- Joined
- Oct 12, 2005
- Messages
- 281,619
- Reaction score
- 100,389
- Location
- Ohio
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
Is it the massacre or is it political expediency or just plain pandering
Is it the massacre or is it political expediency or just plain pandering
I think it's combo of the massacre and pandering. I also believe that some of them honestly do believe it would decrease crime, I just disagree with them on that point.Is it the massacre or is it political expediency or just plain pandering
My vote was "Other" because there was no "All of the above".
I think it's combo of the massacre and pandering. I also believe that some of them honestly do believe it would decrease crime, I just disagree with them on that point.
The difference between "never letting a crisis go to waste," ie the age old accusation that people take advantage of difficult times or situations to push for something unrelated but under the guise of addressing the problem, and people honestly trying to address a problem is more often than not just the difference in one's opinion on whatever solution is being proposed.
If you don't like the idea of gun control, than its just the left, libs, and dems using this tragedy to push laws that have alternative motives.
If you do like the idea of gun control, than this tragedy is finally the wake up call the government and people needed to finally take some real action against a serious problem.
Personally I'll pass on the hyperbole and rhetoric and stick to the facts of the matter Turtle.
Is it the massacre or is it political expediency or just plain pandering
those facts being?
The facts are the facts.
How do criminals get their guns? How many people become criminals, who had never committed a crime in the past, because they have a gun? How do our laws address the answers to these two questions? These questions have factual answers that can be determined through analysis. We can both agree that we want to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals, and we want to allow law abiding citizens to have those same firearms. We need thoughtful analysis to determine solutions and courses of action, not hyperbole and rhetoric.
If someone simply says there's nothing we can do, any law will only harm the security of individual citizens that's simply rhetoric. Likewise, if someone says we need to ban all assault rifles, or rifles of similar type as the kind used during the recent school shooting that doesn't really address the real problem of gun crime as most gun crimes or crimes committed with guns are done with pistols. That's also probably just rhetoric.
frontline: hot guns: "How Criminals Get Guns" | PBS
This PBS report using data from the ATF for example shows that the majority of pistols used by criminals or on the illegal market are actually sold by perfectly legitimate gun dealers, who sell their product illegally. That seems like a good starting point because if we shut down or deal with those rogue licensed gun dealers, than we can hamper the amount of guns sold through illegal sales to individuals who couldn't acquire one legally. It wouldn't affect the every day citizen who, if his local gun store is shut down for being one of these rogue dealers, he can simply go to another gun store that plays by the rules and acquire the same weapons.
This is what I mean by facts, looking at the statistics and the information available and figuring out ways to solve the problem or mitigate it at least.
THE ATF HAS PLENTY OF LAWS to shut down rogue dealers. for example, if you buy two handguns from the same dealer in 5 business days or less the dealer is required to submit a form to the ATF. How many cases do you think the ATF actually does that. Someone comes into a store and buys 15 cheap 25 autos (this is a case I know about) did the ATF investigate the guy? NOPE-not until the guns showed up in big city several hundred miles away.
tell us why if I pass a background check (I do several times a year because I buy guns often) why should I be denied the right to own a Colt AR 15 with a 30 round magazine?
I didn't say you should be denied the right, there you got with the hyperbole again. I also didn't say we needed more laws, again hyperbole and rhetoric. I said these rogue dealers seemed like a good starting point, perhaps the way to go is to analysis and examine how the laws are enforced, if they truly have plenty, and see if there's other way to enforce them better, maybe its a simple matter of resources. Perhaps they should be investigating the guy who bought 15 guns in a single day, its worth looking into.
Stop letting your emotions get the better of you.
Is it the massacre or is it political expediency or just plain pandering
Is it the massacre or is it political expediency or just plain pandering
What specifically have they pushed for?
My post was to those in general who whine that we need to restrict the rights of gun owners. I should have made that more clear
and yes, there are plenty of laws to put away rogue dealers. I used to be general counsel for a huge NRA affiliated organization. I don't know any member of that group that had any use for dealers who sold stuff to people they knew or had reason to believe were prohibited or straw purchasers
Is it the massacre or is it political expediency or just plain pandering
Is it the massacre or is it political expediency or just plain pandering