Guy with Gun Blows Away College Student in Traffic

calamity said:

I don;t care if it's 1%, 10% or 0.0001%. Fact remains it's legal gun purchases being flipped for profit in illegal sales.

Click to expand...

No it's not. It's a minute number of Federal FFL holders making illegal sales to gang members and other felons etc. Has nothing to do with your average owner, not even close. That however is neither here nor there as you again have no argument. So I guess we are done here as I have pretty much such you down at this point.

It's funny how you are now going over the top with the exaggerations. No one at all has said it does not happen, it does. It however is already illegal to make straw purchases etc. It is not a crime epidemic or anything even close. Again your agenda is laughable.

calamity said:

Yeah, it is a silly argument which is why I remember seeing it whenever I see it. It's certainly one of Turtle's favorite lines: law abiding gun owners do not shoot people.

Click to expand...

Hmmmm...don't remember TD every stating that....

calamity said:

The rest of your post was TLDNR mishmash of quoting my posts followed by some sort of rant, so I focused on the bold.

Click to expand...

Yea of course. Just more lies due to no argument, nothing. Hehehe!

BretJ said:

Hmmmm...don't remember TD every stating that....

Click to expand...

Right. Never.

Black Dog said:

No it's not. It's a minute number of Federal FFL holders making illegal sales to gang members and other felons etc. Has nothing to do with your average owner, not even close. That however is neither here nor there as you again have no argument. So I guess we are done here as I have pretty much such you down at this point.

It's funny how you are now going over the top with the exaggerations. No one at all has said it does not happen, it does. It however is already illegal to make straw purchases etc. It is not a crime epidemic or anything even close. Again your agenda is laughable.

Click to expand...

You just posted a snip showing that 84,000 guns were sold illegally by legal gun owners. That's not small potatoes, especially since each and every one of those guns is probably being used to commit crimes.

The undisputed facts are as follows

1) most gun deaths in the USA are self inflicted suicides. Criminalizing Suicide is a waste of time since the perpetrator is not subject to prosecution for a successful suicide

2) the remaining deaths-excluding the ever decreasing number of accidental gun shot deaths and justifiable homicides-are mainly perpetrated by people who cannot legally possess a firearm at the time the shooting takes place. Thus attempts to "ban" or restrict the possession of firearms doesn't impact the vast majority of those who illegally kill others with firearms-those people are already banned from having guns

3) most murders take place in only a few counties in the country. many of those counties are in areas subject to anti gun laws and run by anti gun politicians.

calamity said:

Right. Never.

Click to expand...

Seriously. No. If he does in the future, I will take note and say something.

BretJ said:

Seriously. No. If he does in the future, I will take note and say something.

Click to expand...

I regularly note that MOST gun violence is committed by people who cannot and did not, legally own the firearm they used at the time of the crime. nothing more, nothing less.

TurtleDude said:

I regularly note that MOST gun violence is committed by people who cannot and did not, legally own the firearm they used at the time of the crime. nothing more, nothing less.

Click to expand...

Fair enough. I retract my earlier assertion and admit I must have misunderstood previous statements by you and others.

calamity said:

You just posted a snip showing that 84,000 guns were sold illegally by legal gun owners.

Click to expand...

So you are going to double down on stupid? I showed that 60% of guns tracked back to the point of sale came back to less than 1% of FFL dealers. You can try and cover the stupidity of your post, but you are failing badly.

calamity said:

That's not small potatoes, especially since each and every one of those guns is probably being used to commit crimes.

Click to expand...

I guess you missed the part about being tracked? LMAO! They are in government hands for the most part. LMAO!

Yea keep digging!

Black Dog said:

So you are going to double down on stupid? I showed that 60% of guns tracked back to the point of sale came back to less than 1% of FFL dealers. You can try and cover the stupidity of your post, but you are failing badly.



I guess you missed the part about being tracked? LMAO! They are in government hand. LMAO!

Yea keep digging!

Click to expand...

Too many distractions around me tonight. I clearly have not been following this conversation very well and screwed up on the Turtle comments further up (if that was in this thread?). Anyway. My bad. I apologize. You're right; I'm wrong. I give up.

TurtleDude said:

The undisputed facts are as follows

1) most gun deaths in the USA are self inflicted suicides. Criminalizing Suicide is a waste of time since the perpetrator is not subject to prosecution for a successful suicide

2) the remaining deaths-excluding the ever decreasing number of accidental gun shot deaths and justifiable homicides-are mainly perpetrated by people who cannot legally possess a firearm at the time the shooting takes place. Thus attempts to "ban" or restrict the possession of firearms doesn't impact the vast majority of those who illegally kill others with firearms-those people are already banned from having guns

3) most murders take place in only a few counties in the country. many of those counties are in areas subject to anti gun laws and run by anti gun politicians.

