Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 45

Thread: Bloomberg Investigation of Gun Shows

  1. #31
    Rockin' In The Free World
    the makeout hobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Last Seen
    04-24-14 @ 06:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    7,102

    Re: Bloomberg Investigation of Gun Shows

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    The whole "gun show loophole" thing is a red herring.

    The fact is that most states do not require private sellers, whether at a gun show or in someone's yard somewhere, to run background checks or register or etc.

    Some FFL dealers break the law.... what a shock.

    All of this is simply looking at a type of tool that is sometimes used in crime. None of this addresses the root problems of this whole issue.

    Root problem number One: WHY do we have dangerous repeat-offender criminals with a long record of violent crime out on the street at all? By the time they get to the point of using guns to commit crime, most criminals have a long record. They've been charged with many petty crimes and likely convicted of a few. Some of them have already committed a serious violent crime, served time, and gotten out. Why should someone who held a pistol on a Quicky-mart clerk for the contents of the register EVER get out of prison? He's demonstrated a total lack of regard for human life and the utter selfishness to risk an innocent life for the sake of less than $100.
    When someone willingly puts the lives of innocents at risk for their own gain for criminal purposes, or otherwise demonstrates that they will do serious harm to others without any legitimate justification, we should remove them from society permanently.

    I'm sorry, are you advocating life in prison for any sort of violent crime? This is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard you say. It isn't practical. First, Prisons only have so much room. To say nothing of how expensive it is to house someone their entire life, to feed them and care for them, when they could otherwise be a productive member of society. Second, life in prison for anything short of rape or murder is just too harsh. The punishment should fit the crime. Also, people change. I mean, people should have the chance to redeem themselves. Isn't that one of the basic tenets of your religion? Let's be realistic here. Very few crimes

    Root problem number Two: We should never release a felon from prison unless we're reasonably sure he/she is no longer a threat to society. If we're reasonably sure they are no longer a threat to society, WHY should they lose their rights as a citizen? If they are unworthy of their rights as a citizen, or if the nature of their crime is such that they can never be trusted with arms again (ie forcible rapist), then WHY are we letting them out at all??
    (because if they want a gun, they can find a way to get one!)
    How are you ever reasonable sure? You aren't. Not to mention, you can't just sentence someone to prison "until we feel like letting you go." It's not ethical or legal.

    The two questions are related, you see.

    Get the real-deal dangerous criminals off the streets and keep them off the streets, and guns won't really be an issue.
    I'm sorry Goshin, you have no contact with reality, do you?
    The Makeout Hobo is real, and does indeed travel around the country in his van and make out with ladies... If you meet the Makeout Hobo, it is customary to greet him with a shot of whiskey and a high five (if you are a dude) or passionate makeouts (if you are a lady).

  2. #32
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: Bloomberg Investigation of Gun Shows

    Quote Originally Posted by the makeout hobo View Post
    How is making sure someone isn't a criminal,
    or isn't mentally unbalanced,
    Don't you mean ex-criminal? If they served their time then they are no longer a criminal and I have no problem with them having 2nd amendment rights. Someone who is the process of committing a crime has nothing to prevent him from getting a fire arm the legal route if he or she has no criminal record and even he does have a criminal record there is nothing stopping him from getting it an illegal route or buying from a private owner.




    anti-second amendment?

    So if the government made a law saying you do not have 1st amendment once you get out of prison you would be cool with that? When it s taking away rights from citizens and inconveniencing law abiding citizens it is anti-2nd amendment.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  3. #33
    Rockin' In The Free World
    the makeout hobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Last Seen
    04-24-14 @ 06:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    7,102

    Re: Bloomberg Investigation of Gun Shows

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    Don't you mean ex-criminal? If they served their time then they are no longer a criminal and I have no problem with them having 2nd amendment rights. Someone who is the process of committing a crime has nothing to prevent him from getting a fire arm the legal route if he or she has no criminal record and even he does have a criminal record there is nothing stopping him from getting it an illegal route or buying from a private owner.
    What if they're on parole?


    So if the government made a law saying you do not have 1st amendment once you get out of prison you would be cool with that? When it s taking away rights from citizens and inconveniencing law abiding citizens it is anti-2nd amendment.
    Do you think there should be any limitations? i think this is where we disagree.
    The Makeout Hobo is real, and does indeed travel around the country in his van and make out with ladies... If you meet the Makeout Hobo, it is customary to greet him with a shot of whiskey and a high five (if you are a dude) or passionate makeouts (if you are a lady).

