• 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!

Gun Control advocates...

BretJ said:
He is not saying it is gun control advocates fault. He is pointing out the very problem you have pointed out in previous posts...What good is a law that no one enforces? If guns are such a big problem, then why the lack of consequences? What is the point of passing even more unenforced laws?
Click to expand...

1) to pander to the slow witted sheeple who want SOMETHING DONE
2) to harass honest people who tend to obey even the most anal and idiotic laws
 
Exactice said:
making it unimaginably harder for a LAW abiding citizen to obtain a right given to them by our constitution.


A criminal will obtain a firearm in any way shape or form......... what does laws do to them.......
Click to expand...

bannerrhoid Movement (BM for short) members never tell us how their stupid laws actually change the legal environment for CRIMINALS

before their stupid laws are passed, its illegal for a criminal to possess a firearm

after their laws are passed, all those laws do is to prevent HONEST People from possessing something
 
Stricter gun control is needed because of all these mass shootings done by complete kooks.
 
a7xfanjma said:
Stricter gun control is needed because of all these mass shootings done by complete kooks.
Click to expand...

Hmm... why is that not an argument for better kook control? It seems that positive identification of kooks is required to limit their ability to have legal access to guns.
 
a7xfanjma said:
Stricter gun control is needed because of all these mass shootings done by complete kooks.
Click to expand...

that's just plain stupid given that mass shootings are already illegal and all those laws do is disarm honest people
 
BretJ said:
He is not saying it is gun control advocates fault. He is pointing out the very problem you have pointed out in previous posts...What good is a law that no one enforces? If guns are such a big problem, then why the lack of consequences? What is the point of passing even more unenforced laws?
Click to expand...

Either he's blaming gun control, or he's not blaming gun control. It should be obvious that he can't do both at the same time. You can't claim this is a statement claiming gun control is ineffective, this seems to argue it's not even implemented.

This is not a surprise for me. Pro gun advocates are often highly motivated and hypersensitive to the mere suggestion of a limitation. They obstruct any amount of responsibility on the part of gun owners as aggressively as possible.
 
RetiredUSN said:
You created a racist thread on a subject by your own words when there was no racism involved, but threw in your own pathetic agenda while trying to convince others?

Sorry, but you lack any substance or the maturity to discuss or debate the matter to begin with.
Click to expand...

Give me a break, I did not create a racist thread nor do I have any kind of agenda, it was a statement of fact. I would have to think blacks or whites are somehow superior for it to be racist, so no that is your own misinterpretation and inability to use a correct definition. You don't know a thing about my maturity or anything else for that matter. You have been here a year, and in one post you think you know me? LMAO!

Now let's look at some evidence supporting what I mentioned...

Blacks Receive 60% Longer Sentences For Same Crimes - https://newsone.com/1859475/black-people-receive-60-longer-sentences-for-same-crimes/

The black/white marijuana arrest gap, in nine charts - https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...st-gap-in-nine-charts/?utm_term=.8dd119d45f34

Oh wait but the stats must be lying right?

Come back when you have something to say and stop derailing with the nonsense.
 
Absentglare said:
Either he's blaming gun control, or he's not blaming gun control. It should be obvious that he can't do both at the same time. You can't claim this is a statement claiming gun control is ineffective, this seems to argue it's not even implemented.

This is not a surprise for me. Pro gun advocates are often highly motivated and hypersensitive to the mere suggestion of a limitation. They obstruct any amount of responsibility on the part of gun owners as aggressively as possible.
Click to expand...

You know as well as I do that is bull**** and has nothing to do with anything I said. Which is why you will not reply or did not reply when I responded.

Your comment is absolute nonsense.
 
Black Dog said:
No I am attacking gun control advocates who call for more laws when they are to afraid to enforce the ones we have. This is why we have people selling guns illegally to known gang members and getting probation. Do I need to explain in more detail? Or do you get it now?
Click to expand...
How were any gun control advocates involved in the sentencing decision for this woman though? For all you know the decision could have been made by someone who opposed gun control and didn’t want to heavily punish for an offence they don’t think should exist at all. Probably more likely the sentencing here had nothing to do with gun control politics at all but was influenced by any of the other factors commonly involved in sentencing (good, bad and indifferent).

