NRA

[Pete F.]

Here is a study on murders in Chicago.
It is detailed enough so that you could look at the proposed changes in gun laws and see what the effect would be.
Pretty close to nil.
https://portal.chicagopolice.org/por...ports/MA11.pdf

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Here is a study on murders in Chicago.
It is detailed enough so that you could look at the proposed changes in gun laws and see what the effect would be.
Pretty close to nil.
https://portal.chicagopolice.org/por...ports/MA11.pdf

"Pretty close to nil."

I agree. But if the difference between "nil" and "pretty close to nil" is the life of a few children, is it not worth discussing? That's all I am saying.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"Pretty close to nil."

I agree. But if the difference between "nil" and "pretty close to nil" is the life of a few children, is it not worth discussing? That's all I am saying.

Using that logic if the children had been garroted with wire leader we would make wire leader illegal thereby preventing this from happening again.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Using that logic if the children had been garroted with wire leader we would make wire leader illegal thereby preventing this from happening again.

Right, because there's no difference between a wire leader, or a brick, or your bare hands, and a rifle with a large capacity magazine.

Many things are potentially lethal, but have significant value and utility in our lives - like a car. No rational person would suggest a federal ban on cars.

If you have to make ridiculous exaggerations to my point in order to make it seem like a weak argument, it seems to me that you have no argument against what I am actually saying.

[Carl]

Here is another aspect of new laws and background checks:

In a letter to the president shortly after the Newtown shooting a number of mayors across the country which are part of a group called MAIG (mayors against gun violence) adressed 7 aspects to curbing gun violence. Some of the points in the letter were the normal rhetoric of banning assault rifles and high capacity magazines, but items 5 and 6 are rather revealing in my opinion.


From the letter:

5. Prosecute prohibited purchasers who attempted to buy firearms, ammunition or high capacity magazines: The justice department should vigorously prosecute felons and other prohibited purchasers who fail gun background check. In 2009, the FBI referred more than 71,000 such cases to ATF, but the US Attorneys ultimately prosecuted only 77 of them. Prosecuting these offenders is a goal broadly supported by our coalition and the National Rifle Association.

6. Required federal agencies to report records to NICS: The NICS Improvement Act of 2007 required federal agancies to submit mental health, substance abuse and other records that prohibit a person from owning a gun to NICS. However, few agencies comly. In October 2011, the FBI provided data to MAIG on reporting by 60 federal agencies. Of those 60 agencies, 52 had given zero mental health records to NICS. Although total federal agency reporting of mental health records increased by ten percent between march and October 2011, to 143579, the vast majority of those records had been submitted by one agency, the dept fo Veteran affairs. Even fewer federal agencies are reporting drug abusers. Only three agencies - the FBI, the US coast guard, and the Court Services and Offenders Supervision Agency (CSOSA), the probation and parole services agency for the Distric of Columbia - have submitted any substance abuse records, and the vast majority fo federal agencies, including the DEA, have not submitted a single substance abuse record. ..."


So,

the government should clean their own house first since they have only prosecuted 0.1 % of all failed background checks. And have actually convicted even less (very close to 0).

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Carl

Here is another aspect of new laws and background checks:

In a letter to the president shortly after the Newtown shooting a number of mayors across the country which are part of a group called MAIG (mayors against gun violence) adressed 7 aspects to curbing gun violence. Some of the points in the letter were the normal rhetoric of banning assault rifles and high capacity magazines, but items 5 and 6 are rather revealing in my opinion.

I like that there's a group called "mayors against gun violence". As if there are mayors out there who are in favor of gun violence.

The big problem is our culture, not availability of guns. If every single person on the planet were given a gun, I'm certain that murder rates in the US would still be much higher than most other developed countries. I have no idea how to fix that.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I like that there's a group called "mayors against gun violence". As if there are mayors out there who are in favor of gun violence.

The big problem is our culture, not availability of guns. If every single person on the planet were given a gun, I'm certain that murder rates in the US would still be much higher than most other developed countries. I have no idea how to fix that.

Invest more money in social programs 👍
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Here is a study on murders in Chicago.
It is detailed enough so that you could look at the proposed changes in gun laws and see what the effect would be.
Pretty close to nil.
https://portal.chicagopolice.org/por...ports/MA11.pdf

This report tells how many assault weapons were used to commit murder in Chicago in a recent year.
Read it and tell me how effective the assault weapons ban will be?

