Anyone here know NY Gun laws? (Union, Philadelphia: safe area, to buy, school)

[Alan B 718]

Originally Posted by Elvira Black

Glen Oaks, Queens til I was fifteen, then Manhattan for a long time, and now the Bronx.

And you? (though you may have mentioned it).

Any particular reason you're askin'?

i think he said east newyork, and im sure he's asking to establish your street cred.

[Alan B 718]

Originally Posted by apvbguy

considering the fact that most of the cities with tough gun control laws are also the most dangerous, I'd say that gun control isn't doing a good job.
If the bad guys know that john q public is unarmed they are free to try and do anything. In Fla where anyone with a clean background can carry a weapon, those bad guys run he risk of being shot themselves, and it happens a lot. unfortunatley crimminals are fairly stupid because the fact that many people do carry guns in FL, there is still a lot of gun crimes.
Nonetheless places like NY, NJ, DC, Pa,that have strict gun control also have bad crime rates, and places with more open gun laws crime outside of inner city ghettos is almost nil

Ok, so lets break this down.
Florida has lax GC laws, but you say the criminals are stupid because there are still alot of gun crimes. umm i think you just defeated yourself slightly.

You state that places with lax GC laws have almost nil crime EXCEPT when they are near inner city ghettos.
ok.. now. lets list those cities again.
NY - can we say many places in nyc can qualify as an inner city ghetto? sure lots of gentirifcation and rich whites flooding the area, but id bet that if you check crime charts 90% of the gun related crimes will be in the poorer minortiy areas (ghettos)
DC - come on now.. DC is DC. with the exception of the white house, DC is a ghetto.
NJ - take out, newark, elizabeth, camden, patterson. guess what, NJ is heaven on earth. (ps, thats where the inner city ghettos are)
PA - Take out Philly and whatever other bad areas (betcha its an inner-city ghetto) and PA would be even better than jersey.

The point is, when you have a high concentration of poor people (inner city ghetto) there is more likely to be violent crime in abundance. With that, if theres a high availability of guns laying around, there will be even MORE gun crime. People will be getting jacked, not for their dollars but for their pieces.
Theres nothing a criminal who intends to use gun likes more than a gun with no bodies on it.

Now, lets take it to the next level.
i'm a criminal in a place where EVERYONE carries. I run the risk of being shot if i rob someone. But i need my meth fix. Well, do i go up and announce that im going to rob you and gimmie your cash?
Or do i walk up and but one in the back of your head and just take what i want? Think like a criminal. think like one that has nothing to lose. Think like one that just dont give a $h!t about anything. Then think about your chances.
I bet most desperate criminals in this area would resort to violence rather than just slapping you silent.

Now, fast forward to new york.
Im a criminal, where im assured 99% chance of walking up to someone and takin their stuff with no hassles, other than maybe some chick screaming.
Well, do i go up and announce that im robbing you and dont make a sound or i will kill you, know full well the victim cant do anything?
or do i blast first, ask later?

Most criminals here, might punch/kick the stuffing outta ya and take your stuff, but at least you live.

This debate can rage on and on, and it has been for ages by people much more left and right than we are. The end result is, in my opinion i think areas like nyc are much safer simply because there arent that many guns around.

[Alan B 718]

Originally Posted by jflores

yes guns are dangerous but they are much more dangerous in the hands of criminals as opposed to law abiding citizens. Do you know the extensive procedures one has to go through to get a gun, they have to call the feds for a background check, like I said before if the feds find me competent that I can get a gun then no one out there should have a problem with it.

Rofl.
Guns are dangerous in the hands of ANYONE. Im sure there's at least a very FEW people that will testify that guns are even dangerous in the hands of the NYPD! OMG!!
No offense. you want me to feel comfortable that the US Govt. OUR US GOVT found you competent with a 'background' check. Dude. come on.
Personally, i've never filled out the questionnaire to get a gun, please tell me what EXTENSIVE types of checks are done to make sure you're not psychotic.
Sure, the Feds might be able to tell if you got a felony, but how do they know you're MENTALLY capable to carry a gun.
How do they know if you have children in your house, or if your spouse has a record, or if you will lock up your gun reliably when not in use.

Most law abiding citizens, are usually raised being taught NOT to take someone else's life. In the 2 or 3 seconds a law abiding citizen might debate actually killing someone, they themselves might get killed.

There are just too many variables for such a densely populated area.

[Alan B 718]

Originally Posted by jflores

Out of place?? It seems to me that most of you never took any history and do not understand your constitution, somewhere along the line the second ammendment (the right to bear arms) got thrown out the window.

Guns serve as a deterrent to crime, I honestly believe that. Most of you have never even grown up in a rough neigborhood but fall for the propaganda that media spews out about gun control. How is it possible that there can be more illegal guns on the streets than legal guns.