I’m sure a lot of gun control advocates would unconditionally support the idea that this sentence was too week and argue for more while gun control opponents might have more mixed opinions of the situation given they naturally oppose the law she was caught breaking but generally won’t support the specifics of what she did. I don’t think the specific sentencing decision made in this case reflects on any socio-political opinions though.
 
HonestJoe said:
How were any gun control advocates involved in the sentencing decision for this woman though? For all you know the decision could have been made by someone who opposed gun control and didn’t want to heavily punish for an offence they don’t think should exist at all. Probably more likely the sentencing here had nothing to do with gun control politics at all but was influenced by any of the other factors commonly involved in sentencing (good, bad and indifferent).
Click to expand...

If it was one isolated incident I would agree, but it's not...

The "enforce the laws" camp got a boost last week from a study by the Americans for Gun Safety Foundation that documents the embarrassing extent to which federal gun laws are not, in fact, enforced. Of the 22 major federal gun statutes, 20 are almost completely ignored. And they happen to be the laws intended to combat the black-market for firearms. - Feds Shoot Blanks On Gun Laws - CBS News

Washington (CNN)Despite plenty of disagreement during President Barack Obama's town hall on guns, there was one point on which he and his critics agreed: There isn't enough enforcement of the laws already on the books. - Why even gun laws that exist don't always get enforced - CNNPolitics.com

HonestJoe said:
I’m sure a lot of gun control advocates would unconditionally support the idea that this sentence was too week and argue for more while gun control opponents might have more mixed opinions of the situation given they naturally oppose the law she was caught breaking but generally won’t support the specifics of what she did. I don’t think the specific sentencing decision made in this case reflects on any socio-political opinions though.
Click to expand...

I am sure some would call for more enforcement. This however does not stop or even slow down the call for more useless, unenforceable gun laws.

In the end she was charged with 4 felonies including selling guns to people she knew were known gang members. I am not sure what part of that needs explaining. That is a perfect example of how screwed up enforcement is. This is also in Chicago, so no excuses about "gun nuts" etc, lol.
 
Black Dog said:
Please feel free to address this...

Mousheh was arrested last September and charged with four felonies after an investigation by the Chicago Police Firearm Investigation Team concluded she had bought handguns through the benefit of her state-issued Firearms Owners Identification card and then illegally resold them. - Straw purchaser with 4 felony gun charges will not get jail time

So why do we need more gun laws when we don't even enforce the laws we have. 4 gun felonies in Chicago no less and she gets probation???

Don't talk to me about gun control ever. You lose.
Click to expand...

You think non-violent offenders should automatically be jailed? She's on probation and has permanently had a constitutional right infringed, is that not enough?
 
Black Dog said:
Give me a break, I did not create a racist thread nor do I have any kind of agenda, it was a statement of fact. I would have to think blacks or whites are somehow superior for it to be racist, so no that is your own misinterpretation and inability to use a correct definition. You don't know a thing about my maturity or anything else for that matter. You have been here a year, and in one post you think you know me? LMAO!

Now let's look at some evidence supporting what I mentioned...

Blacks Receive 60% Longer Sentences For Same Crimes - https://newsone.com/1859475/black-people-receive-60-longer-sentences-for-same-crimes/

The black/white marijuana arrest gap, in nine charts - https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...st-gap-in-nine-charts/?utm_term=.8dd119d45f34

Oh wait but the stats must be lying right?

Come back when you have something to say and stop derailing with the nonsense.
Click to expand...

How many priors before the hammer dropped?
 
Black Dog said:
If it was one isolated incident I would agree, but it's not...
Click to expand...
Well this isn’t a question of enforcement, it’s a question of sentencing and you’ve still not established whether the (perceived) low sentence was “by the book” or unusual in this case and either way, why the sentencing was lower than we might expect for the offences as reported (that last word could be a factor too of course). It’s a relevant discussion but not one that directly impacts discussions about other gun law changes.

Black Dog said:
I am sure some would call for more enforcement. This however does not stop or even slow down the call for more useless, unenforceable gun laws.
Click to expand...
Probably because those will be separate statements from different people. There isn’t a single amorphous blob of “gun control advocates” (nor one of “gun rights advocates” for that matter). That some people make flawed or ignorant statements on the issue, from any direction, doesn’t colour the better thought out and considered statements from a similar direction.