[Fishpart]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

This report tells how many assault weapons were used to commit murder in Chicago in a recent year.
Read it and tell me how effective the assault weapons ban will be?

It's not about public safety, it's about POWER and CONTROL.

[Jay Dog]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

This report tells how many assault weapons were used to commit murder in Chicago in a recent year.
Read it and tell me how effective the assault weapons ban will be?

All these facts are true but at the same time if you were told in the past 6 months in 4 seperate incidents 45 people were killed and over 60 wounded, this included 21 kids under age 8 dead, all by the same type of weapon what do you think the reaction of the average person would be.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by Jay Dog

All these facts are true but at the same time if you were told in the past 6 months in 4 seperate incidents 45 people were killed and over 60 wounded, this included 21 kids under age 8 dead, all by the same type of weapon what do you think the reaction of the average person would be.

It wasn't the reaction of the average person to ban modern sporting arms. It was the use of this crisis to further an agenda that is calling for a ban
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jay Dog]

Originally Posted by Jay Dog

All these facts are true but at the same time if you were told in the past 6 months in 4 seperate incidents 45 people were killed and over 60 wounded, this included 21 kids under age 8 dead, all by the same type of weapon what do you think the reaction of the average person would be.

Originally Posted by buckman

It wasn't the reaction of the average person to ban modern sporting arms. It was the use of this crisis to further an agenda that is calling for a ban
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What they are trying to do is redefine "Sporting Arms"
The average person see's a rifle with a wood stock and that's a "Hunting Rifle" if that gun is fiberglass and plastic it's an "Assault Rifle" even if the capabilities are the same.
That's the stigma that needs to be overcome.
And having people yelling about rebellion and impeachment is not doing anyone any favors.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by Jay Dog

And having people yelling about rebellion and impeachment is not doing anyone any favors.

It will be interesting to see what people think when Obama uses schoolchildren as props tomorrow when he makes his announcement.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by buckman

It will be interesting to see what people think when Obama uses schoolchildren as props tomorrow when he makes his announcement.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

that's a layup.....

if you agree with Obama you care deeply about little children and give him permission to do whatever he feels is necessary to keep them safe....

if you disagree with Obama you probably hate little children and want to see more of them shot.....


there should never be any assumption of civility, reason or expectation that this bunch will not resort to the most shameful of antics....they will demand that you not engage in certain behaviour(regardless of whether you intend to or have done so or not) just before they begin an all out campaign displaying exactly that behaviour...I wonder how much Americans will continue to stomach...



W.H. Releases Letters from Little Kids Pleading for Gun Control7:20 AM, Jan 16, 2013 • By DANIEL HALPER

The White House today released letters from little kids pleading for gun control, just hours before President Obama is to release a comprehensive proposal to limit guns and ammunition. The letters were released to the Associated Press in what appears to be a coordinated effort to help shape the narrative the day of Obama's announcement.

"Three days after six teachers and 20 students were killed by a rampaging gunman at their elementary school in Newtown, Conn., an 8-year-old from Maryland pulled out a sheet of paper and asked President Barack Obama for 'some changes in the laws with guns,'" the AP reports.

"It's a free country but I recommend there needs (to) be a limit with guns," Grant wrote in a letter dated Dec. 17. "Please don't let people own machine guns or other powerful guns like that."

In the days after the shooting, children around the country had the same idea as Grant. They put their feelings about the massacre on paper and sent those letters to a receptive White House.

"I am writing to ask you to STOP gun violence," wrote Tajeah, a 10-year-old from Georgia. "I am very sad about the children who lost their lives. So, I thought I would write to you to STOP gun violence."

Half way through the article, the AP admits, "The White House shared three such letters with The Associated Press, from young writers who seemed to agree that Obama should do what's necessary to make it harder for people to get guns."

White House spokesman Jay Carney announced yesterday that Obama will be surrounded by little kids when he announces his gun proposal later today.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by Jay Dog

All these facts are true but at the same time if you were told in the past 6 months in 4 seperate incidents 45 people were killed and over 60 wounded, this included 21 kids under age 8 dead, all by the same type of weapon what do you think the reaction of the average person would be.

Interestingly enough, if 2012 trends similar to 2011, more children died either as a direct or indirect result of alcohol use.

I don't see anyone calling for sweeping bans on alcohol. With that in mind, AWBs are not about saving lives. They are about taking guns out of the hands of lawful owners.

Also, the stomping on the Constitution has already begun:
NY Senate passes 'landmark' gun control laws - WSJ.com