Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you have the cash, it is no longer illegal to own.... Where does that leave you?
Illegals owning guns, is suppose to be illegal, but how is that going to be policed, unless it is by the very citizens of this nation to keep a watch for illegal activity and eliminate it.
If you have the cash, it is no longer illegal to own.... Where does that leave you?
Illegals owning guns, is suppose to be illegal, but how is that going to be policed, unless it is by the very citizens of this nation to keep a watch for illegal activity and eliminate it.
Eliminate gun shows for one, or legislate that all sales at gun shows have to go through the same process as buying a gun from a gun store.
Confiscate illegal weapons from the streets.
Press criminal charges against owners of guns that lend their guns to friends or family members who subsequently use the gun in violent crime.
Actually there is very little valid data on whether gun control reduces or increases violent crime, and you can thank the NRA for that since they lobbied to reduce funding to the CDC to keep track of that kind of information, and succeeded.
However there are indications that gun control lowers homicide rates.
States with stricter gun control have lower rates of homicide:
"States with stricter gun control laws have fewer deaths from gun-related violence. Last year, economist Richard Florida examined the correlations between gun deaths and other kinds of social indicators. Some of what he found was, perhaps, unexpected: Higher populations, more stress, more immigrants, and more mental illness were not correlated with more deaths from gun violence. But one thing he found was, perhaps, perfectly predictable: States with tighter gun control laws appear to have fewer gun-related deaths.
The states with the strictest gun control laws also have the cities with the nations worst crime rates....
California - Los Angeles, Oakland, Richmond, Stockton
Maryland - Baltimore
Pennsylvania - Philadelphia
New Jersey - Newark, Camden
New York - New York City
Illinois - Chicago
Michigan - Detroit, Flint
Massachusetts - Boston
How do you do that ? Aren't the police already trying to prevent criminals from having guns ?
If I loan a gun to a friend to go hunting and his son steals the gun and robs a store... you want me prosecuted ?
yes, you're goin' to jail Guns are dangerous weapons, no one should be lending them to others because that person doesn't need to go through a gun registration check.
The states with the strictest gun control laws also have the cities with the nations worst crime rates....
California - Los Angeles, Oakland, Richmond
Maryland - Baltimore
Pennsylvania - Philadelphia
New Jersey - Newark, Camden
New York - New York City
Illinois - Chicago
Michigan - Detroit
These are your nations leaders in crime...
The thing is it's a catch-22. The reason those cities have strict gun controls is because they have a high incidence of gangs, drug trade, and violent crime. The gun control laws in those cities are obviously not controlling the guns they were meant to control --- the guns in the hands of violent criminals. So those cities need to find some kind of policies or law enforcement efforts to get illegally circulating dangerous weapons off the streets.
The thing is it's a catch-22. The reason those cities have strict gun controls is because they have a high incidence of gangs, drug trade, and violent crime. The gun control laws in those cities are obviously not controlling the guns they were meant to control --- the guns in the hands of violent criminals. So those cities need to find some kind of policies or law enforcement efforts to get illegally circulating dangerous weapons off the streets.
And this is where the whole debate comes full circle...
This is not a new phenomenon....The Federal government has a ton of culpability in both black markets (guns and drugs). So why should law abiding gun owners fall on the sword for a game the government has been playing for decades?
My opinion is..you don't throw the baby out with the bath water when it comes to gun control. There is a reason why there is so much neglect by congress to address the inner city issues with illegally obtained firearms.
They also don't want to talk about our privately run prison system which brings in revenue hand over fist form this drug war and gun walking.
And this is where the whole debate comes full circle...
This is not a new phenomenon....The Federal government has a ton of culpability in both black markets (guns and drugs). So why should law abiding gun owners fall on the sword for a game the government has been playing for decades?
My opinion is..you don't throw the baby out with the bath water when it comes to gun control. There is a reason why there is so much neglect by congress to address the inner city issues with illegally obtained firearms.
They also don't want to talk about our privately run prison system which brings in revenue hand over fist form this drug war and gun walking.
I see your point. And most of the gang related murders are with hand guns anyway, so even an assault weapon ban is not going to affect them much.
The thing is it's a catch-22. The reason those cities have strict gun controls is because they have a high incidence of gangs, drug trade, and violent crime. The gun control laws in those cities are obviously not controlling the guns they were meant to control --- the guns in the hands of violent criminals. So those cities need to find some kind of policies or law enforcement efforts to get illegally circulating dangerous weapons off the streets.
Allowing home owners to protect their property, themselves and others under attack would go a long way towards fixing the problem.
Example
If someone wants to break into a house and there are 2 simular homes but one has a big dog and the other doesnt, the one without the dog gets broken into.
Why is that relivant? Well if the crimal is told one of the 2 homes has a gun owner who will shoot but he doesnt know which one it will cause him to decide if he wants to take the chance.
With the dog he knows his chances. With a gun owner he doesnt. Just having the law helps both home owners. The one who buys and the one who doesnt.
We need to help our mentally disturbed youth, not punish our law abiding patriots!
Really? Weren't the guns Adam Lanza used obtained legally? In the Columbine shootings, one of the shooters' girlfriends bought three of the four guns legally. I don't know if we yet know how the other one was obtained.
No. He killed his mother and stole them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Guns are dangerous weapons, no one should be lending them to others because that person doesn't need to go through a gun registration check.
