Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#41
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
The gun thread
On 11/4/2014 9:04 AM, Harrold wrote:
On 11/4/2014 8:34 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 11/4/2014 7:14 AM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On 11/3/2014 8:38 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Mon, 03 Nov 2014 19:57:01 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: The registration document required on dealer purchases can trace the serial number of the firearm from the manufacturer to the dealer and then to the original purchaser. That record of custody becomes broken when you do a private transfer. === Exactly what problem or crime do you expect to solve with this unbroken chain of custody? I don't hear law enforcement agencies clamoring that they really need this. In mot crimes that I hear about, the original owner of the gun does not seem to be an important question. In itself registration won't prevent crimes Wayne but it may start to reduce the number of guns readily available to those who commit them. Right now it is estimated that between 20 and 40 percent of the guns in the USA are not registered anywhere. How many guns should there be in the USA that are allowed to be in the people's hands? It's a process. It won't return any rewards overnight. You can stop the same number of car related deaths each year by outlawing cars. I agree that from what I've read most in law enforcement do not support many of the contemplated new gun-control proposals but they are more related to things like gun types, magazine sizes, etc. There isn't much on the concept of background checks and registration, mainly I think because those laws already exist for guns purchased through a dealer. Again, the laws exist and are ineffective and you want to require all states to implement ineffective laws. Can't help myself. My responses to your questions and comments: Bar: "How many guns should there be in the USA that are allowed to be in the people's hands?" Me: "As many as they want. I am not against owning guns" Bar: "You can stop the same number of car related deaths each year by outlawing cars." Me: "False equivalency. Cars are not a cause of violent crimes committed by criminals" Maybe "get-a-way cars" :-) Bar: "Again, the laws exist and are ineffective and you want to require all states to implement ineffective laws. Me: "The laws that require a background check and registration for guns purchased from a licensed dealer already exists in *all* the states. It's a federal law. At issue are the guns acquired by other means that are not registered and traceable to the current owner or possessor of the gun. Here are the stats on guns *used in crimes*: 39.6% are obtained from a friend or family member. 39.2% are obtained "on the street" or from an illegal source. 0.7% are purchased at a gun show. 1% are purchased a flea market. 3.8% are from a pawn shop. 8.3% are bought at FFL licenced retail outlets So, you can see that the overwhelming majority of guns that end up being used in a crime come from sources that *do not* require that a chain of custody is maintained. That's why the registration of guns is ineffective as it stands today. If transfers required re-registration to subsequent owners, the number of guns available "on the street" would diminish over time and those used in a crime would be more traceable. We can never completely eliminate gun crimes but when there are 74 or more shootings in schools in 18 months, don't you think it's worth trying? That's my argument. I thought you were done with this thread. ;-) Ok. I am. It's funny though. You know me. In Massachusetts my views are considered to be very conservative. One thing I learned in this thread though is that in many places in the rest of the country I'd be considered a card-carrying progressive liberal. :-) Oh well. It's all relative I guess. |
#43
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
The gun thread
On Tue, 4 Nov 2014 06:53:48 -0800 (PST), True North
wrote: If transfers required re-registration to subsequent owners, the number of guns available "on the street" would diminish over time and those used in a crime would be more traceable. We can never completely eliminate gun crimes but when there are 74 or more shootings in schools in 18 months, don't you think it's worth trying? That's my argument. === Your cure is worse than the disease. Take a look at that "friend or family member" statistic. How do you propose to fix that? If you are the registered owner of a gun that is used in a crime, you share the responsibility for the commitment of that crime unless it is reported as stolen or lost within a time prescribed by law (typically 24-48 hrs). Transfer of ownership to friends or family requires state registration by new owner. This does not require paying a FFL. In MA we can do it on-line and it's free as long as the new owner holds a valid gun permit. Bingo! If Johnny's grandson shoots someone or commits a crime with that fancy rifle, Johnny should share a cell with the kid. === None of that prevents the crime. What it does do it make it less likely that future generations will grow up to be responsible gun owners, and that would be unfortunate. |
#44
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
The gun thread
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 11/4/2014 8:51 AM, Wayne.B wrote: On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 08:34:45 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 11/4/2014 7:14 AM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On 11/3/2014 8:38 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Mon, 03 Nov 2014 19:57:01 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: The registration document required on dealer purchases can trace the serial number of the firearm from the manufacturer to the dealer and then to the original purchaser. That record of custody becomes broken when you do a private transfer. === Exactly what problem or crime do you expect to solve with this unbroken chain of custody? I don't hear law enforcement agencies clamoring that they really need this. In mot crimes that I hear about, the original owner of the gun does not seem to be an important question. In itself registration won't prevent crimes Wayne but it may start to reduce the number of guns readily available to those who commit them. Right now it is estimated that between 20 and 40 percent of the guns in the USA are not registered anywhere. How many guns should there be in the USA that are allowed to be in the people's hands? It's a process. It won't return any rewards overnight. You can stop the same number of car related deaths each year by outlawing cars. I agree that from what I've read most in law enforcement do not support many of the contemplated new gun-control proposals but they are more related to things like gun types, magazine sizes, etc. There isn't much on the concept of background checks and registration, mainly I think because those laws already exist for guns purchased through a dealer. Again, the laws exist and are ineffective and you want to require all states to implement ineffective laws. Can't help myself. My responses to your questions and comments: Bar: "How many guns should there be in the USA that are allowed to be in the people's hands?" Me: "As many as they want. I am not against owning guns" Bar: "You can stop the same number of car related deaths each year by outlawing cars." Me: "False equivalency. Cars are not a cause of violent crimes committed by criminals" Maybe "get-a-way cars" :-) Bar: "Again, the laws exist and are ineffective and you want to require all states to implement ineffective laws. Me: "The laws that require a background check and registration for guns purchased from a licensed dealer already exists in *all* the states. It's a federal law. At issue are the guns acquired by other means that are not registered and traceable to the current owner or possessor of the gun. Here are the stats on guns *used in crimes*: 39.6% are obtained from a friend or family member. 39.2% are obtained "on the street" or from an illegal source. 0.7% are purchased at a gun show. 1% are purchased a flea market. 3.8% are from a pawn shop. 8.3% are bought at FFL licenced retail outlets So, you can see that the overwhelming majority of guns that end up being used in a crime come from sources that *do not* require that a chain of custody is maintained. That's why the registration of guns is ineffective as it stands today. If transfers required re-registration to subsequent owners, the number of guns available "on the street" would diminish over time and those used in a crime would be more traceable. We can never completely eliminate gun crimes but when there are 74 or more shootings in schools in 18 months, don't you think it's worth trying? That's my argument. === Your cure is worse than the disease. Take a look at that "friend or family member" statistic. How do you propose to fix that? If you are the registered owner of a gun that is used in a crime, you share the responsibility for the commitment of that crime unless it is reported as stolen or lost within a time prescribed by law (typically 24-48 hrs). Transfer of ownership to friends or family requires state registration by new owner. This does not require paying a FFL. In MA we can do it on-line and it's free as long as the new owner holds a valid gun permit. You may not know the family member stole the gun for a lot longer than 24 hours. How many check their guns daily? As to ineffective laws. They are even worse than the gun problem. People just start ignoring laws, if you have bunches of stupid laws. Prohibition spawned criminal dynasties, that exist today, because of one really stupid admendment to the constitution. |
#45
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
The gun thread
wrote:
On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 11:07:33 -0600, Califbill wrote: Prohibition spawned criminal dynasties, that exist today, because of one really stupid admendment to the constitution. They perpetuated that when they simply traded prohibition for the drug war. Same dynasties, with a few added. |
#46
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
The gun thread
On Tue, 4 Nov 2014 06:53:48 -0800 (PST), True North
wrote: On Tuesday, 4 November 2014 10:36:47 UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 11/4/2014 8:51 AM, Wayne.B wrote: On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 08:34:45 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: On 11/4/2014 7:14 AM, BAR wrote: In article , says... On 11/3/2014 8:38 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Mon, 03 Nov 2014 19:57:01 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: The registration document required on dealer purchases can trace the serial number of the firearm from the manufacturer to the dealer and then to the original purchaser. That record of custody becomes broken when you do a private transfer. === Exactly what problem or crime do you expect to solve with this unbroken chain of custody? I don't hear law enforcement agencies clamoring that they really need this. In mot crimes that I hear about, the original owner of the gun does not seem to be an important question. In itself registration won't prevent crimes Wayne but it may start to reduce the number of guns readily available to those who commit them. Right now it is estimated that between 20 and 40 percent of the guns in the USA are not registered anywhere. How many guns should there be in the USA that are allowed to be in the people's hands? It's a process. It won't return any rewards overnight. You can stop the same number of car related deaths each year by outlawing cars. I agree that from what I've read most in law enforcement do not support many of the