I didn't say more legislation was the answer, I simply said there was something wrong with the system specifically its not working as designed. My idea in this situation would be to exaimine the enforcement of the law, as it clearly did not live up to expectations in this case. I don't know specifically what I'm looking for but there's a place to start. I mean if a felon can purchase a weapon from a gun store, which is supposed to be illegal than clearly something needs to be done to ensure the law is actually enforced?
Your opinions do not trump fact: permit holders tend to be more law-abiding than the general population and very rarely cause any trouble.
If he truly had no recorded criminal history, there was no reason for the shop not to sell him the gun.
The system was enforced and worked exactly like it was designed. The guy did NOT have a criminal record and did NOT have any mental issues on his record.
Law enforcement can't use a crystal ball or read tea leaves to determine what someone might do in the future.
I didn't say more legislation was the answer, I simply said there was something wrong with the system specifically its not working as designed. My idea in this situation would be to exaimine the enforcement of the law, as it clearly did not live up to expectations in this case. I don't know specifically what I'm looking for but there's a place to start. I mean if a felon can purchase a weapon from a gun store, which is supposed to be illegal than clearly something needs to be done to ensure the law is actually enforced?
I agree, there's certainly a easy way around this law by using multiple persons and a law which isn't effective at its stated goal probably shouldn't exist. I brought this up not because I agree with it, but because I'm open to reading and learning about new ideas which is how I can justify my opposition or support of them. You on other hand, in the belief you know all you need to know already, won't learn anything new or look at new ideas and systems and may miss something which is a better way of doing things than.
No in this case state law controls the type of sale this man completed, specifically the state laws which govern the sale of semi-automatic pistols. They differ state-by-state on many levels and what I was saying is that AngryAmerican does have anywhere near the knowledge required on the subject of Arizona gun laws to make a statement such as "There is no way we can improve their laws."
I'm not talking about holes in the Federal law which might have allowed this guy to slip through, but I'm talking about Arizona law. And so is he for a matter of fact since the last thing he posted on the subject was about Arizona law not federal law.
Color me surprised that it took less than 24 hours for someone to turn a tragic event into a political grandstand against gun ownership. :doh
Arizona Suspect's Erratic Behavior Raises Questions About Gun Sales
it's a legitimate question.
it's a legitimate question.
Care to explain what could have been done differently?
i don't know. but why is it a bad thing to take a look at what's done currently and see if improvements can be made? for example, semi automatic availability?
Wait...you think semi-automatics should not be available? :doh Please clairfy what you mean here. What type of weapon should someone be able to legally carry?
non auto/semi long arms ... what might be expected to be used for hunting and self defense
handguns should be allowed only for leos and the military
Who do you think has those now? I'd wager it's not law abiding citizens... So nevermind the fact that the police are under no legal obligation to protect you or stop crimes, you're just plain advocating giving superior weaponry to bad guys. Got it. Thanks, that's all I needed to know about you.Loose inventory controls are notorious in government agencies, as shown by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) that has “misplaced” 539 weapons, including a gas-grenade launcher and 39 automatic rifles or machine guns. Six guns were eventually linked to crimes (two guns had been used in armed robberies, one confiscated in a raid on a drug laboratory and two others during arrests. One was being held as evidence in a homicide investigation). And in July of 2001, it was reported that the FBI lost 449 weapons, including machine guns.
Thank you for demonstrating your ignorance on the matter. According to you we should all be carrying bolt action rifles down the street. :roflmao:
Btw, the government loses a significant quantity of guns every year. According to an Associated Press article published in 2001:
Who do you think has those now? I'd wager it's not law abiding citizens... So nevermind the fact that the police are under no legal obligation to protect you or stop crimes, you're just plain advocating giving superior weaponry to bad guys. Got it. Thanks, that's all I needed to know about you.
Wait...you think semi-automatics should not be available? :doh Please clairfy what you mean here. What type of weapon should someone be able to legally carry?
under no legal obligation to protect us or stop crimes? seriously?
non auto/semi long arms ... what might be expected to be used for hunting and self defense
handguns should be allowed only for leos and the military
So you want the government and criminals to have hand guns and semiautomatic weapons? I would rather law abiding citizens have those kinds of weapons. The government and criminals are the last two groups who should be trusted with weapons that have an advantage to what the civilian population has.
It's not about gun ownership? That's the problem with the idiotic NRA all-or-nothing argument!
It's about tracking how this jackass got his guns and his bullets and blocking that. No one gives a turd about your legally purchased guns. Waste your money shooting at cans and unarmed deer. We want to stop the flood of guns into the grey/black market.
If the idiots at the NRA would get that and join with the rest of us with some pragmatic solutions to prevent guns getting to those who would misuse them, then we could get somewhere?
But NO-OOOOOOO! They're a bunch of paranoid assholes who won't budge an inch off their backwards all-or-nothing stance. The blood of that 9-year-old girl is on their hands. And anyone who refuses to even have the conversation.
the hand guns are too easily concealed ... that makes them prime weapons of choice for offensive rather than defensive purposes. semi/auto also have an offensive purposeSo you want the government and criminals to have hand guns and semiautomatic weapons? I would rather law abiding citizens have those kinds of weapons. The government and criminals are the last two groups who should be trusted with weapons that have an advantage to what the civilian population has.
i have no issues with hunting, nor do i have issues with a gun used for personal protection, although i do believe in strong regulation. not knowing a lot about guns, can you tell me a why a person would need to get off that many rounds that quickly? a plausible situation, i mean.
we are no longer the wild, wild west.
In other words, you are trolling and baiting. Are there not rules about that on DP?That was just an idea I had, I wasn't advocating it as a solution because I knew there would be things that would crop up when it was confronted, like for example it would mean divulging medical information to additional parties. But it was just an idea, what I'm really here in this topic for is to get AngryAmerican to acknowledge he's let his opinions get the better of him.
And if you want a job, you will authorize the potiential employer have access to your medial records, right? :roll:if you want credit, you will authorize the prospective lender access to your credit records
if you want a gun permit, you will authorize the issuing party access to your medical records
the hand guns are too easily concealed ... that makes them prime weapons of choice for offensive rather than defensive purposes. semi/auto also have an offensive purpose
combined with that would be absolute enforcement of laws prohibiting the carrying of handguns - with stiff prison time penalties for those found carrying those weapons
yes, then the only ones carrying handguns would be those intending to perpetrate crimeeliminate victimless crime laws and then refill the prisons with those who insist on carrying handguns
...and what stops them when they wish to perpetrate their crime on you?
the same thing that stops them now, since i do not carry
but their number would diminish once it became illegal for them to possess small arms; they would become easily identifiable as criminals, which is not the instance today
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?