of women who own a gun only for protection, which is why most women initially buy a gun.

Study More Women Buying Guns Participating In Shooting Sports Times Record
​

What is driving this growth? At least in part the success of the conceal carry movement.

The gun control groups staked their reputations on a lie...that conceal carry would lead to a new "Wild West" where law abiding citizens would be filling the streets with lead! Oh my!

Not only did that narrative prove false, but just the opposite occurred, crime dropped, and responsible citizens (gasp) carried concealed weapons responsibly.

Today, women are asking "why am I not doing that? I am responsible. Why am I leaving myself at a disadvantage?"

And in response, they are not.

My wife owns here own guns, with far different designated purposes than my own. Where my guns are almost exclusively of the hunting variety, hers are exclusively for the purpose of self defense.

She and her girlfriends have a girls range day once a week. At first there were four...now there are ten.

I keep trying to steal away her Maverick 8-shot Model 88 Security 12 gauge, but so far I have not been successful.

Herein lies your problem. NO ONE has proposed banning all guns. Not Obama, not Schumer, not Bloomberg, not Feinstein.

Reasonable guns laws are NOT unreasonable, unless you are an absolutist or extremist.

It is called "incremental" gun banning, meaning you take it in individual steps. You are NOT fooling anyone.

 

[ChrisL]

See here is my point. While making a childish comment he calls me infantile. Oh boy. And I'm not even anti gun.

I think everyone really needs to chill though. Some of the nicest people I know are gun owners and the same can be said for anti gun people. Discuss things in a civil manner.

You are vile. The reason why I call you names is because you are a dishonest hack piece of crap with an agenda. You ignore data and links provided to you. You outright lie. YOU claim you are not anti-gun yet post anti-gun rhetoric in EVERY single gun thread. You are a liar and a traitor to the American people. I hate you. That's why I call YOU names. A lying dishonest sack of crap is all you are. YOU have earned every single name I've called you.

And again the angry gun nut. Thanks for proving my point.

Angry anti gun nut is YOU. You want to leave women defenseless against rapists who may even murder them, and even go so far as to say that women can fight off a rapist and that men are NOT stronger than women. You are a piece of shit.

This is part of the problem gun grabbers are facing. Women are the number one driving force behind gun control...conversely, the number one fastest growing segment of gun owners are women.

LAS VEGAS — The gun world is not just a man’s world anymore.

Women are buying more guns, hunting and participating in the shooting sports more than ever, according to a study released Wednesday by the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

“We’re changing the industry,” said Lucretia Free, publisher of The American Woman Shooter.

In 2001, there were 1.8 million female hunters in the country. In 2013, there were 3.3 million female hunters, an 85 percent increase in the dozen years, according to the study released last week at the shooting sports organization’s annual SHOT (Shooting, Hunting and Outdoors Trade) Show in Las Vegas.

In 2001, there were 3.3 million female target shooters in the country. In 2013, that number had grown to 5.4 million, or increased by 60 percent.

And those numbers don’t include the number of women who own a gun only for protection, which is why most women initially buy a gun.

Study More Women Buying Guns Participating In Shooting Sports Times Record
​

What is driving this growth? At least in part the success of the conceal carry movement.

The gun control groups staked their reputations on a lie...that conceal carry would lead to a new "Wild West" where law abiding citizens would be filling the streets with lead! Oh my!

Not only did that narrative prove false, but just the opposite occurred, crime dropped, and responsible citizens (gasp) carried concealed weapons responsibly.

Today, women are asking "why am I not doing that? I am responsible. Why am I leaving myself at a disadvantage?"

And in response, they are not.

My wife owns here own guns, with far different designated purposes than my own. Where my guns are almost exclusively of the hunting variety, hers are exclusively for the purpose of self defense.

She and her girlfriends have a girls range day once a week. At first there were four...now there are ten.

I keep trying to steal away her Maverick 8-shot Model 88 Security 12 gauge, but so far I have not been successful.

Herein lies your problem. NO ONE has proposed banning all guns. Not Obama, not Schumer, not Bloomberg, not Feinstein.

Reasonable guns laws are NOT unreasonable, unless you are an absolutist or extremist.

Another thing . . . voting is quite a responsibility. How about we put some restrictions on who can vote. How would you feel about that. It's no different. Voting is a right, as is the 2nd amendment.

When you give the government permission to mess with any one of our rights, then what is to stop them from messing with others? Nothing because you have set a precedent.

 

[2aguy]

Here is some actual research........where do actual convicts get their guns....

Fewer than 1 percent of state prison inmates obtained their guns at the time of offense from gun shows costs of regulations exceed benefits - Crime Prevention Research Center

What is interesting is the remarkable consistency of the rate that criminals obtained their guns from gun shows (a copy of the earlier report is available here).