I grew up in poverty, I grew up in ENY, at times it can be a war zone out there.

If anything, I dont have a problem with their being strict restrictions on being able to carry a concealed weapon like your carrying a cell phone, but we should atleast be able to have a legal gun in our homes for those that think its ok to break in.

To make things clear, If I am at home and someone breaks in and is willing to harm my wife and kids to get what they can out of our home, I will shoot thats just life.

I grew up in flatbush, i grew up in the 80s (teen years). Yea, back then flatbush was no east newyork, but it sure as hell wasnt bayridge.

You mention if someone breaks in and is willing to harm your wife and kids, you will shoot. When they break in, where is your gun? Is it under your mattress/pillow/bed fully loaded and ready to go?
Or is it locked in the closet 5 feet away?
or did your kid take it to school when you thought that you hid it really good this time?
What if you get your gun, load it and have it ready when the criminal makes his way to your room. What if you shoot, and shoot and shoot. what if you miss? what if a bullet goes thru the wall to your neighbor's apartment? what if it ricochets into the baby's room? what if it turns into a gunfight and your whole family gets shot up?

What if it isn't YOUR APARTMENT getting robbed, but your neighbor's and all the shooting is going on next door, or upstairs, or downstairs.
What if you aren't home when your house gets robbed? (as most burglaries are non violent) and your gun(s) get stolen?

I think that desperation would drive criminals to disregard the fact that they might get shot and commit crimes anyway.
Look at how drug dealers are constantly gunning for each other. They all know the other one is packing heat, but they still go at it. Gangbangers, same deal. Eventually the criminal mind will become numb to the fact that most people have guns and they will still do the deed, but they will shoot first then steal.

The funny thing is, i do believe that guns to deter crime, and I think we should have the right to bear arms. But i also think that in areas that are thick with life, things need to be regulated
-------------------
Now as far as history goes, i wont google it, but i seem to remember the 2nd amendment being put in place, not to deter crime from your neighbor, but from the GOVERNMENT. Its there (as well as the 4th amendment for search and seizure) to protect citizens and allow you the military muscle to overthrow (or at least threaten) the government.
Of course, the government is robbing/illegaly searching/arresting us anyways, but i'll leave that to the political science majors and the powers that be. Without radical change America of the future will not be such a great place.

just my 2cents

[Elvira Black]

Originally Posted by Alan B 718

i think he said east newyork, and im sure he's asking to establish your street cred.

Well, now that I've looked up his previous posts, I think he said he's recently moved to Texas, where I believe you can pack a pistol much more easily. That's fine, but if you move to NYC, best not to be a scofflaw IMO.

OK, my street cred; let's break it down:

Nice Jewish girl (actually my mom was Jewish; my dad's from Arkansas.) His kin have been in this country a very long time.. My mom was born on the LES. My grandparents fled Eastern Europe to, like, continue living. My mom was one of five kids, two to a bed, tenement walk up, no "amenities". My aunt said she doesn't have to visit the LES tenement museum...she lived it.

Glen Oaks Village, Queens til age 15. Nice area for a kid, but no house...garden apt. Working class whites. On the border of Nassau. One and a half hours to Manhattan--my dad commuted by train/bus daily. I went to Manhattan periodically.

One aunt still lives in the Seward Park coops on the Lower East Side. When my parents died, I moved in with them (1975-79). Not a fashionable or conventionally "safe" area, but I did fine. Went to the local high school, plenty of diversity, emerged unscathed. Excellent teachers, since I was in the honors society. Not many whites in my school though.

After college, the Upper East Side for 12 years, when it was still affordable.

Then in 91, the Lower East Side--Grand St. Coops. The coop went market rate a few years? later. Split the considerable but still relatively modest proceeds with my ex-b/f, moved to the Bronx. No mortgage in both places--I've been in debt before, and I don't like it much.

Bought my Bronx coop in April, but very familiar with Fordham area since I hung with my b/f in his Section 8 apt quite a bit for 9 years. Still alive and kicking, just like on the LES of yore. IMO, this area is much safer than Manhattan was in the "bad old days" of the 70s.

My b/f has considerably more "street cred" than I though. Also white, born in Oklahoma, moved here in '69.

So yeah, I didn't grow up in East NY. What can ya do....guess my street cred is not as impressive than some others. But now that I live in "da ghetto," many on this thread think I'm totally insane. What can I do, I'm just not phobic about the "colored folk." Most are much nicer and more polite than the yuppie Manhattan hordes.

[jflores]

Originally Posted by Elvira Black

LOL, 009. What is it about guys (at the expense of sounding sexist) that makes them lose all perspective and common sense when it comes to guns? Is it all those Westerns and movies and TV shows where everyone is shooting each other all the time, as common as a handshake?

