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.
Bob that might be relevant if the availability of these guns changed which it didn't. The only change was an increase in the price. While the ban was in place I purchased a Sig Sauer with 2 fifteen round magazines and bought an additional 2 magazines shortly after. I could of purchased thousands of them and the only thing preventing me from doing so was funds.
Location: Huntersville/Charlotte, NC and Washington, DC
26,700 posts, read 41,748,461 times
Reputation: 41381
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale Cooper
It's obvious what we should ban: Redskins gloves!
When are you people going to start taking responsibiity instead of always blaming someone or something else? Lord have Mercy, it gets old.
What the hell do you mean "you people"?
BTW I highly doubt a residency law on gun sales is going to deter a person who is going to commit a robbery or murder anyway from buying them illegally.
How do you buy a gun without ID? You can only have 1 ID and it's going to have either a DC or Virginia address. If it's a DC address you can't legally purchase from a dealer or private person.
I can have a residence in VA, doesn't even have to be a residence and I can get a VA license, just need a mailing address that I claim as my residence. Probably not even worth the trouble, I could go to a private sale in several states and get any gun I wanted.
Until we have universal gun control the issue whether strict guns laws working in a particular area, NY City, DC, Chicago are meaningless. NY City has some of th estrictest gun laws in the nation yes soemtjhing like 40% of the guns come from outside the city.
AWs were used in only a small fraction of gun crimes prior to the ban: about 2%
according to most studies and no more than 8%. Most of the AWs used in crime
are assault pistols rather than assault rifles.
"Should it be renewed, the ban’s effects on gun violence are likely to be small at
best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement. AWs were rarely used in
gun crimes even before the ban. LCMs are involved in a more substantial share
of gun crimes, but it is not clear how often the outcomes of gun attacks depend on
the ability of offenders to fire more than ten shots (the current magazine capacity
limit) without reloading."
Indeed, AWs or other semiautomatics with LCMs were involved in 6, or 40%, of
15 mass shooting incidents occurring between 1984 and 1993 in which six or more
persons were killed or a total of 12 or more were wounded (Kleck, 1997, pp.124-126,
144). Early studies of AWs, though sometimes based on limited and potentially
unrepresentative data, also suggested that AWs recovered by police were often associated
with drug trafficking and organized crime (Cox Newspapers, 1989; also see Roth and
Koper, 1997, Chapter 5), fueling a perception that AWs were guns of choice among drug
dealers and other particularly violent groups. All of this intensified concern over AWs
and other semiautomatics with large ammunition capacities and helped spur the passage
of AW bans in California, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Hawaii between 1989 and 1993,
as well as the 1989 federal import ban on selected semiautomatic rifles. Maryland also
passed AW legislation in 1994, just a few months prior to the passage of the 1994 federal
AW ban.9
Looking at the nation’s gun crime problem more broadly, however, AWs and
LCMs were used in only a minority of gun crimes prior to the 1994 federal ban, and AWs
were used in a particularly small percentage of gun crimes.
How do you buy a gun without ID? You can only have 1 ID and it's going to have either a DC or Virginia address. If it's a DC address you can't legally purchase from a dealer or private person.
Well if you're a resident of Virginia, and a resident of DC you could most likely buy from a dealer in Virginia, even with a DC drivers license. You would have to provide proof of residency in Virginia, for instance utility bills, deeds, land patents with a photo ID to confirm you are who you say you are. However without a Virginia drivers license it might be difficult to privately buy a firearm, I don't know anyone who sells privately who doesn't want to see someone's drivers license, and throwing a bunch of bills and pieces of paper at someone would likely result in the seller walking off.
However if you took those weapons back to DC if they were prohibited there, then you would be breaking the law, but that's not a failure in the regulations, it's a failing of both policing, and education. This is what irritates me about gun control advocates, they support gun control at local, state and national levels, and when they show how by committing felonies (and I don't know any gun crime that won't result in a felony charge since most trafficking is interstate thus Federal) someone can bypass a local or state law, they state it's because the control measures are not strong enough and should be national. Well no, it because the police are not stringently enforcing the laws of that locality.
If DC wants to prevent illegal importation of firearms into DC, it's about time they stop whinging and get off their ass and do something, put checkpoints on all routes into DC and do vehicle searches, if the people of DC (and people who work in DC) don't like it, well that's too bad, change the law, move, or work elsewhere. If someone is not going into DC, but through DC, well they can bypass DC, or explain at the checkpoint and get a manifest taken on entry and get it checked on exit, neither of those violates FOPA free passage provisions.
Passing laws then not enforcing them and blaming someone else is not responsible. Nor should any other State, County, or locality need to change their local laws or bear any additional costs to enforce something that the complainer isn't helping themselves try to fix. You can't have your cake and eat it at the same time. Same applies to New York, Chicago, etc. Those are common sense measures I could really get behind.
Lets look at one extreme example, suppose the 2nd is repealed, and gun are banned and the magic Feistein Fairy comes along and makes all guns vanish with her fairy dust. If guns are still getting into the US are we going to complain about the gun laws in Venezuela, if we find that people are illegally importing guns from there? Are we going to demand that any country with civilian ownership of firearms needs gun controls as strong as that new US? So we're going to go to say France and demand they eliminate civilian ownership of firearms, or Switzerland and do the same. It's absolutely absurd, but that's effectively what people in DC are saying about their gun problem, and Bloomberg has been saying for years about how illegal guns get into New York well if you know how they get in then you can do something about it Michael you idiot, it might cost some overtime, and might **** off some people, but if it's for the common good right?
No they need to get off their ass and do something to stop it. However none of them have, why I couldn't begin to speculate, if particular (or all) guns are such a problem that they need to implement local laws controlling them then it would make sense that they're also such a problem that the majority of people in those areas also want them enforced, and will pay for those enforcements. If they're not prepared to deal with the inconvenience, and costs associated, well then it leads me to ask whether the aim was not safety through gun control, but the appearance safety through gun control.
We can't keep illegal aliens and drugs out of this country today.
I don't have much confidence in our goobermunt to do any
better with guns.
In fact, imagine IF some fairy dust did exist and guns
disappeared. In certain areas of the country you would see
wholesale robberies, rapes, murders etc.
The bad guys would have a field day! The only good thing
is that the bad guys would prey on liberals since they seem
to congregant in the same areas.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 24 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,560 posts, read 16,548,014 times
Reputation: 6042
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inoxkeeper
DC has the toughest gun laws so how can this happen? *******s please explain!
Police in the District are looking for several robbers after eight holdups occurred in the span of just a few hours Friday night.
Police say the robberies started at around 7:00 p.m. in the 3300 block of 6th Street SE. After that, there were two more reported robberies in Southeast and five more in Northwest.
Several of the incidents involved guns. And in one, a thief reportedly wore Redskins gloves.
pretty sure the D.C. gun laws, like Chicago's, were overturned. they are on the books in the same way as the segregation laws are still on the books in Alabama.
that being added tot he fact that it neighboring Virginia and Maryland, you should be able to answer your own question.
Well if you're a resident of Virginia, and a resident of DC you could most likely buy from a dealer in Virginia, even with a DC drivers license. You would have to provide proof of residency in Virginia, for instance utility bills, deeds, land patents with a photo ID to confirm you are who you say you are. However without a Virginia drivers license it might be difficult to privately buy a firearm, I don't know anyone who sells privately who doesn't want to see someone's drivers license, and throwing a bunch of bills and pieces of paper at someone would likely result in the seller walking off.
However if you took those weapons back to DC if they were prohibited there, then you would be breaking the law, but that's not a failure in the regulations, it's a failing of both policing, and education. This is what irritates me about gun control advocates, they support gun control at local, state and national levels, and when they show how by committing felonies (and I don't know any gun crime that won't result in a felony charge since most trafficking is interstate thus Federal) someone can bypass a local or state law, they state it's because the control measures are not strong enough and should be national. Well no, it because the police are not stringently enforcing the laws of that locality.
If DC wants to prevent illegal importation of firearms into DC, it's about time they stop whinging and get off their ass and do something, put checkpoints on all routes into DC and do vehicle searches, if the people of DC (and people who work in DC) don't like it, well that's too bad, change the law, move, or work elsewhere. If someone is not going into DC, but through DC, well they can bypass DC, or explain at the checkpoint and get a manifest taken on entry and get it checked on exit, neither of those violates FOPA free passage provisions.
Passing laws then not enforcing them and blaming someone else is not responsible. Nor should any other State, County, or locality need to change their local laws or bear any additional costs to enforce something that the complainer isn't helping themselves try to fix. You can't have your cake and eat it at the same time. Same applies to New York, Chicago, etc. Those are common sense measures I could really get behind.
Lets look at one extreme example, suppose the 2nd is repealed, and gun are banned and the magic Feistein Fairy comes along and makes all guns vanish with her fairy dust. If guns are still getting into the US are we going to complain about the gun laws in Venezuela, if we find that people are illegally importing guns from there? Are we going to demand that any country with civilian ownership of firearms needs gun controls as strong as that new US? So we're going to go to say France and demand they eliminate civilian ownership of firearms, or Switzerland and do the same. It's absolutely absurd, but that's effectively what people in DC are saying about their gun problem, and Bloomberg has been saying for years about how illegal guns get into New York well if you know how they get in then you can do something about it Michael you idiot, it might cost some overtime, and might **** off some people, but if it's for the common good right?
No they need to get off their ass and do something to stop it. However none of them have, why I couldn't begin to speculate, if particular (or all) guns are such a problem that they need to implement local laws controlling them then it would make sense that they're also such a problem that the majority of people in those areas also want them enforced, and will pay for those enforcements. If they're not prepared to deal with the inconvenience, and costs associated, well then it leads me to ask whether the aim was not safety through gun control, but the appearance safety through gun control.
Gun checkpoints at all cities, now there is a reasonable solution, it couldn't be stricter gun laws in other states. Illegal searches of vehicles might be a violation of another amendment besides the 2nd.
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.