contemplated new gun-control proposals but they are more related to things like gun types, magazine sizes, etc. There isn't much on the concept of background checks and registration, mainly I think because those laws already exist for guns purchased through a dealer. Again, the laws exist and are ineffective and you want to require all states to implement ineffective laws. Can't help myself. My responses to your questions and comments: Bar: "How many guns should there be in the USA that are allowed to be in the people's hands?" Me: "As many as they want. I am not against owning guns" Bar: "You can stop the same number of car related deaths each year by outlawing cars." Me: "False equivalency. Cars are not a cause of violent crimes committed by criminals" Maybe "get-a-way cars" :-) Bar: "Again, the laws exist and are ineffective and you want to require all states to implement ineffective laws. Me: "The laws that require a background check and registration for guns purchased from a licensed dealer already exists in *all* the states. It's a federal law. At issue are the guns acquired by other means that are not registered and traceable to the current owner or possessor of the gun. Here are the stats on guns *used in crimes*: 39.6% are obtained from a friend or family member. 39.2% are obtained "on the street" or from an illegal source. 0.7% are purchased at a gun show. 1% are purchased a flea market. 3.8% are from a pawn shop. 8.3% are bought at FFL licenced retail outlets So, you can see that the overwhelming majority of guns that end up being used in a crime come from sources that *do not* require that a chain of custody is maintained. That's why the registration of guns is ineffective as it stands today. If transfers required re-registration to subsequent owners, the number of guns available "on the street" would diminish over time and those used in a crime would be more traceable. We can never completely eliminate gun crimes but when there are 74 or more shootings in schools in 18 months, don't you think it's worth trying? That's my argument. === Your cure is worse than the disease. Take a look at that "friend or family member" statistic. How do you propose to fix that? If you are the registered owner of a gun that is used in a crime, you share the responsibility for the commitment of that crime unless it is reported as stolen or lost within a time prescribed by law (typically 24-48 hrs). Transfer of ownership to friends or family requires state registration by new owner. This does not require paying a FFL. In MA we can do it on-line and it's free as long as the new owner holds a valid gun permit. Bingo! If Johnny's grandson shoots someone or commits a crime with that fancy rifle, Johnny should share a cell with the kid. Why? If I went through the FFL process (not required in this state), would the results be any different? The crime would still have been committed. |
#47
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
The gun thread
|
#48
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
The gun thread
On 11/4/14 2:21 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 10:43:28 -0500, wrote: On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 08:34:45 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Here are the stats on guns *used in crimes*: 39.6% are obtained from a friend or family member. 39.2% are obtained "on the street" or from an illegal source. 0.7% are purchased at a gun show. 1% are purchased a flea market. 3.8% are from a pawn shop. 8.3% are bought at FFL licenced retail outlets So, you can see that the overwhelming majority of guns that end up being used in a crime come from sources that *do not* require that a chain of custody is maintained. That's why the registration of guns is ineffective as it stands today. If transfers required re-registration to subsequent owners, the number of guns available "on the street" would diminish over time and those used in a crime would be more traceable. We can never completely eliminate gun crimes but when there are 74 or more shootings in schools in 18 months, don't you think it's worth trying? That's my argument. Your argument automatically excludes almost 80% of the crime guns because friends and family may include "borrowed" or "stolen" guns and it is not likely that these people would ever go to a FFL to hand down a gun. There is also about 8% that are not accounted for in that statistic I am still not sure why the "on the street" number would change that much if they came from an "illegal source" AKA stolen. Considering most of the school shooting have involved family guns that were legally purchased I am not sure that registration is even significant. I do find it amusing that after all of this gun show rhetoric, 0.7% of those guns have showed up in a crime. BTW "pawn shops" are FFL licensed gun dealers so you can just make the dealer number 11.1% And note that no mention is made of 'illegal' purchases at gun shows. I've been to several in this state. When a weapon is purchased, the Form 4473 is completed by the buyer and the seller puts the data in a computer. After a short wait, the transaction is completed. None of this back door stuff Krause keeps talking about. Our boy Johnny apparently is unaware of private sellers who frequent Virginia gun shows and sell guns to buyers without the benefit of the instant background check. Those sorts of sales have been on TV news shows many times but perhaps not the local fox news Channel our boy Johnny watches. -- “There’s more idleness and abuse of government favors among the economically privileged than among the ranks of the disadvantaged.” - Norman Mailer |
#49
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
The gun thread