Click to expand...

facts say you have no valid point:

The worst 2 percent of counties contain 47 percent of the population and account for 51 percent of the murders.

Click to expand...

47% of the people commit 51% of the murders
a stunningly meaningless fact you would want to offer in defense of gun abuse

justabubba said:

facts say you have no valid point:

47% of the people commit 51% of the murders
a stunningly meaningless fact you would want to offer in defense of gun abuse

Click to expand...

what is stupid is pretending -as you do-the way to control CRIME is to pass laws that target the people who own MOST of the guns but commit very little of the crime

=calamity;1067368849]Could have happened at any time. It's probably good that I was no longer binge drinking heavily by then.

Click to expand...

So binge drinking is it? Of course you may not have any other things just pop up?You know like a really bad day or prescription drug or anything else.

I don't live out there anymore. I live in town now. There is no need to be armed and at the 24/7 ready when you have neighbors and cops on patrol who are always within a few blocks.

Click to expand...

If that's the case if you were my neighbor that give up your guns to rely on the police,you know the guys under no obligation to put themselves in harms way to protect you. Something happened well you'd be on your own.
It's their job to get there afterward to draw lines and scrape up the evidence. Not saying all police but enough.

Supreme Court Ruling: Police Have No Duty to Protect the General Public | Tribunist

http://6abc.com/traffic/new-surveil...f-gunmans-truck-in-road-rage-killing/2164008/

calamity said:

I don't care if it's 1%, 10% or 0.0001%. Fact remains it's legal gun purchases being flipped for profit in illegal sales.

The rest of your post was TLDNR mishmash of quoting my posts followed by some sort of rant, so I focused on the bold.

Click to expand...

Well, and there you have it. The action of selling a legal firearm illegally makes it ...wait for it...= an illegal firearm.

zsu2357 said:

So binge drinking is it? Of course you may not have any other things just pop up?You know like a really bad day or prescription drug or anything else.

Click to expand...

Nah...I'm probably only going to do something stupid when drunk. That's one of maybe 5 reasons I no longer like to drink. Poor decision making.

If that's the case if you were my neighbor that give up your guns to rely on the police,you know the guys under no obligation to put themselves in harms way to protect you. Something happened well you'd be on your own.
It's their job to get there afterward to draw lines and scrape up the evidence. Not saying all police but enough.

Supreme Court Ruling: Police Have No Duty to Protect the General Public | Tribunist

Click to expand...

You misunderstood my point. It's not that neighbors and cops would "save" me. It's that having neighbors and cops around deters people from just rolling up on a house and deciding it's an easy target to break into, tie up the men and rape the women.

Nobody gets killed in their home by home invaders in this town...but several have out in the rural part of the county. Hence, that's why I was armed to the gills in the country but see no reason for such precautions here in town.

Lovebug said:

Well, and there you have it. The action of selling a legal firearm illegally makes it ...wait for it...= an illegal firearm.

Click to expand...

Yes...at some point a gun used in a crime eventually did fall into the hands of a criminal. One reason I got lost in the discussion with BD above is because this is so obvious that the argument, of course, goes circular. A legal gun becomes illegal.

A person who wasn't a criminal becomes a criminal. Sometimes it's the shooter, sometimes it's the seller. But never is a crime committed where no one party to handling that gun, anywhere in the chain, broke a law. Obviously.

calamity said:

Yes...at some point a gun used in a crime eventually did fall into the hands of a criminal. One reason I got lost in the discussion with BD above is because this is so obvious that the argument, of course, goes circular. A legal gun becomes illegal.

A person who wasn't a criminal becomes a criminal. Sometimes it's the shooter, sometimes it's the seller. But never is a crime committed where no one party to handling that gun, anywhere in the chain, broke a law. Obviously.

Click to expand...

This is true, but you are still missing the point. The lion's share of weapons being used in the crimes start off illegal right from the start. If 60% or well over half of the guns used in the commision of a crime come from less than 1% of FFL dealers, the problem is not straw purchases, illegal private sales or even stolen weapons. It's weapons being sold directly from a licenced dealer illegally to someone who is most likely already a criminal or known gang member, domestic abuser etc. A very small portion of gun crime less than I think it was .03% are committed by CCW owners. Your average every day gun owner barring suicide and accidents (they happen to the best of us) are responsible for almost no gun crime at all statistically speaking.

