How to ban guns without firing a single shot!

[CLAX1911]

Poor Brad Dad. Has no actually argument so just makes up lies. And doesn’t realize obvious his little bit is.

Nope. Just "please won't someone think of the children". But to hell with children who's parents would defend them.

 

[CLAX1911]

Do you consider 0.0004% a large number?

I think it's just " guns bad" and that's the depth of thought.

 

[Feynman Lives!]

Actually I would like you to explain why I can’t compare them?

Why? Can't you look it up?

If this thread were about World Economy, I'd be more than happy to explain it to you. But it's not. It's about mitigating gun violence by banning the sale of assault weapons (and related measures). If you don't know what factors make a nation underdeveloped, look them up.

Besides, I don't think there would be much to gain by me explaining it to you. You would just deny it. I did explain it to you. And, sure enough... Deny facts while doing NO research was exactly what you did. If you look it up YOURSELF, on the other hand, then you can't deny the results of YOUR OWN research.

I know this "delay" tactics very well from my discussions with MAGAs. That's their tactic.

Because they are different?

Significantly! Hint: look at indicators like "crime rate" and "law enforcement". But you might also want to look into WHY those numbers are what they are.

The same in the us. Criminals use firearms over and over as well in the us.

Nope! COMPLETELY different. Think of an organized ARMY of criminals. With high level training and pretty much unlimited funding.

I don't want to give up too many spoilers that it would ruin the surprises in your research.

 

[RF667799]

Why? Can't you look it up?

If this thread were about World Economy, I'd be more than happy to explain it to you. But it's not. It's about mitigating gun violence by banning the sale of assault weapons (and related measures).

You've never been able to explain how that would mitigate "gun violence".

If you don't know what factors make a nation underdeveloped, look them up.

Besides, I don't think there would be much to gain by me explaining it to you. You would just deny it. I did explain it to you. And deny reality is exactly what you did. If you look it up YOURSELF, on the other hand, then you can't deny the results of YOUR OWN research.



Significantly! Hint: look at indicators like "crime rate" and "law enforcement". But you might also want to look into WHY those numbers are what they are.


Nope! COMPLETELY different. Think of an organized ARMY of criminals. With high level training and pretty much unlimited funding.

I don't want to give up too many spoilers that it would ruin the surprises in your research.

 

[CLAX1911]

You've never been able to explain how that would mitigate "gun violence".

You're just supposed to listen and believe that's how this ideology works.

 

[RF667799]

Nope. Just "please won't someone think of the children". But to hell with children who's parents would defend them.

His own statement as I quote in my signature, being ironic in that.

 

[jaeger19]

Why? Can't you look it up?

If this thread were about World Economy, I'd be more than happy to explain it to you. But it's not. It's about mitigating gun violence by banning the sale of assault weapons (and related measures). If you don't know what factors make a nation underdeveloped, look them up.

I do. You just need to explain in detail why the us can’t be compared to Mexico simply because Mexico is not as developed as the us.

Besides, I don't think there would be much to gain by me explaining it to you. You would just deny it. I did explain it to you. And, sure enough... Deny facts while doing NO research was exactly what you did. If you look it up YOURSELF, on the other hand, then you can't deny the results of YOUR OWN research.

No you didn’t. You went on a rant about it being from highschool etc.

I know this "delay" tactics very well from my discussions with MAGAs. That's their tactic.

You are the on delaying .

Significantly! Hint: look at indicators like "crime rate" and "law enforcement". But you might also want to look into WHY those numbers are what they are.

Oh I know why. It’s because gun control , YOUR PROPOSALS clearly don’t work. If they did then Mexico would be extremely peaceful.

Nope! COMPLETELY different. Think of an organized ARMY of criminals. With high level training and pretty much unlimited funding.

Drug dealers and other organized crime in the us… okay?

I don't want to give up too many spoilers that it would ruin the surprises in your research.

In other words as usual you have nothing.

See , I understand science and research and when you say you “ can’t compare the us to Mexico “ that’s complete bs from a research standpoint.

When you are studying the effectiveness of an intervention you don’t always compare similar populations.
For example you don’t compare the effectiveness of a blood pressure pill by using it on people with low blood pressure!!!!
You use it on people who have high blood pressure and all the comorbidities like obesity / sedentary lifestyles etc.
and if it’s effective it will lower blood pressure DESPITE the other factors.