One problem with using these surveys is that people think that if one were to actually stop all criminals from obtaining guns from gun shows or through some other way, that will actually stop the criminals from getting guns. Yet, even when there are complete bans on guns criminals are still able to obtain them. Given how much of violent crime is drug gang related and given how hard it is to stop drug gangs from getting illegal drugs to sell, it is just as difficult to stop these drug gangs from getting the guns that they need to protect their very valuable drugs. Thus, it isn’t too surprising that background checks on private transfers has beneficial no impact on crime rates (see here or here).

Gun show regulations do have a cost. Almost everyone all those stopped by background checks are false positives — a law-abiding citizen who shouldn’t have been stopped. Other delays extend beyond the length of the gun show — the delays can usually take up to three business days to clear and gun shows only last for two days over a weekend. So even if you buy a gun at the very beginning of a gun show (say Saturday morning), the federal government has until Tuesday morning before a seller is allowed to complete the sale, but by that time the people who have traveled all the way to the show are long gone. For 2002 to 2006, 92 percent of checks were completed during the initial call by the dealer. About 3 percent of background checks take up to two hours to complete. Another 2 percent take up to 3 business days and 3 percent take 3 full business days. Even a two hour delay can mean the difference between whether the a sales occurs. After all, the next stage of the background check won’t begin until the first business day, which will be after the gun show has packed up and left. That implies that if you try waiting in hopes that the delay will only take two hours, there is a 63 percent chance that you will wait the 2 hours and still not be able to get the gun.

Forcing the gun dealer to wait on the telephone for up to a couple of hours means that the dealer can’t be making other gun sales.

A third problem is that there apparently more breakdowns occurring in the computer background check system. When the system breaks down no sales can be completed. Under the Clinton administration, the system was down for about 6 days each month. That problem essentially disappeared during the Bush administration, but it appears to be back under Obama, though the administration no longer keeps detailed data on how long these delays are.

We know how gun grabbers think....they want these background checks to make it harder and more expensive for regular people to get guns.....because while they know criminals can always get guns no matter what laws the gun grabbers pass....those laws will stop regular people from getting guns....and that is what matters most to them....

Stop projecting your lack of ethics on me. I am not a gun grabber. I am a citizen who wants to stop unethical gun sellers from abusing the law and using the gun show loophole to sell guns without a background check.

Interesting, you cite a scum bag liar like John Lott who is a right-wing author who has made claims about the benefits of guns using fabricated evidence. To support his points on the Internet, he adopts various pseudonyms (known as sock puppets) who write in supporting John Lott and giving his books good reviews.

Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence Gun Law Information Experts

Yeah, Yeah....asked and answered about John Lott.....and that is why he is still one of the most respected researchers in the field....and using the law center...really....they don't tell the truth....and actual research, shows that they are lying....

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I SUPPORT the right of citizens to bear arms to protect themselves, their family and their property. But it is NOT an absolute right. It does not mean you can possess any weapon you desire, like a weapon that belongs only on a battlefield. And criminals should not have that right afforded to them by laws with loopholes.

A guy selling a gun isn't a loophole. You never stated how many gun show buys are used in crimes for obvious reasons and no one is suggesting owning any weapon they want.

Fail.

People like BFGRN think a semi auto AR-15 belongs only on the battle field...because it's scary looking.

It has nothing to do with looks. It has to do with rate of fire, magazine capacity and the carnage it can inflict in a school, movie theater or any public place where citizens peacefully gather.

We all know that so called assault rifles are very rarely used in mass killings.

 

[Bfgrn]

It is because you are infantile and stupid, not so much because you are anti-gun.

See here is my point. While making a childish comment he calls me infantile. Oh boy. And I'm not even anti gun.

I think everyone really needs to chill though. Some of the nicest people I know are gun owners and the same can be said for anti gun people. Discuss things in a civil manner.

You are vile. The reason why I call you names is because you are a dishonest hack piece of crap with an agenda. You ignore data and links provided to you. You outright lie. YOU claim you are not anti-gun yet post anti-gun rhetoric in EVERY single gun thread. You are a liar and a traitor to the American people. I hate you. That's why I call YOU names. A lying dishonest sack of crap is all you are. YOU have earned every single name I've called you.

And again the angry gun nut. Thanks for proving my point.

Angry anti gun nut is YOU. You want to leave women defenseless against rapists who may even murder them, and even go so far as to say that women can fight off a rapist and that men are NOT stronger than women. You are a piece of shit.

This is part of the problem gun grabbers are facing. Women are the number one driving force behind gun control...conversely, the number one fastest growing segment of gun owners are women.

LAS VEGAS — The gun world is not just a man’s world anymore.