For heaven's sake, the joint is no joke. Talk about self defense...talk about having to deal with criminals assaulting you...

Invest in good locks and a window gate if you need it, or heck even a full fledged alarm system if that makes you feel safer--or a doorman building if you can afford it. That's my opinion on the manner. Welcome to NYC--there's a lot to gripe about, a lot that seems "unfair" to the average citizen. Lots of compromises to be made for the common good and otherwise.

The reason I asked where you were from was because of the comment you made (bold)...when you grow up in a neighborhood like I did you tend to see a lot of things that some others havent. It has nothing to do with street credibility, just wanted to see from what point of view was your comment based on.

[Elvira Black]

Maybe it has more to do with me being female, so I don't have so much of that testosterone flowing through me..lol. I don't hear much about women brandishing guns even in the ghetto, and I don't see much about them starting any wars either.

American culture and American TV/movies are trigger happy. We see so many "shootings" on TV over the course of an average day that some kids will (and do) think it's all a game. I remember a few prominent cases where a tiny tot brought a gun to school, and shot another kid, thinking they would just get up again. Got the gun from....their house. Hmmmm......

Might be an interesting perspective to look at this from a more global viewpoint--our violent crime rate compared to other countries. From what I've read, we're pretty "out there". Cowboys and Indians...even I had a toy gun when I was a kid! Guess it goes back to our original frontier heritage. Small wonder we're so adept at reclaiming "our" territory in NYC!

[Alan B 718]

Originally Posted by Elvira Black

Maybe it has more to do with me being female, so I don't have so much of that testosterone flowing through me..lol. I don't hear much about women brandishing guns even in the ghetto, and I don't see much about them starting any wars either.

Psychologically speaking, while most men try to kill each other to establish dominance in this society, women are more likely to disfigure.
When i was a kid growing up, you'd always hear guys saying how they want to stab or shoot someone. The girls were always talkin about how they were gonna cut some skank's face.
Personally, i think women are much more vicious than men, they just havent had their turn wielding the power. That time is coming as well. Women are getting arrested at a horrendous clip, and for much more violent crime.

Originally Posted by Elvira Black

American culture and American TV/movies are trigger happy. We see so many "shootings" on TV over the course of an average day that some kids will (and do) think it's all a game. I remember a few prominent cases where a tiny tot brought a gun to school, and shot another kid, thinking they would just get up again. Got the gun from....their house. Hmmmm......

yes, these cases happen all the time. mostly the kid gets tattled on just for brandishing the gun at school, so you dont hear about those cases. 99% of the time the kid got the gun from his house.

Originally Posted by Elvira Black

Might be an interesting perspective to look at this from a more global viewpoint--our violent crime rate compared to other countries. From what I've read, we're pretty "out there". Cowboys and Indians...even I had a toy gun when I was a kid! Guess it goes back to our original frontier heritage. Small wonder we're so adept at reclaiming "our" territory in NYC!

Compared to other countries with strict gun control (london, france, canada, etc) there is a huuuuuge disparity in gun deaths and crime when compared to the US. We are gun happy. If you live in NYC, just fly down to the the carolinas to get a piece, or virginia. The difference in those other contries, is that NO ONE is allowed to have a gun. there is no area in london where you can carry or own easily like there is in the states. No source for guns = no gun crime.

[Elvira Black]

Nice points AlanB, though I don't know as I'd agree with the first one about women being more vicious. It is true that if you look at peer behavior in schoolchildren, girls will often exclude others via gossip and other more passive-agressive ways. I don't know if the girls you heard about would actually slash a rival's face, but since physical attractiveness is of course very desirable especially for women, there would be no better way to destoy a rival. But still I don't see too many disfigured women walking around. I remember Marla Hanson--the model who got slashed by some guy--and some wives get burnt or disfigured by their male partners, but I think if this were more common among women we'd see it on the news, no?

IMO some people are all talk. Threats of violence are unpleasant, but certainly not as devastating as an actual attack.

I also think if you look at incarceration rates, though women may be getting up there (some due to association with male gangs or their own gangs) the numbers will still be much lower, and some of the women are in there for prostitution, drug use, etc.--or perhaps due to hanging out with criminally inclined boyfriends!

Would be interested in hearing more about your theory about women. Historically speaking, I'd be hard pressed to find many women who participated in war and oppression, with the possible exception of royalty or dictatorships (Queens. Eva Peron, Chairman Mao's wife, maybe Margaret Thatcher). I'm sure that there are female sociopaths out there who, if the opportunity presented itself, would resort to murder. Some do, but it's a rare case to find a female serial killer (Aileen Wermos? don't know the spelling) comes to mind.

Since violence is so all pervasive in our society (and in our media) and women have more oppotunities for influence and power, it is more likely that some may turn to murder etc. But I still think it will be a small percentage compared to men, at least in the foreseeable future. Often, behind every murderous woman is a murderous man (just like behind every great man is a great woman).

[Alan B 718]

Originally Posted by Elvira Black

Nice points AlanB, though I don't know as I'd agree with the first one about women being more vicious. It is true that if you look at peer behavior in schoolchildren, girls will often exclude others via gossip and other more passive-agressive ways. I don't know if the girls you heard about would actually slash a rival's face, but since physical attractiveness is of course very desirable especially for women, there would be no better way to destoy a rival. But still I don't see too many disfigured women walking around. I remember Marla Hanson--the model who got slashed by some guy--and some wives get burnt or disfigured by their male partners, but I think if this were more common among women we'd see it on the news, no?
IMO some people are all talk. Threats of violence are unpleasant, but certainly not as devastating as an actual attack.

The girls that are getting slashed and doing the slashing, are more than likely not your average female you see walking around town, shopping in nice areas, or going to their job in midtown manhattan. We are talking Project/ghetto chicks. If you happen to take a stroll to your nearest public housing and hang out with some of the locals, you will find many females bearing facial and neck scars. Of course you cant tell by looking if it was inflicted by a man or woman, but in talking to many of them, they fondly recall and recount the fights they had in school/parks/parties, etc.
As far as seeing it on the news, slashings on joe and jane q. public are so commonplace, that you dont see them at all. Its not news that some dominican chick from spanish harlem slashed some black girl's face for sleeping with her man. theres no ratings in that.
Now, when she slashes a 90 yr old woman or a cop, or a nice white socialite out with her kids, then yes, that makes the news.

Originally Posted by Elvira Black

I also think if you look at incarceration rates, though women may be getting up there (some due to association with male gangs or their own gangs) the numbers will still be much lower, and some of the women are in there for prostitution, drug use, etc.--or perhaps due to hanging out with criminally inclined boyfriends!

Obviously men will almost always outnumber women in being jailed. My point was that women historically were arrested for prostitiution/drugs are now being arrested and held longer for more violent crimes.
Also, perhaps i'm using the term WOMAN loosely. Im not talking about your 28 year old mother of 3. Im talking about the 12-21 age bracket. Girls really, that are acting out the gangsta-girl life style and reproducing and passing on that mentality.
I'm pretty sure i read that many states had a 2 or 3% female incarceration rate are now hitting the 17-20% mark. And this is not the in/out prostitution cycle. These women are getting locked up for robbery, assault, burglary, murder.

Whats also contributing to the statistics (which never tell the whole story) is that classically, when a female committed a crime, she usually did not go to jail. Women were usually found to have some kind of mental problem (usually due to abuse of some kind and they wind up in a mental institution for a few weeks and then got released. They usually got the pass because they were abused, and the average female when abused becomes self-destructive. meaning eating disorders, suicide, promiscuity and drugs.
Boys got locked up no matter what, simply because they acted out their aggressions on other people.
Now with younger females being arrested more frequently, and for more serious crimes, they are following the same cycle of violence that has plagued the boys.
IMO Much of the problems i see in todays youth are the cause of the degredation of the american household. No fathers around, moms with various boyfriends, everyone praying to the almighty dollar.

Originally Posted by Elvira Black

Would be interested in hearing more about your theory about women. Historically speaking, I'd be hard pressed to find many women who participated in war and oppression, with the possible exception of royalty or dictatorships (Queens. Eva Peron, Chairman Mao's wife, maybe Margaret Thatcher). I'm sure that there are female sociopaths out there who, if the opportunity presented itself, would resort to murder. Some do, but it's a rare case to find a female serial killer (Aileen Wermos? don't know the spelling) comes to mind.

I'm hardly a scholar and my theory, if it could be called that (i would just call it a train of thought) is that women, given the opportunity, and being raised in a culture so trained on violence, will be just as if not more vicious than men.
You say historically speaking you would be hard pressed to find a woman that contributes to violence, then you go on to name some of the most powerful cruel women in history. My history is a bit shoddy, but i think it would be surprising if you list all the powerful women in history and then extract a percentage of how many of them were as evil or corrupt as their male counterparts.
Power corrupts, and i don't think it cares about your gender.

Originally Posted by Elvira Black

Since violence is so all pervasive in our society (and in our media) and women have more oppotunities for influence and power, it is more likely that some may turn to murder etc. But I still think it will be a small percentage compared to men, at least in the foreseeable future. Often, behind every murderous woman is a murderous man (just like behind every great man is a great woman).

The point is not only how women (girls) compare to men in the violence department, but how they compare to themselves in the past and the future.

Historically an abused women took her frustrations out on herself and her children, while men took it out on everyone.
To me, this scenario is rapidly changing. The gap between men and women draws closer, the parallels between them are starting to even out.

It will be interesting to see how the american society turns out in 200 years.