Purchasing a Pistol
 

On Wed, 6 Jan 2016 11:33:48 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

It was an eye opener to see how many murders go unsolved here. I was
really surprised. When you take into account that at least a third are
not really "who done it" crimes it does demonstrate the futility of
gun control as a crime control measure because these murders take
place in cities with the strictest gun control laws..

What about the 2/3rds that *are* solved? Is your glass two thirds full
or one third empty?

Since most of them are acquaintance murders where the killer is still
there when the cops arrive, I am not sure any of these proposed
changes will have any effect at all. These are also more likely to be
the murders that involve weapons other than guns.
We do not see a lot of actual analysis of murder because the numbers
would not help advance anyone's agenda.
The data is there but nobody seems to do much more than cherry pick
out the stat they need to make their point.
The things that actually rile up the various groups are usually
anomalies.
The fact is black people usually kill black people (almost half of the
murders)
White people kill white people (usually by someone they know) and most
kids are killed by their parents.
It is pretty hard to drum up a scare campaign with that tho.

Purchasing a Pistol
 

On Wed, 6 Jan 2016 11:35:52 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:



So what? It still demonstrated how easy one with a hair across his ass
can buy a gun. Or two. Or three.


The point is, if someone was willing to break an existing federal law,
why wouldn't they break a new federal law?

Purchasing a Pistol
 

On Wed, 6 Jan 2016 11:54:17 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Banning guns will not eliminate murder.



Of course not. But, according to this, about 69 percent of murders
committed in the USA in 2012 were done with guns. Banning them,
(which nobody, including me is advocating) would certainly have an
affect on those stats. Check out:

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004888.html

I know. Murderers will just use more clubs, hammers and knives, right?

They did in Australia.

Purchasing a Pistol
 

On 1/6/2016 11:43 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2016 02:58:21 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 1/6/2016 2:25 AM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...


Some people are only concerned with and support laws or regulations
that protects *them* or their interests. Laws or regulations
that don't concern them are unnecessary and the cost to enforce
them a personal burden in their minds.

You could have just said "gun nut."


I am a gun owner but I don't consider myself a gun nut.

I never owned a firearm when we had kids living with us. Didn't buy my
first gun until 2009 and did so only at the recommendation of
a lawyer friend because I owned and ran a guitar shop and often had
large sums of cash on me. I also had been thinking about getting
a permit and gun simply because my wife and I are now older and not
quite as physically capable as we were years ago in terms of defending
ourselves. So, basically the guns serve as a potential (but unlikely)
home invasion defense. Most of the time they sit in a safe that
I can guarantee even Greg couldn't "crack" unless he used dynamite. :-)


You are not making much sense now. You have a gun to protect against
"home invasion" but it is in a safe.
Are you planning on them calling for an appointment? ;-)

You must have missed "most of the time". I have several guns.
Not all are in the safe *all* of the time. At least one is within
an arm's reach at night.


BTW have you ever seen what a 14" cutoff saw does with a diamond blade
in it? Concrete and steel is certainly no match for it.

You haven't seen my safe. First, you would have to find it. Second,
it's not your average home safe. Don't know about the top, sides or
bottom because I can't get to them from the outside but the door is
about 2 and a half inches thick. Dynamite would probably be faster and
less noisy.



The first thing a thief will have to do at my house will be to know
where to even look. One thing about large scale renovations is it
allows you to create "hidey holes" in unexpected places ;-)

Purchasing a Pistol
 

On 1/6/2016 11:33 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
whoa fully
You've been around Horses toooo long. ;-)

Purchasing a Pistol
 

On 1/6/2016 12:34 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2016 11:35:52 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:



So what? It still demonstrated how easy one with a hair across his ass
can buy a gun. Or two. Or three.


The point is, if someone was willing to break an existing federal law,
why wouldn't they break a new federal law?


Because a chain of custody that automatically exists because of the
background check allows a trace as to where that gun came from, who
owned it, who sold it, when and to whom.

Purchasing a Pistol
 

On 1/6/2016 11:40 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/6/2016 11:02 AM, Justan Olphart wrote:
On 1/6/2016 10:12 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/6/2016 9:36 AM, Justan Olphart wrote:
On 1/6/2016 2:02 AM, Boating All Out wrote:
The obvious answer to reducing gun deaths is to reduce the
number of guns. Sorry.

Now that's just plain stupid.


It's not really stupid. It's logical. And, if those opposed to
*any* kind of constructive discussion or attempts to reduce gun
deaths and crime with reasonable gun control laws, it may just come to
that eventually.

You need to take the guns out of the hands of people who are likely to
commit crimes with them. Reducing the number of guns isn't going to
accomplish that. His comment was still stupid (IMO). Taking Luddite's
guns away from him won't accomplish anything.


I agree with you and one way to take the guns out of the hands of people
who are likely to commit crimes with them is to have mandatory
background checks across the board. It won't stop *all* illegal
transfers but it, along with some records of custody may start to reduce
the number in unqualified people's hands.

But, I know the naysayers will now jump in and cite that because it
doesn't solve everything, it's not worth doing ... or at least considering.


Removing career criminals from society permanently will produce far
better gun crime statistics than O'Bama's plan. But that's not how
liberals fly. Kill em with kindness (rehab) and penalize the good guys
is their M O.

Purchasing a Pistol
 

On 1/6/2016 12:36 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jan 2016 11:54:17 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Banning guns will not eliminate murder.



Of course not. But, according to this, about 69 percent of murders
committed in the USA in 2012 were done with guns. Banning them,
(which nobody, including me is advocating) would certainly have an
affect on those stats. Check out:

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004888.html

I know. Murderers will just use more clubs, hammers and knives, right?

They did in Australia.



There you go! Excellent point. Since a lack of guns means that
murderers will shift to using more clubs, hammers and knives which are
a far more painful way to die, we may as well lift all restrictions on
guns since it's quick, more efficient and a more humane way to kill someone.

Purchasing a Pistol
 

On 1/6/2016 12:39 PM, Justan Olphart wrote:
On 1/6/2016 11:33 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
whoa fully
You've been around Horses toooo long. ;-)


No ****. Very sensitive subject around here right now. :-)

I still perform my appointed duties though. Feed 'em hay
in the morning after making my old fart deliveries to the
day care place and add 15 gallons of hot water to their
frozen solid water trough. 9 degrees here at 7 am this morning.

Purchasing a Pistol
 

On 1/6/2016 12:59 PM, John H. wrote:

My next door neighbor was a FFL until he died.

Well that certainly would end his career.