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.
So what's your argument..."let's start nowhere?" A good chunk of illegal guns will end up off the streets by attrition from the illegal drug trade ending. Turf wars are primarily over drug dealing markets, not the Sharks vs Jets of the '50s. If gun battles begin over human trafficking then that can take center stage. Should be no problem to get political traction for the "War Against Human Trafficking." Yes, for the 10th time there will be of those domestic issues....which is all of about a fraction of the annual illegal gun death totals. So let's focus on the small picture and ignore the big one first. Classic.
We don't collect or eradicate all the illegal guns. That is absurd and impossible. We start by taking away the root cause of the highest percentage of (illegal) gun violence and by logic, the # of guns (and crime, and prisoners) drops substantially.
If you can not eradicate all illegal guns, why should the law-abiding be rendered defenseless against the criminal element?
Did placing decongestants behind the counter reduce the quantity of drugs through attrition?
It's a Pollyana rose-colored glasses perspective to believe that legalizing drugs (all? Some? Only those from plants?) would make a dent in illegal weapons. Medford Pharmacy shooting...an addict hooked on prescription drugs, not illegal stuff. You'd be trading one set of problems for another.
Like i said the gambino family made lots of money ,had lots of guns and committed lots of crime. All without the drug trade.
There is plenty of crime and murder with extortion,loansharking, gambling and thefts
Are you for real? Gambino family members went away for drug trafficking in the 90's. Castellano himself was charged with trafficking but not convicted.
Hmmm. Mafia with no drugs? Read a book. Another one with a well thought out rebuttal like "duh, it'll never happen." Like any of the other hare-brained notions, particularly anything dipstick LaPierre had to say are likely to happen. At least my idea won't happen but WOULD WORK.
Prohibition -- organized crime made a fortune smuggling illegal booze. Only AFTER repeal did illegal drugs start coming into the picture, and even then it was only a few families.
What do you think is going to happen if guns are banned?
If you can not eradicate all illegal guns, why should the law-abiding be rendered defenseless against the criminal element?
Did placing decongestants behind the counter reduce the quantity of drugs through attrition?
It's a Pollyana rose-colored glasses perspective to believe that legalizing drugs (all? Some? Only those from plants?) would make a dent in illegal weapons. Medford Pharmacy shooting...an addict hooked on prescription drugs, not illegal stuff. You'd be trading one set of problems for another.
Sorry OBH, completely wrong there.
1. When did anything I say remotely allude to law abiding citizens giving up their guns? I like legal guns.
2. Hiding sudafed HAS reduced meth production. That's a fact.
3. Medford situation was about legal drugs dispensed ILLEGALLY. The doc is on his way to prison right now. Prescription abuse is another tentacle in the phony "war on drugs" we'll continue to stay in denial about. Douchey Laffer was a veteran. Of course he should have a gun. He earned it. Maybe it's the drugs he shouldn't have had....hmmmmmmmm?
What do you think is going to happen if guns are banned?
I NEVER ONCE SAID ANYTHING ABOUT BANNING GUNS!!! sheesh
I said legalize drugs. Take the violence aspect out of the "war" (by taking the $ aspect out of it), THEN deal with the gun culture issue in a more sensible way.
One could say the booze trade during prohibition WAS the drug trade. There was a demand, illegal supply, rivers of cash and senseless violence. Kind of exactly like the current prohibition. When it was over...the violence went bye bye. Except for drunks behind the wheel, beating their wives and starring on episodes of cops in their stained T-shirts.
100% opposite. Drugs will be legal long before guns are banned. The NRA and 2nd amendment types are solidly dug in against getting a gun pried from their cold dead hands. The illegal drug trade has no lobbying group and pot is less than a decade from full legalization across the country already. The prisons are full and healthcare is expanding to include addiction treatment. Momentum towards decriminalization is in full swing. Momentum against guns is based on the shooting at Newtown. People will forget quickly when the next atrocity comes along. The gun battle is already falling back behind the fiscal cliff battle.
I'd wager pot 100% decriminalized in 10 years, but not fully legal.
Back to topic-- there is too much money for the government to lose if it were to enact a full ban. Sales tax, permits, loss of jobs, etc. My bet is ban on magazines over a certain size, a registry ($ to register) and limits to ammo purchases (must provide registry ID when purchasing, Fed database flags potential stockpiles.)
Are you for real? Gambino family members went away for drug trafficking in the 90's. Castellano himself was charged with trafficking but not convicted.
Castellano forbid drugs. But that didnt stop gotti from doing it. Actually castellano almost killed ruggierio when he found out ruggierio borrowed 200k from him which he was told was for porno and ruggierio used it to sell drugs.
Back to topic-- there is too much money for the government to lose if it were to enact a full ban. Sales tax, permits, loss of jobs, etc. My bet is ban on magazines over a certain size, a registry ($ to register) and limits to ammo purchases (must provide registry ID when purchasing, Fed database flags potential stockpiles.)
Sounds about right. Compromise neither side will be particularly happy with but will make Congress appear as though they did something.
Castellano forbid drugs. But that didnt stop gotti from doing it. Actually castellano almost killed ruggierio when he found out ruggierio borrowed 200k from him which he was told was for porno and ruggierio used it to sell drugs.
OK, 1st the mafia wasn't involved. Then Gambino family wasn't involved. Then only Castellano wasn't involved. Any more incorrect "facts" you want to go back on?
Whatever you say. Castellano was a saint. Half the family going away for drug trafficking but he knew nothing about it. Was charged but not convicted. Must have told the judge "gee your honor, I told those mooks dope wuz bad."
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.
