Common sense question about gun control leaders [W:753]

[Crimefree]

what?

It not your fault I do understand shall I say the words slowly or write them bigger?

Quote Originally Posted by calamity
The proper question would be--what is the percentage of people who commit crimes with illegally purchased legally acquired firearms?

Fact Sheet: Illegal gun trafficking arms criminals & youth « Gun Victims Action Council

Your point is?

 

[BretJ]

The point of the laws are to make it harder for criminals to carry out more destructive acts. Throw enough saftey measures in that only the most die hard crooks would attempt to break the law.

The point of laws are to punish criminals who disobey them. Throw enough safety measures in so only the most docile and compliant remain...........and at that point, what do you have......

 

[BretJ]

It was intended that weapons used in the battle of the Somme are not used by someone intent on similar levels of carnage.

All battles fought during WWI, including the battle of the Somme, were fought primarily with bolt action rifles and were capable of killing at far greater distances than an M4/AR/AK. Bolt actions, with few exceptions, were the primary weapon of most armies during WWII.
So if the potential for creating WWI carnage is a concern, why not track and restrict the sale of pool acid, ammonia or bleach? Hell of a lot more capable of killing more folks than a heavy/light machine gun. I see chlorine tankers all the time. Think of all the death and destruction one of those could create....or......one could stop worrying about these sorts of things and get a life.

 

[TurtleDude]

All battles fought during WWI, including the battle of the Somme, were fought primarily with bolt action rifles and were capable of killing at far greater distances than an M4/AR/AK. Bolt actions, with few exceptions, were the primary weapon of most armies during WWII.
So if the potential for creating WWI carnage is a concern, why not track and restrict the sale of pool acid, ammonia or bleach? Hell of a lot more capable of killing more folks than a heavy/light machine gun. I see chlorine tankers all the time. Think of all the death and destruction one of those could create....or......one could stop worrying about these sorts of things and get a life.

when people actually understand firearms, they tend not to support stupid laws

those who understand firearms but support firearms restrictions almost never are motivated by a desire to stop crime but rather for more sinister reasons

 

[BretJ]

A machine gun is more firepower then a civilian needs.

Anything more than 500CC is more displacement than any civilian motorcyclist needs yet how many people are killed with larger motorcycles?
Anything capable of going faster than 70MPH of the highway is more horsepower than any civilian motorist needs yet how many people are killed while speeding?
Anything with more than 5% alcohol by volume in a container/containers containing more than 12oz is more than anyone needs. Heck, nobody needs it. Yet how many people commit suicide or are murdered because of it? How many women/girls are raped or children abused?

Don't use the "we don't need _______" argument. It's vacuous and downright ignorant.

 

[Crimefree]

when people actually understand firearms, they tend not to support stupid laws

those who understand firearms but support firearms restrictions almost never are motivated by a desire to stop crime but rather for more sinister reasons

That is kind of a concern. The average duped Joe honestly believes they are doing it for the good of all people. What in reality they are doing is reacting to the fear gun control has instilled in them. This is rationalised as what all people want.

If one wanted to talk peace and winning this fight that realisation is one of the keys. In essence both sides want safety for themselves thus it is the only common ground that can be found. The idea of meeting gun control half way is either gun control's or firearm organisation's brain fart. I'm not sure which. Either way as long as firearm owners would rather protect guns and have sensible reasonable gun control laws they are going to lose as they have absolutely no idea of what kind of war this is or how it should be fought. It has one simple rule acceptance of gun control propaganda is defeat. No army can win when +10% of the soldiers sympathise, agree and accept the enemy policy. The basket is full of bad apples.

Time to go

 

[Crimefree]

It was intended that weapons used in the battle of the Somme are not used by someone intent on similar levels of carnage.

Which only has relevance if fear is the controlling issue.

 

[LaMidRighter]

I don't suppose war crimes count?

UWS, You are all over the place on this. Slow down for a second here. I'll address a bunch of your points in this post here.