Women are buying more guns, hunting and participating in the shooting sports more than ever, according to a study released Wednesday by the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

“We’re changing the industry,” said Lucretia Free, publisher of The American Woman Shooter.

In 2001, there were 1.8 million female hunters in the country. In 2013, there were 3.3 million female hunters, an 85 percent increase in the dozen years, according to the study released last week at the shooting sports organization’s annual SHOT (Shooting, Hunting and Outdoors Trade) Show in Las Vegas.

In 2001, there were 3.3 million female target shooters in the country. In 2013, that number had grown to 5.4 million, or increased by 60 percent.

And those numbers don’t include the number of women who own a gun only for protection, which is why most women initially buy a gun.

Study More Women Buying Guns Participating In Shooting Sports Times Record
​

What is driving this growth? At least in part the success of the conceal carry movement.

The gun control groups staked their reputations on a lie...that conceal carry would lead to a new "Wild West" where law abiding citizens would be filling the streets with lead! Oh my!

Not only did that narrative prove false, but just the opposite occurred, crime dropped, and responsible citizens (gasp) carried concealed weapons responsibly.

Today, women are asking "why am I not doing that? I am responsible. Why am I leaving myself at a disadvantage?"

And in response, they are not...they are learning about, and buying firearms in droves.

My wife owns her own guns, with far different designated purposes than my own. Where my guns are almost exclusively of the hunting variety, hers are exclusively for the purpose of self defense.

She and her girlfriends have a girls range day once a week. At first there were four...now there are ten.

I keep trying to steal away her Maverick 8-shot Model 88 Security 12 gauge, but so far I have not been successful.

P.S. - Brain and I actually get along pretty well, considering we are on opposite sides of this issue.

Fla. mom gets 20 years for firing warning shots

Marissa Alexander of Jacksonville, Fla., received a 20-years prison sentence, Friday, May 11, 2012, for firing warning shots against her allegedly abusive husband. The judge rejected a defense under Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law. WETV


(CBS News) JACKSONVILLE, Fla. - A Florida woman who fired warning shots against her allegedly abusive husband has been sentenced to 20 years in prison.

Marissa Alexander of Jacksonville had said the state's "Stand Your Ground" law should apply to her because she was defending herself against her allegedly abusive husband when she fired warning shots inside her home in August 2010. She told police it was to escape a brutal beating by her husband, against whom she had already taken out a protective order.

 

[ChrisL]

I SUPPORT the right of citizens to bear arms to protect themselves, their family and their property. But it is NOT an absolute right. It does not mean you can possess any weapon you desire, like a weapon that belongs only on a battlefield. And criminals should not have that right afforded to them by laws with loopholes.

A guy selling a gun isn't a loophole. You never stated how many gun show buys are used in crimes for obvious reasons and no one is suggesting owning any weapon they want.

Fail.

People like BFGRN think a semi auto AR-15 belongs only on the battle field...because it's scary looking.

It has nothing to do with looks. It has to do with rate of fire, magazine capacity and the carnage it can inflict in a school, movie theater or any public place where citizens peacefully gather.

Those instances are EXTREMELY rare, less than 1% of all murders. Why aren't you concerned about the black on black crime in the inner cities? That is responsible for more deaths than honest gun owners fool.

 

[pismoe]

good news Missorian , thanks for the woman update !! I also encourage people that are new to the USA to take advantage of the 2nd Amendment and the 1 guy that I'm thinking of that I encouraged couldn't believe that he could go to a gun store and just buy an AR15 . I also encourage kids and relatives that I don't see very often .

 

[ChrisL]

See here is my point. While making a childish comment he calls me infantile. Oh boy. And I'm not even anti gun.

I think everyone really needs to chill though. Some of the nicest people I know are gun owners and the same can be said for anti gun people. Discuss things in a civil manner.

You are vile. The reason why I call you names is because you are a dishonest hack piece of crap with an agenda. You ignore data and links provided to you. You outright lie. YOU claim you are not anti-gun yet post anti-gun rhetoric in EVERY single gun thread. You are a liar and a traitor to the American people. I hate you. That's why I call YOU names. A lying dishonest sack of crap is all you are. YOU have earned every single name I've called you.

And again the angry gun nut. Thanks for proving my point.

Angry anti gun nut is YOU. You want to leave women defenseless against rapists who may even murder them, and even go so far as to say that women can fight off a rapist and that men are NOT stronger than women. You are a piece of shit.

This is part of the problem gun grabbers are facing. Women are the number one driving force behind gun control...conversely, the number one fastest growing segment of gun owners are women.

LAS VEGAS — The gun world is not just a man’s world anymore.

Women are buying more guns, hunting and participating in the shooting sports more than ever, according to a study released Wednesday by the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

“We’re changing the industry,” said Lucretia Free, publisher of The American Woman Shooter.

In 2001, there were 1.8 million female hunters in the country. In 2013, there were 3.3 million female hunters, an 85 percent increase in the dozen years, according to the study released last week at the shooting sports organization’s annual SHOT (Shooting, Hunting and Outdoors Trade) Show in Las Vegas.

In 2001, there were 3.3 million female target shooters in the country. In 2013, that number had grown to 5.4 million, or increased by 60 percent.

And those numbers don’t include the number of women who own a gun only for protection, which is why most women initially buy a gun.

Study More Women Buying Guns Participating In Shooting Sports Times Record
​

What is driving this growth? At least in part the success of the conceal carry movement.

The gun control groups staked their reputations on a lie...that conceal carry would lead to a new "Wild West" where law abiding citizens would be filling the streets with lead! Oh my!

Not only did that narrative prove false, but just the opposite occurred, crime dropped, and responsible citizens (gasp) carried concealed weapons responsibly.

Today, women are asking "why am I not doing that? I am responsible. Why am I leaving myself at a disadvantage?"

And in response, they are not...they are learning about, and buying firearms in droves.

My wife owns her own guns, with far different designated purposes than my own. Where my guns are almost exclusively of the hunting variety, hers are exclusively for the purpose of self defense.

She and her girlfriends have a girls range day once a week. At first there were four...now there are ten.

I keep trying to steal away her Maverick 8-shot Model 88 Security 12 gauge, but so far I have not been successful.

P.S. - Brain and I actually get along pretty well, considering we are on opposite sides of this issue.

Fla. mom gets 20 years for firing warning shots

Marissa Alexander of Jacksonville, Fla., received a 20-years prison sentence, Friday, May 11, 2012, for firing warning shots against her allegedly abusive husband. The judge rejected a defense under Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law. WETV


(CBS News) JACKSONVILLE, Fla. - A Florida woman who fired warning shots against her allegedly abusive husband has been sentenced to 20 years in prison.

Marissa Alexander of Jacksonville had said the state's "Stand Your Ground" law should apply to her because she was defending herself against her allegedly abusive husband when she fired warning shots inside her home in August 2010. She told police it was to escape a brutal beating by her husband, against whom she had already taken out a protective order.

What is your point in posting this? You think this woman doesn't have a right to defend herself against abuse? Do you know how many women are killed by their abusive husbands every year?

 

[2aguy]

good catch 'herewego' I didn't notice that Bfgrn was posting some anti gun sites stats .

But pro gun stats are acceptable, from a guy who takes funding from one of the nation's largest gun manufacturers.

Which guy are you talking about........and which anti-gun nut site made up that allegation...as they accept money from former mayor bloomberg or george soros.......or like the violence policy center just refuse to say who funds them....

 

[Bfgrn]

Here is some actual research........where do actual convicts get their guns....

Fewer than 1 percent of state prison inmates obtained their guns at the time of offense from gun shows costs of regulations exceed benefits - Crime Prevention Research Center

What is interesting is the remarkable consistency of the rate that criminals obtained their guns from gun shows (a copy of the earlier report is available here).

One problem with using these surveys is that people think that if one were to actually stop all criminals from obtaining guns from gun shows or through some other way, that will actually stop the criminals from getting guns. Yet, even when there are complete bans on guns criminals are still able to obtain them. Given how much of violent crime is drug gang related and given how hard it is to stop drug gangs from getting illegal drugs to sell, it is just as difficult to stop these drug gangs from getting the guns that they need to protect their very valuable drugs. Thus, it isn’t too surprising that background checks on private transfers has beneficial no impact on crime rates (see here or here).

Gun show regulations do have a cost. Almost everyone all those stopped by background checks are false positives — a law-abiding citizen who shouldn’t have been stopped. Other delays extend beyond the length of the gun show — the delays can usually take up to three business days to clear and gun shows only last for two days over a weekend. So even if you buy a gun at the very beginning of a gun show (say Saturday morning), the federal government has until Tuesday morning before a seller is allowed to complete the sale, but by that time the people who have traveled all the way to the show are long gone. For 2002 to 2006, 92 percent of checks were completed during the initial call by the dealer. About 3 percent of background checks take up to two hours to complete. Another 2 percent take up to 3 business days and 3 percent take 3 full business days. Even a two hour delay can mean the difference between whether the a sales occurs. After all, the next stage of the background check won’t begin until the first business day, which will be after the gun show has packed up and left. That implies that if you try waiting in hopes that the delay will only take two hours, there is a 63 percent chance that you will wait the 2 hours and still not be able to get the gun.

Forcing the gun dealer to wait on the telephone for up to a couple of hours means that the dealer can’t be making other gun sales.

A third problem is that there apparently more breakdowns occurring in the computer background check system. When the system breaks down no sales can be completed. Under the Clinton administration, the system was down for about 6 days each month. That problem essentially disappeared during the Bush administration, but it appears to be back under Obama, though the administration no longer keeps detailed data on how long these delays are.

We know how gun grabbers think....they want these background checks to make it harder and more expensive for regular people to get guns.....because while they know criminals can always get guns no matter what laws the gun grabbers pass....those laws will stop regular people from getting guns....and that is what matters most to them....

Stop projecting your lack of ethics on me. I am not a gun grabber. I am a citizen who wants to stop unethical gun sellers from abusing the law and using the gun show loophole to sell guns without a background check.

Interesting, you cite a scum bag liar like John Lott who is a right-wing author who has made claims about the benefits of guns using fabricated evidence. To support his points on the Internet, he adopts various pseudonyms (known as sock puppets) who write in supporting John Lott and giving his books good reviews.

Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence Gun Law Information Experts

Yeah, Yeah....asked and answered about John Lott.....and that is why he is still one of the most respected researchers in the field....and using the law center...really....they don't tell the truth....and actual research, shows that they are lying....

John Lott is a lying scum bag paid for by gun manufacturers. Just HOW stupid are you folks?

 

[ChrisL]

It is a little more complicated than that....don't ya THINK?

No not really. Look at how many ugn owners there are vs how many incidents of gun violence. If guns correlated to incidents of gun violence we'd have far more incidents than we do.

Criminals account for gun violence, not law-abidding gun owners.

And look at the carnage an assault weapon can cause in mere seconds in a public place. And look at how easy it is for a criminal to walk into a security safe gun show, and buy any weapon he desires without a background check.

And, as citizens, we can't stop a criminal from buying an illegal firearm from the trunk of another criminal in some dark alley.

But, that's where the criminal should be forced to buy a gun. In a totally illegal setting, with all the inherent dangers that come with it. BUT, our current laws sanction criminals being able to walk into a gun show, receive expert advice, discounts, then buy whatever weapon(s) they desire without a background check or having to pay black market prices or risk the dangers of buying a weapon from another criminal in a dark alley.

"And look at the carnage an assault weapon can cause in mere seconds in a public place. And look at how easy it is for a criminal to walk into a security safe gun show, and buy any weapon he desires without a background check. "

Look at automobile accidents. Your logic applies to that as well. Wanna ban cars too? Are cars the problem, or irresponsible drivers?

It's just a few days past the one year anniversary of the SXSW Tragedy. Four killed, 20+ injured, when Rashad Owens intentionally drove his Honda through the crowded SXSW event in Austin, Texas...

Time to ban cars and black people.

Well, if these anti gunners were so concerned about people and death, they would want to ban swimming and vehicles, which are NOT necessities nor rights, and kill many more people every year.

 

[2aguy]

Here is some actual research........where do actual convicts get their guns....

Fewer than 1 percent of state prison inmates obtained their guns at the time of offense from gun shows costs of regulations exceed benefits - Crime Prevention Research Center

What is interesting is the remarkable consistency of the rate that criminals obtained their guns from gun shows (a copy of the earlier report is available here).

One problem with using these surveys is that people think that if one were to actually stop all criminals from obtaining guns from gun shows or through some other way, that will actually stop the criminals from getting guns. Yet, even when there are complete bans on guns criminals are still able to obtain them. Given how much of violent crime is drug gang related and given how hard it is to stop drug gangs from getting illegal drugs to sell, it is just as difficult to stop these drug gangs from getting the guns that they need to protect their very valuable drugs. Thus, it isn’t too surprising that background checks on private transfers has beneficial no impact on crime rates (see here or here).

Gun show regulations do have a cost. Almost everyone all those stopped by background checks are false positives — a law-abiding citizen who shouldn’t have been stopped. Other delays extend beyond the length of the gun show — the delays can usually take up to three business days to clear and gun shows only last for two days over a weekend. So even if you buy a gun at the very beginning of a gun show (say Saturday morning), the federal government has until Tuesday morning before a seller is allowed to complete the sale, but by that time the people who have traveled all the way to the show are long gone. For 2002 to 2006, 92 percent of checks were completed during the initial call by the dealer. About 3 percent of background checks take up to two hours to complete. Another 2 percent take up to 3 business days and 3 percent take 3 full business days. Even a two hour delay can mean the difference between whether the a sales occurs. After all, the next stage of the background check won’t begin until the first business day, which will be after the gun show has packed up and left. That implies that if you try waiting in hopes that the delay will only take two hours, there is a 63 percent chance that you will wait the 2 hours and still not be able to get the gun.

Forcing the gun dealer to wait on the telephone for up to a couple of hours means that the dealer can’t be making other gun sales.