If gun control worked , then Mexico would be safer than the us . You say “ but but they don’t enforce the laws”. They most certainly do in Mexico. It’s very difficult for a law abiding citizen in Mexico to get a firearm.
Just as you would make it difficult for law abiding citizens to get firearms by your proposals.
Yet it doesn’t work in Mexico and therefore won’t work here.

 

[Feynman Lives!]

I do. You just need to explain in detail why the us can’t be compared to Mexico simply because Mexico is not as developed as the us.

The reason you can't compare us to Mexico IS because Mexico is an underdeveloped nation. But you won't understand this until you educate yourself on what "underdeveloped nation" means.

After so many discussions with MAGAs I am accustomed to seeing posters who refuse to do their research. That's the reason for my sig! Or, even worse, they DO research. But as soon as they realize that they are wrong, simply act as if they didn't.

PAY ATTENTION: All you need to know is that large portions of the Mexican territory are controlled, not by the government, but by drug cartels. These cartels are at constant war with each other, and they organize and finance assassination of their enemies and of anybody who "betrays" them... or even so much as a drug addict who won't pay for their drugs. Law enforcement is very limited in those areas. And they are a safe haven for "sicarios" after they commit crimes in areas that DO have proper law enforcement. Therefore, the number of murders is much higher than it would be in a developed nation where that type of activity, if it exists, is much more limited. This is very typical of ALL underdeveloped nations in Latin America.

I just did your research for you!

Now it's YOUR turn. Do you or do you NOT have a rebuttal for any of the points in the OP. Because none of this has ANY bearing whatsoever in my proposals. And you still need to quote ONE of them, and attempt to rebut it.

No you didn’t.

Despite my perception that you are just trolling, I just did. Above. I would have HOPED you did your own research. It would have proven that you are serious and not just another MAGA-like poster who refuses to look up reality on their own. But what I explained above was ALL you needed to know.

Now your turn. Comparting us to Mexico was just something ridiculous that you were doing and I just thought I'd point it out. But it has NOTHING to do with ANY of my proposals. I don't know if they would work in any OTHER country, but they would definitely work in the U.S And you haven't even ATTEMPTED to make a case as to why any of them wouldn't.

Now... feel free to deny reality. Feel free to deny that I just GAVE you an explanation (I already HAD before). I can cut and paste it as many times as you want. I can change the font and put it in bold, if you prefer. But that IS the reason why you can't compare Mexico to US.

 

[RF667799]

The reason you can't compare us to Mexico IS because Mexico is an underdeveloped nation. But you won't understand this until you educate yourself on what "underdeveloped nation" means.

After so many discussions with MAGAs I am accustomed to seeing posters who refuse to do their research. That's the reason for my sig! Or, even worse, they DO research. But as soon as they realize that they are wrong, simply act as if they didn't.

PAY ATTENTION: All you need to know is that large portions of the Mexican territory are controlled, not by the government, but by drug cartels. These cartels are at constant war with each other, and they organize and finance assassination of their enemies and of anybody who "betrays" them... or even so much as a drug addict who won't pay for their drugs. Law enforcement is very limited in those areas. And they are a safe haven for "sicarios" after they commit crimes in areas that DO have proper law enforcement. Therefore, the number of murders is much higher than it would be in a developed nation where that type of activity, if it exists, is much more limited. This is very typical of ALL underdeveloped nations in Latin America.

I just did your research for you!

Now it's YOUR turn. Do you or do you NOT have a rebuttal for any of the points in the OP. Because none of this has ANY bearing whatsoever in my proposals. And you still need to quote ONE of them, and attempt to rebut it.





Despite my perception that you are just trolling, I just did. Above. I would have HOPED you did your own research. It would have proven that you are serious and not just another MAGA-like poster who refuses to look up reality on their own. But what I explained above was ALL you needed to know.

Now your turn. Comparting us to Mexico was just something ridiculous that you were doing and I just thought I'd point it out. But it has NOTHING to do with ANY of my proposals. I don't know if they would work in any OTHER country, but they would definitely work in the U.S And you haven't even ATTEMPTED to make a case as to why any of them wouldn't.

Now... feel free to deny reality. Feel free to deny that I just GAVE you an explanation (I already HAD before). I can cut and paste it as many times as you want. I can change the font and put it in bold, if you prefer. But that IS the reason why you can't compare Mexico to US.

Good job. That goes a long way to explaining why murders are more common in some of our own geographical areas.

Of course, overall our murder rate is lower than Mexico's, but then our lawless areas are more limited.

Gun control seems to be irrelevant to that.

 

[jaeger19]

The reason you can't compare us to Mexico IS because Mexico is an underdeveloped nation. But you won't understand this until you educate yourself on what "underdeveloped nation" means.

After so many discussions with MAGAs I am accustomed to seeing posters who refuse to do their research. That's the reason for my sig! Or, even worse, they DO research. But as soon as they realize that they are wrong, simply act as if they didn't.

PAY ATTENTION: All you need to know is that large portions of the Mexican territory are controlled, not by the government, but by drug cartels. These cartels are at constant war with each other, and they organize and finance assassination of their enemies and of anybody who "betrays" them... or even so much as a drug addict who won't pay for their drugs. Law enforcement is very limited in those areas. And they are a safe haven for "sicarios" after they commit crimes in areas that DO have proper law enforcement. Therefore, the number of murders is much higher than it would be in a developed nation where that type of activity, if it exists, is much more limited. This is very typical of ALL underdeveloped nations in Latin America.

I just did your research for you!

Now it's YOUR turn. Do you or do you NOT have a rebuttal for any of the points in the OP. Because none of this has ANY bearing whatsoever in my proposals. And you still need to quote ONE of them, and attempt to rebut it.





Despite my perception that you are just trolling, I just did. Above. I would have HOPED you did your own research. It would have proven that you are serious and not just another MAGA-like poster who refuses to look up reality on their own. But what I explained above was ALL you needed to know.

Now your turn. Comparting us to Mexico was just something ridiculous that you were doing and I just thought I'd point it out. But it has NOTHING to do with ANY of my proposals. I don't know if they would work in any OTHER country, but they would definitely work in the U.S And you haven't even ATTEMPTED to make a case as to why any of them wouldn't.

Now... feel free to deny reality. Feel free to deny that I just GAVE you an explanation (I already HAD before). I can cut and paste it as many times as you want. I can change the font and put it in bold, if you prefer. But that IS the reason why you can't compare Mexico to US.

Yeah. No.

Here is the problem with your arguments. Your claim is that your proposals will make it harder for criminals to get firearms in the us because it’s going to make it harder for law abiding citizens to have firearms.
NONE of your proposals address the illegal traffic of firearms.
They only reduce the LEGAL avenues of sale.
Basically just like Mexico .

So all you will end up with is criminals having firearms and the law abiding populace disarmed. Like Mexico.

 

[Feynman Lives!]

Yeah. No.

Like I said: if I told you what an "underdeveloped nation" is, you would just deny it. The only way is for you to do YOUR OWN research. Which you refuse to do.

Since I debate with MAGAs constantly, I'm used to them denying reality even if you throw it to their facies.

Here is the problem with your arguments. Your claim is that your proposals will make it harder for criminals to get firearms in the us because it’s going to make it harder for law abiding citizens to have firearms.

Ok. So now you want to change the focus of what you try to rebut. Good!

My proposals will make it harder for EVERYBODY to get firearms. INCLUDING people who would use them to commit a crime. And very specifically mass shootings, like the OP explains.

NONE of your proposals address the illegal traffic of firearms.

That is correct! My proposals DO NOT directly (only indirectly) address illegal traffic of firearms. They are not INTENDED to do that. Just to make it HARDER for people who would use them to commit illegal acts. ESPECIALLY kids (most of which don't have a criminal record) who can just run to the corner gun shop and come out with an AR-15 and 50-round magazines to shoot their classmates because... somebody made fun of their hair (or something like that)

Gun manufacturers put in gun stores thousands of these firearms every year. My proposals will STOP gun manufacturers from putting out more.

It's HARDER to buy a firearm illegally then it is to just hop by by your local gun shop and come out with an Assault Rifle. Not impossible. Just "harder". A bit more of a chance of being caught. But THAT (to make it harder), like the OP SAYS, is the whole purpose of these proposals. You are welcome to read it. the purpose has ALWAYS been there. And then QUOTE from there, what you decide you want to try to rebut.

 

[RF667799]

Like I said: if I told you what an "underdeveloped nation" is, you would just deny it. The only way is for you to do YOUR OWN research. Which you refuse to do.

Since I debate with MAGAs constantly, I'm used to them denying reality even if you throw it to their facies.


Ok. So now you want to change the focus of what you try to rebut. Good!

My proposals will make it harder for EVERYBODY to get firearms. INCLUDING people who would use them to commit a crime. And very specifically mass shootings, like the OP explains.



That is correct! My proposals DO NOT directly (only indirectly) address illegal traffic of firearms. They are not INTENDED to do that. Just to make it HARDER for people who would use them to commit illegal acts. ESPECIALLY kids (most of which don't have a criminal record) who can just run to the corner gun shop and come out with an AR-15 and 50-round magazines to shoot their classmates because... somebody made fun of their hair (or something like that)

Gun manufacturers put in gun stores thousands of these firearms every year. My proposals will STOP gun manufacturers from putting out more.

It's HARDER to buy a firearm illegally then it is to just hop by by your local gun shop and come out with an Assault Rifle. Not impossible. Just "harder". A bit more of a chance of being caught. But THAT (to make it harder), like the OP SAYS, is the whole purpose of these proposals. You are welcome to read it. the purpose has ALWAYS been there. And then QUOTE from there, what you decide you want to try to rebut.

You could make stabbings harder by prohibiting people from buying knives, right? I mean...who gives a shit if 99.99% of knife owners won't stab anyone, right?

 

[JMB1911A1]

You could make stabbings harder by prohibiting people from buying knives, right? I mean...who gives a shit if 99.99% of knife owners won't stab anyone, right?

You mean like the UK, LOL.

Why stopping knife crime needs to start in the kitchen

Phasing out pointed-tip kitchen knives in favour of round-tip knives is a natural extension of the UK’s progress on weapons control.

theconversation.com

Killer kitchen knives should be phased out as dangerous and unnecessary. Round-tip knives are less likely to tempt violence, and less damaging if used.

Sounds a lot like our resident gun banners.

 

[RF667799]

You mean like the UK, LOL.

Why stopping knife crime needs to start in the kitchen

Phasing out pointed-tip kitchen knives in favour of round-tip knives is a natural extension of the UK’s progress on weapons control.

theconversation.com

Killer kitchen knives should be phased out as dangerous and unnecessary. Round-tip knives are less likely to tempt violence, and less damaging if used.

Sounds a lot like our resident gun banners.

I wonder if any pro-gun people in the UK argued that knives would be next on the list, and the gun banners pooh-poohed them.

 

[jaeger19]

Like I said: if I told you what an "underdeveloped nation" is, you would just deny it. The only way is for you to do YOUR OWN research. Which you refuse to do.

Um no. That’s another of your lies.

Since I debate with MAGAs constantly, I'm used to them denying reality even if you throw it to their facies.

Well since I am not maga perhaps that explains why you have lost this debate.

Ok. So now you want to change the focus of what you try to rebut. Good!

No.

My proposals will make it harder for EVERYBODY to get firearms. INCLUDING people who would use them to commit a crime. And very specifically mass shootings, like the OP explains.

No it doesn’t as has been pointed out . Just as Mexico has made it hard for law abiding citizens to get firearms, but the criminals don’t have a problem.
I

That is correct! My proposals DO NOT directly (only indirectly) address illegal traffic of firearms.

Bingo. And as such are doomed to fail.

They are not INTENDED to do that. Just to make it HARDER for people who would use them to commit illegal acts.

See above.

ESPECIALLY kids (most of which don't have a criminal record) who can just run to the corner gun shop and come out with an AR-15 and 50-round magazines to shoot their classmates because... somebody made fun of their hair (or something like that)

Well no they don’t. As pointed out repeatedly your proposals would not stop that at all .
Your assertions to the contrary aren’t a rebuttal for the fact you have no understanding how the secondary market works.
Much less the black market.

Gun manufacturers put in gun stores thousands of these firearms every year. My proposals will STOP gun manufacturers from putting out more.

No it won’t.

It's HARDER to buy a firearm illegally then it is to just hop by by your local gun shop and come out with an Assault Rifle.

Actually no it isn’t. I don’t know where you get this bs. Have you ever bought a firearm “ illegally”?
I actually have. It’s way easier than buying legally. Which is why I did it. To avoid the hassle and expense.

Not impossible. Just "harder". A bit more of a chance of being caught. But THAT (to make it harder), like the OP SAYS, is the whole purpose of these proposals. You are welcome to read it. the purpose has ALWAYS been there. And then QUOTE from there, what you decide you want to try to rebut.

All you do is make it harder for law abiding citizens to get firearms and make it easier for criminals to get their hands on firearms.
Just like Mexico.

 

[Feynman Lives!]

Well since I am not maga perhaps that explains why you have lost this debate.

I didn't say you're a MAGA. I'm saying you DEBATE like a MAGA. It's the same tactic: deny reality, forgo any argument that requires rational thought and logic (arguments that are not explicitly verifiable but inferred by the most basic logic), refuse to do your own research, and then make idiotic questions to AVOID a serious debate, and then IGNORE the answer. Pure MAGA-tactics.

For example...

Um no. That’s another of your lies.

I have said NO lies. You don't say what the lie is or why.... whatever it is... is a lie. Pure MAGA-speak

Or nonsense like this:

Actually no it isn’t. I don’t know where you get this bs. Have you ever bought a firearm “ illegally”?
I actually have. It’s way easier than buying legally. Which is why I did it. To avoid the hassle and expense.

If you buy a gun illegally, there is a much HIGHER probability of getting caught. They are more likely to want the gun to commit a crime.

And, BTW, anybody who is dumb enough to buy a gun illegally when they can buy it LEGALLY is not very bright. So the likelihood that they will be caught BEFORE committing that crime increases. This description you made of yourself helps explain many of the things you have said.

The lesson we have learned is that not being a MAGA doesn't necessarily mean that you are smarter than a MAGA.

My proposals will force gun manufacturers to STOP putting more and more assault weapons out on the street. So, in due time, they will be more scarce. Which will mean more expensive. And the likelihood that a criminal who INSISTS on buying one, will find this great "deal" on some assault weapon. But the "seller" will turn out to be an undercover cop.

So not only do we get the GUNS off the street. We ALSO get more criminals BEFORE they use the guns.

 

[RF667799]

I didn't say you're a MAGA. I'm saying you DEBATE like a MAGA. It's the same tactic: deny reality, forgo any argument that requires rational thought and logic (arguments that are not explicitly verifiable but inferred by the most basic logic), refuse to do your own research, and then make idiotic questions to AVOID a serious debate, and then IGNORE the answer. Pure MAGA-tactics.

For example...

I have said NO lies. You don't say what the lie is or why.... whatever it is... is a lie. Pure MAGA-speak

Or nonsense like this:



If you buy a gun illegally, there is a much HIGHER probability of getting caught. They are more likely to want the gun to commit a crime.

And, BTW, anybody who is dumb enough to buy a gun illegally when they can buy it LEGALLY is not very bright. So the likelihood that they will be caught BEFORE committing that crime increases. This description you made of yourself helps explain many of the things you have said.

The lesson we have learned is that not being a MAGA doesn't necessarily mean that you are smarter than a MAGA.

My proposals will force gun manufacturers to STOP putting more and more assault weapons out on the street. So, in due time, they will be more scarce. Which will mean more expensive. And the likelihood that a criminal who INSISTS on buying one, will find this great "deal" on some assault weapon. But the "seller" will turn out to be an undercover cop.

So not only do we get the GUNS off the street. We ALSO get more criminals BEFORE they use the guns.

Sorry. I don't see an induced scarcity of modern sporting rifles as some sort of benefit.

 

[jaeger19]

I didn't say you're a MAGA. I'm saying you DEBATE like a MAGA. It's the same tactic: deny reality, forgo any argument that requires rational thought and logic (arguments that are not explicitly verifiable but inferred by the most basic logic), refuse to do your own research, and then make idiotic questions to AVOID a serious debate, and then IGNORE the answer. Pure MAGA-tactics.

Yeah. All lies from you my friend.
You should look up the definition of psychological projection.

For example...

I have said NO lies. You don't say what the lie is or why.... whatever it is... is a lie. Pure MAGA-speak

Or nonsense like this:

See above.

If you buy a gun illegally, there is a much HIGHER probability of getting caught. They are more likely to want the gun to commit a crime.

Um no. Criminals buy guns illegally because they are LESS likely to get caught.

And, BTW, anybody who is dumb enough to buy a gun illegally when they can buy it LEGALLY is not very bright. So the likelihood that they will be caught BEFORE committing that crime increases. This description you made of yourself helps explain many of the things you have said.

Um no. Wrong
Buying that firearm illegally was cheaper. Easier. No background checks and zero traceability.
There is absolutely zero chance of being caught “ before the crime”. .
You simply don’t understand the gun market.

The lesson we have learned is that not being a MAGA doesn't necessarily mean that you are smarter than a MAGA.

Exactly. You are certainly not smarter than a MAGA . It’s time you recognized that. In fact your arguments are very trumpian in that you just assume your ideas will work when you’ve demonstrated you have no clue about reality.

Remember how you claim that magazines would “ rust away” lmao.

My proposals will force gun manufacturers to STOP putting more and more assault weapons out on the street.

Nah. We already had an “ assault weapons ban” like you propose for 10 years. After study of it, it was concluded it had no effect on gun violence or mass shootings.
The reality is if you pass such a ban. There will be a huge run on weapons on that list and that will keep supply up gor decades particularly for criminals.

So, in due time, they will be more scarce.

Nope. Se above.

Which will mean more expensive.

Not for criminals.

And the likelihood that a criminal who INSISTS on buying one, will find this great "deal" on some assault weapon. But the "seller" will turn out to be an undercover cop.

Nope. As stated you have no idea how such enforcement could work.

So not only do we get the GUNS off the street. We ALSO get more criminals BEFORE they use the guns.

Nope. You simply don’t understand the secondary market for firearms.

 

[Feynman Lives!]

Sorry. I don't see an induced scarcity of modern sporting rifles as some sort of benefit.

I bet the kids at Sandy Hook did see the benefits when they saw their classmates being shot and were just waiting for it to be their turn.

When will you get the message that this is not about YOU!!

 

[RF667799]

I bet the kids at Sandy Hook did see the benefits when they saw their classmates being shot and were just waiting for it to be their turn.

When will you get the message that this is not about YOU!!

Well, me and the 100 million or so other peaceful people who find their guns to be beneficial.

Check my sig. I got it from a gun banner.

 

[Feynman Lives!]

Um no. Criminals buy guns illegally because they are LESS likely to get caught.

Most school shootings (for example) were carried out by people who were NOT criminals. If we stop those, we save lives, and it will all have been worth it!

THAT should be the FIRST priority. Whether it's more or less likely.... I don't care. The point is that we need to start saving some lives lost to this MADNESS of having such easy access to weapons that are designed to kill more people in the shortest amount of time.

If they can just hop down to the store and buy one, that's what they'll do. And the likelihood that they will get caught is very close to ZERO.. If that option no longer exists, they will either buy a LEGAL gun or gothey try to go to the illegal market because that option no longer exists, probability that they will get caught is much higher.

Again: you are looking for excuses.

 

[Feynman Lives!]

Well, me and the 100 million or so other peaceful people who find their guns to be beneficial.

Yeah! You're going to need to find a new phallic symbol to worship.

It must be tough to be you!

 

[RF667799]

Yeah! You're going to need to find a new phallic symbol to worship.

It must be tough to be you!

That might be a good argument in an echo chamber of sympathetic bobble heads.

Here it's just a stupid one, indicating you have no substantive response.

 

[RF667799]

Most school shootings (for example) were carried out by people who were NOT criminals. If we stop those, we save lives, and it will all have been worth it!

THAT should be the FIRST priority. Whether it's more or less likely.... I don't care. The point is that we need to start saving some lives lost to this MADNESS of having such easy access to weapons that are designed to kill more people in the shortest amount of time.

If they can just hop down to the store and buy one, that's what they'll do. And the likelihood that they will get caught is very close to ZERO.. If that option no longer exists, they will either buy a LEGAL gun or gothey try to go to the illegal market because that option no longer exists, probability that they will get caught is much higher.

Again: you are looking for excuses.

"gothey try to go to"

It's rare to see someone so irate that they stutter in a text medium.

 

[jaeger19]

Most school shootings (for example) were carried out by people who were NOT criminals. If we stop those, we save lives, and it will all have been worth it!

Exactly. Most had mental health issues tgat if dealt with would have prevented ANY violence.
But instead of that you propose a licensing scheme that you admit, these folks would pass and still get firearms.

THAT should be the FIRST priority. Whether it's more or less likely.... I don't care. The point is that we need to start saving some lives lost to this MADNESS of having such easy access to weapons that are designed to kill more people in the shortest amount of time.

It’s not “ access to guns”. Mexico proves that.
NY state proves that. Washington DC proves that. All of those places have LOWER access to firearms than say Utah or Maine or a number of states and countries and yet they have higher crime.

If they can just hop down to the store and buy one, that's what they'll do.

Or just buy one from a neighbor . Which is easier. Or any other person . As I did.

And the likelihood that they will get caught is very close to ZERO.. If that option no longer exists, they will either buy a LEGAL gun or gothey try to go to the illegal market because that option no longer exists, probability that they will get caught is much higher.

No the probability of getting caught is much LOWER which is exactly WHY few criminals try to purchase through dealers !!!!

Again: you are looking for excuses.

No. I am presenting reality.
You don’t like facts or logic.