Black Dog said:

This is true, but you are still missing the point. The lion's share of weapons being used in the crimes start off illegal right from the start. If 60% or well over half of the guns used in the commision of a crime come from less than 1% of FFL dealers, the problem is not straw purchases, illegal private sales or even stolen weapons. It's weapons being sold directly from a licenced dealer illegally to someone who is most likely already a criminal or known gang member, domestic abuser etc. A very small portion of gun crime less than I think it was .03% are committed by CCW owners. Your average every day gun owner barring suicide and accidents (they happen to the best of us) are responsible for almost no gun crime at all statistically speaking.

Click to expand...

I agree. That's why it's hard for me to put my finger on what exactly is happening here. Let me try this....

An FFL dealer is by definition "legal." He has no criminal record and appears to be, on the surface at least, a law abiding citizen. A very small percentage of them break the law; they sell guns illegally. Unless caught, those dealers remain legal licensees and are allowed to continue buying and selling guns, some of which or perhaps many of which they then sell illegally.

What's that mean? It means some legal dealers are actually illegal dealers. I think much the same happens with some shooters. Wasn't the guy in NO who shot that football player during a traffic dispute a legal CCW? How about the ex-cop in Tampa, who blew away that man in the movie theater? I'm sure he was carrying legally. It could well be that this moron in the red truck was CCW as well. We'll have to see.

Now, I concede that people legally authorized to carry are a small minority of our murderers and mass shooters...at least so far. But, if we add to the murderer count people who are legally allowed to own guns, I'm not sure they are much of a minority anymore. Like I said, the two yahoos who killed my friend were legally allowed to own those guns. They probably carried them illegally to the crime scene, and of course, they broke all sorts of laws when they got there. But, that's besides the point.

calamity said:

I agree. That's why it's hard for me to put my finger on what exactly is happening here. Let me try this....

An FFL dealer is by definition "legal." He has no criminal record and appears to be, on the surface at least, a law abiding citizen. A very small percentage of them break the law; they sell guns illegally. Unless caught, those dealers remain legal licensees and are allowed to continue buying and selling guns, some of which or perhaps many of which they then sell illegally.

Click to expand...

Less than 1%. This is not rocket science. 99.9% of FFL holders are legal and sell legally. There are already laws against the illegal sale of guns. So you want to punish the majority for legally practicing a right due to the 1% who break the law? I mean that is what you are getting at.

calamity said:

What's that mean? It means some legal dealers are actually illegal dealers. I think much the same happens with some shooters. Wasn't the guy in NO who shot that football player during a traffic dispute a legal CCW? How about the ex-cop in Tampa, who blew away that man in the movie theater? I'm sure he was carrying legally. It could well be that this moron in the red truck was CCW as well. We'll have to see.

Click to expand...

Again why are you concentrating on a miniscule statistic? Let's say we could magically stop all legal gun owner from ever committing a crime again, what affect on crime would that have? It would not stop suicide, that's legal. It would not stop accidents, that's why we call them accidents. It would not stop criminals as they are already ignoring the law. So we would stop maybe 1% of the crime? This is what it appears you are trying to argue for. Lets ban all guns for 20% of the crime rather than address the real problems.

calamity said:

Now, I concede that people legally authorized to carry are a small minority of our murderers and mass shooters...at least so far.

Click to expand...

What a load of bull****. This statistic has been pretty constant for many years. A law abiding citizen is just that. So you can take that political agenda nonsense and stow it.

calamity said:

But, if we add to the murderer count people who are legally allowed to own guns, I'm not sure they are much of a minority anymore.

Click to expand...

If we add to the murder count people who are legally allowed to own guns? I already posted the data. Do you ever bother to actually read what people post? Seriously?

n analysis of 762 crimes conducted by the college's Graduate School of Public Health shows that in nearly 80 percent of the crimes in which a gun was recovered by the Pittsburgh Bureau of Police Firearm Tracking Unit in 2008, the perpetrator was not the lawful owner of the gun. - Most gun crimes not committed by legal gun owner, Pittsburgh study says - UPI.com

In the study, led by epidemiologist Anthony Fabio of Pittsburgh’s Graduate School of Public Health, researchers partnered with the Pittsburgh Bureau of Police to trace the origins of all 893 firearms that police recovered from crime scenes in the year 2008. They found that in approximately 8 out of 10 cases, the perpetrator was not a lawful gun owner but rather in illegal possession of a weapon that belonged to someone else. - Study: the Vast Majority of Gun Crime Isn't Committed by Lawful Gun Owners | National Review

So what you said on top of making no sense at all, is totally false.

calamity said:

Like I said, the two yahoos who killed my friend were legally allowed to own those guns. They probably carried them illegally to the crime scene, and of course, they broke all sorts of laws when they got there. But, that's besides the point.

Click to expand...