  4. #34
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: Bloomberg Investigation of Gun Shows

    Quote Originally Posted by the makeout hobo View Post
    What if they're on parole?




    Do you think there should be any limitations? i think this is where we disagree.
    If they are that dangerous to not be trusted to exercise all their constitutional rights then they should not be let out in the first place.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  5. #35
    Rockin' In The Free World
    the makeout hobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Last Seen
    04-24-14 @ 06:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    7,102

    Re: Bloomberg Investigation of Gun Shows

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    If they are that dangerous to not be trusted to exercise all their constitutional rights then they should not be let out in the first place.
    what if they're on parole?
    The Makeout Hobo is real, and does indeed travel around the country in his van and make out with ladies... If you meet the Makeout Hobo, it is customary to greet him with a shot of whiskey and a high five (if you are a dude) or passionate makeouts (if you are a lady).

  6. #36
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: Bloomberg Investigation of Gun Shows

    Quote Originally Posted by the makeout hobo View Post
    what if they're on parole?
    If they are going to be trusted to be out in society then sure. Regardless of whether or not Parolees should be allowed to exercise 2nd amendment rights is irrelevant to the fact the government has no business inconveniencing people with back ground checks,registrations, licenses/permits,weapon limits and restrictions and other anti-2nd amendment law. All those things basically do is require citizens to seek permission from the government to exercise a right and the second you have to have permission it stops being a right, it becomes a privilege. There is no Driving is a privilege because nowhere is it listed as a right in the constitution so the government can require you to jump through all sorts of hoops to get that privilege if it wants.
    Last edited by jamesrage; 10-20-09 at 09:34 AM.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  7. #37
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,610

    Re: Bloomberg Investigation of Gun Shows

    The only people who broke the law were the agents Bloomberg sent across state lines to make illegal purchases.


    Bloomberg should be arrested.
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  8. #38
    Advisor rebelbuc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    New Orleans
    Last Seen
    08-21-17 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    574

    Re: Bloomberg Investigation of Gun Shows

    Quote Originally Posted by PogueMoran View Post
    I noticed no one had posted about Mayor Bloomberg's undercover investigation at Gun Shows across the country. After seeing the highly partisan way the Acorn "undercover investigation" was carried out I thought it would be nice to show how a real undercover investigation works. The premise: Private investigators were sent to gun shows in various states to buy guns from private dealers. The way the law works now is that private dealers do not have to run background checks at gunshows but if they feel that the person would not pass a background check they are obligated not to sell guns to the person. So the PIs bought guns under the premise that they would fail a background check. Now in the videos there are dealers who follow the law and those who don't.

    What they found is 35 out of the 47 dealers they approached, sold them arms illegally.

    YouTube - The Loophole: Private Sellers Who Arent Private

    A dealer allowing a straw purchase (which is illegal)
    YouTube - Illegal Sale #2: Allowing Illegal Straw Purchase

    A dealer stopping a straw purchase (when someone buys a gun and has someone else fill out the paper work for them)
    YouTube - Illegal Sale #2: Rejecting Illegal Straw Purchase

    Several dealers ignoring the investigator saying he couldn't pass a background check
    YouTube - llegal Sale #1: Private Dealer Reactions

    Dealer following the law and denying the purchase
    YouTube - Illegal Sale #1: Seller Passes the Integrity Test

    Dealer failing to follow the law
    YouTube - Illegal Sale #1: Sellers Fail the Integrity Test

    Now this is what a real undercover investigation looks like. If the Acorn guy was interested in being honest he would release videos showing people who turned him away.
    As stated earlier, you have compared gun buyers who violate ineffective laws that border on bypassing our 2nd amendment with catching a government-subsidized organization in complicity in violating tax laws in the act of importing illegal, underage teenage prostitutes. And you don't even draw a distinction... amazing!

