• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Senate gun hearing opens with Giffords' call for action

bicycleman said:
Get yourself a compound bow or crossbow and do some target practice with it. At least you'll have some kind of weapon with which to defend your home.
Click to expand...

Never, ever, felt the need - perhaps it's a function of the city I live in, which has very little crime that isn't focussed in particular areas and population segments of the city prone to gang violence, places and people I have zero interaction with and I have no intention of starting now.
 
Catawba said:
You made the claim, you provide the documentation. I am happy to support making it a little harder and more expensive for criminals and crazies to get guns.
Click to expand...
Look at how cute you are. YOU made the claim. YOU claim that all these criminals were denied access to firearms. Thats what you call a CRIMINAL act...so...come on..dont hold back on us. HOW MANY of those 1.9 million 'criminals' were arrested tried and convicted? Why is that so hard for you to answer?
 
MMC said:
How does a Federal Gun Registry Database make it harder for criminals and crazies to get guns?!!!! Answer it doesn't!

Do states have a Database on criminals? Do the states know which crimes are State Crimes as opposed to Federal?

What need is there for a Federal Database on those who already own guns legally and have nothing to do with crime? Why would the Federal government need to know who already owns guns?
Click to expand...

Canada just got rid of its "long gun" registry, a promise that was part of the campaign of the Conservative Party who won a majority government in the last federal election here. The registry basically made law abiding rural citizens feel like criminals while actual criminals were not affected at all.

It was a billion dollar bureaucratic liberal wet dream and most sane people saw it for what it is/was.
 
:lamo

OMG Catawba...thats just funny as hell!

No WONDER you cant respond...they didnt give you the talking points re how many of those 'criminals' were arrested. They DID however give you instructions on 'How to use it"

How can I use it?

Use this report to make the case that gun laws work by making it harder for dangerous people to get guns. Urge legislators to extend this successful law to cover all gun sales, including those at gun shows, and to fund the NICS Improvement Act to increase the number of relevant records in the NICS system.

Citation

Bureau of Justice Statistics, Background Checks for Firearm Transfers, 2009 - Statistical Tables, October 20, 2010

Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence : Studies
 
VanceMack said:
Look at how cute you are. YOU made the claim. YOU claim that all these criminals were denied access to firearms. Thats what you call a CRIMINAL act...so...come on..dont hold back on us. HOW MANY of those 1.9 million 'criminals' were arrested tried and convicted? Why is that so hard for you to answer?
Click to expand...

Your claim that it is illegal for someone to apply for gun purchase and be denied, remains undocumented.
 
So lets counter with another extraordinarily self serving article...

The Washington Times
Thursday, July 02, 1998
Commentary Section
Gun control decoys on the firing range
By James Bovard
"The Justice Department announced on June 21 that presale handgun background checks mandated by the Brady law and by state laws resulted in 69,000 people being denied permission to purchase guns in 1997.

But the Justice Department's estimates did not even maintain credibility for a week. The Indianapolis Star and News reported on June 24 that the Justice Department exaggerated by 1,300 percent the number of gun buyers turned down in Indiana because of the Brady Act. White House spokeswoman Nanda Chitre conceded the same day that President Clinton had exaggerated the number of people stopped from buying guns by the Brady Act and that White House counsel Rahm Emanuel had greatly exaggerated the number of newly bought guns used in homicides."


"This is not the first time Clinton administration numbers on the Brady Act have gone down in disgrace. A 1996 General Accounting Office report found that the data used to estimate nationwide denials under the Brady act are extremely unreliable. For instance, arrests are sometimes counted the same as convictions - and the fact that a person was once arrested (though later found innocent) could be used to deny their request to buy a firearm. GAO found almost half of all rejections under the Brady Act were due to paperwork problems or traffic violations, not to criminal records."

"Despite Clinton administration claims on how dangerous illicit gun buyers are, the federal government prosecutes fewer than 1 in 1,000 violators. The number of convictions from prosecutions for making false statements on Brady forms declined from 253 in 1994 to 36 in 1997."



"Nor has the Brady Act been a significant factor in reducing crime. Violent crime rates have declined more rapidly in states not covered by the Brady Act (because they have instant background checks, or other reasons) than in other states. In fact, according to University of Chicago professor John Lott, author of the newly published "More Guns, Less Crime," the Brady Act is actually responsible for "significant increase in rapes and aggravated assaults." The Brady Act banned law enforcement agencies from using background check information to compile registration lists of gun owners. But some law enforcement agencies blatantly violate this provision of the law. National Rifle Association Vice President Neal Knox recently observed, "Some local and state agencies, such as the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigation and Identification, have been caught maintaining computerized records of Brady purchases despite the clear prosecutions have resulted."