1) .50 Caliber is .50 Caliber whether it's fired from a BMG rifle or a mounted machine gun, same round with different rate of fire and barrel design. Same with any round.
2) Most criminals are not using mounted machine guns, and most of them can barely fire a standard firearm much less a full auto with any kind of efficiency. I would actually rather they have a full auto if they are gunning for me because they are going to have a probability of error in my favor.
3) Full auto is inaccurate because of ride up. Even with proper technique, proper trigger discipline, and mounted you will use more rounds per hit than any other platform.
4) Only two legally owned full autos have been used in a murder. One was owned by a cop.
5) Bolt actions will not kill "five people at a time" unless they happen to all be standing in a line back to back, in close proximity, and you happen to place the shot correctly and it's a hot load.
6) Machine guns are extremely good for one thing, fast rate of fire. The reason it allows for effective "multiple kills" is the reason anything would be, the rate of fire sends a lot of lead in a direction quickly which causes either panic or movement suppression(forcing people's heads down to allow you to move in and/or flank). It can cause panic and movement suppression in a civilian population, but that would be an incredibly rare occurrence for a shooter to choose that platform. Really, where the machine gun issue came about was the gangland wars during prohibition. The reason those criminals used machine guns weren't to have some kind of advantage but to make a statement. Do a lot of damage, send a lot of bullets flying, it was basically a dick waving to send a message to police and rivals.

EDIT - Missed one, war crimes tend to come from tribal war, Juntas, or militarized dictatorships. All of those require some form of power structure similar to a legitimate government. Criminal or not that isn't about the firearms but unequal force.

 

[LaMidRighter]

And you don't count the hundreds of thousands killed by machine guns in two world wars.

That was an intergovernmental action, nothing about that was criminal, nor did it involve civilians or civilian usage of automatic weapons.

 

[LaMidRighter]

It limits ones options and if he turned to illiegal sources to acquire guns it would increase the chance of him being caught.

Negative. It's much harder to catch a black market seller than an FFL, an FFL dealer must document every last step of every sale, eventually if they are illegally selling to prohibited persons or if they are knowingly engaging in straw sales their books will catch up to them. Every gun manufacturer has a record of the initial sale to dealer, they know exactly which FFL they sold to.

Black market dealers by their nature don't follow any of the protocols, if a firearm is purchased via them and the criminal was smart enough to wipe a tainted gun for fingerprints the authorities may never know who used it or where it came from, even if they caught the seller.

 

[calamity]

It not your fault I do understand shall I say the words slowly or write them bigger?

A paragraph which actually makes sense would help.

Your point is?

Point is that before the guns fell into the hands of criminals who used them to commit crimes they were legal guns. So, in a sense, all guns used illegally were once legal guns. This then renders your earlier question moot.

 

[TurtleDude]

A paragraph which actually makes sense would help.



Point is that before the guns fell into the hands of criminals who used them to commit crimes they were legal guns. So, in a sense, all guns used illegally were once legal guns. This then renders your earlier question moot.

and do you have a solution to such a problem that doesn't interfere with the rights of millions of honest gun owners?

 

[Crimefree]

and do you have a solution to such a problem that doesn't interfere with the rights of millions of honest gun owners?

It's gun control chasing the bogeyman again and getting people who are not going to think to follow.

It's useless babble, unproductive and a waste of time. What is this nightmare gun control creates out of thin air that suggests firstly that guns can be taken from criminals hands and second that it will do any good?

Can gun control offer a shred of credible evidence there is a causal relationship between guns and crime? So far in 200 years of the most desperate searching, dredging of cesspools and manufacturing is own factoids gun control has not even found a hint it exists.

So other than a belief we know is an outright lie taking guns from criminals or "the wrong hands" cannot produce the results gun control promises. Until gun control can prove it radical anti-social harmful demands can work simply reject this band of ideologically driven prevaricators.