I am sorry but you have been shown to be completely wrong on all counts. It looks like you are desperately trying to push an untrue narrative to fit your ban them agenda. And it is a ban them all agenda obviously, just look at your posts. You don't appear to want reasonable answers and are constantly trying to play a game with the stats. If you actually cared about stopping gun crime, you would be looking at the lion's share rather than a small minority. Instead you push an unrealistic agenda that boils down to ban them all.

Black Dog said:

Less than 1%. This is not rocket science. 99.9% of FFL holders are legal and sell legally. There are already laws against the illegal sale of guns. So you want to punish the majority for legally practicing a right due to the 1% who break the law? I mean that is what you are getting at.



Again why are you concentrating on a miniscule statistic? Let's say we could magically stop all legal gun owner from ever committing a crime again, what affect on crime would that have? It would not stop suicide, that's legal. It would not stop accidents, that's why we call them accidents. It would not stop criminals as they are already ignoring the law. So we would stop maybe 1% of the crime? This is what it appears you are trying to argue for. Lets ban all guns for 20% of the crime rather than address the real problems.



What a load of bull****. This statistic has been pretty constant for many years. A law abiding citizen is just that. So you can take that political agenda nonsense and stow it.



If we add to the murder count people who are legally allowed to own guns? I already posted the data. Do you ever bother to actually read what people post? Seriously?

n analysis of 762 crimes conducted by the college's Graduate School of Public Health shows that in nearly 80 percent of the crimes in which a gun was recovered by the Pittsburgh Bureau of Police Firearm Tracking Unit in 2008, the perpetrator was not the lawful owner of the gun. - Most gun crimes not committed by legal gun owner, Pittsburgh study says - UPI.com

In the study, led by epidemiologist Anthony Fabio of Pittsburgh’s Graduate School of Public Health, researchers partnered with the Pittsburgh Bureau of Police to trace the origins of all 893 firearms that police recovered from crime scenes in the year 2008. They found that in approximately 8 out of 10 cases, the perpetrator was not a lawful gun owner but rather in illegal possession of a weapon that belonged to someone else. - Study: the Vast Majority of Gun Crime Isn't Committed by Lawful Gun Owners | National Review

So what you said on top of making no sense at all, is totally false.



I am sorry but you have been shown to be completely wrong on all counts. It looks like you are desperately trying to push an untrue narrative to fit your ban them agenda. And it is a ban them all agenda obviously, just look at your posts. You don't appear to want reasonable answers and are constantly trying to play a game with the stats. If you actually cared about stopping gun crime, you would be looking at the lion's share rather than a small minority. Instead you push an unrealistic agenda that boils down to ban them all.

Click to expand...

Dylan Roof? Legally purchased gun (although via clerical error) used illegally. Adam Lanza? Legal gun used illegally (no, it was not his gun, but it certainly was one in his home to which he had legal access). Most (perhaps even all, I'd have to dig back into all of them to verify) of the people I personally know who were murdered were killed by people who were legally allowed to own guns and used legal guns illegally.

So, in my world, in the personal universe which I inhabit and care about, lots of murders are committed by legal gun owners using guns they legally obtained.

calamity said:

Dylan Roof? Legally purchased gun (although via clerical error) used illegally. Adam Lanza? Legal gun used illegally (no, it was not his gun, but it certainly was one in his home to which he had legal access). Most (perhaps even all, I'd have to dig back into all of them to verify) of the people I personally know who were murdered were killed by people who were legally allowed to own guns and used legal guns illegally.

So, in my world, in the personal universe which I inhabit and care about, lots of murders are committed by legal gun owners using guns they legally obtained.

Click to expand...

There you go again with the false, wait no you know better. Lets call it what it is... Absolute unsubstantiated dishonest lying bull****.

Have a nice day.

Black Dog said:

There you go again with the false, wait no you know better. Lets call it what it is... Absolute unsubstantiated dishonest lying bull****.

Have a nice day.

Click to expand...

No. What I see here is the usual attempt to dismiss murders committed by legal gun owners and those who obtained guns legally by pointing to those who did not and saying, "See! Most murders are committed by people who are criminals anyway."

That's not an argument, IMO. It's just hand-washing.

calamity said:

No. What I see here is the usual attempt to dismiss murders committed by legal gun owners and those who obtained guns legally by pointing to those who did not and saying, "See! Most murders are committed by people who are criminals anyway."

That's not an argument, IMO. It's just hand-washing.

Click to expand...

No what you see here is an opportunity to demonize and try to punish the majority of people you politically and ideologically disagree with, period. Your posts and my evidence as well as the ridiculousness of your straw man I bolded bare this out.

Since you obviously have forgotten what a straw man is...

The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position.

It is not only a valid argument backed up by tangible fact, it is the reality of the situation. You don't like being called on your bull**** agenda, and that is exactly what it is. This is why you never have any responce that actually addresses my point or the facts presented.

Again, have a great day.