On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 15:50:53 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 11/4/14 2:21 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 10:43:28 -0500, wrote: On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 08:34:45 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Here are the stats on guns *used in crimes*: 39.6% are obtained from a friend or family member. 39.2% are obtained "on the street" or from an illegal source. 0.7% are purchased at a gun show. 1% are purchased a flea market. 3.8% are from a pawn shop. 8.3% are bought at FFL licenced retail outlets So, you can see that the overwhelming majority of guns that end up being used in a crime come from sources that *do not* require that a chain of custody is maintained. That's why the registration of guns is ineffective as it stands today. If transfers required re-registration to subsequent owners, the number of guns available "on the street" would diminish over time and those used in a crime would be more traceable. We can never completely eliminate gun crimes but when there are 74 or more shootings in schools in 18 months, don't you think it's worth trying? That's my argument. Your argument automatically excludes almost 80% of the crime guns because friends and family may include "borrowed" or "stolen" guns and it is not likely that these people would ever go to a FFL to hand down a gun. There is also about 8% that are not accounted for in that statistic I am still not sure why the "on the street" number would change that much if they came from an "illegal source" AKA stolen. Considering most of the school shooting have involved family guns that were legally purchased I am not sure that registration is even significant. I do find it amusing that after all of this gun show rhetoric, 0.7% of those guns have showed up in a crime. BTW "pawn shops" are FFL licensed gun dealers so you can just make the dealer number 11.1% And note that no mention is made of 'illegal' purchases at gun shows. I've been to several in this state. When a weapon is purchased, the Form 4473 is completed by the buyer and the seller puts the data in a computer. After a short wait, the transaction is completed. None of this back door stuff Krause keeps talking about. Our boy Johnny apparently is unaware of private sellers who frequent Virginia gun shows and sell guns to buyers without the benefit of the instant background check. Those sorts of sales have been on TV news shows many times but perhaps not the local fox news Channel our boy Johnny watches. Show me. If it made the TV news, then it made the 'paper' news. You've been spouting the same bull**** over and over, but have yet to back up your tripe. This has been a relatively 'ridicule free' thread until your return. Thanks. |
#50
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
The gun thread
On 11/4/2014 4:05 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 15:50:53 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote: On 11/4/14 2:21 PM, Poco Loco wrote: On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 10:43:28 -0500, wrote: On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 08:34:45 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote: Here are the stats on guns *used in crimes*: 39.6% are obtained from a friend or family member. 39.2% are obtained "on the street" or from an illegal source. 0.7% are purchased at a gun show. 1% are purchased a flea market. 3.8% are from a pawn shop. 8.3% are bought at FFL licenced retail outlets So, you can see that the overwhelming majority of guns that end up being used in a crime come from sources that *do not* require that a chain of custody is maintained. That's why the registration of guns is ineffective as it stands today. If transfers required re-registration to subsequent owners, the number of guns available "on the street" would diminish over time and those used in a crime would be more traceable. We can never completely eliminate gun crimes but when there are 74 or more shootings in schools in 18 months, don't you think it's worth trying? That's my argument. Your argument automatically excludes almost 80% of the crime guns because friends and family may include "borrowed" or "stolen" guns and it is not likely that these people would ever go to a FFL to hand down a gun. There is also about 8% that are not accounted for in that statistic I am still not sure why the "on the street" number would change that much if they came from an "illegal source" AKA stolen. Considering most of the school shooting have involved family guns that were legally purchased I am not sure that registration is even significant. I do find it amusing that after all of this gun show rhetoric, 0.7% of those guns have showed up in a crime. BTW "pawn shops" are FFL licensed gun dealers so you can just make the dealer number 11.1% And note that no mention is made of 'illegal' purchases at gun shows. I've been to several in this state. When a weapon is purchased, the Form 4473 is completed by the buyer and the seller puts the data in a computer. After a short wait, the transaction is completed. None of this back door stuff Krause keeps talking about. Our boy Johnny apparently is unaware of private sellers who frequent Virginia gun shows and sell guns to buyers without the benefit of the instant background check. Those sorts of sales have been on TV news shows many times but perhaps not the local fox news Channel our boy Johnny watches. Show me. If it made the TV news, then it made the 'paper' news. You've been spouting the same bull**** over and over, but have yet to back up your tripe. This has been a relatively 'ridicule free' thread until your return. Thanks. John, I saw the report on TV also. It was on Andersen Cooper's AC360 (CNN) I think it was not long after the Sandy Hook thing. Here's the video for your viewing pleasu https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A51Gr0zpX_c |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Fine Thread vs Course Thread | General | |||
New Thread | ASA | |||
What again? Another thread on Watermakers? | ASA | |||
The Nordie Thread | ASA |