Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    10:40 PM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: The NRA's idea does not work. Back to Topics
Michiganian

Champion Author
Michigan

Posts:6,040
Points:1,034,545
Joined:Jun 2004
Message Posted: Dec 21, 2012 4:11:46 PM

Just ask the survivors at Columbine HS, Fort Hood and Virginia Tech.
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,848
Points:2,543,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Apr 24, 2014 7:15:00 PM

Weaslespit - "but it was quite violent nevertheless with the haves pushing around the have-nots... Plenty of vigilante justice as well, which IMO is a step backwards in social evolution."

IOW much like some inner cities, which often have the strictest gun restrictions and the lowest rates of legal gun ownership.

And you're overstating the amount of violence, though that's a common misconception. Western movies and TV shows were much more violent than the actual "Wild West" was.

"Not really - it is mere common sense that the more CC there is, the more outbreaks of unnecessary violence there will be (shooting kids because they mouthed off to you, shooting somebody because they threw popcorn at you, shooting at kids because they beat you up after you chased them down in an act of road rage). It is a simple extrapolation based on events we are already seeing."

Except that those events are quite rare, and we're not seeing any significant occurrences of those events in the areas with the loosest gun laws.

So hardly "common sense".
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,251
Points:458,570
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Apr 24, 2014 4:07:51 PM

"So isn't failure to at least notify the someone else dereliction of duty?"

Wouldn't that imply willful neglect? Seems to me they are simply overwhelmed...
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,251
Points:458,570
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Apr 24, 2014 4:06:44 PM

"The "Wild West" didn't have gun fights in the street every 15 minutes, and there wasn't blood flowing down the streets."

I haven't seen anybody say there was a shoot-out every 15 minutes, but it was quite violent nevertheless with the haves pushing around the have-nots... Plenty of vigilante justice as well, which IMO is a step backwards in social evolution.

"Yet you've only got your paranoia to say that that would be a really really bad thing."

Not really - it is mere common sense that the more CC there is, the more outbreaks of unnecessary violence there will be (shooting kids because they mouthed off to you, shooting somebody because they threw popcorn at you, shooting at kids because they beat you up after you chased them down in an act of road rage). It is a simple extrapolation based on events we are already seeing.
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,848
Points:2,543,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Apr 24, 2014 3:38:49 PM

Perhaps, but the publicity wouldn't be good for careers.
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:20,501
Points:3,503,390
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Apr 24, 2014 3:31:21 PM

"Maybe those authorities can and should be sued by any victims of their failure."

Sovereign Immunity might negate any recovery.
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:20,501
Points:3,503,390
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Apr 24, 2014 3:27:58 PM

"So isn't failure to at least notify the someone else dereliction of duty?"

YES!
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,848
Points:2,543,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Apr 24, 2014 3:25:08 PM

SE3.5 - "That looks to me like, 'whew, they are now someone else's problem.'"

So you're thinking is that they are considered dangerous, but someone else's problem?

So isn't failure to at least notify the someone else dereliction of duty? Maybe those authorities can and should be sued by any victims of their failure.

Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,848
Points:2,543,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Apr 24, 2014 3:22:44 PM

Weaslespit - "Please, explain."

The "Wild West" didn't have gun fights in the street every 15 minutes, and there wasn't blood flowing down the streets.

IOW, it was typically safer than your usual inner city neighborhood.

"Yes - I am paranoid that if we follow the will of the NRA that anybody will be carrying at any time anywhere... I agree."

Yet you've only got your paranoia to say that that would be a really really bad thing.

We've already got 5 states that allow unrestricted concealed and open carry (Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Vermont and Wyoming). Vermont has never had restrictions. Montana and Idaho both currently allow concealed carry without a permit in places outside of any incorporated municipality. None of them have had any significant problems with it.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,251
Points:458,570
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Apr 24, 2014 1:58:49 PM

"The gaps are largely a byproduct of the fact that police and prosecutors are often unwilling to spend the time or money to pursue fugitives across a state border."