Put simply, even if the sentencing in this case and others like it was ridiculously wrong, even if the enforcement of existing laws is poor, blocked or impossible, that doesn’t automatically and unconditionally invalidate any and all proposed gun control laws that could be presented. Each and every proposal should be considered on its own merits.
 
spud_meister said:
You think non-violent offenders should automatically be jailed? She's on probation and has permanently had a constitutional right infringed, is that not enough?
Click to expand...

No. It sends the wrong message. It is a felony, 4 felonies to be exact. Prison time was justified.
 
RetiredUSN said:
How many priors before the hammer dropped?
Click to expand...

Clemency is the only way out for the thousands of nonviolent drug offenders serving life terms in federal prison - How a first crack cocaine offense led to a life sentence | The Washington Post

“Our nation’s prison population has more than quintupled,” she said. “And this is due largely to the war on drugs and the ‘get tough’ movement. The drug war has been waged almost exclusively in poor communities of color even though studies have consistently shown now for decades that contrary to popular belief, people of color are no more likely to use or sell illegal drugs than whites, but by waging this drug war almost exclusively in poor communities of color, we’ve now created a vast new racial under-caste.”

Since 1971, when President Richard Nixon declared a war on drugs, there has been a 700% increase in the U.S. prison population. Today, African-Americans are also more likely to spend time in prison for drug related offenses than their white counterparts. According to the Sentencing Project, African-Americans make up 12% of the nation’s drug users, but represent 34% of those arrested for drug offenses, and 45% of those in state prison for such offense as of 2005. - Criminal injustice: The percentage of African-Americans in prison | MSNBC

Black people constitute 1.2 percent of Vermont's population but nearly 11 percent of Vermont's inmate population, according to the Department of Corrections. Black people in Vermont were 4.36 times more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession or dealing than white people, the American Civil Liberties Union reported in 2013. A 2012 Vermont State Police report found that nonwhite drivers were more likely to get a ticket than white drivers when pulled over. They're more likely to be searched, too, even though searches of white drivers more often turned up evidence of a crime. - A First-Time Drug Offender Gets 10 Years. Is It Racism? | Crime | Seven Days | Vermont's Independent Voice

Are you going to keep playing this game? Or are you man enough to admit you were and are wrong?
 
HonestJoe said:
Well this isn’t a question of enforcement, it’s a question of sentencing and you’ve still not established whether the (perceived) low sentence was “by the book” or unusual in this case and either way, why the sentencing was lower than we might expect for the offences as reported (that last word could be a factor too of course). It’s a relevant discussion but not one that directly impacts discussions about other gun law changes.

Probably because those will be separate statements from different people. There isn’t a single amorphous blob of “gun control advocates” (nor one of “gun rights advocates” for that matter). That some people make flawed or ignorant statements on the issue, from any direction, doesn’t colour the better thought out and considered statements from a similar direction.

Put simply, even if the sentencing in this case and others like it was ridiculously wrong, even if the enforcement of existing laws is poor, blocked or impossible, that doesn’t automatically and unconditionally invalidate any and all proposed gun control laws that could be presented. Each and every proposal should be considered on its own merits.
Click to expand...

Well you obviously did not read a single article I posted. Your first question about enforcement bares that out. So if you are not going to look at the evidence and ask questions already shown by the articles to be irrelevant or flat out wrong. We are done here.
 
Black Dog said:
No. It sends the wrong message. It is a felony, 4 felonies to be exact. Prison time was justified.
Click to expand...

You think sending people to prison for non-violent crimes sends a good message? Imprisoning people for just selling illegal things is one of the biggest issues with the War on Drugs, and you want to extend that ridiculous and stupid mentality to guns as well.
 
Black Dog said:
Well you obviously did not read a single article I posted. Your first question about enforcement bares that out. So if you are not going to look at the evidence and ask questions already shown by the articles to be irrelevant or flat out wrong. We are done here.
Click to expand...
None of the articles you’ve linked discuss the specific reasons for the outcome in the initial case but my main point is that case has nothing to do with the general question of enforcement of gun control laws.

You may well have some perfectly valid points, the issue is that the case you initially cited doesn’t appear to back any of them up and certainly doesn’t support your unconditional dismissal of any and all newly proposed gun control laws.
 
a7xfanjma said:
Stricter gun control is needed because of all these mass shootings done by complete kooks.
Click to expand...

