Gun control ideas

[cornographic]

 

There are so many guns distributed through various black markets, I don't know how you can control it much. Bad guys are going to get guns. There's no problem with good guys having guns, though I think in order to purchase a gun you should have to demonstrate responsibility somewhat like applying for a driver's license. I have a bit of a problem with the "stand your ground" laws as people can get trigger happy, and there's the problem with accidental shooting from parents leaving guns laying around the house for their kids to get ahold of which is just plain stupid. Sometimes, however, you can't fix stupid.

Cornographic: You just violated stipulation #2. "Just because we can't eliminate 100% of any given crime doesn't mean we can't reduce the problem. DUI and Crack Cocaine use were sited earlier."

 

We lowered DUI deaths by 50% without taking away anyone's cars. Shouldn't we try to reduce gun deaths without taking away anyone's guns?

 

 

Actually, they usually take away the driving privileges of DUI offenders. I think my position is clear: make it harder to get a gun(s), and go after the various gun black markets/gun show/online loopholes.

[BigRedBuster]

But....yet....most gun violence doesn't happen in the part of the population that owns the most guns.

 

Hmmmm......

[StPaulHusker]

 

 

There are so many guns distributed through various black markets, I don't know how you can control it much. Bad guys are going to get guns. There's no problem with good guys having guns, though I think in order to purchase a gun you should have to demonstrate responsibility somewhat like applying for a driver's license. I have a bit of a problem with the "stand your ground" laws as people can get trigger happy, and there's the problem with accidental shooting from parents leaving guns laying around the house for their kids to get ahold of which is just plain stupid. Sometimes, however, you can't fix stupid.

Cornographic: You just violated stipulation #2. "Just because we can't eliminate 100% of any given crime doesn't mean we can't reduce the problem. DUI and Crack Cocaine use were sited earlier."

 

We lowered DUI deaths by 50% without taking away anyone's cars. Shouldn't we try to reduce gun deaths without taking away anyone's guns?

 

 

Actually, they usually take away the driving privileges of DUI offenders. I think my position is clear: make it harder to get a gun(s), and go after the various gun black markets/gun show/online loopholes.

 

You missed the point. They didn't take away the CAR. They took away the privilege to drive the car.

[NUance]

But....yet....most gun violence doesn't happen in the part of the population that owns the most guns.

 

Hmmmm......

 

^^ THIS is the problem. +1. It doesn't bother me personally that there are some localized gun control laws for certain types of guns in specific areas. Like bans on certain pistols and assault weapons in urban areas like Chicago. Those sorts of guns aren't used much for hunting, and they're largely the types of guns that are used in crimes. Localized gun control still leaves room for pump action shotguns for home protection. But the problem is that the entire state of Illinois has all kinds of gun control laws, mostly due to what goes on in Chicago. Although I live in Illinois, I don't live in Chicago. So why should the rights to own guns in my backwoods part of the state be limited by the madness that goes on in Chicago?

[cornographic]

 

 

 

There are so many guns distributed through various black markets, I don't know how you can control it much. Bad guys are going to get guns. There's no problem with good guys having guns, though I think in order to purchase a gun you should have to demonstrate responsibility somewhat like applying for a driver's license. I have a bit of a problem with the "stand your ground" laws as people can get trigger happy, and there's the problem with accidental shooting from parents leaving guns laying around the house for their kids to get ahold of which is just plain stupid. Sometimes, however, you can't fix stupid.

Cornographic: You just violated stipulation #2. "Just because we can't eliminate 100% of any given crime doesn't mean we can't reduce the problem. DUI and Crack Cocaine use were sited earlier."

 

We lowered DUI deaths by 50% without taking away anyone's cars. Shouldn't we try to reduce gun deaths without taking away anyone's guns?

 

 

Actually, they usually take away the driving privileges of DUI offenders. I think my position is clear: make it harder to get a gun(s), and go after the various gun black markets/gun show/online loopholes.

 

You missed the point. They didn't take away the CAR. They took away the privilege to drive the car.

 

You're right, I missed the point, lol. Well, while we're on the subject, cars still kill ~30-40K people/year whereas guns ~12-13K year. Cars still more dangerous, it appears. That is, the drivers of cars, just as it is the shooters of guns that are the problem, not the gun. So, it we can get rid of drivers and shooters, we should have both these problems solved. Or, we could get rid of cars and guns...but then there are bee stings.

 

My favorite line is from Tom Cruise, in "Collateral":

 

Jamie Foxx: "You killed that guy!!!"

 

Cruise: "I didn't kill him, the bullet killed him..."

[StPaulHusker]

 

 

 

 

There are so many guns distributed through various black markets, I don't know how you can control it much. Bad guys are going to get guns. There's no problem with good guys having guns, though I think in order to purchase a gun you should have to demonstrate responsibility somewhat like applying for a driver's license. I have a bit of a problem with the "stand your ground" laws as people can get trigger happy, and there's the problem with accidental shooting from parents leaving guns laying around the house for their kids to get ahold of which is just plain stupid. Sometimes, however, you can't fix stupid.

Cornographic: You just violated stipulation #2. "Just because we can't eliminate 100% of any given crime doesn't mean we can't reduce the problem. DUI and Crack Cocaine use were sited earlier."

 

We lowered DUI deaths by 50% without taking away anyone's cars. Shouldn't we try to reduce gun deaths without taking away anyone's guns?

 

 

Actually, they usually take away the driving privileges of DUI offenders. I think my position is clear: make it harder to get a gun(s), and go after the various gun black markets/gun show/online loopholes.

 

You missed the point. They didn't take away the CAR. They took away the privilege to drive the car.

 

You're right, I missed the point, lol. Well, while we're on the subject, there were over 32k deaths by car in 2013 and ~12k deaths by gun, in the USA. Driving still more dangerous, it appears.

 

I'm not disagreeing with you. I just noticed you weren't comparing the same things.

[cornographic]

 

 

 

 

 

There are so many guns distributed through various black markets, I don't know how you can control it much. Bad guys are going to get guns. There's no problem with good guys having guns, though I think in order to purchase a gun you should have to demonstrate responsibility somewhat like applying for a driver's license. I have a bit of a problem with the "stand your ground" laws as people can get trigger happy, and there's the problem with accidental shooting from parents leaving guns laying around the house for their kids to get ahold of which is just plain stupid. Sometimes, however, you can't fix stupid.

Cornographic: You just violated stipulation #2. "Just because we can't eliminate 100% of any given crime doesn't mean we can't reduce the problem. DUI and Crack Cocaine use were sited earlier."

 

We lowered DUI deaths by 50% without taking away anyone's cars. Shouldn't we try to reduce gun deaths without taking away anyone's guns?

 

 

Actually, they usually take away the driving privileges of DUI offenders. I think my position is clear: make it harder to get a gun(s), and go after the various gun black markets/gun show/online loopholes.

 

You missed the point. They didn't take away the CAR. They took away the privilege to drive the car.

 

You're right, I missed the point, lol. Well, while we're on the subject, there were over 32k deaths by car in 2013 and ~12k deaths by gun, in the USA. Driving still more dangerous, it appears.

 

I'm not disagreeing with you. I just noticed you weren't comparing the same things.

 

My head starts to spin on this topic. I'm not a gun guy anyway..maybe I should be.

[GBRedneck]

 

 

There are so many guns distributed through various black markets, I don't know how you can control it much. Bad guys are going to get guns. There's no problem with good guys having guns, though I think in order to purchase a gun you should have to demonstrate responsibility somewhat like applying for a driver's license. I have a bit of a problem with the "stand your ground" laws as people can get trigger happy, and there's the problem with accidental shooting from parents leaving guns laying around the house for their kids to get ahold of which is just plain stupid. Sometimes, however, you can't fix stupid.

Cornographic: You just violated stipulation #2. "Just because we can't eliminate 100% of any given crime doesn't mean we can't reduce the problem. DUI and Crack Cocaine use were sited earlier."

 

We lowered DUI deaths by 50% without taking away anyone's cars. Shouldn't we try to reduce gun deaths without taking away anyone's guns?

 

 

Actually, they usually take away the driving privileges of DUI offenders. I think my position is clear: make it harder to get a gun(s), and go after the various gun black markets/gun show/online loopholes.

 

There are no gun show or online loopholes. What are you talking about?

[StPaulHusker]

 

 

 

There are so many guns distributed through various black markets, I don't know how you can control it much. Bad guys are going to get guns. There's no problem with good guys having guns, though I think in order to purchase a gun you should have to demonstrate responsibility somewhat like applying for a driver's license. I have a bit of a problem with the "stand your ground" laws as people can get trigger happy, and there's the problem with accidental shooting from parents leaving guns laying around the house for their kids to get ahold of which is just plain stupid. Sometimes, however, you can't fix stupid.

Cornographic: You just violated stipulation #2. "Just because we can't eliminate 100% of any given crime doesn't mean we can't reduce the problem. DUI and Crack Cocaine use were sited earlier."

 

We lowered DUI deaths by 50% without taking away anyone's cars. Shouldn't we try to reduce gun deaths without taking away anyone's guns?

 

 

Actually, they usually take away the driving privileges of DUI offenders. I think my position is clear: make it harder to get a gun(s), and go after the various gun black markets/gun show/online loopholes.

 

There are no gun show or online loopholes. What are you talking about?

 

It's possible the "loophole" in question would be that some states do not require secondary market sellers (gun shows) to perform background checks on the purchaser of the firearm.

[Saunders]

 

 

 

 

There are so many guns distributed through various black markets, I don't know how you can control it much. Bad guys are going to get guns. There's no problem with good guys having guns, though I think in order to purchase a gun you should have to demonstrate responsibility somewhat like applying for a driver's license. I have a bit of a problem with the "stand your ground" laws as people can get trigger happy, and there's the problem with accidental shooting from parents leaving guns laying around the house for their kids to get ahold of which is just plain stupid. Sometimes, however, you can't fix stupid.

Cornographic: You just violated stipulation #2. "Just because we can't eliminate 100% of any given crime doesn't mean we can't reduce the problem. DUI and Crack Cocaine use were sited earlier."

 

We lowered DUI deaths by 50% without taking away anyone's cars. Shouldn't we try to reduce gun deaths without taking away anyone's guns?

 

 

Actually, they usually take away the driving privileges of DUI offenders. I think my position is clear: make it harder to get a gun(s), and go after the various gun black markets/gun show/online loopholes.

 

There are no gun show or online loopholes. What are you talking about?

 

It's possible the "loophole" in question would be that some states do not require secondary market sellers (gun shows) to perform background checks on the purchaser of the firearm.

 

This is is a common myth that's pushed out by the gun control groups. There is no gunshow/internet loophole. The only way to buy a firearm without a background check is person to person. It's federal law. Any business caught selling a firearm without a background check would have the ATF on them immediately.

[StPaulHusker]

 

 

 

 

 

There are so many guns distributed through various black markets, I don't know how you can control it much. Bad guys are going to get guns. There's no problem with good guys having guns, though I think in order to purchase a gun you should have to demonstrate responsibility somewhat like applying for a driver's license. I have a bit of a problem with the "stand your ground" laws as people can get trigger happy, and there's the problem with accidental shooting from parents leaving guns laying around the house for their kids to get ahold of which is just plain stupid. Sometimes, however, you can't fix stupid.

Cornographic: You just violated stipulation #2. "Just because we can't eliminate 100% of any given crime doesn't mean we can't reduce the problem. DUI and Crack Cocaine use were sited earlier."

 

We lowered DUI deaths by 50% without taking away anyone's cars. Shouldn't we try to reduce gun deaths without taking away anyone's guns?

 

 

Actually, they usually take away the driving privileges of DUI offenders. I think my position is clear: make it harder to get a gun(s), and go after the various gun black markets/gun show/online loopholes.

 

There are no gun show or online loopholes. What are you talking about?

 

It's possible the "loophole" in question would be that some states do not require secondary market sellers (gun shows) to perform background checks on the purchaser of the firearm.

 

This is is a common myth that's pushed out by the gun control groups. There is no gunshow/internet loophole. The only way to buy a firearm without a background check is person to person. It's federal law. Any business caught selling a firearm without a background check would have the ATF on them immediately.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_show_loophole

[Saunders]

 

 

 

 

 

 

There are so many guns distributed through various black markets, I don't know how you can control it much. Bad guys are going to get guns. There's no problem with good guys having guns, though I think in order to purchase a gun you should have to demonstrate responsibility somewhat like applying for a driver's license. I have a bit of a problem with the "stand your ground" laws as people can get trigger happy, and there's the problem with accidental shooting from parents leaving guns laying around the house for their kids to get ahold of which is just plain stupid. Sometimes, however, you can't fix stupid.

Cornographic: You just violated stipulation #2. "Just because we can't eliminate 100% of any given crime doesn't mean we can't reduce the problem. DUI and Crack Cocaine use were sited earlier."

 

We lowered DUI deaths by 50% without taking away anyone's cars. Shouldn't we try to reduce gun deaths without taking away anyone's guns?

 

 

Actually, they usually take away the driving privileges of DUI offenders. I think my position is clear: make it harder to get a gun(s), and go after the various gun black markets/gun show/online loopholes.

 

There are no gun show or online loopholes. What are you talking about?

 

It's possible the "loophole" in question would be that some states do not require secondary market sellers (gun shows) to perform background checks on the purchaser of the firearm.

 

This is is a common myth that's pushed out by the gun control groups. There is no gunshow/internet loophole. The only way to buy a firearm without a background check is person to person. It's federal law. Any business caught selling a firearm without a background check would have the ATF on them immediately.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_show_loophole

 

Right. It's a private party sale. And the reality is, individual sellers at gun shows are nearly nonexistent these days, because the booth space is outrageous. Plus, many of them have clamped down on private party sales by not allowing transactions on site. I'm fine with requiring a BG check at shows, but it's going to affect somewhere around less than 1% of PP transactions.

 

The problem is, the vast majority of guns used in crimes (IIRC it's like 70%) were via a straw purchase, so a BG check can only do so much.

[StPaulHusker]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There are so many guns distributed through various black markets, I don't know how you can control it much. Bad guys are going to get guns. There's no problem with good guys having guns, though I think in order to purchase a gun you should have to demonstrate responsibility somewhat like applying for a driver's license. I have a bit of a problem with the "stand your ground" laws as people can get trigger happy, and there's the problem with accidental shooting from parents leaving guns laying around the house for their kids to get ahold of which is just plain stupid. Sometimes, however, you can't fix stupid.

Cornographic: You just violated stipulation #2. "Just because we can't eliminate 100% of any given crime doesn't mean we can't reduce the problem. DUI and Crack Cocaine use were sited earlier."

 

We lowered DUI deaths by 50% without taking away anyone's cars. Shouldn't we try to reduce gun deaths without taking away anyone's guns?

 

 

Actually, they usually take away the driving privileges of DUI offenders. I think my position is clear: make it harder to get a gun(s), and go after the various gun black markets/gun show/online loopholes.

 

There are no gun show or online loopholes. What are you talking about?

 

It's possible the "loophole" in question would be that some states do not require secondary market sellers (gun shows) to perform background checks on the purchaser of the firearm.

 

This is is a common myth that's pushed out by the gun control groups. There is no gunshow/internet loophole. The only way to buy a firearm without a background check is person to person. It's federal law. Any business caught selling a firearm without a background check would have the ATF on them immediately.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_show_loophole

 

Right. It's a private party sale. And the reality is, individual sellers at gun shows are nearly nonexistent these days, because the booth space is outrageous. Plus, many of them have clamped down on private party sales by not allowing transactions on site. I'm fine with requiring a BG check at shows, but it's going to affect somewhere around less than 1% of PP transactions.

 

The problem is, the vast majority of guns used in crimes were via a straw purchase, so a BG check can only do so much.

 

This doesn't mean it's a myth and not a loophole.

 

And I am not sure what individual vendors try to sell at these shows to pay for itself but a quick Google search found that several shows run from $350-$500 for a 10X10 booth. Seems reasonable if you are in that business. But I admit I don't really know much about it/

[Saunders]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There are so many guns distributed through various black markets, I don't know how you can control it much. Bad guys are going to get guns. There's no problem with good guys having guns, though I think in order to purchase a gun you should have to demonstrate responsibility somewhat like applying for a driver's license. I have a bit of a problem with the "stand your ground" laws as people can get trigger happy, and there's the problem with accidental shooting from parents leaving guns laying around the house for their kids to get ahold of which is just plain stupid. Sometimes, however, you can't fix stupid.

Cornographic: You just violated stipulation #2. "Just because we can't eliminate 100% of any given crime doesn't mean we can't reduce the problem. DUI and Crack Cocaine use were sited earlier."

 

We lowered DUI deaths by 50% without taking away anyone's cars. Shouldn't we try to reduce gun deaths without taking away anyone's guns?

 

 

Actually, they usually take away the driving privileges of DUI offenders. I think my position is clear: make it harder to get a gun(s), and go after the various gun black markets/gun show/online loopholes.

 

There are no gun show or online loopholes. What are you talking about?

 

It's possible the "loophole" in question would be that some states do not require secondary market sellers (gun shows) to perform background checks on the purchaser of the firearm.

 

This is is a common myth that's pushed out by the gun control groups. There is no gunshow/internet loophole. The only way to buy a firearm without a background check is person to person. It's federal law. Any business caught selling a firearm without a background check would have the ATF on them immediately.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_show_loophole

 

Right. It's a private party sale. And the reality is, individual sellers at gun shows are nearly nonexistent these days, because the booth space is outrageous. Plus, many of them have clamped down on private party sales by not allowing transactions on site. I'm fine with requiring a BG check at shows, but it's going to affect somewhere around less than 1% of PP transactions.

 

The problem is, the vast majority of guns used in crimes were via a straw purchase, so a BG check can only do so much.

 

This doesn't mean it's a myth and not a loophole.

 

And I am not sure what individual vendors try to sell at these shows to pay for itself but a quick Google search found that several shows run from $350-$500 for a 10X10 booth. Seems reasonable if you are in that business. But I admit I don't really know much about it/

 

Politicians like to lump the "gun show/internet purchase" into this loophole talk like it's something special. I've even heard them say "oh you can just buy it and get it shipped to your house" which is unequivocally false. It has to be shipped to a firearms dealer, and they have to ship it via UPS or FEDEX express protected shipping.

 

Buying a gun from a person is a private party sale. It's no different than going to someone's house, or meeting up in person. Plus, the ATF watches gun shows, and if they see a guy moving lots of firearms via "private sales" they quickly become very interested.

 

But like I said before, straw purchases are a much, much bigger problem.

[StPaulHusker]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There are so many guns distributed through various black markets, I don't know how you can control it much. Bad guys are going to get guns. There's no problem with good guys having guns, though I think in order to purchase a gun you should have to demonstrate responsibility somewhat like applying for a driver's license. I have a bit of a problem with the "stand your ground" laws as people can get trigger happy, and there's the problem with accidental shooting from parents leaving guns laying around the house for their kids to get ahold of which is just plain stupid. Sometimes, however, you can't fix stupid.

Cornographic: You just violated stipulation #2. "Just because we can't eliminate 100% of any given crime doesn't mean we can't reduce the problem. DUI and Crack Cocaine use were sited earlier."

 

We lowered DUI deaths by 50% without taking away anyone's cars. Shouldn't we try to reduce gun deaths without taking away anyone's guns?

 

 

Actually, they usually take away the driving privileges of DUI offenders. I think my position is clear: make it harder to get a gun(s), and go after the various gun black markets/gun show/online loopholes.

 

There are no gun show or online loopholes. What are you talking about?

 

It's possible the "loophole" in question would be that some states do not require secondary market sellers (gun shows) to perform background checks on the purchaser of the firearm.

 

This is is a common myth that's pushed out by the gun control groups. There is no gunshow/internet loophole. The only way to buy a firearm without a background check is person to person. It's federal law. Any business caught selling a firearm without a background check would have the ATF on them immediately.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_show_loophole

 

Right. It's a private party sale. And the reality is, individual sellers at gun shows are nearly nonexistent these days, because the booth space is outrageous. Plus, many of them have clamped down on private party sales by not allowing transactions on site. I'm fine with requiring a BG check at shows, but it's going to affect somewhere around less than 1% of PP transactions.

 

The problem is, the vast majority of guns used in crimes were via a straw purchase, so a BG check can only do so much.

 

This doesn't mean it's a myth and not a loophole.

 

And I am not sure what individual vendors try to sell at these shows to pay for itself but a quick Google search found that several shows run from $350-$500 for a 10X10 booth. Seems reasonable if you are in that business. But I admit I don't really know much about it/

 

Politicians like to lump the "gun show/internet purchase" into this loophole talk like it's something special. I've even heard them say "oh you can just buy it and get it shipped to your house" which is unequivocally false. It has to be shipped to a firearms dealer, and they have to ship it via UPS or FEDEX express protected shipping.

 

Buying a gun from a person is a private party sale. It's no different than going to someone's house, or meeting up in person. Plus, the ATF watches gun shows, and if they see a guy moving lots of firearms via "private sales" they quickly become very interested.

 

But like I said before, straw purchases are a much, much bigger problem.

 

You are doing a fine job dancing around the original statement.