​
 
Catawba said:
Your claim that it is illegal for someone to apply for gun purchase and be denied, remains undocumented.
Click to expand...
See post 131. Of course...they didnt tell you what to say in response to the whole arrest and prosecution thing for some reason.

Its funny bro...they made the sound come from you and I didnt even see their lips move! :lamo
 
The GAO thinks Brady is a joke...

A team of Congressional special agents was able to bypass Brady Act background checks and successfully purchase firearms using fake IDs in all five states where they tried, according to a March 19, 2001 General Accounting Office.

The investigation was conducted by the General Accounting Office at the request of U.S. Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-CA), ranking minority member of the House Committee on Government Reform.

Agents purchased firearms from licensed dealers in Virginia, West Virginia, Montana, New Mexico, and Arizona from late October 2000 through February 2001. All five states conform to minimum requirements of the Brady Act, relying on instant background checks, but do not require fingerprinting or waiting periods for firearms purchases. The gun stores and pawnshops visited were selected at random from the yellow pages of local telephone directories. The investigation was conducted in accordance with investigative standards established by the President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency.

State-level background checks required in Virginia and Arizona also failed to catch the fake IDs.

Based on their investigation, GAO concluded that in the five states, "the instant background check does not positively identify purchasers of firearms," and that it "cannot ensure that the prospective purchaser is not a felon."

According to the report, "the instant background check does not positively identify purchasers of firearms. Rather, it is a negative check that cannot ensure that the prospective purchaser is not a felon or other prohibited person whose receipt and possession of a firearm would be unlawful."

Fake ID's Foil Brady Checks - GAO
 
Heck, even NAMI thinks its BS...

The U.S. Surgeon General has determined that the likelihood of violence from people with mental illness is low. There are many reasons why violence occurs in our society, many of which have nothing or little to do with mental illness. In contrast to the mayors’ report, National Public Radio last week broadcast a balanced discussion on “The Law—and the Reality—of Gun Access.” Federal law currently bars certain categories of individuals—including some with a history of mental illness—from purchasing or owning guns. Potential purchasers are screened through the NICS.

NAMI Blog: Gun Laws and Mental Health
 
VanceMack said:
So lets counter with another extraordinarily self serving article...
Click to expand...

Since you you were unable to document your previous claim............Ok, let's see what you've got this time:


The Washington Times
Thursday, July 02, 1998
Commentary Section
Gun control decoys on the firing range
By James Bovard
"The Justice Department announced on June 21 that presale handgun background checks mandated by the Brady law and by state laws resulted in 69,000 people being denied permission to purchase guns in 1997.

But the Justice Department's estimates did not even maintain credibility for a week. The Indianapolis Star and News reported on June 24 that the Justice Department exaggerated by 1,300 percent the number of gun buyers turned down in Indiana because of the Brady Act. White House spokeswoman Nanda Chitre conceded the same day that President Clinton had exaggerated the number of people stopped from buying guns by the Brady Act and that White House counsel Rahm Emanuel had greatly exaggerated the number of newly bought guns used in homicides."


"This is not the first time Clinton administration numbers on the Brady Act have gone down in disgrace. A 1996 General Accounting Office report found that the data used to estimate nationwide denials under the Brady act are extremely unreliable. For instance, arrests are sometimes counted the same as convictions - and the fact that a person was once arrested (though later found innocent) could be used to deny their request to buy a firearm. GAO found almost half of all rejections under the Brady Act were due to paperwork problems or traffic violations, not to criminal records."

"Despite Clinton administration claims on how dangerous illicit gun buyers are, the federal government prosecutes fewer than 1 in 1,000 violators. The number of convictions from prosecutions for making false statements on Brady forms declined from 253 in 1994 to 36 in 1997."



"Nor has the Brady Act been a significant factor in reducing crime. Violent crime rates have declined more rapidly in states not covered by the Brady Act (because they have instant background checks, or other reasons) than in other states. In fact, according to University of Chicago professor John Lott, author of the newly published "More Guns, Less Crime," the Brady Act is actually responsible for "significant increase in rapes and aggravated assaults." The Brady Act banned law enforcement agencies from using background check information to compile registration lists of gun owners. But some law enforcement agencies blatantly violate this provision of the law. National Rifle Association Vice President Neal Knox recently observed, "Some local and state agencies, such as the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigation and Identification, have been caught maintaining computerized records of Brady purchases despite the clear prosecutions have resulted."
​
Click to expand...


Do you expect anyone other than the far right to accept the word of a single newspaper over DOJ statistics?​
 
** "Brady may not directly result in measurable reductions of gun-related crimes." (General Accounting Office,"Implementation of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act," Report to the Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. Senate, and the Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. House of Representatives, GAO/GGD-96-22 Gun Control, January 1996, p. 8)

Of 250 cases referred for prosecution during Brady`s first year, 217 were rejected. ("Implementation of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act," Report to the Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. Senate, and the Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. House of Representatives, GAO/GGD-96-22 Gun Control, January 1996, pp. 8, 45)
 
Catawba said:
Since you you were unable to document your previous claim............Ok, let's see what you've got this time:




Do you expect anyone other than the far right to accept the word of a single newspaper over DOJ statistics?
Click to expand...
GOA reports anyone?

Maybe you can send the Brady people an email and ask them what you should say when you get asked actual QUESTIONS about your little talking point snippet.
 
VanceMack said:
The GAO thinks Brady is a joke...

A team of Congressional special agents was able to bypass Brady Act background checks and successfully purchase firearms using fake IDs in all five states where they tried, according to a March 19, 2001 General Accounting Office.

The investigation was conducted by the General Accounting Office at the request of U.S. Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-CA), ranking minority member of the House Committee on Government Reform.

Agents purchased firearms from licensed dealers in Virginia, West Virginia, Montana, New Mexico, and Arizona from late October 2000 through February 2001. All five states conform to minimum requirements of the Brady Act, relying on instant background checks, but do not require fingerprinting or waiting periods for firearms purchases. The gun stores and pawnshops visited were selected at random from the yellow pages of local telephone directories. The investigation was conducted in accordance with investigative standards established by the President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency.

State-level background checks required in Virginia and Arizona also failed to catch the fake IDs.

Based on their investigation, GAO concluded that in the five states, "the instant background check does not positively identify purchasers of firearms," and that it "cannot ensure that the prospective purchaser is not a felon."

According to the report, "the instant background check does not positively identify purchasers of firearms. Rather, it is a negative check that cannot ensure that the prospective purchaser is not a felon or other prohibited person whose receipt and possession of a firearm would be unlawful."

Fake ID's Foil Brady Checks - GAO
Click to expand...


I'm sure some slip through, which is why I support beefing up the background checks.
 
The General Accounting Office reported that during the Act`s first year, 95.2% of handgun purchase applicants were approved without a hitch. Of the denials, nearly half were due to traffic tickets or administrative problems with application forms (including sending forms to the wrong law enforcement agency). ("Implementation of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act," Report to theCommittee on the Judiciary, U.S. Senate, and the Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. House of Representatives, GAO/GGD-96-22, Jan. 1996, pp. 64-66)
 
GAO reports that "Only 4 of the 15 jurisdictions (studied) had sufficiently detailed records to permit GAO to quantify denials based on violent crimes. GAO found that denials of applicants who had been convicted of or indicted for aggravated assault, murder, rape, or robbery totaled 371 and represented 0.2 percent of the applications and 4.9 percent of the denials in these 4 jurisdictions." (GAO, p. 6)
 
VanceMack said:
Heck, even NAMI thinks its BS...

The U.S. Surgeon General has determined that the likelihood of violence from people with mental illness is low. There are many reasons why violence occurs in our society, many of which have nothing or little to do with mental illness. In contrast to the mayors’ report, National Public Radio last week broadcast a balanced discussion on “The Law—and the Reality—of Gun Access.” Federal law currently bars certain categories of individuals—including some with a history of mental illness—from purchasing or owning guns. Potential purchasers are screened through the NICS.

NAMI Blog: Gun Laws and Mental Health
Click to expand...


If you fail the background check, you have not committed the crime of owning or purchasing.
 
In 1996, 60,037 people went to licensed gun dealers to purchase handguns. Of that figure, 327—less than one half of one percent—were denied because of a disqualifying factor. . . . While we were able to keep 327 people from getting a handgun at point A—each of them was able to purchase a rifle or handgun the very same day at point B. To our knowledge, under the Brady Act, not a single one of the 327 people . . . have been prosecuted by the U.S. Justice Department."

Attorney General Betty D. Montgomery, "The U.S. Supreme Court’s Action in Striking Portions of the Brady Act," News Statement (June 30, 1997).
 
Chicago has a ban on assault weapons. Yet people are dropping like flies there as Chicago continues to break murder records at an alarming pace. More people were killed in Chicago last year than our soldiers in war.

Crickets from the media, of course. That's Obama/Rahm liberal territory.
 