 

[Crimefree]

A paragraph which actually makes sense would help.

It must be another language then, I cannot keep guessing why only you do not understand. If you would do the sensible thing and explain exactly what you don't understand maybe somebody would be able to help.

Point is that before the guns fell into the hands of criminals who used them to commit crimes they were legal guns. So, in a sense, all guns used illegally were once legal guns. This then renders your earlier question moot.

As is normal your assumption is erroneous.

What is the point of all this babble of yours about legal and illegal guns you just assume everyone knows? Are illegal guns more dangerous? Have special powers? Some quality you are keeping secret and only you know?

When am I going to see something that actually is factual and makes rational sense? Nobody understands the emotional connections of the indoctrinated unless they are aware of the propaganda.

 

[calamity]

It must be another language then, I cannot keep guessing why only you do not understand. If you would do the sensible thing and explain exactly what you don't understand maybe somebody would be able to help.



As is normal your assumption is erroneous.

What is the point of all this babble of yours about legal and illegal guns you just assume everyone knows? Are illegal guns more dangerous? Have special powers? Some quality you are keeping secret and only you know?

When am I going to see something that actually is factual and makes rational sense? Nobody understands the emotional connections of the indoctrinated unless they are aware of the propaganda.

You're the one who brought it up. Remember your question about percentages of crime caused by legal gun owners?

Well. There you have it. I provided the info you asked for, and now you play like you don't know why I bring it up.

 

[Crimefree]

You're the one who brought it up. Remember your question about percentages of crime caused by legal gun owners?

No I did not bring it up. I suggested that your claim was hypocrisy and proved it. You cannot deny the information I posted is fact becasue it is. You accepted it was correct and tried poisoning the well, with a claim of racism. Your acceptance is not in doubt you never posted a single fact or reason to refute the figures. What are you babbling on about now?

Well. There you have it. I provided the info you asked for, and now you play like you don't know why I bring it up.

Do repost your socalled info so we all can see what you are babbling about actually has some basis. Claims of racism and other such irrelevant ad hominem remarks are not refuting or fact and most certainly not evidence of anything but the poster.

Let's see you evidence.

Then answer as requested.

What is the point of all this babble of yours about legal and illegal guns you just assume everyone knows? Are illegal guns more dangerous? Have special powers? Some quality you are keeping secret and only you know?

When am I going to see something that actually is factual and makes rational sense? Nobody understands the emotional connections of the indoctrinated unless they are aware of the propaganda.

You brought it up it is your claim.

Point is that before the guns fell into the hands of criminals who used them to commit crimes they were legal guns. So, in a sense, all guns used illegally were once legal guns.

 

[calamity]

No I did not bring it up. I suggested that your claim was hypocrisy and proved it. You cannot deny the information I posted is fact becasue it is. You accepted it was correct and tried poisoning the well, with a claim of racism. Your acceptance is not in doubt you never posted a single fact or reason to refute the figures. What are you babbling on about now?



Do repost your socalled info so we all can see what you are babbling about actually has some basis. Claims of racism and other such irrelevant ad hominem remarks are not refuting or fact and most certainly not evidence of anything but the poster.

Let's see you evidence.

Then answer as requested.

What is the point of all this babble of yours about legal and illegal guns you just assume everyone knows? Are illegal guns more dangerous? Have special powers? Some quality you are keeping secret and only you know?

When am I going to see something that actually is factual and makes rational sense? Nobody understands the emotional connections of the indoctrinated unless they are aware of the propaganda.

You brought it up it is your claim.

What racism?

 

[calamity]

Out of interest do you have a percentage of people who commit crimes with legally acquired firearms. Oh even a guess will do

No I did not bring it up. I suggested that your claim was hypocrisy and proved it. You cannot deny the information I posted is fact becasue it is. You accepted it was correct and tried poisoning the well, with a claim of racism. Your acceptance is not in doubt you never posted a single fact or reason to refute the figures. What are you babbling on about now?



Do repost your socalled info so we all can see what you are babbling about actually has some basis. Claims of racism and other such irrelevant ad hominem remarks are not refuting or fact and most certainly not evidence of anything but the poster.

Let's see you evidence.

Then answer as requested.

What is the point of all this babble of yours about legal and illegal guns you just assume everyone knows? Are illegal guns more dangerous? Have special powers? Some quality you are keeping secret and only you know?

When am I going to see something that actually is factual and makes rational sense? Nobody understands the emotional connections of the indoctrinated unless they are aware of the propaganda.

You brought it up it is your claim.

Short memory you have there, CF.

Let me refresh it:

Out of interest do you have a percentage of people who commit crimes with legally acquired firearms. Oh even a guess will do

The proper question would be--what is the percentage of people who commit crimes with illegally purchased legally acquired firearms?

Fact Sheet: Illegal gun trafficking arms criminals & youth « Gun Victims Action Council

 

[Crimefree]

Good did you read the question this was in response to? Had I wanted to know the rubbish you responded with I would have asked. I did not and phrased my question exactly which still has not been answered.

A huge amount of babble in avoidance of that has emanated from a single source. I eventually got tired and researched it myself since obviously neither you or the OP know the answer.

I wanted to know how many gun control was trying to make laws to impact but in fact make every other purchaser suffer the stupidity of a nonsensical control of objects.

It is quite obvious from the study of every ban that it is not possible to take guns out of the hands of criminals. I invited you to show the success of gun control laws and you declined for good reason. There are none.

The study noted the number of criminals who obtained guns from retail outlets was dwarfed by the number of those who picked up their arms through means other than legal purchases. The report was the result of interviews with more than 18,000 state and federal inmates conducted nationwide. It found that nearly 80 percent of those interviewed got their guns from friends or family members, or on the street through illegal purchases. Less than 9 percent were bought at retail outlets and only seven-tenths of 1 percent came from gun shows.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/fuo.pdf

Out of interest do you have a percentage of people who commit crimes with legally acquired firearms. Oh even a guess will do

Short memory you have there, CF.

Let me refresh it:

Let me me help you again.

Originally Posted by Unitedwestand13
I'm more worried about crooks who use the law to acqurie their weapons legally in order to commit illegal acts later.

Out of interest do you have a percentage of people who commit crimes with legally acquired firearms. Oh even a guess will do

Originally Posted by calamity
The proper question would be--what is the percentage of people who commit crimes with illegally purchased legally acquired firearms?

Fact Sheet: Illegal gun trafficking arms criminals & youth « Gun Victims Action Council

Babble and tainted cesspool dredged research.
MISSION STATEMENT:
National Gun Victims Action Council
(Gun Victims Action) is organized to educate the public about:

1. The epidemic of gun violence in the United States that results in tens of thousands of gun homicides, suicides and accidental gun-related deaths each year, costing U.S.taxpayers billions of tax dollars.

2. Why gun violence is a direct consequence of current gun laws.

3. How sensible gun laws can simultaneously protect the Second Amendment right of the legal gun owner and the rights of non-gun owners to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

4. The urgent need to find common ground between legal gun owners and non-gun owners that minimizes gun violence in our culture.

 

[calamity]

Good did you read the question this was in response to? Had I wanted to know the rubbish you responded with I would have asked. I did not and phrased my question exactly which still has not been answered.

A huge amount of babble in avoidance of that has emanated from a single source. I eventually got tired and researched it myself since obviously neither you or the OP know the answer.

I wanted to know how many gun control was trying to make laws to impact but in fact make every other purchaser suffer the stupidity of a nonsensical control of objects.

It is quite obvious from the study of every ban that it is not possible to take guns out of the hands of criminals. I invited you to show the success of gun control laws and you declined for good reason. There are none.

The study noted the number of criminals who obtained guns from retail outlets was dwarfed by the number of those who picked up their arms through means other than legal purchases. The report was the result of interviews with more than 18,000 state and federal inmates conducted nationwide. It found that nearly 80 percent of those interviewed got their guns from friends or family members, or on the street through illegal purchases. Less than 9 percent were bought at retail outlets and only seven-tenths of 1 percent came from gun shows.
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/fuo.pdf





Let me me help you again.







Babble and tainted cesspool dredged research.
MISSION STATEMENT:
National Gun Victims Action Council
(Gun Victims Action) is organized to educate the public about:

1. The epidemic of gun violence in the United States that results in tens of thousands of gun homicides, suicides and accidental gun-related deaths each year, costing U.S.taxpayers billions of tax dollars.

2. Why gun violence is a direct consequence of current gun laws.

3. How sensible gun laws can simultaneously protect the Second Amendment right of the legal gun owner and the rights of non-gun owners to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

4. The urgent need to find common ground between legal gun owners and non-gun owners that minimizes gun violence in our culture.

How do drug laws work? How about laws to get drunk drivers off the road? Gun laws would have the same effect. Catch a violator, off to jail they go. Our streets become safer by one criminal less. Duh.

 

[TurtleDude]

How do drug laws work? How about laws to get drunk drivers off the road? Gun laws would have the same effect. Catch a violator, off to jail they go. Our streets become safer by one criminal less. Duh.

drunk driving laws punish misuse of alcohol . that has no relevance to gun control laws which would be akin to prohibition.

you want gun laws that turn people who have never misused firearms into criminals just for owning weapons

 

[calamity]

drunk driving laws punish misuse of alcohol . that has no relevance to gun control laws which would be akin to prohibition.

you want gun laws that turn people who have never misused firearms into criminals just for owning weapons

No. But, I'm glad you asked.

NYC cleaned up its streets by arresting anyone and everyone who didn't pass the stop and frisk: those carrying drugs, illegal weapons, improper ID, or anyone with outstanding warrants. In the end removing those most likely to be hardened criminals, those who are caught being petty criminals, resulted in a significantly lower crime rate.

Law abiding gun owners, those who who have CCW licenses and all their other affairs in order have nothing to fear. Also, if this or that regarding illegal possession of a gun is part of another crime, we get enhanced sentencing for those in violation . This takes scum off the street even longer.

 

[BretJ]

No. But, I'm glad you asked.

NYC cleaned up its streets by arresting anyone and everyone who didn't pass the stop and frisk: those carrying drugs, illegal weapons, improper ID, or anyone with outstanding warrants. In the end removing those most likely to be hardened criminals, those who are caught being petty criminals, resulted in a significantly lower crime rate.

Law abiding gun owners, those who who have CCW licenses and all their other affairs in order have nothing to fear. Also, if this or that regarding illegal possession of a gun is part of another crime, we get enhanced sentencing for those in violation . This takes scum off the street even longer.

So you think it is OK for law enforcement to randomly choose folks on the street whom they believe "looks" suspicious...Not very consistent from someone who swings the word racist about like a dead cat. But that can be overlooked as long as it takes some of the scum off the street. Right?

Regardless, what does that have to do with the point Turtle made?

 

[blackjack50]

No. But, I'm glad you asked.

NYC cleaned up its streets by arresting anyone and everyone who didn't pass the stop and frisk: those carrying drugs, illegal weapons, improper ID, or anyone with outstanding warrants. In the end removing those most likely to be hardened criminals, those who are caught being petty criminals, resulted in a significantly lower crime rate.

Law abiding gun owners, those who who have CCW licenses and all their other affairs in order have nothing to fear. Also, if this or that regarding illegal possession of a gun is part of another crime, we get enhanced sentencing for those in violation . This takes scum off the street even longer.

Like we said...if they don't care about the second...why would they care about the 4th?

 

[calamity]

Like we said...if they don't care about the second...why would they care about the 4th?

We need to do away with the stupid freedom of religion one too while we're at it.