A third problem is that there apparently more breakdowns occurring in the computer background check system. When the system breaks down no sales can be completed. Under the Clinton administration, the system was down for about 6 days each month. That problem essentially disappeared during the Bush administration, but it appears to be back under Obama, though the administration no longer keeps detailed data on how long these delays are.

We know how gun grabbers think....they want these background checks to make it harder and more expensive for regular people to get guns.....because while they know criminals can always get guns no matter what laws the gun grabbers pass....those laws will stop regular people from getting guns....and that is what matters most to them....

Stop projecting your lack of ethics on me. I am not a gun grabber. I am a citizen who wants to stop unethical gun sellers from abusing the law and using the gun show loophole to sell guns without a background check.

Interesting, you cite a scum bag liar like John Lott who is a right-wing author who has made claims about the benefits of guns using fabricated evidence. To support his points on the Internet, he adopts various pseudonyms (known as sock puppets) who write in supporting John Lott and giving his books good reviews.

Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence Gun Law Information Experts

That's what you ALL say. You are all the same. YOU want to take away rights from citizens, then in the next breath, people like you will complain that the police are all racists. Sorry, but someone needs to inform you all that you are idiots.

The only extremists on this thread are on the right.... the absolutist mentality just doesn't pass for reasonable or intelligent.

I SUPPORT the right of citizens to bear arms to protect themselves, their family and their property. But it is NOT an absolute right. It does not mean you can possess any weapon you desire, like a weapon that belongs only on a battlefield. And criminals should not have that right afforded to them by laws with loopholes.

I guess these guys are "gun-grabbers" too...

You do realize that handguns and shotguns are also military weapons.......and at some point, that fact will be used to designate them "Battlefield" weapons that no civilian should possess...right?

 

[ChrisL]

Here is some actual research........where do actual convicts get their guns....

Fewer than 1 percent of state prison inmates obtained their guns at the time of offense from gun shows costs of regulations exceed benefits - Crime Prevention Research Center

What is interesting is the remarkable consistency of the rate that criminals obtained their guns from gun shows (a copy of the earlier report is available here).

One problem with using these surveys is that people think that if one were to actually stop all criminals from obtaining guns from gun shows or through some other way, that will actually stop the criminals from getting guns. Yet, even when there are complete bans on guns criminals are still able to obtain them. Given how much of violent crime is drug gang related and given how hard it is to stop drug gangs from getting illegal drugs to sell, it is just as difficult to stop these drug gangs from getting the guns that they need to protect their very valuable drugs. Thus, it isn’t too surprising that background checks on private transfers has beneficial no impact on crime rates (see here or here).

Gun show regulations do have a cost. Almost everyone all those stopped by background checks are false positives — a law-abiding citizen who shouldn’t have been stopped. Other delays extend beyond the length of the gun show — the delays can usually take up to three business days to clear and gun shows only last for two days over a weekend. So even if you buy a gun at the very beginning of a gun show (say Saturday morning), the federal government has until Tuesday morning before a seller is allowed to complete the sale, but by that time the people who have traveled all the way to the show are long gone. For 2002 to 2006, 92 percent of checks were completed during the initial call by the dealer. About 3 percent of background checks take up to two hours to complete. Another 2 percent take up to 3 business days and 3 percent take 3 full business days. Even a two hour delay can mean the difference between whether the a sales occurs. After all, the next stage of the background check won’t begin until the first business day, which will be after the gun show has packed up and left. That implies that if you try waiting in hopes that the delay will only take two hours, there is a 63 percent chance that you will wait the 2 hours and still not be able to get the gun.

Forcing the gun dealer to wait on the telephone for up to a couple of hours means that the dealer can’t be making other gun sales.

A third problem is that there apparently more breakdowns occurring in the computer background check system. When the system breaks down no sales can be completed. Under the Clinton administration, the system was down for about 6 days each month. That problem essentially disappeared during the Bush administration, but it appears to be back under Obama, though the administration no longer keeps detailed data on how long these delays are.

We know how gun grabbers think....they want these background checks to make it harder and more expensive for regular people to get guns.....because while they know criminals can always get guns no matter what laws the gun grabbers pass....those laws will stop regular people from getting guns....and that is what matters most to them....

Stop projecting your lack of ethics on me. I am not a gun grabber. I am a citizen who wants to stop unethical gun sellers from abusing the law and using the gun show loophole to sell guns without a background check.

Interesting, you cite a scum bag liar like John Lott who is a right-wing author who has made claims about the benefits of guns using fabricated evidence. To support his points on the Internet, he adopts various pseudonyms (known as sock puppets) who write in supporting John Lott and giving his books good reviews.

Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence Gun Law Information Experts

Yeah, Yeah....asked and answered about John Lott.....and that is why he is still one of the most respected researchers in the field....and using the law center...really....they don't tell the truth....and actual research, shows that they are lying....

John Lott is a lying scum bag paid for by gun manufacturers. Just HOW stupid are you folks?

And what about Dr. Kleck?

 

[2aguy]

Here is some actual research........where do actual convicts get their guns....

Fewer than 1 percent of state prison inmates obtained their guns at the time of offense from gun shows costs of regulations exceed benefits - Crime Prevention Research Center

What is interesting is the remarkable consistency of the rate that criminals obtained their guns from gun shows (a copy of the earlier report is available here).

One problem with using these surveys is that people think that if one were to actually stop all criminals from obtaining guns from gun shows or through some other way, that will actually stop the criminals from getting guns. Yet, even when there are complete bans on guns criminals are still able to obtain them. Given how much of violent crime is drug gang related and given how hard it is to stop drug gangs from getting illegal drugs to sell, it is just as difficult to stop these drug gangs from getting the guns that they need to protect their very valuable drugs. Thus, it isn’t too surprising that background checks on private transfers has beneficial no impact on crime rates (see here or here).

Gun show regulations do have a cost. Almost everyone all those stopped by background checks are false positives — a law-abiding citizen who shouldn’t have been stopped. Other delays extend beyond the length of the gun show — the delays can usually take up to three business days to clear and gun shows only last for two days over a weekend. So even if you buy a gun at the very beginning of a gun show (say Saturday morning), the federal government has until Tuesday morning before a seller is allowed to complete the sale, but by that time the people who have traveled all the way to the show are long gone. For 2002 to 2006, 92 percent of checks were completed during the initial call by the dealer. About 3 percent of background checks take up to two hours to complete. Another 2 percent take up to 3 business days and 3 percent take 3 full business days. Even a two hour delay can mean the difference between whether the a sales occurs. After all, the next stage of the background check won’t begin until the first business day, which will be after the gun show has packed up and left. That implies that if you try waiting in hopes that the delay will only take two hours, there is a 63 percent chance that you will wait the 2 hours and still not be able to get the gun.

Forcing the gun dealer to wait on the telephone for up to a couple of hours means that the dealer can’t be making other gun sales.

A third problem is that there apparently more breakdowns occurring in the computer background check system. When the system breaks down no sales can be completed. Under the Clinton administration, the system was down for about 6 days each month. That problem essentially disappeared during the Bush administration, but it appears to be back under Obama, though the administration no longer keeps detailed data on how long these delays are.

We know how gun grabbers think....they want these background checks to make it harder and more expensive for regular people to get guns.....because while they know criminals can always get guns no matter what laws the gun grabbers pass....those laws will stop regular people from getting guns....and that is what matters most to them....

Stop projecting your lack of ethics on me. I am not a gun grabber. I am a citizen who wants to stop unethical gun sellers from abusing the law and using the gun show loophole to sell guns without a background check.

Interesting, you cite a scum bag liar like John Lott who is a right-wing author who has made claims about the benefits of guns using fabricated evidence. To support his points on the Internet, he adopts various pseudonyms (known as sock puppets) who write in supporting John Lott and giving his books good reviews.

Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence Gun Law Information Experts

Yeah, Yeah....asked and answered about John Lott.....and that is why he is still one of the most respected researchers in the field....and using the law center...really....they don't tell the truth....and actual research, shows that they are lying....

John Lott is a lying scum bag paid for by gun manufacturers. Just HOW stupid are you folks?

He doesn't accept funding from gun manufacturers.......that is an anti-gun nut lie...as they accept all of their funding from rabid anti gunners like soros and bloomberg...who both use heavily armed body guards.....

 

[ChrisL]

It's quite obvious that they have an agenda to take away one of our constitutionally guaranteed rights. They do NOT care about the deaths.

 

[2aguy]

I SUPPORT the right of citizens to bear arms to protect themselves, their family and their property. But it is NOT an absolute right. It does not mean you can possess any weapon you desire, like a weapon that belongs only on a battlefield. And criminals should not have that right afforded to them by laws with loopholes.

A guy selling a gun isn't a loophole. You never stated how many gun show buys are used in crimes for obvious reasons and no one is suggesting owning any weapon they want.

Fail.

"It is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners"
Albert Camus

Every gun sale should require a background check IMO. But what the gun show loophole allows is dealers who POSE as 'private' sellers to set up a booth at gun shows and sell weapons without a background check. If the 'private' seller suspects the buyer is a criminal, he is supposed to terminate the sale. Undercover buyers/investigators with hidden cameras went to seven gun shows across Ohio, Tennessee and Nevada, and found out just how easy it is for criminals and the mentally ill to walk in and buy guns -- no questions asked.

Investigators told the private sellers that they "probably couldn't pass a background check" -- and at that point, the seller should have sent them away. Because even private sellers are prohibited by federal law from selling to those who they have reason to suspect could not pass a background check.

Instead, 19 out of 30 private sellers made the sale.

And every 1960s radical was trained reading Camus.....and then went on to bomb buildings and kill bank guards....

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

MISSOURIAN SAID:

“This is part of the problem gun grabbers are facing.”

There is no such thing as a 'gun-grabber,' the notion is ridiculous and unfounded, the contrivance of demagogues.

 

[Bfgrn]

Here is another "gun grabber"

Adolphus Busch IV is trying to tell you something. Something that only an insider can provide. Only someone who KNOWS what the NRA is REALLY all about.

But the parrots will disregard this information and continue to believe the NRA cares about the American people.

Budweiser heir Adolphus Busch IV resigns NRA membership



ST. LOUIS (KSDK) - One day after the U.S. Senate rejected a bill that would have expanded background checks on guns, one of St. Louis' most powerful and staunch supporters of gun rights ended his lifetime membership with the National Rifle Association (NRA).

"The NRA I see today has undermined the values upon which it was established," wrote Busch, who also dropped his NRA membership. "Your current strategic focus clearly places priority on the needs of gun and ammunition manufacturers while disregarding the opinions of your 4 million individual members."

Busch joined the pro-gun organization in 1975 and has spoken before of his love of hunting. But the NRA has moved in a direction that Busch would not follow. "One only has to look at the makeup of the 75-member board of directors, dominated by manufacturing interests, to confirm my point. The NRA appears to have evolved into the lobby for gun and ammunition manufacturers rather than gun owners," he wrote.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

No not really. Look at how many ugn owners there are vs how many incidents of gun violence. If guns correlated to incidents of gun violence we'd have far more incidents than we do.

Criminals account for gun violence, not law-abidding gun owners.

And look at the carnage an assault weapon can cause in mere seconds in a public place. And look at how easy it is for a criminal to walk into a security safe gun show, and buy any weapon he desires without a background check.

And, as citizens, we can't stop a criminal from buying an illegal firearm from the trunk of another criminal in some dark alley.

But, that's where the criminal should be forced to buy a gun. In a totally illegal setting, with all the inherent dangers that come with it. BUT, our current laws sanction criminals being able to walk into a gun show, receive expert advice, discounts, then buy whatever weapon(s) they desire without a background check or having to pay black market prices or risk the dangers of buying a weapon from another criminal in a dark alley.

"And look at the carnage an assault weapon can cause in mere seconds in a public place. And look at how easy it is for a criminal to walk into a security safe gun show, and buy any weapon he desires without a background check. "

Look at automobile accidents. Your logic applies to that as well. Wanna ban cars too? Are cars the problem, or irresponsible drivers?

It's just a few days past the one year anniversary of the SXSW Tragedy. Four killed, 20+ injured, when Rashad Owens intentionally drove his Honda through the crowded SXSW event in Austin, Texas...

Time to ban cars and black people.

Well, if these anti gunners were so concerned about people and death, they would want to ban swimming and vehicles, which are NOT necessities nor rights, and kill many more people every year.

This fails as a false comparison fallacy.

 

[2aguy]

I SUPPORT the right of citizens to bear arms to protect themselves, their family and their property. But it is NOT an absolute right. It does not mean you can possess any weapon you desire, like a weapon that belongs only on a battlefield. And criminals should not have that right afforded to them by laws with loopholes.

A guy selling a gun isn't a loophole. You never stated how many gun show buys are used in crimes for obvious reasons and no one is suggesting owning any weapon they want.

Fail.

"It is the job of thinking people not to be on the side of the executioners"
Albert Camus

Every gun sale should require a background check IMO. But what the gun show loophole allows is dealers who POSE as 'private' sellers to set up a booth at gun shows and sell weapons without a background check. If the 'private' seller suspects the buyer is a criminal, he is supposed to terminate the sale. Undercover buyers/investigators with hidden cameras went to seven gun shows across Ohio, Tennessee and Nevada, and found out just how easy it is for criminals and the mentally ill to walk in and buy guns -- no questions asked.

Investigators told the private sellers that they "probably couldn't pass a background check" -- and at that point, the seller should have sent them away. Because even private sellers are prohibited by federal law from selling to those who they have reason to suspect could not pass a background check.

Instead, 19 out of 30 private sellers made the sale.

Yes...that fake under cover sting.....all of those "Sellers" were private citizens not registered firearm dealers.....and nothing you try to implement is going to stop them if the are willing to sell a gun to someone who outright tells them "I can't pass a background check," IF they sell to that person they don't care about the law...any law that you want passed.....and you can't stop them with background checks.......