Like I said, a lack of resources.
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:20,501
Points:3,503,390
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Apr 24, 2014 9:29:51 AM

"Which probably means they don't consider them dangerous."

ROTFL at your naivety. Did you read this in the article? "The gaps are largely a byproduct of the fact that police and prosecutors are often unwilling to spend the time or money to pursue fugitives across a state border."

That looks to me like, "whew, they are now someone else's problem."



[Edited by: SE3.5 at 4/24/2014 9:30:12 AM EST]
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,251
Points:458,570
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Apr 24, 2014 9:08:00 AM

"First of all, the usual cries about a "return of the Wild West" are based on both an ignorance of the real "Wild West"...

Please, explain.

"and acute paranoia about guns"

Yes - I am paranoid that if we follow the will of the NRA that anybody will be carrying at any time anywhere... I agree.
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,848
Points:2,543,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Apr 23, 2014 1:38:36 PM

WES03 - "When Florida passed right-to-carry in 1987 (I think that was the year), predictions were of carnage. Instead murder rates fell dramatically. When Virginia passed similar laws the Washington Post predicted the return of the Wild West. Instead murder rates fell and is much lower than it's gun restricted neighbor, ultra-liberal Maryland. How can this be?"

Probably due to several reasons. First of all, the usual cries about a "return of the Wild West" are based on both an ignorance of the real "Wild West" and acute paranoia about guns. Second, crime rates started falling all over the country after 1993, most probably due to taking tetraethyl lead out of gasoline 20-some years earlier.

And it looks like the murder rate in Virginia was lower than that in Maryland even before Virginia went to "shall-issue".
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,251
Points:458,570
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Apr 23, 2014 1:24:25 PM

"I have seen police being laid off from "traditional" police departments."

Which is a major source for information to populate the database.

"Even my local school district now has its own "police force" with full police powers. Federal, state and local government agencies now have their own separate "police forces"."

Do these all have access to enter information into the national database?
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,848
Points:2,543,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Apr 23, 2014 1:16:19 PM

SE3.5 - "Headline (USA Today 04.23.14): GUN CHECKS MISS MILLIONS OF FUGITIVES"

From the article: "many agencies see no reason to include the names of fugitives they have no intention of pursuing."

Which probably means they don't consider them dangerous.

Note that this is also based on arrest warrants, which means they haven't actually been convicted of anything.

They also don't have any real numbers for how many of those "Millions of fugitives" actually try to buy guns, or commit crimes with them.

On the whole, looks like yet another attempt to revive the dead horse of gun control.

[Edited by: rjhenn at 4/23/2014 1:16:30 PM EST]
Profile Pic
WES03
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:6,130
Points:1,532,650
Joined:Feb 2009
Message Posted: Apr 23, 2014 12:03:21 PM

When Florida passed right-to-carry in 1987 (I think that was the year), predictions were of carnage. Instead murder rates fell dramatically. When Virginia passed similar laws the Washington Post predicted the return of the Wild West. Instead murder rates fell and is much lower than it's gun restricted neighbor, ultra-liberal Maryland. How can this be?
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:20,501
Points:3,503,390
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Apr 23, 2014 10:15:56 AM

"Or do you not see the massive amount of layoffs of local police across the country since the Recession?"

I have seen police being laid off from "traditional" police departments. I have also seen a proliferation of new "police forces". Even my local school district now has its own "police force" with full police powers. Federal, state and local government agencies now have their own separate "police forces".
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,251
Points:458,570
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Apr 23, 2014 9:47:52 AM

"The problem is not the NRA and its ideas. The problem is with the lazy government employees who fail to enforce the myriad gun laws on the books. Here is a glaring example:"

Lazy? Oh my... Try instead 'lacking in resources'. Or do you not see the massive amount of layoffs of local police across the country since the Recession?
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,251
Points:458,570
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Apr 23, 2014 9:46:09 AM

"I don't expect any measurable effect, other than increased media attention on every shooting in Georgia."

I believe we are in agreement on this.
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:20,501
Points:3,503,390
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Apr 23, 2014 8:45:16 AM

The problem is not the NRA and its ideas. The problem is with the lazy government employees who fail to enforce the myriad gun laws on the books. Here is a glaring example:

Headline (USA Today 04.23.14): GUN CHECKS MISS MILLIONS OF FUGITIVES

"Millions of fugitives can pass undetected through federal background checks and buy guns illegally because police departments across the country routinely fail to put their names into a national database that tracks people on the run from the law."

--Brad Heath, USA Today

Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,848
Points:2,543,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Apr 23, 2014 12:52:13 AM

01DuraMAX - "Victory in Georgia
Betcha see the crime rates in Georgia go Down!!"

I don't expect any measurable effect, other than increased media attention on every shooting in Georgia.

[Edited by: rjhenn at 4/23/2014 12:52:38 AM EST]
Profile Pic
01DuraMAX
Champion Author Tacoma

Posts:5,167
Points:985,050
Joined:Apr 2008
Message Posted: Apr 23, 2014 12:23:13 AM

Victory in Georgia
Betcha see the crime rates in Georgia go Down!!
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,251
Points:458,570
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Apr 22, 2014 10:33:04 AM

"Banning abortion would save more than one life, but I guess that's different."

I agreed with your previous sentiment - is there a reason you are still commenting on the same thing?
Profile Pic
Cirdan
Champion Author Nevada

Posts:2,394
Points:133,685
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Apr 22, 2014 1:53:28 AM

Banning abortion would save more than one life, but I guess that's different.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,251
Points:458,570
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Apr 21, 2014 9:06:56 AM

"“If it prevents even one” phraseology is familiar to all who follow the gun control debate."

And that is probably the worst argument made from the Left...
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:25,967
Points:1,268,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Apr 20, 2014 1:15:44 PM

If it saves just one life - its worth it
.
.
>>>The article noted that a co-sponsor of Colorado’s background check law, State Rep. Rhonda Fields, has repeatedly said that the incursion on Second Amendment rights is justified if it prevents even one prohibited person from acquiring a firearm.

“If it prevents even one” phraseology is familiar to all who follow the gun control debate. Last year, President Obama campaigned for his gun control agenda, saying “if there’s even one thing we can do, if there’s just one life we can save, we’ve got an obligation to try.” Vice-President Joe “Buy a Shotgun” Biden agreed with the president, saying “even if what we do only saves one life, it makes sense.”<<<

Why is it that the liberal politicians and control freaks only wish to use that idea when it comes to guns. Lets apply that same thinking to all aspects of everyday life.

Since kids have gotten killed playing sports - ban all sports. Since there is carnage on the nations roads every day - ban all private ownership of motor vehicles and only allow select government vehicles on the roads. It has been conclusively proven that everyone who has drank water has or will die we must ban the drinking of water - after all "if it saves just one life".
Profile Pic
johnnyg1200
Champion Author St. Louis

Posts:7,038
Points:979,225
Joined:May 2011
Message Posted: Apr 17, 2014 7:48:07 PM

Being unarmed didn't help these two drivers both killed in less than six months.

[Edited by: johnnyg1200 at 4/17/2014 7:48:39 PM EST]
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:25,967
Points:1,268,150
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Apr 17, 2014 5:39:40 PM


That being armed seemed to work good here
.
.
>>> The Buffalo News reported:

A gang of robbers attacked a pizza deliveryman just before 10:30 p.m. Monday as he brought food to a house in the 400 block of Cornwall Avenue, near Erie County Medical Center.

In the front hallway of the house, one of the robbers, who wore a mask and had a brown hoodie pulled over his face, hit the deliveryman on the head with a hammer, according to police.

The masked man also displayed what appeared to be a gun, police said.

But then, the deliveryman told investigators, he pulled out his own handgun and fired a shot, striking the masked man. The rest of the gang scattered.<<<

Good on ya Pizza guy......
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,848
Points:2,543,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Apr 17, 2014 4:42:00 PM

Weaslespit - "Only if you are looking at the literal sense, and mine was certainly figurative based on your apples-to-oranges comparison."

Hardly apples-to-oranges. More like dollars-to-Deutsch marks.

"It doesn't seem to work very well as-is..."

I doubt it could ever work perfectly, without getting a lot more intrusive. And letting a few hundred or thousand a year get through, out of millions of checks, isn't doing that badly.

"No, the 110% increase in likely trafficked guns used in crimes."

That doesn't seem to be what the legend on the left says. Even if so, all that means is that NICS has driven traffic away from legitimate dealers to the black market.

"And I would contend you would have far fewer cases go to trial if it were a simple fine to be paid - much like a traffic ticket. You only need appear in court if you wish to dispute the charges :) Perhaps a bit simplified..."

I can see any number of problems, but it might have an effect.

Not on prohibited persons getting guns, but on them getting them from legitimate dealers.

Who's going to issue the ticket? What about fake IDs?

[Edited by: rjhenn at 4/17/2014 4:45:51 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,251
Points:458,570
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Apr 17, 2014 4:29:43 PM

"If the pharmacist breaks the law and risks losing his license."

Only if you are looking at the literal sense, and mine was certainly figurative based on your apples-to-oranges comparison.

"No, I just know how it works."

It doesn't seem to work very well as-is...

"A 2004 report by the Justice Department’s Inspector General found that even agents who regularly investigate gun crime believe that most people who fail background checks are not dangerous, and that the reasons they flunk the check are minor or based on incidents that occurred years in the past. The report cited the case of a man who was rejected because of a 1941 felony conviction for stealing a pig."

And in 10 years, no improvements have been made - quite a feat given how much data is shared these days.

"Not sure I follow. What's scary about the ability to trace over twice as many crime guns back to their last point of sale?"

No, the 110% increase in likely trafficked guns used in crimes.

"True, but I was only talking about the cost of prosecution, which is what the DA's or US Attorney's office would be concerned with."

And I would contend you would have far fewer cases go to trial if it were a simple fine to be paid - much like a traffic ticket. You only need appear in court if you wish to dispute the charges :) Perhaps a bit simplified...
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,848
Points:2,543,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Apr 17, 2014 3:49:19 PM

Weaslespit - "Absolutely - but right now with the gaping holes in the current system you would be able to attain 'illegal drugs at a pharmacy'..."

If the pharmacist breaks the law and risks losing his license.

"You are very trusting of the system..."

No, I just know how it works.

"Unworkable? Nay - just not properly supported. Did you not read the link provided?"

Yep: "A 2004 report by the Justice Department’s Inspector General found that even agents who regularly investigate gun crime believe that most people who fail background checks are not dangerous, and that the reasons they flunk the check are minor or based on incidents that occurred years in the past. The report cited the case of a man who was rejected because of a 1941 felony conviction for stealing a pig."

And: "“The word went out, ‘You are going to be denied. You might as well find another means of getting it, either through the illicit market or through the legal non-NICS markets, such as gun shows and private transactions,’” says Alfred Blumstein, a crime expert at Carnegie Mellon University."

"Here is a scary trend..."

Not sure I follow. What's scary about the ability to trace over twice as many crime guns back to their last point of sale?

"I would argue that jailing an inmate is far more costly than collecting a fine, as well as prosecuting..."

True, but I was only talking about the cost of prosecution, which is what the DA's or US Attorney's office would be concerned with.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,251
Points:458,570
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Apr 17, 2014 3:20:19 PM

"If they bought from a licensed dealer. But there are plenty of other places to get guns. Just like there are plenty of places to get drugs."

Absolutely - but right now with the gaping holes in the current system you would be able to attain 'illegal drugs at a pharmacy'...

"If they didn't game the system with fake ID, most likely they did fail."

You are very trusting of the system...

"Paper system? And it might not work that well because it's essentially unworkable."

Unworkable? Nay - just not properly supported. Did you not read the link provided?

Here is a scary trend...

"Not much, if any."

I would argue that jailing an inmate is far more costly than collecting a fine, as well as prosecuting...
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,848
Points:2,543,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Apr 17, 2014 3:03:30 PM

Weaslespit - "Did they?"

If they bought from a licensed dealer. But there are plenty of other places to get guns. Just like there are plenty of places to get drugs.

"And if they did, did they fail again?"

If they didn't game the system with fake ID, most likely they did fail.

"I sure don't trust a paper system lacking in resources and current information to get it right enough to depend on..."

Paper system? And it might not work that well because it's essentially unworkable.

"One is much more expensive than the other..."

Not much, if any.
Profile Pic
johnnyg1200
Champion Author St. Louis

Posts:7,038
Points:979,225
Joined:May 2011
Message Posted: Apr 17, 2014 1:25:08 PM

`


[Edited by: johnnyg1200 at 4/17/2014 1:25:24 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,251
Points:458,570
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Apr 17, 2014 9:05:37 AM

"And go through the same BG check?"

Did they? And if they did, did they fail again? I sure don't trust a paper system lacking in resources and current information to get it right enough to depend on...

"Either requires prosecution."

One is much more expensive than the other...

[Edited by: Weaslespit at 4/17/2014 9:06:26 AM EST]
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,848
Points:2,543,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Apr 16, 2014 5:46:58 PM

Weaslespit - "Does your data show that they didn't go to the next store down the street and try again?"

And go through the same BG check?

"Does it have to be a jailable offense? I think a hefty fine would be better..."

Either requires prosecution.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,251
Points:458,570
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Apr 16, 2014 4:25:51 PM

"Yet they still aren't able to buy a firearm legally, so how did the BG check fail?"

Does your data show that they didn't go to the next store down the street and try again?

"Can we afford that many prosecutions for being refused a purchase of a firearm?"

Does it have to be a jailable offense? I think a hefty fine would be better...
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,848
Points:2,543,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Apr 16, 2014 3:49:09 PM

Weaslespit - "No, I don't think that they work, otherwise the few that are recorded as being ineligible wouldn't try in the first place - especially as there are no repercussions for attempting to do so..."

Yet they still aren't able to buy a firearm legally, so how did the BG check fail?
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,848
Points:2,543,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Apr 16, 2014 3:29:27 PM

Weaslespit - "No, I don't think that they work, otherwise the few that are recorded as being ineligible wouldn't try in the first place - especially as there are no repercussions for attempting to do so..."

True, it's not illegal to fail a background check, just illegal to sell a firearm to someone who failed a BG check. That wouldn't change with any of the proposed 'solutions' that I've heard of.

And about 150,000 a year isn't "few". Can we afford that many prosecutions for being refused a purchase of a firearm?

So what do you support?
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,251
Points:458,570
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Apr 16, 2014 2:57:50 PM

"So you don't think that background checks work, or that most criminals get their weapons through already illegal channels?"

No, I don't think that they work, otherwise the few that are recorded as being ineligible wouldn't try in the first place - especially as there are no repercussions for attempting to do so...

"Actually, most of the real problems with illegal drugs seem to only be made worse by making them illegal."

There is not a doubt that is does cause other issues - like burglaries due to the high street costs ;)
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,848
Points:2,543,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Apr 16, 2014 2:26:53 PM

Weaslespit - "Do you have data? I would bet it is still one-sided with there being more burglaries when the owners are not home...

"An estimated 3.7 million household burglaries occurred each
year on average from 2003 to 2007. In about 28% of these
burglaries, a household member was present during the burglary."
U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics

The similar figure for England and Wales is over 50%. Table 1.8 (Excel spreadsheet)

"There are other factors too, I should think."

Without a doubt.

"Was he over-the-top? Sure. His points are still valid, however, and it is 'still' the worst counter-argument made by the Right."

If that's the worst one, then his side is in real trouble.

"Nope, it only shows that right now we are still giving them free access - we aren't even trying to make it hard for them..."

So you don't think that background checks work, or that most criminals get their weapons through already illegal channels?

"Or there is simple empirical evidence as is the case with marijuana that is really isn't that bad as it was made out to be..."

Indeed. Actually, most of the real problems with illegal drugs seem to only be made worse by making them illegal.

Again: "criminals don't follow the law". 7;-]

[Edited by: rjhenn at 4/16/2014 2:30:15 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,251
Points:458,570
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Apr 16, 2014 1:00:12 PM

"That’s an interesting argument, especially when you consider the push to legalize many of the drugs that are or were illegal because they either can’t stop the flow or realized there was tax money to be made..."

Or there is simple empirical evidence as is the case with marijuana that is really isn't that bad as it was made out to be...
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,251
Points:458,570
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Apr 16, 2014 12:58:55 PM

"Which doesn't explain why the US rate of burglary while someone is home tends to be much lower than that of other countries, where guns are more restricted than here."

Do you have data? I would bet it is still one-sided with there being more burglaries when the owners are not home...

There are other factors too, I should think.

"Gun restrictions are not laws against "a destructive behavior". Owning a gun is not a destructive behavior. Misusing a gun is a destructive behavior. The "anti-gun regulation crowd" generally has no problem with laws against misusing guns. But I'm pretty sure he's unable to see the distinction."

Was he over-the-top? Sure. His points are still valid, however, and it is 'still' the worst counter-argument made by the Right.

"And if his major concern is to make it harder for bad buys to get their hands on guns, then the argument that "criminals don't follow the law" is a pretty good one."

Nope, it only shows that right now we are still giving them free access - we aren't even trying to make it hard for them...
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,251
Points:458,570
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Apr 16, 2014 12:53:06 PM

"Weaselspit's "Criminlas don't follow the law' is the worst excuse from the Right..." linked article is written by someone who obviously doesn't have a clue and isn't smart enough to even complete a few sentences without having to need an expletive to complete his train of thought..."

It was like reading one of your own posts, eh? LOL!
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,848
Points:2,543,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Apr 16, 2014 12:34:20 AM

Well, we do have the example of Prohibition.
Profile Pic
johnnyg1200
Champion Author St. Louis

Posts:7,038
Points:979,225
Joined:May 2011
Message Posted: Apr 15, 2014 6:42:12 PM

>>>>>>And if his major concern is to make it harder for bad buys to get their hands on guns, then the argument that "criminals don't follow the law" is a pretty good one. Since our drug laws have only made it very profitable to sell illegal drugs, why would we expect a different result if guns were severely regulated?<<<<<

That’s an interesting argument, especially when you consider the push to legalize many of the drugs that are or were illegal because they either can’t stop the flow or realized there was tax money to be made.
Profile Pic
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:25,848
Points:2,543,130
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Apr 15, 2014 5:11:33 PM

Weaslespit - "Avoiding detection to prevent capture would be the #1 deterrent there - not to prevent death."

Which doesn't explain why the US rate of burglary while someone is home tends to be much lower than that of other countries, where guns are more restricted than here.

"'Criminlas don't follow the law' is the worst excuse from the Right..."

Well, he's right that "if you make idiotic, childish arguments you sacrifice your credibility."

His argument about gun laws and rape is completely idiotic and childish. Gun restrictions are not laws against "a destructive behavior". Owning a gun is not a destructive behavior. Misusing a gun is a destructive behavior. The "anti-gun regulation crowd" generally has no problem with laws against misusing guns. But I'm pretty sure he's unable to see the distinction.

So where does he have any evidence that reasonable restrictions can in any way make it harder for bad buys to get their hands on guns? And what does he consider "reasonable restrictions"?

And if his major concern is to make it harder for bad buys to get their hands on guns, then the argument that "criminals don't follow the law" is a pretty good one. Since our drug laws have only made it very profitable to sell illegal drugs, why would we expect a different result if guns were severely regulated?

[Edited by: rjhenn at 4/15/2014 5:13:06 PM EST]
Profile Pic
jeskibuff
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:9,686
Points:1,778,050
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Apr 15, 2014 3:14:14 PM

BuzzLOL said: "Back in 2000, our city had 1,000 cops... now with budget cuts, that has dropped to about 500... I feel much safer now... when there was 1,000, they were lurking on every street corner trying to get their quota of traffic tickets"

Good story there.

Some may infer from it that cops are bad, because cutting the force in half was actually better for the citizens.

But what they SHOULD infer from it is that BIG GOVERNMENT is bad, demonstrated by a force that no longer had the people's interests in mind, but their own.

[Edited by: jeskibuff at 4/15/2014 3:14:51 PM EST]
Profile Pic
jeskibuff
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:9,686
Points:1,778,050
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Apr 15, 2014 3:04:44 PM

Weaselspit's "Criminlas don't follow the law' is the worst excuse from the Right..." linked article is written by someone who obviously doesn't have a clue and isn't smart enough to even complete a few sentences without having to need an expletive to complete his train of thought.

Has he no concept that a criminal is only emboldened by a "gun-free zone" sign, knowing that his chances are much better in getting away with his crime in one?

The ability to protect yourself against violent members of our society shouldn't be an argument equal to the enactment and enforcement of anti-pornography laws, as he proclaims. Generally speaking, no one really dies if suddenly exposed to illegal child pornography, for instance. Limiting the ability of law-abiding citizens to protect themselves from savage animals is all that the likes of Feinstein, Schumer & Obozo seek to accomplish with their gun-control efforts.

How do people get to get to be such morons as Mr. James Schlarmann appears to be? What gall they have to call other people stupid when their own arguments fall apart with the greatest of ease!

[Edited by: jeskibuff at 4/15/2014 3:05:40 PM EST]
Profile Pic
BuzzLOL
Champion Author Toledo

Posts:2,412
Points:42,185
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Apr 15, 2014 12:37:29 PM

. I came home one day to discover I had caught some burglars in my house... I called 911 while I stayed outside and tried to keep them bottled up inside... when the police arrived, a female officer asked me how long it had taken to respond... I told her the truth: 1 1/2 hours... she just sighed... in the meantime, they had slipped out a side of the house I wasn't on... but they dropped most of their booty running away...

. Back in 2000, our city had 1,000 cops... now with budget cuts, that has dropped to about 500... I feel much safer now... when there was 1,000, they were lurking on every street corner trying to get their quota of traffic tickets... then started handing out fake tickets to raise more money... the police union finally filed a grievance against the city to stop them being pressured into writing fake tickets... I had gotten 8 or 9 of them... took about 20 trips to court and a couple times in jail to get free of them all... but they never got a penny out of me... the courts kept calling each court appearance a pre-trial as the officers began refusing to show up to support the phony tickets... a cell phone and/or dashcam camera could show them to be perjuring themselves, so they got scared...

[Edited by: BuzzLOL at 4/15/2014 12:39:49 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,251
Points:458,570
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Apr 15, 2014 10:05:35 AM

"When seconds count, I'm sure it comforts you to know that the police are just minutes away."

If seconds count, I again defer you to playing the odds which are higher in your favor of survival - ie do not needlessly escalate the situation.

Sure, you 'might' come out on top as Johnny posted examples of, but...
Post a reply Back to Topics