BoatBanter.com

BoatBanter.com (https://www.boatbanter.com/)
-   General (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/)
-   -   Had to share this story (https://www.boatbanter.com/general/162312-had-share-story.html)

Mr. Luddite November 2nd 14 03:20 PM

Had to share this story
 
On 11/2/2014 10:00 AM, wrote:
On Sunday, November 2, 2014 9:05:40 AM UTC-5, Wayne. B wrote:
On Sun, 02 Nov 2014 08:07:46 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/2/2014 8:00 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 20:31:48 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 12:15:27 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

I never said that. I said the opposite. Most gun crimes are done with
legally purchased guns. Stolen guns are a very small percentage.
You've mistaken me for Basskisser.

OK perhaps but what are you calling "gun crimes". Are you talking
about acquaintance killings or are you talking about drug killings,
robberies gone bad and gang violence?


Gun crimes by legal gun owners.



I would sure like to see some proof that most gun crimes are committed
by legal gun owners.


Define "legal" gun owners.


===

I think that's relatively easy:

Any person who is legally entitled to own a gun, and using a gun that
they legally own (not stolen or borrowed without permission).


BOA is playing with words. Virtually all guns are initially legally purchased. However, I've seen no evidence that most gun crimes are committed by legal gun owners with their legally purchased guns. That's BS.



Maybe he can post a cite that supports his claim. I've looked. Can't
find any.



Mr. Luddite November 2nd 14 03:35 PM

Had to share this story
 
On 11/2/2014 10:12 AM, wrote:
On Sunday, November 2, 2014 9:29:22 AM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:


For example, I've looked at the gun laws in South Carolina. All you
have to do is prove you are a resident and you can buy a gun. No
permit, no license, no safety course. Nothing. A permit is required if
you want to conceal carry however.


Well, not quite.

"Federal law requires federally licensed firearms dealers (but not private sellers) to initiate a background check on the purchaser prior to sale of a firearm. Federal law provides states with the option of serving as a state "point of contact" and conducting their own background checks using state, as well as federal, records and databases, or having the checks performed by the FBI using only the federal National Instant Criminal Background Check System ("NICS") database. (Note that state files are not always included in the federal database.)

South Carolina is not a point of contact state for firearm purchaser background checks.1 In South Carolina, firearms dealers must initiate the background check required by federal law by contacting the FBI directly.

Federal law does not require dealers to conduct a background check if a firearm purchaser presents a state permit to purchase or possess firearms that meets certain conditions.2 As a result, concealable weapons permit holders in South Carolina are exempt from the federal background check requirement.3 (Note, however, that people who have become prohibited from possessing firearms may continue to hold state permits to purchase or carry firearms if the state fails to remove these permits in a timely fashion.).

South Carolina law states that a person must be a resident of South Carolina to purchase a handgun from a South Carolina dealer, and that the possession of a valid South Carolina driver's license or Department of Motor Vehicles identification card constitutes proof of residency.4 A dealer may not sell a handgun without clear evidence as to the identity of the purchaser being furnished to the dealer.5

South Carolina does not require private sellers (sellers who are not licensed dealers) to initiate a background check when transferring a firearm."

So, that reads to me that I must be a resident, and will have a background check done on me unless I am a concealed permit holder.

Should I have to take a safety course to get a permit to buy a gun? I'm on the fence with that. One thing is for sure... requiring that would not have any effect on gun crimes. Criminals don't get permits or care about safety, right?



I asked my son about this a while back after he moved to SC. He seemed
to think all you needed was a driver's license to prove residency. He
had a concealed carry permit here in MA but he didn't bother getting one
in SC. He said you can have a handgun in your car in the glove
compartment or center console without a concealed carry permit.

From what you've said it sounds like a SC dealer does an "instant"
background check at the time of purchase like they do in Florida.




[email protected] November 2nd 14 04:03 PM

Had to share this story
 
On Sunday, November 2, 2014 10:35:46 AM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/2/2014 10:12 AM, wrote:
On Sunday, November 2, 2014 9:29:22 AM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:


For example, I've looked at the gun laws in South Carolina. All you
have to do is prove you are a resident and you can buy a gun. No
permit, no license, no safety course. Nothing. A permit is required if
you want to conceal carry however.


Well, not quite.

"Federal law requires federally licensed firearms dealers (but not private sellers) to initiate a background check on the purchaser prior to sale of a firearm. Federal law provides states with the option of serving as a state "point of contact" and conducting their own background checks using state, as well as federal, records and databases, or having the checks performed by the FBI using only the federal National Instant Criminal Background Check System ("NICS") database. (Note that state files are not always included in the federal database.)

South Carolina is not a point of contact state for firearm purchaser background checks.1 In South Carolina, firearms dealers must initiate the background check required by federal law by contacting the FBI directly.

Federal law does not require dealers to conduct a background check if a firearm purchaser presents a state permit to purchase or possess firearms that meets certain conditions.2 As a result, concealable weapons permit holders in South Carolina are exempt from the federal background check requirement.3 (Note, however, that people who have become prohibited from possessing firearms may continue to hold state permits to purchase or carry firearms if the state fails to remove these permits in a timely fashion.).

South Carolina law states that a person must be a resident of South Carolina to purchase a handgun from a South Carolina dealer, and that the possession of a valid South Carolina driver's license or Department of Motor Vehicles identification card constitutes proof of residency.4 A dealer may not sell a handgun without clear evidence as to the identity of the purchaser being furnished to the dealer.5

South Carolina does not require private sellers (sellers who are not licensed dealers) to initiate a background check when transferring a firearm."

So, that reads to me that I must be a resident, and will have a background check done on me unless I am a concealed permit holder.

Should I have to take a safety course to get a permit to buy a gun? I'm on the fence with that. One thing is for sure... requiring that would not have any effect on gun crimes. Criminals don't get permits or care about safety, right?



I asked my son about this a while back after he moved to SC. He seemed
to think all you needed was a driver's license to prove residency. He
had a concealed carry permit here in MA but he didn't bother getting one
in SC. He said you can have a handgun in your car in the glove
compartment or center console without a concealed carry permit.

From what you've said it sounds like a SC dealer does an "instant"
background check at the time of purchase like they do in Florida.


You and your son are correct, at least with my understanding of the state laws. This website has some really good info. It might be helpful especially since you are considering a move to our fine state!

http://www.charlestonlaw.net/handgun-carry-laws-south-carolina/

If you do move down here, I think you'll enjoy it. Great weather while still retaining the four seasons, and the Charleston area is nice and has some really outstanding restaurants. The natives are nice too!

Mr. Luddite November 2nd 14 04:06 PM

Had to share this story
 
On 11/2/2014 10:24 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 2 Nov 2014 10:02:30 -0500, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On 11/2/2014 9:11 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sun, 02 Nov 2014 08:07:46 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/2/2014 8:00 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 20:31:48 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 12:15:27 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

I never said that. I said the opposite. Most gun crimes are done with
legally purchased guns. Stolen guns are a very small percentage.
You've mistaken me for Basskisser.

OK perhaps but what are you calling "gun crimes". Are you talking
about acquaintance killings or are you talking about drug killings,
robberies gone bad and gang violence?


Gun crimes by legal gun owners.



I would sure like to see some proof that most gun crimes are committed
by legal gun owners.


Define "legal" gun owners.



What he said ...'most gun crimes are done with legally purchased
guns'...and then...'gun crimes by legal gun owners'.

I'm thinking that if I wanted to commit a crime with a gun, I wouldn't
want to use one that's traceable back to me. If I had to use one that
was traceable to me, then it would be somewhere in the Potomac when I
was finished with it.

The Chicago Tribune reports 440 murders in Chicago in 2013. You reckon
most of those were committed by 'legal gun owners'? And then throw in
Flint, New Orleans, Detroit, and Jackson. Most murders committed by
legal gun owners?



I find it hard to believe most crimes involving guns are committed by
legal gun owners but then again, I don't know what "legal" means in the
areas you mentioned.


legal
adj., adv. according to law, not in violation of law or anything related
to the law.

For example, I've looked at the gun laws in South Carolina. All you
have to do is prove you are a resident and you can buy a gun. No
permit, no license, no safety course. Nothing. A permit is required if
you want to conceal carry however.


Do you believe that people should have to ask and receive permission
from the government to exercise their rights before they exercise their
rights?


BAO is certainly a fascist (in the classical sense) He sees no real
limit to government power, even implying he thinks you should need to
be finger printed and submit to a background check before you can
vote.

I doubt Richard would agree with that but then he is simply cherry
picking the rights we are entitled to without infringement.



I don't see a background check as being an infringement on your right to
buy or own a firearm. The concept of a nationwide computerized data
base was unfathomable when the Bill of Rights was written. By virtue of
getting a permit it means you had a background check performed.

What I'd really like to see is some standardization and uniformity of
the gun laws throughout the country. In some states, like mine, the
determination of granting a permit and what type comes down to the
police chief in the town or city you live in. Massachusetts used to be
a "may issue" state for all types of permits with the determination left
up to the local police department chief. That was changed to "shall
issue" for permits that do not allow concealed carry and "may issue" for
concealed carry. There was a time when it was difficult to get any
type of gun permit because it was all up to the local (town) government
and police department. There are still a couple of towns that are
trying to stay "gun free zones".



Mr. Luddite November 2nd 14 04:25 PM

Had to share this story
 
On 11/2/2014 11:03 AM, wrote:
On Sunday, November 2, 2014 10:35:46 AM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/2/2014 10:12 AM,
wrote:
On Sunday, November 2, 2014 9:29:22 AM UTC-5, Mr. Luddite wrote:


For example, I've looked at the gun laws in South Carolina. All you
have to do is prove you are a resident and you can buy a gun. No
permit, no license, no safety course. Nothing. A permit is required if
you want to conceal carry however.

Well, not quite.

"Federal law requires federally licensed firearms dealers (but not private sellers) to initiate a background check on the purchaser prior to sale of a firearm. Federal law provides states with the option of serving as a state "point of contact" and conducting their own background checks using state, as well as federal, records and databases, or having the checks performed by the FBI using only the federal National Instant Criminal Background Check System ("NICS") database. (Note that state files are not always included in the federal database.)

South Carolina is not a point of contact state for firearm purchaser background checks.1 In South Carolina, firearms dealers must initiate the background check required by federal law by contacting the FBI directly.

Federal law does not require dealers to conduct a background check if a firearm purchaser presents a state permit to purchase or possess firearms that meets certain conditions.2 As a result, concealable weapons permit holders in South Carolina are exempt from the federal background check requirement.3 (Note, however, that people who have become prohibited from possessing firearms may continue to hold state permits to purchase or carry firearms if the state fails to remove these permits in a timely fashion.).

South Carolina law states that a person must be a resident of South Carolina to purchase a handgun from a South Carolina dealer, and that the possession of a valid South Carolina driver's license or Department of Motor Vehicles identification card constitutes proof of residency.4 A dealer may not sell a handgun without clear evidence as to the identity of the purchaser being furnished to the dealer.5

South Carolina does not require private sellers (sellers who are not licensed dealers) to initiate a background check when transferring a firearm."

So, that reads to me that I must be a resident, and will have a background check done on me unless I am a concealed permit holder.

Should I have to take a safety course to get a permit to buy a gun? I'm on the fence with that. One thing is for sure... requiring that would not have any effect on gun crimes. Criminals don't get permits or care about safety, right?



I asked my son about this a while back after he moved to SC. He seemed
to think all you needed was a driver's license to prove residency. He
had a concealed carry permit here in MA but he didn't bother getting one
in SC. He said you can have a handgun in your car in the glove
compartment or center console without a concealed carry permit.

From what you've said it sounds like a SC dealer does an "instant"
background check at the time of purchase like they do in Florida.


You and your son are correct, at least with my understanding of the state laws. This website has some really good info. It might be helpful especially since you are considering a move to our fine state!

http://www.charlestonlaw.net/handgun-carry-laws-south-carolina/

If you do move down here, I think you'll enjoy it. Great weather while still retaining the four seasons, and the Charleston area is nice and has some really outstanding restaurants. The natives are nice too!



My son and his family moved down there about 2 and a half years ago.
They have two girls, (one 16, one 10 or 11) and 3 year old twins ... a
boy and a girl. All of them love it down there.

Of all things, he decided to buy an existing liqueur store in the Mt.
Pleasant area where he lives. It was run down and not doing that well
so he applied and received the licenses required, bought the place and
completely renovated it. He turned it into more of a high-end, boutique
place with a sports theme and the place has become very popular, both
for locals and for boaters on the ICW looking to "stock up". His place
has won awards for the selection of booze available, the service and
it's unique atmosphere. Last year he was able to lease an adjoining
space and opened it exclusively for wine sales.



Mr. Luddite November 2nd 14 04:39 PM

Had to share this story
 
On 11/2/2014 11:28 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 02 Nov 2014 11:06:06 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/2/2014 10:24 AM,
wrote:
On Sun, 2 Nov 2014 10:02:30 -0500, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On 11/2/2014 9:11 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sun, 02 Nov 2014 08:07:46 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/2/2014 8:00 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 20:31:48 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 12:15:27 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

I never said that. I said the opposite. Most gun crimes are done with
legally purchased guns. Stolen guns are a very small percentage.
You've mistaken me for Basskisser.

OK perhaps but what are you calling "gun crimes". Are you talking
about acquaintance killings or are you talking about drug killings,
robberies gone bad and gang violence?


Gun crimes by legal gun owners.



I would sure like to see some proof that most gun crimes are committed
by legal gun owners.


Define "legal" gun owners.



What he said ...'most gun crimes are done with legally purchased
guns'...and then...'gun crimes by legal gun owners'.

I'm thinking that if I wanted to commit a crime with a gun, I wouldn't
want to use one that's traceable back to me. If I had to use one that
was traceable to me, then it would be somewhere in the Potomac when I
was finished with it.

The Chicago Tribune reports 440 murders in Chicago in 2013. You reckon
most of those were committed by 'legal gun owners'? And then throw in
Flint, New Orleans, Detroit, and Jackson. Most murders committed by
legal gun owners?



I find it hard to believe most crimes involving guns are committed by
legal gun owners but then again, I don't know what "legal" means in the
areas you mentioned.

legal
adj., adv. according to law, not in violation of law or anything related
to the law.

For example, I've looked at the gun laws in South Carolina. All you
have to do is prove you are a resident and you can buy a gun. No
permit, no license, no safety course. Nothing. A permit is required if
you want to conceal carry however.

Do you believe that people should have to ask and receive permission
from the government to exercise their rights before they exercise their
rights?

BAO is certainly a fascist (in the classical sense) He sees no real
limit to government power, even implying he thinks you should need to
be finger printed and submit to a background check before you can
vote.

I doubt Richard would agree with that but then he is simply cherry
picking the rights we are entitled to without infringement.



I don't see a background check as being an infringement on your right to
buy or own a firearm. The concept of a nationwide computerized data
base was unfathomable when the Bill of Rights was written. By virtue of
getting a permit it means you had a background check performed.

What I'd really like to see is some standardization and uniformity of
the gun laws throughout the country. In some states, like mine, the
determination of granting a permit and what type comes down to the
police chief in the town or city you live in. Massachusetts used to be
a "may issue" state for all types of permits with the determination left
up to the local police department chief. That was changed to "shall
issue" for permits that do not allow concealed carry and "may issue" for
concealed carry. There was a time when it was difficult to get any
type of gun permit because it was all up to the local (town) government
and police department. There are still a couple of towns that are
trying to stay "gun free zones".


I would contend that most of the country has very little in common
with the Northern Atlantic states. That is why we had a limited
federal government in the first place. Laws that seem to make perfect
sense to people in Boston, New York or New Haven sound ridiculous in
Butte or Boise



So, you're saying that "PaPy" in Boise still hands a .22 rifle to 9 year
old "Jr" and tells him, "I'm a'grumblin. Go fetch us some viddles while
I stoke up the stove"?




Mr. Luddite November 2nd 14 04:46 PM

Had to share this story
 
On 11/2/2014 11:07 AM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 11/2/2014 10:02 AM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 11/2/2014 9:11 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sun, 02 Nov 2014 08:07:46 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/2/2014 8:00 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 20:31:48 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 12:15:27 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

I never said that. I said the opposite. Most gun crimes are done with
legally purchased guns. Stolen guns are a very small percentage.
You've mistaken me for Basskisser.

OK perhaps but what are you calling "gun crimes". Are you talking
about acquaintance killings or are you talking about drug killings,
robberies gone bad and gang violence?


Gun crimes by legal gun owners.



I would sure like to see some proof that most gun crimes are committed
by legal gun owners.


Define "legal" gun owners.



What he said ...'most gun crimes are done with legally purchased
guns'...and then...'gun crimes by legal gun owners'.

I'm thinking that if I wanted to commit a crime with a gun, I wouldn't
want to use one that's traceable back to me. If I had to use one that
was traceable to me, then it would be somewhere in the Potomac when I
was finished with it.

The Chicago Tribune reports 440 murders in Chicago in 2013. You reckon
most of those were committed by 'legal gun owners'? And then throw in
Flint, New Orleans, Detroit, and Jackson. Most murders committed by
legal gun owners?



I find it hard to believe most crimes involving guns are committed by
legal gun owners but then again, I don't know what "legal" means in the
areas you mentioned.

legal
adj., adv. according to law, not in violation of law or anything related
to the law.

For example, I've looked at the gun laws in South Carolina. All you
have to do is prove you are a resident and you can buy a gun. No
permit, no license, no safety course. Nothing. A permit is required if
you want to conceal carry however.

Do you believe that people should have to ask and receive permission
from the government to exercise their rights before they exercise their
rights?



No I don't, but in that case how do you justify the federal laws that
prohibits those with a felony conviction from legally owning a firearm
or not being able to vote if you are in prison, on parole or on

probation?

Why shouldn't a person who has served their time (prison, parole or
probation) for a conviction have his rights restored? If evidence of
previous bad acts can't be used to convict someone why should the same
apply with respect to rights.

I support the idea of having background checks for gun ownership.


Do you support the idea of having background checks for casting votes?
Why do you treat some rights differently than other rights?



Voting and owning a gun are two different things, don'cha think? Come
to think of it, I don't know which is more dangerous. -)

BTW .. While in prison a convict cannot vote. While he/she is is on
parole or probation ... they cannot vote. Once a sentence is served or
a parole/probation period is completed, their right to vote is restored.
Federal law.



Poco Loco November 2nd 14 05:20 PM

Had to share this story
 
On Sun, 02 Nov 2014 10:20:43 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/2/2014 10:00 AM, wrote:
On Sunday, November 2, 2014 9:05:40 AM UTC-5, Wayne. B wrote:
On Sun, 02 Nov 2014 08:07:46 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/2/2014 8:00 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 20:31:48 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 12:15:27 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

I never said that. I said the opposite. Most gun crimes are done with
legally purchased guns. Stolen guns are a very small percentage.
You've mistaken me for Basskisser.

OK perhaps but what are you calling "gun crimes". Are you talking
about acquaintance killings or are you talking about drug killings,
robberies gone bad and gang violence?


Gun crimes by legal gun owners.



I would sure like to see some proof that most gun crimes are committed
by legal gun owners.


Define "legal" gun owners.


===

I think that's relatively easy:

Any person who is legally entitled to own a gun, and using a gun that
they legally own (not stolen or borrowed without permission).


BOA is playing with words. Virtually all guns are initially legally purchased. However, I've seen no evidence that most gun crimes are committed by legal gun owners with their legally purchased guns. That's BS.



Maybe he can post a cite that supports his claim. I've looked. Can't
find any.


That's what I asked for!

Poco Loco November 2nd 14 05:22 PM

Had to share this story
 
On Sun, 02 Nov 2014 11:46:29 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/2/2014 11:07 AM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 11/2/2014 10:02 AM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 11/2/2014 9:11 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sun, 02 Nov 2014 08:07:46 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/2/2014 8:00 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 20:31:48 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 12:15:27 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

I never said that. I said the opposite. Most gun crimes are done with
legally purchased guns. Stolen guns are a very small percentage.
You've mistaken me for Basskisser.

OK perhaps but what are you calling "gun crimes". Are you talking
about acquaintance killings or are you talking about drug killings,
robberies gone bad and gang violence?


Gun crimes by legal gun owners.



I would sure like to see some proof that most gun crimes are committed
by legal gun owners.


Define "legal" gun owners.



What he said ...'most gun crimes are done with legally purchased
guns'...and then...'gun crimes by legal gun owners'.

I'm thinking that if I wanted to commit a crime with a gun, I wouldn't
want to use one that's traceable back to me. If I had to use one that
was traceable to me, then it would be somewhere in the Potomac when I
was finished with it.

The Chicago Tribune reports 440 murders in Chicago in 2013. You reckon
most of those were committed by 'legal gun owners'? And then throw in
Flint, New Orleans, Detroit, and Jackson. Most murders committed by
legal gun owners?



I find it hard to believe most crimes involving guns are committed by
legal gun owners but then again, I don't know what "legal" means in the
areas you mentioned.

legal
adj., adv. according to law, not in violation of law or anything related
to the law.

For example, I've looked at the gun laws in South Carolina. All you
have to do is prove you are a resident and you can buy a gun. No
permit, no license, no safety course. Nothing. A permit is required if
you want to conceal carry however.

Do you believe that people should have to ask and receive permission
from the government to exercise their rights before they exercise their
rights?



No I don't, but in that case how do you justify the federal laws that
prohibits those with a felony conviction from legally owning a firearm
or not being able to vote if you are in prison, on parole or on

probation?

Why shouldn't a person who has served their time (prison, parole or
probation) for a conviction have his rights restored? If evidence of
previous bad acts can't be used to convict someone why should the same
apply with respect to rights.

I support the idea of having background checks for gun ownership.


Do you support the idea of having background checks for casting votes?
Why do you treat some rights differently than other rights?



Voting and owning a gun are two different things, don'cha think? Come
to think of it, I don't know which is more dangerous. -)

BTW .. While in prison a convict cannot vote. While he/she is is on
parole or probation ... they cannot vote. Once a sentence is served or
a parole/probation period is completed, their right to vote is restored.
Federal law.


Are you talking about legal or illegal convicts? :)

Poco Loco November 2nd 14 05:24 PM

Had to share this story
 
On Sun, 02 Nov 2014 11:39:23 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/2/2014 11:28 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 02 Nov 2014 11:06:06 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/2/2014 10:24 AM,
wrote:
On Sun, 2 Nov 2014 10:02:30 -0500, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On 11/2/2014 9:11 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sun, 02 Nov 2014 08:07:46 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/2/2014 8:00 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 20:31:48 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 1 Nov 2014 12:15:27 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

I never said that. I said the opposite. Most gun crimes are done with
legally purchased guns. Stolen guns are a very small percentage.
You've mistaken me for Basskisser.

OK perhaps but what are you calling "gun crimes". Are you talking
about acquaintance killings or are you talking about drug killings,
robberies gone bad and gang violence?


Gun crimes by legal gun owners.



I would sure like to see some proof that most gun crimes are committed
by legal gun owners.


Define "legal" gun owners.



What he said ...'most gun crimes are done with legally purchased
guns'...and then...'gun crimes by legal gun owners'.

I'm thinking that if I wanted to commit a crime with a gun, I wouldn't
want to use one that's traceable back to me. If I had to use one that
was traceable to me, then it would be somewhere in the Potomac when I
was finished with it.

The Chicago Tribune reports 440 murders in Chicago in 2013. You reckon
most of those were committed by 'legal gun owners'? And then throw in
Flint, New Orleans, Detroit, and Jackson. Most murders committed by
legal gun owners?



I find it hard to believe most crimes involving guns are committed by
legal gun owners but then again, I don't know what "legal" means in the
areas you mentioned.

legal
adj., adv. according to law, not in violation of law or anything related
to the law.

For example, I've looked at the gun laws in South Carolina. All you
have to do is prove you are a resident and you can buy a gun. No
permit, no license, no safety course. Nothing. A permit is required if
you want to conceal carry however.

Do you believe that people should have to ask and receive permission
from the government to exercise their rights before they exercise their
rights?

BAO is certainly a fascist (in the classical sense) He sees no real
limit to government power, even implying he thinks you should need to
be finger printed and submit to a background check before you can
vote.

I doubt Richard would agree with that but then he is simply cherry
picking the rights we are entitled to without infringement.



I don't see a background check as being an infringement on your right to
buy or own a firearm. The concept of a nationwide computerized data
base was unfathomable when the Bill of Rights was written. By virtue of
getting a permit it means you had a background check performed.

What I'd really like to see is some standardization and uniformity of
the gun laws throughout the country. In some states, like mine, the
determination of granting a permit and what type comes down to the
police chief in the town or city you live in. Massachusetts used to be
a "may issue" state for all types of permits with the determination left
up to the local police department chief. That was changed to "shall
issue" for permits that do not allow concealed carry and "may issue" for
concealed carry. There was a time when it was difficult to get any
type of gun permit because it was all up to the local (town) government
and police department. There are still a couple of towns that are
trying to stay "gun free zones".


I would contend that most of the country has very little in common
with the Northern Atlantic states. That is why we had a limited
federal government in the first place. Laws that seem to make perfect
sense to people in Boston, New York or New Haven sound ridiculous in
Butte or Boise



So, you're saying that "PaPy" in Boise still hands a .22 rifle to 9 year
old "Jr" and tells him, "I'm a'grumblin. Go fetch us some viddles while
I stoke up the stove"?



I was a tad older, 12, when I'd bring rabbits and squirrels home a
couple times a week for dinner.

Believe it, it's done.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:19 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com