VanceMack said:
GAO reports that "Only 4 of the 15 jurisdictions (studied) had sufficiently detailed records to permit GAO to quantify denials based on violent crimes. GAO found that denials of applicants who had been convicted of or indicted for aggravated assault, murder, rape, or robbery totaled 371 and represented 0.2 percent of the applications and 4.9 percent of the denials in these 4 jurisdictions." (GAO, p. 6)
Click to expand...

As I said, I am all for beefing up the background checks. Reducing easy access to any criminals or crazies to any degree is worth extending and expanding the background checks. That is why background checks have a 91% approval rating from the public.
 
Catawba said:
If you fail the background check, you have not committed the crime of owning or purchasing.
Click to expand...
If you were a felon as you suggested soooooo many of that 1.9 million were, you are guilty of committing a criminal act. And as you can see...not very many have ever so much as been CHARGED.

Your single line talking point bullet spoon fed to you by the Brady people is a dismal failure. But chin up, son. You delivered it well. You followed their guidance on "How to use this information". Other than the fact you were just doing what you were told, its not really your fault.
 
VanceMack said:
In 1996, 60,037 people went to licensed gun dealers to purchase handguns. Of that figure, 327—less than one half of one percent—were denied because of a disqualifying factor. . . . While we were able to keep 327 people from getting a handgun at point A—each of them was able to purchase a rifle or handgun the very same day at point B. To our knowledge, under the Brady Act, not a single one of the 327 people . . . have been prosecuted by the U.S. Justice Department."

Attorney General Betty D. Montgomery, "The U.S. Supreme Court’s Action in Striking Portions of the Brady Act," News Statement (June 30, 1997).
Click to expand...

No arrest for failing the background check at point A is my point. Its not illegal to fail the background check. And further reducing the point B's in the 40 remaining states by closing the private sales loophole will help accomplish the goal of restricting access to criminals and crazies.
 
VanceMack said:
If you were a felon as you suggested soooooo many of that 1.9 million were, you are guilty of committing a criminal act. And as you can see...not very many have ever so much as been CHARGED.

Your single line talking point bullet spoon fed to you by the Brady people is a dismal failure. But chin up, son. You delivered it well. You followed their guidance on "How to use this information". Other than the fact you were just doing what you were told, its not really your fault.
Click to expand...

You have not yet proven to me it is against the law for a felon to apply for and fail a background check.
 
42-49 people killed for the month of January in Chicago! Wheres Gabby?????

gabby_giffords_pledge_dnc2012_ap-301kb_606.jpg


Course her Bestest Bud as the Chair of the DNC good ole Debbie Wasserman Schultz.....isn't using her at All.....Rights? :roll:
 
VanceMack said:
In 1996, 60,037 people went to licensed gun dealers to purchase handguns. Of that figure, 327—less than one half of one percent—were denied because of a disqualifying factor. . . . While we were able to keep 327 people from getting a handgun at point A—each of them was able to purchase a rifle or handgun the very same day at point B. To our knowledge, under the Brady Act, not a single one of the 327 people . . . have been prosecuted by the U.S. Justice Department."

Attorney General Betty D. Montgomery, "The U.S. Supreme Court’s Action in Striking Portions of the Brady Act," News Statement (June 30, 1997).
Click to expand...

Where are you getting your information that all of the 327 you allege simply went down the street and were able to purchase a gun? In addition, where are you getting your information that only 327 out of 60,000 were denied permission to purchase? That's not my experience or perception at all.

Even if true, which I doubt, how many felons and others who would not pass a background did not even try? And why do 1996 statistics matter?
 
Catawba said:
No arrest for failing the background check at point A is my point. Its not illegal to fail the background check. And further reducing the point B's in the 40 remaining states by closing the private sales loophole will help accomplish the goal of restricting access to criminals and crazies.
Click to expand...
It IS illegal to be a felon and attempt to purchase a firearm. That WAS your initial claim...remember?

Look...I get it. You had this wonderful statistic given to you. You were supposed to be able to repeat what they told you to say and it was supposed to score points. Its not your fault they didnt go into details on their bull**** statistic. Its not your fault they provided intentionally misleading information and really...its not your fault they didnt tell you how you were supposed to respond when their silly bull**** statistic blew up in your face. Its not like they expect you to question anything.

So...we CAN keep doing this all day or we can just accept the fact. Your statistic is bull****. It absolutely does not indicate the world is a safer place or that violent offenders did not manage to get firearms from...say...their illegal drug dealer. It damn sure doesnt say that all of your criminals that were denied weapons were arrested and convicted for an illegal act (in fact, the truth is the GAO reports show that is NOT the case).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom