We now have more proof that gun control does not stop criminals from obtaining guns.
The University of Chicago of all places attempted to do the opposite but find out what
we all (or at least most of us) already knew.
https://thebreakaway.wordpress.com/...tally-proved-that-gun-control-laws-dont-work/
Not surprisingly, administers of the study quickly learned these criminals do not acquire their guns from licensed dealers, private sellers, or even the Internet.
The study looked at inmates in Chicago’s Cook County Jail who face gun charges or who have a history of firearm related convictions.
They learned zero criminals have used gun shows or the Internet to purchase their weapons.
The reason why? The method is too easily traceable by law enforcement.
Instead, the preferred method for criminals was to purchase firearms available on the streets, where they are harder for law enforcement to track.
The vast majority of the inmates used handguns to commit their crimes or protect themselves, very few cited using “military-style assault weapons.” And they said their habit was to get rid of a gun after one year because of the “legal liability” of being caught with a gun that could be linked to crimes they or others committed.
As for specifics regarding sources for purchasing guns, some of the inmates indicated that gangs have individuals with a Firearm Owners Identification Card who buy guns then sell them to gang members. Others indicated using “corrupt cops” who seize guns then “put them back on the street.”
yet another nail in the whole gun control is for criminals nonsense.
If guns are forbidden, it will be easier to tell the good guys from the bad.
And the ugly can't hide in any case.
not really. Lots of good guys won't give their guns up. Nor will the police. If police have them-other honest civilians should to.
If guns are forbidden, it will be easier to tell the good guys from the bad.
And the ugly can't hide in any case.
How? Why is that always left out?
If they don't give the guns up, they will be criminals after the new law and not honest citizens anymore.
Political correctness?
What if they were criminals before?
Who are the only people who will give up their guns? Explain how this will help whatever this idiotic law is claimed to do.
If they were criminally and keep their guns, the law will not change anything. If they were criminals and give up their guns, it will be more difficult to tell, but they will be unarmed criminals. Isn't that fine?
If they don't give the guns up, they will be criminals after the new law and not honest citizens anymore.
that's really statist nonsense. Unjust laws that penalize behavior that has been legal for centuries should be ignored when the motivations for the law are dishonest. Rosa Parks was a "criminal"
If they were criminally and keep their guns, the law will not change anything. If they were criminals and give up their guns, it will be more difficult to tell, but they will be unarmed criminals. Isn't that fine?
If only criminals can get guns then gun control works. Brilliant!
i believe that is the goal of the some of the leaders of the Bannerrhoid movement. They want honest people disarmed so that honest people will be more inclined to cede more rights away to the government in order to gain the illusion of safety.
I find it interesting that this whole gun control thing is the attempt to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, but as we already knew criminals don't go to the places
that require these types of gun control to use. they go to the black market to get their guns.
in fact the number one place they get guns is from friends or family members.
They don't go to a gun show.
they don't go to a legal dealer.
they might go to a sketchy pawn shop that they already know about, but then again that is how they obtain guns anyway.
so we can only conclude that gun control is specifically aimed at disarming the law abiding citizens of a right.
I find it interesting that this whole gun control thing is the attempt to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, but as we already knew criminals don't go to the places
that require these types of gun control to use. they go to the black market to get their guns.
in fact the number one place they get guns is from friends or family members.
They don't go to a gun show.
they don't go to a legal dealer.
they might go to a sketchy pawn shop that they already know about, but then again that is how they obtain guns anyway.
so we can only conclude that gun control is specifically aimed at disarming the law abiding citizens of a right.
obviously
lets look at gun control efforts of the Bannerrhoid movement and the Democrat party in the last 30 years
1) the Hughes Amendment-bans all private citizens from possessing a machine gun made after May 19, 1986. Rationale for the ban "No one can be against banning machine guns" (Bill Hughes-D NJ) real reason-to derail a pro gun bipartisan bill that the Dems knew had the votes to pass and which RWR was going to sign.
Crime control? in the 50 years prior to this ban, not one privately owned legally possessed machine gun had been used in any murders save for one case where a DAYTON OHIO police officer killed an informant by shooting him with a sub machine gun
2) Clinton Gun ban. it has been illegal-for decades, for criminals to own, possess, touch, any firearm. So a "semi auto assault weapon ban, only decreases the rights of law abiding people
same with magazine limits
same with how many firearms you can purchase in a month
same with registration-the USSC has ruled that criminals are exempt from any prosecution for disobeying registration requirements due to the fifth amendment
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?