If more honest citizens were armed they could make the criminals afraid to do drive-by shooting.

I guess everyone needs to wear a kevlar vest, helmet and live in a house with sandbag walls, just in-case the law-abiding citizens start a war.

once again, no facts, no logic, no substance

those who profit from more guns).

I suggested shooting at criminals, you changed it to law-abiding starting a war.

"If more honest citizens were armed they could make the criminals afraid to do drive-by shooting"

Nothing about "if everyone were armed" as you incorrectly quoted him as saying. The ONLY ONES who post that shit are the anti-gun zealots but hey, never let the truth get in the way of your whining, right?

But you just keep on making shit up. That seems to be what you do best when it comes to this subject.

That's ALL he can do.

yet few if any gun extremist suggest anyway of slowing that problem down.

If you want to put more guns in the hands of law abiding citizens and keep less in the hands of the lawless, require background checks on all purchases of handgun and then register them to legal buyers. Having an unregistered handgun in your possession could then put the criminal and insane in jail before they shoot someone. It would slow straw sales and make it harder to sell to illegal buyers. If someone is in illegal possession and it is unregistered the sentence could then be doubled for the extra crime.

While I agree with BGC on all guns sales, there is no evidence registration actually works. How would you prevent the good faith effort from being abused, or a back door ban? How would you prevent it becoming like NFA transference tax, where the backers did not think a ban would survive SCOTUS, so they put on an astronomical (for the time) tax?

Work those out and over turn Haynes v. United States, then I would be more open minded on the subject.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haynes_v._United_States

the gangster connection. The public went along with it. A $5 or $10, one time tax, put in the law, would be both reasonable and acceptable to the public.

You support a BGC on private sales? Get ready to be called a "grabber".

Most of the folks here support background checks on all buyers. Unfortunately, private sellers are prohibited from using the NICS system.

on private sales. 9 out of 10 people are only interested the $, that's why they don't bother to ask if you are prohibited or not. Even if asked, crooks lie. That's why records of the sale, including driver's licenses should be mandatory for handgun sales. Pay 10 bucks and have to go to a police station for the transaction would make it harder and more dangerous for the crooks selling and buying. On the other hand, legal people would still be able to buy and sell. Other than the 10 bucks, I can see no problem. With the cost of handguns and bullets, 10 bucks ain't nothing. This would not stop illegal sales, but would slow them down.

In another post someone suggested mandatory registration of violent gun crime crooks. I could go with that. Just like child sex offenders. Like sex offenders, violent gun crime folks make up a minority of the population, but are responsible for a high percentage of the crimes.

What most folks object to is the "Pay 10 bucks and have to go to a police station" part when all that is needed is a quick phone call to the current NICS center like the FFLs do.

The biggest problem right now is that the illegal sales normally do not get prosecuted.

the transference tax was used because the writers figured it would not be struck down.

That the point has been made that prohibited persons can not be compelled by law to register guns.

Something about not having to bear witness against ones self, and not being penalized for refusal to do so, I think it was.

change that. In states, try getting caught driving an unregistered or licensed auto.

Again, I looking for solutions to cut the number of criminals with guns while still making it so law abiding people can still own and possess guns. Not excuses for doing nothing.

there is no law against felons having a car.
While they can't be busted for unregistered weapon, they can still be convicted of "felon in possession".

Shooting back at criminals is a very effective way of discouraging them.

But it probably won't be your kid getting struck by the stray bullet, right?

...if they had not been stopped then? It was OK with you that Frank James killed Joseph Lee Heywood, a bank clerk? After all, you are against effective citizen resistance to crime.

The drive-by shooters will do other drive-bys because nothing bad happened to them on these. It is safe for them to do drive-bys, but not safe for the town's people.

Last edited Thu May 31, 2012, 11:20 AM - Edit history (1)

First I will take note of what is behind the thug so I won't endanger someone else in case I miss. If the background is clear, then I will shoot back. Please note that it is very rare for a CCWer to shoot an innocent person. We have a better safety record than the police with regard to innocents accidently hit - and there are lots more of us too.

Your worries are not based in reality.

In most cases even the thought of return fire is enough to discourage a thug. That is why armed guards are so effective even though they rarely draw their guns.

trys to make a broadbrush indictment of gun ownership in general using these crimes as a backdrop.

I am not sure what to make of it but on the face of it, it appears a simple minded attempt at linking these gun crimes to all gun owners.

having a disagreement with local bible meeting groups and community involvement honchos.

It'd be interesting to see if the drivers had CCW's and driver's licenses.

"Most Americans do not, however, own guns, because three-quarters of people with guns own two or more. According to the General Social Survey, conducted by the National Policy Opinion Center at the University of Chicago, the prevalence of gun ownership has declined steadily in the past few decades. In 1973, there were guns in roughly one in two households in the United States; in 2010, one in three. In 1980, nearly one in three Americans owned a gun; in 2010, that figure had dropped to one in five."

Last edited Wed May 30, 2012, 10:56 AM - Edit history (1)

Using Gallup, who has no real ax to grind on the issue, isn't fair to the gun control fans around here.

Why would you tell a perfect stranger you own a gun or guns? Especially a pollster. I wouldn't tell them a damn thing.

there are also probably as many, if not more, who would tell that perfect stranger they were armed to the teeth, when they don't even own a bb gun. Try doing a survey on that one. Asking someone what guns they own or not is as stupid as asking what their alarm code is. Are people that gullible?

I'd say the answer is HELL YES!. Given the amount of people that can't keep A/V running on their PCS. Won't learn to not click on links in emails, won't learn to not go to certain websites and won't learn to not D/L crap. I'd say many Americans could be sold any number of bridges.

Of course the flip side to that is if the person doing the survey comes across as some sanctimonious shit engaged in push-polling a certain position, people might say anything to try and piss off the person making the survey, even if they're working for minimum wage in some boiler room operation.

If I knew for a fact the some Executive Asshole from VPC or MAIG was calling me, I might tell them the most outrageous thing I could think of.

I'd either tell them to get lost or start by telling them about the land mines surrounding my property. I don't care who they say they represent, it's none of their business.

I don't have any credit cards to pay interest on.

between New Zealand and Australia 20 years ago.

http://www.allcountries.org/gun_ownership_rates.html

Spencer60 debunks the author nicely.

More guns victimized by sorry excuses for humans...


and people wonder why CC is so popular.

and the author of the article needs to remove his head from his ass and acknowledge the real problem instead of blaming his bastardized interpretation of the 2nd amendment and the NRA...

They said something about drugs and street girls forcing them to lock their restroom doors and hand out coins for the door.


I remember being a 5-6yo and they restrooms had .10 coin locks but that was for profit.

problem has been ignored or pandered to for just a bit too long. If these stellar members of society were worried about law enforcement they wouldn't be so bold. The cops need to get organized and start applying some pressure, real pressure. We need gang round ups and identification of members. Instead of busting pot dispensaries and harassing people for traffic violations the cops need to adopt a zero tolerance program against gangs and start busting some heads. If they don't do something it's going to be a long hot summer.

It does little good to arrest these gang members and the judges turn them loose...let's see. If the jails weren't full of petty drug offenders then maybe we would have room for real bad guys.

As -..__... posted for us above, it would seem that these crimes were gang-related.

It's not a gun problem, it's a gang problem, which is fundamentally a social problem.

Drive bys by gangsters have been around since at least the 1920s.