    Now, considering that you seem to know that the investigating couple visited some ACORN offices without obtaining damning video, one must ask how you know this. Assuming that you are right, that means that the investigators did admit that not all ACORN workers exhibited corrupt behavior. Your only metric of the Bloomberg study that seems to qualify it as a "real undercover investigation" is the observation of legal gun sales. Therefore, your contention that ACORN was not always found to be guilty has just proven that the young couple launched a "real undercover investigation". Your own argument defeats your allegations!

    Also consider this. You call the ACORN investigation biased, but you consider Bloomberg's lackeys to be unbiased with respect to gun shows. Get real!
    Last edited by rebelbuc; 10-20-09 at 09:57 AM.
    Obama lied... Ambassador Stevens died!

  9. #39
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Bloomberg Investigation of Gun Shows

    Quote Originally Posted by rebelbuc View Post
    As stated earlier, you have compared gun buyers who violate ineffective laws that border on bypassing our 2nd amendment with catching a government-subsidized organization in complicity in violating tax laws in the act of importing illegal, underage teenage prostitutes. And you don't even draw a distinction... amazing!

    Now, considering that you seem to know that the investigating couple visited some ACORN offices without obtaining damning video, one must ask how you know this. Assuming that you are right, that means that the investigators did admit that not all ACORN workers exhibited corrupt behavior. Your only metric of the Bloomberg study that seems to qualify it as a "real undercover investigation" is the observation of legal gun sales. Therefore, your contention that ACORN was not always found to be guilty has just proven that the young couple launched a "real undercover investigation". Your own argument defeats your allegations!

    Also consider this. You call the ACORN investigation biased, but you consider Bloomberg's lackeys to be unbiased with respect to gun shows. Get real!
    Outstanding post

  10. #40
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,159

    Re: Bloomberg Investigation of Gun Shows

    Quote Originally Posted by the makeout hobo View Post
    I'm sorry, are you advocating life in prison for any sort of violent crime? This is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard you say. It isn't practical. First, Prisons only have so much room. To say nothing of how expensive it is to house someone their entire life, to feed them and care for them, when they could otherwise be a productive member of society. Second, life in prison for anything short of rape or murder is just too harsh. The punishment should fit the crime. Also, people change. I mean, people should have the chance to redeem themselves. Isn't that one of the basic tenets of your religion? Let's be realistic here. Very few crimes



    How are you ever reasonable sure? You aren't. Not to mention, you can't just sentence someone to prison "until we feel like letting you go." It's not ethical or legal.



    I'm sorry Goshin, you have no contact with reality, do you?

    Ah, I needed that laugh, thanks.

    Bud, I've dealt with more raw reality than you could probably cope with. You should try it sometime, it is very enlightening. Ever stared down the barrel of a gun held by someone who is really pissed at you? It focuses the mind marvelously. Ever had someone try to carve your guts out with a hawkbill knife? It's quite the thrill ride, bud.

    Most seriously violent criminals are not simply poor misunderstood and misguided youths-who-are-victims-of-society. They are scum who have shed their shell of human compassion, morals or ethics, and many of them have no qualms about killing you becuase you were in the way. Some of them think raping and torturing a man's family in front of him is a fine evening's entertainment.

    I'm not talking out my ass, I've known criminals who had this mindset.

    The recidivism rate for violent criminals is very high. I'm not talking about Joe Doofus who punches some numbnuts in the nose for an off-color remark. I'm talking about people who put innocents in peril of their lives for the sake of money or drugs... often less than $100 worth. Very few thugs ever come back from that to become productive and trustworthy members of society.

    A few do... but many innocents die because violent criminals were let back out into society. I don't think the few serious/violent criminals who change are worth the much larger number of innocent lives lost.

    Not enough room in the prisons? Legalize drugs and pardon nonviolent drug offenders, that will clear up about half the cells. Still not enough room? Executing the more serious offenders wouldn't bother me overmuch.

    You say murder and rape. My list would include those plus: armed robbery, strongarm robbery where any innocent person suffered serious harm, "hot" burglarly (where people are home), carjacking, and any other felony crime where an innocent person suffered serious bodily harm in the course of the commission of that felony.

    Again, I'm not talking about Leshawn the petty pot dealer, or Betty the shop-lifter who pushed a clerk in Wal-mart. I'm talking about people who have engaged in criminal acts that did or easily could have resulted in grave bodily harm or death to innocent citizens.

    Society is not obligated to coddle those who threaten its innocent members unjustly.

    G.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •