Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,905 Year: 4,162/9,624 Month: 1,033/974 Week: 360/286 Day: 3/13 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A discussion of Gun Control for schrafinator
nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 358 of 409 (131111)
08-06-2004 8:35 PM
Reply to: Message 344 by jar
08-05-2004 6:33 PM


Re: How about the question
quote:
How will you know when a private sale is made?
When the seller turns in some kind of paperwork to a law enforcement agency, maybe the ATF or whoever oversees gun dealers, indicating that they performed the criminal background check.
This shouldn't be a problem if the seller wants to be sure they are not selling a weapon to a criminal, right?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 344 by jar, posted 08-05-2004 6:33 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 361 by jar, posted 08-06-2004 8:47 PM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 359 of 409 (131113)
08-06-2004 8:42 PM
Reply to: Message 353 by joz
08-06-2004 1:42 PM


Re: Misconception about the Constitution and Bill of Rights
quote:
Do these people by any chance also own kitchen knives? Or a hammer? Or a screwdriver? Or a......
Little five year old Jimmy is not likely to be able to kill his little sister accidentally with a kitchen knife, hammer, or screwdriver.
Someone is not likely to break into their home specifically to steal a kitchen knife, hammer, or screwdriver.
Nobody can nearly effortlessly kill anyone else from mere yards away with a kitchen knife, hammer, or screwdriver.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 353 by joz, posted 08-06-2004 1:42 PM joz has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 360 of 409 (131115)
08-06-2004 8:45 PM
Reply to: Message 324 by xavier999
08-04-2004 5:26 AM


Re: Misconception about the Constitution and Bill of Rights
A reply to 326 and 329 please, xavier.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 324 by xavier999, posted 08-04-2004 5:26 AM xavier999 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 374 by xavier999, posted 08-07-2004 3:55 AM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 362 of 409 (131144)
08-06-2004 9:53 PM
Reply to: Message 361 by jar
08-06-2004 8:47 PM


Re: How about the question
quote:
Well, there is no paperwork to turn in to law enforcement even now, including from Dealers unless the person buys more than two guns in a seven day period.
But they do have to keep a record of each purchase, and they do have to run a criminal background check.
I think private sellers should also have to report when someone buys more than two guns in a seven day period.
Why should private sales be exempt from this?
quote:
Second, in a private sale there is no external trigger to show that anything happened. Those who wish to get around it simply won't report it. So what would it accomplish? What is the mechanism that would help?
People who are law-abiding and don't want to sell a gun to a criminal would likely be amenable to keeping a record of the sale and to doing a criminal background check if it was required by law.
At leat there would be a paper trail if the gun was used in a crime, perhaps telling law enforcement where the perpetrator was at one time.
I think that registering guns with their owners, and licensing people to own and operate firearms, just like we register cars with their owners and require a basic knowledge of how to operate a vehicle and the traffic laws, would be a great idea.
Then, the registration is transferred to the new owner just like in a private car sale.
This message has been edited by schrafinator, 08-06-2004 08:55 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 361 by jar, posted 08-06-2004 8:47 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 363 by jar, posted 08-06-2004 10:23 PM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 364 of 409 (131170)
08-06-2004 10:29 PM
Reply to: Message 363 by jar
08-06-2004 10:23 PM


Re: How about the question
quote:
Registration is one of the first steps in the chain towards confiscation, and it's one that no gun owner will take graciously.
If it's in the constitution, and you own your guns legally, why should you fear?
By the way, why have you suddenly become really quiet on the subject of criminal background checks once I pointed out that they were cheap and easy to do on the internet?
This message has been edited by schrafinator, 08-06-2004 09:31 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 363 by jar, posted 08-06-2004 10:23 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 365 by jar, posted 08-06-2004 10:37 PM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 366 of 409 (131176)
08-06-2004 10:44 PM
Reply to: Message 365 by jar
08-06-2004 10:37 PM


Re: How about the question
I don't really like you attempting to be in control of the questions and answers in this thread.
I have said it before, I don't think you are honestly answering my questions, yet you expect me to honestly answer yours.
I haven't been coy in my answers, yet you have been quite coy with yours.
I have asked you to back up your assertions with facts on a number of occasions and you just kind of glide over them and go on to asking me something we weren't discussing.
Why do you disbelieve the FBI when they say that gun shows are a significant source of guns for criminal activity?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 365 by jar, posted 08-06-2004 10:37 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 368 by jar, posted 08-06-2004 11:00 PM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 367 of 409 (131182)
08-06-2004 11:00 PM
Reply to: Message 304 by xavier999
08-01-2004 12:26 PM


Re: Suicide
quote:
Maybe instead of worrying about trying to limit guns as a MEANS of suicide you should focus more on the SOURCE of most suicides: depression. If a person wants to kill themself they only need find the nearest tall building, start their car in a closed garage, etc.
It takes planning and effort to find a tall building one can get to the top of. They can also be seen by other people and possibly stopped or distracted.
Carbon monoxide poisoning takes a long time and can be uncomfortable.
A gunshot is intantaneous and deadly and doesn't require leaving the house, or even the bed.
I would imagine that the "instantaneous" part is attractive to people who don't want to feel any pain.
quote:
More funding to help educate people about looking for the warning signs of depression (in both themselves and others) and what to do if they see them would go a LOT farther in reducing suicides than even if you could magically make every gun disappear.
Possibly.
Having a gun in the house makes a suicide more likely to be successful, though. There are certainly other methods, but most other methods are more likely to be survived.
That's why guns are so popular. They are very good at killing.
quote:
If a person doesn't want to kill themself then they won't commit suicide, guns or no guns.
But if they do want to kill themselves and a gun is in the house, they are very likely to use it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 304 by xavier999, posted 08-01-2004 12:26 PM xavier999 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 375 by xavier999, posted 08-07-2004 4:37 AM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 369 of 409 (131184)
08-06-2004 11:04 PM
Reply to: Message 308 by jar
08-02-2004 10:17 PM


quote:
That's true but it is financial information only and only used to protect the lender. So how would the financial data relate to gun ownership?
It wouldn't, but a record of criminal activity woukd potect the seller from selling a gun to a criminal.
If criminal background checks for private sales became the law, then a private seller would be held accountable if they sell a gun to someone who is a criminal.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 308 by jar, posted 08-02-2004 10:17 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 372 by jar, posted 08-06-2004 11:43 PM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 370 of 409 (131195)
08-06-2004 11:19 PM
Reply to: Message 368 by jar
08-06-2004 11:00 PM


Re: How about the question
quote:
well, I have not been able to find that quote from the FBI, only references from HCI and they have about the same credibility as ICR or Dr. Dino.
Sorry, I misremenbered FBI.
What I should have said is the ATF, the Department of the Treasury, and the Justice Department.
Are they equivalent to Hovind to you?
Page not found - Game Online Menarik 2020
persons who purchase firearms from private sellers - estimated to be 40 percent of all gun purchasers - are not required to undergo background checks. In addition, private sellers, unlike licensed dealers, are not required to document gun sales in any way.
Although this huge gap in federal law is often referred to as the ?gun show" loophole, this term is misleading because federal law does not currently obligate private sellers to conduct background checks at any sales location. Studies have shown that gun shows are particularly problematic, however. In 1999, for example, the Department of the Treasury, Department of Justice and ATF issued a report entitled Gun Shows: Brady Checks and Crime Gun Traces. That report found that gun shows provide a forum for illegal firearms sales and gun trafficking nationwide, and recommended that federal law be amended to require background checks on all gun show purchasers.
Do you have a link to the studies cited?
I'd like to read them for myself and not take the analysis of a conservative policy analyst at face value.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 368 by jar, posted 08-06-2004 11:00 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 371 by jar, posted 08-06-2004 11:39 PM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 376 of 409 (131298)
08-07-2004 10:13 AM
Reply to: Message 373 by xavier999
08-07-2004 3:48 AM


Re: Misconception about the Constitution and Bill of Rights
quote:
Making a low cost product in and of itself isn't bad. I shop at Wal-Mart all the time.
Making a product that is low in cost because of unsafe and faulty design is bad, and that is what these companies are being allowed to do.
The idea is that if US gun manufacturers were required to meet quality and safety standards, just like the manufacturers of teddy bears and swing sets, several very profitable guns wouldn't be quite as popular with the criminals because they would be too expensive.
quote:
As to people misusing the product I say it is bad. But again, let's try and fix the root of the problem. Why are people committing crimes in the first place? It's not because they have a gun.
The easy and wide availability of cheap, easily concealed handguns makes the use of a gun in a crime more likely.
quote:
I don't need to list the social problems that are plaguing many of our cities today. Fixing these social problems would cut down on ALL types of crime, including those that are non-gun related.
Completely agreed.
PS. I haven't been in a walmart in over 10 years. Walmart represents so many of the things that are wrong with America today. Walmart puts entire blocks of privately owned shops out of business in the towns it enters, thus taking money out of the community and filling the corporate coffers elsewhere, it is a major part of the homogenization of American culture, it treats it's workers like shit, it treats it's domestic suppliers like shit, it promotes the exportation of manufacturing jobs overseas, etc. ...but that is for another thread.
quote:
I agree with you on this one Schraf. There is no reason a firearm should fail a drop test, especially in this day and age. Making a manufacturor produce a quality product is a very reasonable request.
Then why has the gun lobby resisted every single effort to do so?
quote:
This particular safety standard would not infringe upon the right to own and use a firearm. But before you load up the wagon and go to town on me for saying that this doesn't mean that the government should be able to do anything it wants simply in the name of safety. Safety is a good thing. We should always strive to make all areas of our life safer, but NOT if it comes at the cost of giving up those rights that our nation was founded upon.
I don't mind if you have a musket. You can have all of the muskets you want.
quote:
Like I have said time and time again. Let's start looking at the roots of all these problems and come up with ways to fix them that do not take away ANY of our rights.
I'll even let you have a dueling pistol.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 373 by xavier999, posted 08-07-2004 3:48 AM xavier999 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 390 by xavier999, posted 08-09-2004 11:03 PM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 377 of 409 (131299)
08-07-2004 10:15 AM
Reply to: Message 374 by xavier999
08-07-2004 3:55 AM


Re: Misconception about the Constitution and Bill of Rights
quote:
Sorry about that. Your posts kind of fell throught the cracks when contracycle started replying.
No prob. That happens all the time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 374 by xavier999, posted 08-07-2004 3:55 AM xavier999 has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2199 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 378 of 409 (131300)
08-07-2004 10:27 AM
Reply to: Message 375 by xavier999
08-07-2004 4:37 AM


Re: Suicide
(covers ears against the bad trumpet sounds)
quote:
Planning and effort to find a tall building?
Well, yes, and please remember that they have to be able to get up to the roof, or be able to get out of a window.
Severly depressed people often don't want to get out of bed, let alone go out of the house and look around for a building and sneak onto the roof.
quote:
Distracted from killing themself?
Well, yeah.
quote:
Let's not forget about bridges, cliffs, water towers, radio towers, and grain elevators (for those in the Midwest). I'm not saying there is no truth to what you said, but just so little that it can't really be used to draw the conclusion you have made
I'll agree that it's not all that strong.
However, ragarding carbon monoxide poisoning, gund are much more popular a method, and that is just true. Something like 60% of elderly suicides are performed with a gun, probably because it takes the least amount of physical effort.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 375 by xavier999, posted 08-07-2004 4:37 AM xavier999 has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024