You mean, really strict gun control, because mass shootings have been committed with semiautomatic rifles, semiautomatic shotguns, pump shotguns, pistols, revolvers, bolt action hunting rifles, bolt action rim fire rifles and double barrel shotguns. Most of the random mass shooters bought theirs legally, so you're going to need double secret probation for legal firearm purchases, too.
 
spud_meister said:
You think non-violent offenders should automatically be jailed? She's on probation and has permanently had a constitutional right infringed, is that not enough?
Click to expand...

The crime for which she was found guilty has a maximum punishment of a $250,000 fine and 10 years imprisonment. The law regarding straw purchases was created specifically for cases like this, to keep guns out of the hands of violent people. If the law has no teeth, it has no purpose. Should Jalita Johnson have gotten more than probation for her straw purchase that was used by her boyfriend to murder a policewoman?
 
Black Dog said:
Absolute nonsense, This happened in Chicago. Gun advocates did not have a damn thing to do with it. :doh

Your whole article is nothing but a strawman. This case had nothing to do with any violent crime, hence no double standard.
Click to expand...

Black Dog said:
You know as well as I do that is bull**** and has nothing to do with anything I said. Which is why you will not reply or did not reply when I responded.

Your comment is absolute nonsense.
Click to expand...

I don't normally reply to stupid, dishonest arguments, but since you asked.

You never supplied any explanation for why gun control laws are not enforced in Chicago. It is clearly not that the laws were not passed, as the laws must exist in order to be under enforced.

So your entire case is built on dishonesty and delusion about the depth of pro-gun dishonesty. Ironic!!
 
spud_meister said:
You think sending people to prison for non-violent crimes sends a good message? Imprisoning people for just selling illegal things is one of the biggest issues with the War on Drugs, and you want to extend that ridiculous and stupid mentality to guns as well.
Click to expand...

No. I want the punishment to fit the crime. Straw purchases of weapons is illegal and a felony for a reason. Now think about that last statement; "you want to extend that ridiculous and stupid mentality to guns as well."
 
Absentglare said:
I don't normally reply to stupid, dishonest arguments, but since you asked.

You never supplied any explanation for why gun control laws are not enforced in Chicago.
Click to expand...

They aren't enforced on the federal level in the nation as a whole:

FBI denials referred to ATF DENI Branch 76,142
DENI Branch referrals to ATF field divisions 4,732
Not referred to field, overturned, or canceled 71,410
Cases declined by ATF 4,184
Charges referred for prosecution 62
2010 charges that resulted in guilty pleas 13

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/grants/239272.pdf

They aren't prosecuted by the city of Chicago/Cook County:

"From January 2006 through August 2013, thousands of cases involving a weapons violation were thrown out in Cook County’s criminal courts, The Chicago Reporter found. More than 13,000 cases that included a gun violation have been dismissed during that period, shows the Reporter’s analysis of records maintained by the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Cook County. In fact, more felony cases involving a gun--from illegal possession to unlawful sale to a felon--have been thrown out than cases with any other type of charge."

Thousands of felony gun cases are being dismissed in Cook County criminal courts | Chicago Reporter

"Since 1982, when the city tightened its gun ordinances to include the handgun ban, there have been just 2,201 convictions under the laws, according to data obtained by the Chicago News Cooperative from the office of the Cook County Circuit Court clerk. That works out to an average of about 79 convictions a year."

City’s Restrictive Gun Laws Are Rarely Enforced - The New York Times

Of course, it isn't just gun control laws that aren't enforced. In 2015, just 26% of murders committed that year were solved, with an overall clearance rate of 48%, 14 points below the national average.

https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/201...-solved-just-26-percent-of-472-homicides-2015

They have fewer resources to solve crimes:

"The number of detectives on the Chicago police force has dropped to 922 [in 2015] from 1,252 in 2008". That's a 26% reduction.

Chicago's detective force dwindles as murder rate soars | Reuters
 
HonestJoe said:
None of the articles you’ve linked discuss the specific reasons for the outcome in the initial case but my main point is that case has nothing to do with the general question of enforcement of gun control laws.
Click to expand...

It is an EXAMPlE of the stupidity of a system wanting more useless gun control laws while not enforcing the laws on the books.

HonestJoe said:
You may well have some perfectly valid points, the issue is that the case you initially cited doesn’t appear to back any of them up and certainly doesn’t support your unconditional dismissal of any and all newly proposed gun control laws.
Click to expand...

Yes it does as an EXAMPLE. Now please feel free to tell us what gun laws you think should not be enforced, and what new ones we need?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom