Author Topic: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days  (Read 87511 times)

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11389
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #750 on: March 21, 2018, 07:37:23 AM »
If the media reported every mass shooting event in the US as a major event, no other news would be reported.

That's an asinine thing to say.  Forum rules be dammed.

346 mass shootings occurred in the US in 2017 (http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting?year=2017).  The school shooting that occurred yesterday didn't even qualify as a mass shooting as only one person (the shooter) was killed, and two people were injured (needs to have injured/killed at least 4 to be a mass shooting).  You claimed media bias because the shooting wasn't getting front page coverage.  If every shooting that small got front page coverage, you would see a shooting event as the main story literally every day.

No conspiracy, the story was too common place to take top billing - unless you're trying to argue that someone with a gun stopping a shooter is such a rare event that it made the story news worthy.  Was that your argument?

zolotiyeruki

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2671
  • Location: State: Denial
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #751 on: March 21, 2018, 08:02:43 AM »
You are correct, I'm not suggesting that d and r's vote equally on gun control.  I'm criticizing all parties involved.  The fix NICS bill is a perfect example.  The R's are afraid to vote for it.  The D's are thinking about opposing it because they want more.  Dysfunction at its best.

We have a background check system.  Apparently the info kind of sucks sometimes.  Solution, improve the info.  Seems like a fairly simple improvement that should be fairly non-controversial.
Actually, I think the R's are the ones who came up with the fix NICS bill, and the NRA is in favor of it.  But you're right--the D's are worried that if Fix NICS passes, it'll sap any political willpower for further-reaching legislation.

346 mass shootings occurred in the US in 2017 (http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting?year=2017).  The school shooting that occurred yesterday didn't even qualify as a mass shooting as only one person (the shooter) was killed, and two people were injured (needs to have injured/killed at least 4 to be a mass shooting).  You claimed media bias because the shooting wasn't getting front page coverage.  If every shooting that small got front page coverage, you would see a shooting event as the main story literally every day.

No conspiracy, the story was too common place to take top billing - unless you're trying to argue that someone with a gun stopping a shooter is such a rare event that it made the story news worthy.  Was that your argument?
There's an element of survivorship bias here, as well.  Potential mass shootings that get stopped by a GGWAG (Good Guy With A Gun) don't develop into mass shootings, and therefore don't catch the headlines.

Conspiracy? Nah, it's just plain bias.  Swap Trump for Obama, and can you imagine any of those stories showing up at the top on CNN?

Midwest

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1284
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #752 on: March 21, 2018, 08:10:07 AM »
You are correct, I'm not suggesting that d and r's vote equally on gun control.  I'm criticizing all parties involved.  The fix NICS bill is a perfect example.  The R's are afraid to vote for it.  The D's are thinking about opposing it because they want more.  Dysfunction at its best.

We have a background check system.  Apparently the info kind of sucks sometimes.  Solution, improve the info.  Seems like a fairly simple improvement that should be fairly non-controversial.
Actually, I think the R's are the ones who came up with the fix NICS bill, and the NRA is in favor of it.  But you're right--the D's are worried that if Fix NICS passes, it'll sap any political willpower for further-reaching legislation.

That's a bipartisan bill.  https://www.cbsnews.com/news/after-florida-shooting-whats-the-status-of-the-fix-nics-bill/

Apparently you are correct that the NRA supports this particular bill.

My point on the dysfunction stands.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11389
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #753 on: March 21, 2018, 08:23:23 AM »
346 mass shootings occurred in the US in 2017 (http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting?year=2017).  The school shooting that occurred yesterday didn't even qualify as a mass shooting as only one person (the shooter) was killed, and two people were injured (needs to have injured/killed at least 4 to be a mass shooting).  You claimed media bias because the shooting wasn't getting front page coverage.  If every shooting that small got front page coverage, you would see a shooting event as the main story literally every day.

No conspiracy, the story was too common place to take top billing - unless you're trying to argue that someone with a gun stopping a shooter is such a rare event that it made the story news worthy.  Was that your argument?
There's an element of survivorship bias here, as well.  Potential mass shootings that get stopped by a GGWAG (Good Guy With A Gun) don't develop into mass shootings, and therefore don't catch the headlines.

Conspiracy? Nah, it's just plain bias.  Swap Trump for Obama, and can you imagine any of those stories showing up at the top on CNN?

It was a CNN headline.  The school shooting (and a full report of what happened) was up on CNN's main page yesterday (it was the fourth story reported when I checked).  Bender's complaint was that it should have been the highest ranked story for some reason.

To be a headline, there should be something newsworthy about a story.  Mass shootings are a near daily occurrence in the US, and this didn't even have enough people dead to be a mass shooting.  If you believe that a 'Good Guy With A Gun' stopping a criminal is a normal or common occurrence, then there's nothing newsworthy about the story at all.

You're claiming there's bias.  OK.  Why do you believe that the story was newsworthy?

Jrr85

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1103
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #754 on: March 21, 2018, 08:44:23 AM »
Good argument there.  I do think the state laws are effective, but federal would be much more so, closing the cracks for people willing to break the law to obtain illegal weapons.  Universal background checks seems like a good place to start.  What is the reason to oppose rhat?

You realize federal law already requires background checks for any interstate sale and all sales by dealers?  Only intrastate sales by a non-dealer are not covered by federal law, and although the Supreme Ct has just about turned the commerce clause into a general police power, there are still plenty of lawmakers who still think the federal government doesn't have general police powers? 

Heywood57

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 87
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #755 on: March 21, 2018, 11:21:56 AM »
Gun control in England seems to be working well

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/20/world/europe/england-wales-crime-rate.html

"When it comes to crimes committed with guns, up by 23 percent,
"and knife crime, which spiked by 20 percent to its highest level in seven years,
"experts say the increases go well beyond recording practices.

A Definite Beta Guy

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 609
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #756 on: March 21, 2018, 02:17:38 PM »
What are the actual rates, though? And what's the base?

Might be in the article, but you should pull that out if you're going to lecture the anti-gun crowd...

Even if gun control is effective at removing, say, 90% of gun crime, there will still be spikes and troughs in gun crime.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11389
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #757 on: March 21, 2018, 02:21:48 PM »
What are the actual rates, though? And what's the base?

Might be in the article, but you should pull that out if you're going to lecture the anti-gun crowd...

Even if gun control is effective at removing, say, 90% of gun crime, there will still be spikes and troughs in gun crime.

Considering that there's been gun control of some form or other in England since the 16th century, discussing crime changes in the last 10 years seems like it's not really relevant.

lost_in_the_endless_aisle

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 793
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #758 on: March 21, 2018, 06:41:06 PM »
Regarding bender's post about media bias, I will say that Trump has ruined CNN completely. It used to be moderately watchable and gloriously bland, falling somewhere vaguely in between Fox News and MSNBC in terms of editorial slant. Their foreign reporting was a strong core competency dating back from the first gulf war. Now, it's just an unwatchable 24/7 anti-Trump channel (a practice which probably also helped get Trump elected). Of course, it's just a cynical ratings-grab and I am not anywhere near the median target-audience for such predictable content. And I say all of this being firmly anti-Trump.

Just Joe

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1998
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #759 on: March 21, 2018, 06:42:04 PM »

TrudgingAlong

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 170
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #760 on: March 21, 2018, 06:43:51 PM »
I get the feeling the NRA crowd (I use this mostly to deistic guise between gun owners who want no laws and those who are open to changing gun laws) believes those of us who advocate for gun control believe it will stop ALL crime and gun-related incidents. This is not the case, any more than anyone believes seat belt and DUI laws will magically halt all auto deaths. It's all about bringing down the rate, as right now, we appear to have an escalating problem. There is no perfect world where no one commits a crime. Doesn't mean we should throw up our hands and admit defeat.

ncornilsen

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 811
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #761 on: March 22, 2018, 08:00:41 AM »
I get the feeling the NRA crowd (I use this mostly to deistic guise between gun owners who want no laws and those who are open to changing gun laws) believes those of us who advocate for gun control believe it will stop ALL crime and gun-related incidents. This is not the case, any more than anyone believes seat belt and DUI laws will magically halt all auto deaths. It's all about bringing down the rate, as right now, we appear to have an escalating problem. There is no perfect world where no one commits a crime. Doesn't mean we should throw up our hands and admit defeat.

Good news! Gun violence, even including suicides, the gun violence rate in the US has fallen massively since 1993, and has been flat since 2000!  If you remove suicides, it has fallen. That's the issue I have - even with fallingviolence levels, there's a perception that it's going up, and we're talking about banning entire classes of weapons, stripping weapon rights with no due process, etc.

I'm open to universal BG checks, taking weapons away from domestic abusers if there's a good appeals process... and a couple other things. But I don't believe they will make a significant difference, and we'll have this conversation again, only now the measures proposed will be even stricter.  Prediction: Some of these laws will pass, media will change the way they report data to make it look good, then slip into the shoddy methods they use now to drum up fear, and within 15 years we'll be talking about more gun control even though violence levels will be the same or better than they are now.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/10/21/gun-homicides-steady-after-decline-in-90s-suicide-rate-edges-up/

Chris22

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3131
  • Location: Chicago NW Suburbs
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #762 on: March 22, 2018, 10:16:15 AM »
I get the feeling the NRA crowd (I use this mostly to deistic guise between gun owners who want no laws and those who are open to changing gun laws) believes those of us who advocate for gun control believe it will stop ALL crime and gun-related incidents. This is not the case, any more than anyone believes seat belt and DUI laws will magically halt all auto deaths. It's all about bringing down the rate, as right now, we appear to have an escalating problem. There is no perfect world where no one commits a crime. Doesn't mean we should throw up our hands and admit defeat.

Actions speak louder than words. Most of the actions I see proposed like bans on certain weapons classes and magazine size limits arenít going to bring down the rate.  Thatís what frustrates us NRA types, what people propose tend to be overly burdensome and ultimately ineffective. Want to cut the rate?  Crack down on the flow of cheap illegal handguns in major urban areas. Constructing more barriers for licensing, imposing limits on what law abiding gun owners can buy, etc, doesnít drive down the rate.

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3105
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #763 on: March 22, 2018, 10:20:22 AM »
I get the feeling the NRA crowd (I use this mostly to deistic guise between gun owners who want no laws and those who are open to changing gun laws) believes those of us who advocate for gun control believe it will stop ALL crime and gun-related incidents. This is not the case, any more than anyone believes seat belt and DUI laws will magically halt all auto deaths. It's all about bringing down the rate, as right now, we appear to have an escalating problem. There is no perfect world where no one commits a crime. Doesn't mean we should throw up our hands and admit defeat.

Actions speak louder than words. Most of the actions I see proposed like bans on certain weapons classes and magazine size limits arenít going to bring down the rate.  Thatís what frustrates us NRA types, what people propose tend to be overly burdensome and ultimately ineffective. Want to cut the rate?  Crack down on the flow of cheap illegal handguns in major urban areas. Constructing more barriers for licensing, imposing limits on what law abiding gun owners can buy, etc, doesnít drive down the rate.

Most of the gun control legislation proposed comes from the left. If you want the actions that you propose, maybe the right needs to get together and propose them? What's stopping them, do you think?

Chris22

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3131
  • Location: Chicago NW Suburbs
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #764 on: March 22, 2018, 10:31:45 AM »
I get the feeling the NRA crowd (I use this mostly to deistic guise between gun owners who want no laws and those who are open to changing gun laws) believes those of us who advocate for gun control believe it will stop ALL crime and gun-related incidents. This is not the case, any more than anyone believes seat belt and DUI laws will magically halt all auto deaths. It's all about bringing down the rate, as right now, we appear to have an escalating problem. There is no perfect world where no one commits a crime. Doesn't mean we should throw up our hands and admit defeat.

Actions speak louder than words. Most of the actions I see proposed like bans on certain weapons classes and magazine size limits arenít going to bring down the rate.  Thatís what frustrates us NRA types, what people propose tend to be overly burdensome and ultimately ineffective. Want to cut the rate?  Crack down on the flow of cheap illegal handguns in major urban areas. Constructing more barriers for licensing, imposing limits on what law abiding gun owners can buy, etc, doesnít drive down the rate.

Most of the gun control legislation proposed comes from the left. If you want the actions that you propose, maybe the right needs to get together and propose them? What's stopping them, do you think?

I think that is because the right believes the answer isnít ďgun controlĒ as the left understands it. For instance, locally the NRA has been very critical of Chicagoís softness and leiniency on punishing straw buyers. Tougher sentencing isnít ďgun controlĒ but itís part of the solution on fixing the gun violence problem.

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20170421/chicago-mayor-emanuel-demands-tougher-laws-for-gun-dealers-as-straw-purchaser-gets-probation?sf72797439=1

Midwest

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1284
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #765 on: March 22, 2018, 10:31:59 AM »
I get the feeling the NRA crowd (I use this mostly to deistic guise between gun owners who want no laws and those who are open to changing gun laws) believes those of us who advocate for gun control believe it will stop ALL crime and gun-related incidents. This is not the case, any more than anyone believes seat belt and DUI laws will magically halt all auto deaths. It's all about bringing down the rate, as right now, we appear to have an escalating problem. There is no perfect world where no one commits a crime. Doesn't mean we should throw up our hands and admit defeat.

Actions speak louder than words. Most of the actions I see proposed like bans on certain weapons classes and magazine size limits arenít going to bring down the rate.  Thatís what frustrates us NRA types, what people propose tend to be overly burdensome and ultimately ineffective. Want to cut the rate?  Crack down on the flow of cheap illegal handguns in major urban areas. Constructing more barriers for licensing, imposing limits on what law abiding gun owners can buy, etc, doesnít drive down the rate.

Most of the gun control legislation proposed comes from the left. If you want the actions that you propose, maybe the right needs to get together and propose them? What's stopping them, do you think?

Maybe some on the right realize that we already have lots of gun control laws on the books and need to enforce/improve what we have.  Much of what the gun control advocates will be ineffective at best.

Case in point - We had a local citizen get killed by the police recently for pointing a pistol at the cops.  His family is suing for wrongful death.  In the last 5 years leading up to his death, he was convicted of armed robbery and then convicted of having a weapon as a felon two more times. 

I've heard no clamor from the press about why he was walking around free.  No outrage or investigation as to how he got the guns (straw buyer?).  No outrage that this family is suing.   Meanwhile the same paper is promoting the myth that my daughters school participated in the gun control walkout.

I'm one hell of a lot more concerned about a violent felon with a gun than my law abiding neighbor with an Ar-15.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2018, 10:39:12 AM by Midwest »

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11389
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #766 on: March 22, 2018, 10:39:44 AM »
I get the feeling the NRA crowd (I use this mostly to deistic guise between gun owners who want no laws and those who are open to changing gun laws) believes those of us who advocate for gun control believe it will stop ALL crime and gun-related incidents. This is not the case, any more than anyone believes seat belt and DUI laws will magically halt all auto deaths. It's all about bringing down the rate, as right now, we appear to have an escalating problem. There is no perfect world where no one commits a crime. Doesn't mean we should throw up our hands and admit defeat.

Actions speak louder than words. Most of the actions I see proposed like bans on certain weapons classes and magazine size limits arenít going to bring down the rate.  Thatís what frustrates us NRA types, what people propose tend to be overly burdensome and ultimately ineffective. Want to cut the rate?  Crack down on the flow of cheap illegal handguns in major urban areas. Constructing more barriers for licensing, imposing limits on what law abiding gun owners can buy, etc, doesnít drive down the rate.

Most of the gun control legislation proposed comes from the left. If you want the actions that you propose, maybe the right needs to get together and propose them? What's stopping them, do you think?

I think that is because the right believes the answer isnít ďgun controlĒ as the left understands it. For instance, locally the NRA has been very critical of Chicagoís softness and leiniency on punishing straw buyers. Tougher sentencing isnít ďgun controlĒ but itís part of the solution on fixing the gun violence problem.

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20170421/chicago-mayor-emanuel-demands-tougher-laws-for-gun-dealers-as-straw-purchaser-gets-probation?sf72797439=1

This is pure hypocrisy.  The NRA is arguing for something that they've made impossible.

It's extremely difficult to catch someone violating the private sale laws since the government has no knowledge of who owns what guns once they're privately owned.  The best you can do is a few sting operations to randomly catch a few private sales.  The NRA of course, will vehemently argue against any sort of registry that would allow for easy enforcement of the laws they claim to care about.

Midwest

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1284
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #767 on: March 22, 2018, 10:51:28 AM »
I get the feeling the NRA crowd (I use this mostly to deistic guise between gun owners who want no laws and those who are open to changing gun laws) believes those of us who advocate for gun control believe it will stop ALL crime and gun-related incidents. This is not the case, any more than anyone believes seat belt and DUI laws will magically halt all auto deaths. It's all about bringing down the rate, as right now, we appear to have an escalating problem. There is no perfect world where no one commits a crime. Doesn't mean we should throw up our hands and admit defeat.

Actions speak louder than words. Most of the actions I see proposed like bans on certain weapons classes and magazine size limits arenít going to bring down the rate.  Thatís what frustrates us NRA types, what people propose tend to be overly burdensome and ultimately ineffective. Want to cut the rate?  Crack down on the flow of cheap illegal handguns in major urban areas. Constructing more barriers for licensing, imposing limits on what law abiding gun owners can buy, etc, doesnít drive down the rate.

Most of the gun control legislation proposed comes from the left. If you want the actions that you propose, maybe the right needs to get together and propose them? What's stopping them, do you think?

I think that is because the right believes the answer isnít ďgun controlĒ as the left understands it. For instance, locally the NRA has been very critical of Chicagoís softness and leiniency on punishing straw buyers. Tougher sentencing isnít ďgun controlĒ but itís part of the solution on fixing the gun violence problem.

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20170421/chicago-mayor-emanuel-demands-tougher-laws-for-gun-dealers-as-straw-purchaser-gets-probation?sf72797439=1

This is pure hypocrisy.  The NRA is arguing for something that they've made impossible.

It's extremely difficult to catch someone violating the private sale laws since the government has no knowledge of who owns what guns once they're privately owned.  The best you can do is a few sting operations to randomly catch a few private sales.  The NRA of course, will vehemently argue against any sort of registry that would allow for easy enforcement of the laws they claim to care about.

Steve:

What happens in Canada if you get caught carrying a pistol around?  What happens in Canada if you are carrying a felon carrying a pistol around?

In the US, the punishment is sometimes a slap on the wrist for these people.  That's who's committing the majority of crimes so why not focus on them and punish them rather than the average citizen. 

You don't need a gun registry to punish a felon caught with a gun.

Chris22

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3131
  • Location: Chicago NW Suburbs
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #768 on: March 22, 2018, 10:53:42 AM »
I get the feeling the NRA crowd (I use this mostly to deistic guise between gun owners who want no laws and those who are open to changing gun laws) believes those of us who advocate for gun control believe it will stop ALL crime and gun-related incidents. This is not the case, any more than anyone believes seat belt and DUI laws will magically halt all auto deaths. It's all about bringing down the rate, as right now, we appear to have an escalating problem. There is no perfect world where no one commits a crime. Doesn't mean we should throw up our hands and admit defeat.

Actions speak louder than words. Most of the actions I see proposed like bans on certain weapons classes and magazine size limits arenít going to bring down the rate.  Thatís what frustrates us NRA types, what people propose tend to be overly burdensome and ultimately ineffective. Want to cut the rate?  Crack down on the flow of cheap illegal handguns in major urban areas. Constructing more barriers for licensing, imposing limits on what law abiding gun owners can buy, etc, doesnít drive down the rate.

Most of the gun control legislation proposed comes from the left. If you want the actions that you propose, maybe the right needs to get together and propose them? What's stopping them, do you think?

I think that is because the right believes the answer isnít ďgun controlĒ as the left understands it. For instance, locally the NRA has been very critical of Chicagoís softness and leiniency on punishing straw buyers. Tougher sentencing isnít ďgun controlĒ but itís part of the solution on fixing the gun violence problem.

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20170421/chicago-mayor-emanuel-demands-tougher-laws-for-gun-dealers-as-straw-purchaser-gets-probation?sf72797439=1

This is pure hypocrisy.  The NRA is arguing for something that they've made impossible.

It's extremely difficult to catch someone violating the private sale laws since the government has no knowledge of who owns what guns once they're privately owned.  The best you can do is a few sting operations to randomly catch a few private sales.  The NRA of course, will vehemently argue against any sort of registry that would allow for easy enforcement of the laws they claim to care about.

Itís a fundamental philosophical difference. You want a law that prevents people from doing things, that makes it impossible to do something illegal. I, and the NRA, want a law that maximizes freedom for people who are going to abide by it but harshly punished those who break it. You want a limited on a car that prevents it from going over 80mph, I want the freedom to do it (maybe Iím going on a track?) but fines for people who are caught misusing it. The problem with your approach is that it removes freedom from people who obey the law. My approach is less effective but more free, which is basically the fundamental principle America was founded on.

ncornilsen

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 811
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #769 on: March 22, 2018, 12:12:45 PM »
Quote
...the government has no knowledge of who owns what guns once they're privately owned.
 

I'm OK with that.


Itís a fundamental philosophical difference. You want a law that prevents people from doing things, that makes it impossible to do something illegal. I, and the NRA, want a law that maximizes freedom for people who are going to abide by it but harshly punished those who break it. You want a limited on a car that prevents it from going over 80mph, I want the freedom to do it (maybe Iím going on a track?) but fines for people who are caught misusing it. The problem with your approach is that it removes freedom from people who obey the law. My approach is less effective but more free, which is basically the fundamental principle America was founded on.

I don't know that lacking a registry is less effective anyway. Areas that require universal BG checks for all buyers, without a registry, have seen positive effects regardless... Registries have been used very often to fuck over legal gun owners, in extreme cases even made disarmament feasible. With little to to recommend them and a history of abuse, I say no thanks to registries.



GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11389
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #770 on: March 22, 2018, 12:13:52 PM »
I get the feeling the NRA crowd (I use this mostly to deistic guise between gun owners who want no laws and those who are open to changing gun laws) believes those of us who advocate for gun control believe it will stop ALL crime and gun-related incidents. This is not the case, any more than anyone believes seat belt and DUI laws will magically halt all auto deaths. It's all about bringing down the rate, as right now, we appear to have an escalating problem. There is no perfect world where no one commits a crime. Doesn't mean we should throw up our hands and admit defeat.

Actions speak louder than words. Most of the actions I see proposed like bans on certain weapons classes and magazine size limits arenít going to bring down the rate.  Thatís what frustrates us NRA types, what people propose tend to be overly burdensome and ultimately ineffective. Want to cut the rate?  Crack down on the flow of cheap illegal handguns in major urban areas. Constructing more barriers for licensing, imposing limits on what law abiding gun owners can buy, etc, doesnít drive down the rate.

Most of the gun control legislation proposed comes from the left. If you want the actions that you propose, maybe the right needs to get together and propose them? What's stopping them, do you think?

I think that is because the right believes the answer isnít ďgun controlĒ as the left understands it. For instance, locally the NRA has been very critical of Chicagoís softness and leiniency on punishing straw buyers. Tougher sentencing isnít ďgun controlĒ but itís part of the solution on fixing the gun violence problem.

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20170421/chicago-mayor-emanuel-demands-tougher-laws-for-gun-dealers-as-straw-purchaser-gets-probation?sf72797439=1

This is pure hypocrisy.  The NRA is arguing for something that they've made impossible.

It's extremely difficult to catch someone violating the private sale laws since the government has no knowledge of who owns what guns once they're privately owned.  The best you can do is a few sting operations to randomly catch a few private sales.  The NRA of course, will vehemently argue against any sort of registry that would allow for easy enforcement of the laws they claim to care about.

Steve:

What happens in Canada if you get caught carrying a pistol around?  What happens in Canada if you are carrying a felon carrying a pistol around?

In the US, the punishment is sometimes a slap on the wrist for these people.  That's who's committing the majority of crimes so why not focus on them and punish them rather than the average citizen. 

You don't need a gun registry to punish a felon caught with a gun.

It's perfectly legitimate to want better sentencing regarding firearms offenses.  That wasn't what the article that Chris posted was about.

The NRA is specifically said:
"No matter how onerous a transfer law might be, criminals will still acquire firearms using straw purchasers, as illustrated in the present case. A better emphasis would be to focus on aggressively prosecuting those who buy firearms for dangerous criminals."

The best way to 'aggressively prosecute those who buy firearms for dangerous criminals." is to have a searchable database of who owns what gun so that patterns can be immediately seen and people doing the wrong thing can be prosecuted.  Something that the NRA is completely against.



Itís a fundamental philosophical difference. You want a law that prevents people from doing things, that makes it impossible to do something illegal. I, and the NRA, want a law that maximizes freedom for people who are going to abide by it but harshly punished those who break it. You want a limited on a car that prevents it from going over 80mph, I want the freedom to do it (maybe Iím going on a track?) but fines for people who are caught misusing it. The problem with your approach is that it removes freedom from people who obey the law. My approach is less effective but more free, which is basically the fundamental principle America was founded on.

Not really.

I want a law that prevents criminals from doing illegal things.  Currently you're operating on the honor system, and it isn't going so well.  It seems that some criminals are willing to break the law if there's nothing to stop them.  Go figure.

If there's a gun registry, you can't transfer a gun to a felon.  This has zero impact on the freedoms of a law abiding citizen.

Chris22

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3131
  • Location: Chicago NW Suburbs
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #771 on: March 22, 2018, 12:31:46 PM »
It isnít going well because everyone knows the punishment is minimal. Same reason I speed in my car. Thereís a small chance I get an inexpensive ticket. If there was a greater chance of getting a ticket, or a small chance of a $1k ticket instead of $75, I wouldnít speed.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11389
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #772 on: March 22, 2018, 01:13:08 PM »
It isnít going well because everyone knows the punishment is minimal. Same reason I speed in my car. Thereís a small chance I get an inexpensive ticket. If there was a greater chance of getting a ticket, or a small chance of a $1k ticket instead of $75, I wouldnít speed.

The NRA in the link you posted specifically said the opposite:
"No matter how onerous a transfer law might be, criminals will still acquire firearms using straw purchasers, as illustrated in the present case. A better emphasis would be to focus on aggressively prosecuting those who buy firearms for dangerous criminals."

Jrr85

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1103
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #773 on: March 22, 2018, 01:35:13 PM »

It's perfectly legitimate to want better sentencing regarding firearms offenses.  That wasn't what the article that Chris posted was about.

The NRA is specifically said:
"No matter how onerous a transfer law might be, criminals will still acquire firearms using straw purchasers, as illustrated in the present case. A better emphasis would be to focus on aggressively prosecuting those who buy firearms for dangerous criminals."

The best way to 'aggressively prosecute those who buy firearms for dangerous criminals." is to have a searchable database of who owns what gun so that patterns can be immediately seen and people doing the wrong thing can be prosecuted.  Something that the NRA is completely against.



Itís a fundamental philosophical difference. You want a law that prevents people from doing things, that makes it impossible to do something illegal. I, and the NRA, want a law that maximizes freedom for people who are going to abide by it but harshly punished those who break it. You want a limited on a car that prevents it from going over 80mph, I want the freedom to do it (maybe Iím going on a track?) but fines for people who are caught misusing it. The problem with your approach is that it removes freedom from people who obey the law. My approach is less effective but more free, which is basically the fundamental principle America was founded on.

Not really.

I want a law that prevents criminals from doing illegal things.  Currently you're operating on the honor system, and it isn't going so well.  It seems that some criminals are willing to break the law if there's nothing to stop them.  Go figure.

If there's a gun registry, you can't transfer a gun to a felon.  This has zero impact on the freedoms of a law abiding citizen.

No, the best way to aggressively prosecute straw purchasers is to aggressively prosecute straw purchasers.  Straw purchasers aren't prosecuted out of political convenience and/or laziness, not because the ownership of the gun can't be traced. 

Certainly if straw purchasers were already aggressively prosecuted and punished, a gun registry would make it easier to identify and prosecute more straw purchasers, but since politicians and elected prosecutors aren't willing to treat straw purchasing as the serious crime as it is, that's a pretty iron clad tip off that the gun registry, if it does anything, is just going to hassle law abiding gunowners. 

If the left would start treating straw purchasing as a serious crime, it would be pretty manageable to pass a law requiring that any sale of a gun within 12 or 24 months of purchase has to be through a federally licensed fire arm dealer.  Then you cut out the true straw purchasers with a pretty minimal impact to law abiding gun owners. 

Midwest

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1284
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #774 on: March 22, 2018, 01:46:43 PM »

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11389
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #775 on: March 22, 2018, 01:54:42 PM »
http://fox6now.com/2016/10/27/theres-no-disincentive-to-carry-a-gun-felons-with-guns-still-dodge-minimum-sentence-despite-new-law/

We might want to start by enforcing the laws against felons with guns.

How do you propose that this is accomplished?

From the article you linked:

Quote
From 2011 to 2015, police referred 3,637 gun possession cases to the Milwaukee County District Attorney's Office. The FOX6 Investigators found charges were never filed in 37% of them -- that's more than one in three.

"Because there just isn't sufficient evidence at that point and time," explained Chisholm.

Hundreds of other cases were charged, but then dismissed ó sometimes because a key witness backed out. That's what happened with Bobby Joe Johnson, whose girlfriend -- and mother of his child -- had reported him to police for threatening her with a gun. Police found a gun hidden in the oven and arrested him. But on the day of his trial, the witness failed to show up to testify -- a common problem in domestic violence cases.

"She doesn't show. She's not cooperative. That case gets dismissed," Chisholm said.

Midwest

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1284
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #776 on: March 22, 2018, 02:01:02 PM »
http://fox6now.com/2016/10/27/theres-no-disincentive-to-carry-a-gun-felons-with-guns-still-dodge-minimum-sentence-despite-new-law/

We might want to start by enforcing the laws against felons with guns.

How do you propose that this is accomplished?

From the article you linked:

Quote
From 2011 to 2015, police referred 3,637 gun possession cases to the Milwaukee County District Attorney's Office. The FOX6 Investigators found charges were never filed in 37% of them -- that's more than one in three.

"Because there just isn't sufficient evidence at that point and time," explained Chisholm.

Hundreds of other cases were charged, but then dismissed ó sometimes because a key witness backed out. That's what happened with Bobby Joe Johnson, whose girlfriend -- and mother of his child -- had reported him to police for threatening her with a gun. Police found a gun hidden in the oven and arrested him. But on the day of his trial, the witness failed to show up to testify -- a common problem in domestic violence cases.

"She doesn't show. She's not cooperative. That case gets dismissed," Chisholm said.

"Even when felons are convicted of having a gun in Milwaukee, they don't always go to jail  ó at least not for long.

The FOX6 Investigators found 20% serve less than one year in jail and 75% serve less than three.

"If we can't put the felons in possession of firearms in jail, why are we surprised that we're awash in guns?" Chief Flynn asked."

If they get convicted, quit screwing around with them.  You want to fix the gun problem, start there.  Violent felons are aware they shouldn't have guns and are much more likely to commit more violence with the firearm.  3 years.  Seriously.

If that's all we do to felons caught with guns, what sort of punishment do you suppose we would give to all the straw purchasers being caught with the registry you propose?
« Last Edit: March 22, 2018, 02:04:24 PM by Midwest »

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11389
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #777 on: March 22, 2018, 02:05:06 PM »

It's perfectly legitimate to want better sentencing regarding firearms offenses.  That wasn't what the article that Chris posted was about.

The NRA is specifically said:
"No matter how onerous a transfer law might be, criminals will still acquire firearms using straw purchasers, as illustrated in the present case. A better emphasis would be to focus on aggressively prosecuting those who buy firearms for dangerous criminals."

The best way to 'aggressively prosecute those who buy firearms for dangerous criminals." is to have a searchable database of who owns what gun so that patterns can be immediately seen and people doing the wrong thing can be prosecuted.  Something that the NRA is completely against.



Itís a fundamental philosophical difference. You want a law that prevents people from doing things, that makes it impossible to do something illegal. I, and the NRA, want a law that maximizes freedom for people who are going to abide by it but harshly punished those who break it. You want a limited on a car that prevents it from going over 80mph, I want the freedom to do it (maybe Iím going on a track?) but fines for people who are caught misusing it. The problem with your approach is that it removes freedom from people who obey the law. My approach is less effective but more free, which is basically the fundamental principle America was founded on.

Not really.

I want a law that prevents criminals from doing illegal things.  Currently you're operating on the honor system, and it isn't going so well.  It seems that some criminals are willing to break the law if there's nothing to stop them.  Go figure.

If there's a gun registry, you can't transfer a gun to a felon.  This has zero impact on the freedoms of a law abiding citizen.

No, the best way to aggressively prosecute straw purchasers is to aggressively prosecute straw purchasers.  Straw purchasers aren't prosecuted out of political convenience and/or laziness, not because the ownership of the gun can't be traced. 

Certainly if straw purchasers were already aggressively prosecuted and punished, a gun registry would make it easier to identify and prosecute more straw purchasers, but since politicians and elected prosecutors aren't willing to treat straw purchasing as the serious crime as it is, that's a pretty iron clad tip off that the gun registry, if it does anything, is just going to hassle law abiding gunowners. 

Your claim that prosecutors are simply lazy has evidence to back it up?  You further claim that straw purchasers aren't prosecuted because of 'political convenience'.  What does that mean?

Everything that I've read indicates that it's very difficult and time consuming to prove that a straw purchase has been made.  Time is not unlimited.  If the choice is spending 1000 hours to put a pedophile or murderer behind bars, and spending 1000 hours to catch a straw purchaser . . . it would make sense that the more extreme crime would draw the attention.  If you're going to prioritize a difficult and time consuming task, what current law enforcement work do you want to see cut to meet your demand?  Budget is not unlimited.




If the left would start treating straw purchasing as a serious crime, it would be pretty manageable to pass a law requiring that any sale of a gun within 12 or 24 months of purchase has to be through a federally licensed fire arm dealer.  Then you cut out the true straw purchasers with a pretty minimal impact to law abiding gun owners.

What are you talking about?  Who on 'the left' doesn't want straw purchasing to be treated as a serious crime?

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11389
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #778 on: March 22, 2018, 02:07:33 PM »
http://fox6now.com/2016/10/27/theres-no-disincentive-to-carry-a-gun-felons-with-guns-still-dodge-minimum-sentence-despite-new-law/

We might want to start by enforcing the laws against felons with guns.

How do you propose that this is accomplished?

From the article you linked:

Quote
From 2011 to 2015, police referred 3,637 gun possession cases to the Milwaukee County District Attorney's Office. The FOX6 Investigators found charges were never filed in 37% of them -- that's more than one in three.

"Because there just isn't sufficient evidence at that point and time," explained Chisholm.

Hundreds of other cases were charged, but then dismissed ó sometimes because a key witness backed out. That's what happened with Bobby Joe Johnson, whose girlfriend -- and mother of his child -- had reported him to police for threatening her with a gun. Police found a gun hidden in the oven and arrested him. But on the day of his trial, the witness failed to show up to testify -- a common problem in domestic violence cases.

"She doesn't show. She's not cooperative. That case gets dismissed," Chisholm said.

"Even when felons are convicted of having a gun in Milwaukee, they don't always go to jail  ó at least not for long.

The FOX6 Investigators found 20% serve less than one year in jail and 75% serve less than three.

"If we can't put the felons in possession of firearms in jail, why are we surprised that we're awash in guns?" Chief Flynn asked."

If they get convicted, quit screwing around with them.  You want to fix the gun problem, start there.  Violent felons are aware they shouldn't have guns and are much more likely to commit more violence with the firearm.  3 years.  Seriously.

If that's all we do to felons caught with guns, what sort of punishment do you suppose we would give to all the straw purchasers being caught with the registry you propose?

Can you provide the details of these cases you're referring to?  Why were these felons not given a more severe sentence?

Midwest

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1284
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #779 on: March 22, 2018, 02:21:06 PM »
http://fox6now.com/2016/10/27/theres-no-disincentive-to-carry-a-gun-felons-with-guns-still-dodge-minimum-sentence-despite-new-law/

We might want to start by enforcing the laws against felons with guns.

How do you propose that this is accomplished?

From the article you linked:

Quote
From 2011 to 2015, police referred 3,637 gun possession cases to the Milwaukee County District Attorney's Office. The FOX6 Investigators found charges were never filed in 37% of them -- that's more than one in three.

"Because there just isn't sufficient evidence at that point and time," explained Chisholm.

Hundreds of other cases were charged, but then dismissed ó sometimes because a key witness backed out. That's what happened with Bobby Joe Johnson, whose girlfriend -- and mother of his child -- had reported him to police for threatening her with a gun. Police found a gun hidden in the oven and arrested him. But on the day of his trial, the witness failed to show up to testify -- a common problem in domestic violence cases.

"She doesn't show. She's not cooperative. That case gets dismissed," Chisholm said.

"Even when felons are convicted of having a gun in Milwaukee, they don't always go to jail  ó at least not for long.

The FOX6 Investigators found 20% serve less than one year in jail and 75% serve less than three.

"If we can't put the felons in possession of firearms in jail, why are we surprised that we're awash in guns?" Chief Flynn asked."

If they get convicted, quit screwing around with them.  You want to fix the gun problem, start there.  Violent felons are aware they shouldn't have guns and are much more likely to commit more violence with the firearm.  3 years.  Seriously.

If that's all we do to felons caught with guns, what sort of punishment do you suppose we would give to all the straw purchasers being caught with the registry you propose?

Can you provide the details of these cases you're referring to?  Why were these felons not given a more severe sentence?



That's from the article.  Here's a website indicating the max in MD is 5 years for comparison purposes.  According to that site, that's the max in MD, a state with gun control laws that tend towards strict.

https://www.mdtriallawyer.com/possession-of-a-firearm-by-convicted-felon.html

To answer your initial question, as to why felons caught with guns aren't sentenced more harshly, I don't know.  It's quite illogical to go easy on a felon with a gun (especially a violent felon) if you want to reduce gun violence and violence in general.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11389
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #780 on: March 22, 2018, 02:24:43 PM »
FTR - I have no issues of any kind increasing the sentencing for a felon caught with a firearm.  I think going after them sounds like a good idea, and probably should be part of the overall approach to limiting gun violence in the US.

Jrr85

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1103
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #781 on: March 22, 2018, 02:37:06 PM »

Your claim that prosecutors are simply lazy has evidence to back it up?  You further claim that straw purchasers aren't prosecuted because of 'political convenience'.  What does that mean?

Everything that I've read indicates that it's very difficult and time consuming to prove that a straw purchase has been made.  Time is not unlimited.  If the choice is spending 1000 hours to put a pedophile or murderer behind bars, and spending 1000 hours to catch a straw purchaser . . . it would make sense that the more extreme crime would draw the attention.  If you're going to prioritize a difficult and time consuming task, what current law enforcement work do you want to see cut to meet your demand?  Budget is not unlimited.
  It can be hard.  But it's also often easy.  It's often a relative or girl friend of the person that commits violence with the gun.  They still aren't prosecuted generally and if they are, they generally get extremely light sentences. 

The straw purchaser can either claim the gun was stolen (in which case you add a felony charge to perpetrator depending on value), that the gun was given to them under duress (in which that's more likely to be a felony charge), or claim that they sold to somebody else who just happened to sell to their close relative or boyfriend, which is going to be a difficult claim to make credibly without identifying the middle man.  It's pretty much win-win.  Even in cases where you aren't successful with either putting a felony on the straw purchaser or an extra felony on the perpetrator, just seeing other straw purchasers going through the process is going to scare a lot of would-be straw purchasers off.




If the left would start treating straw purchasing as a serious crime, it would be pretty manageable to pass a law requiring that any sale of a gun within 12 or 24 months of purchase has to be through a federally licensed fire arm dealer.  Then you cut out the true straw purchasers with a pretty minimal impact to law abiding gun owners.

What are you talking about?  Who on 'the left' doesn't want straw purchasing to be treated as a serious crime?
[/quote]  Depends on teh place.  In Chicago, they've actually made straw purchasing a serious crime, but elected prosecutors typically don't want to throw the book at straw purchasers (who by nature have a pretty clean record) because it might hurt them come election time.  In other places, like Baltimore, legislators don't make it a serious crime to begin with.  I don't really understand why.  I at least get the incentives elected prosecutors face.  I don't think legislators would catch the same negative feedback for making it a serious felony.

Just Joe

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1998
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #782 on: March 23, 2018, 06:09:16 AM »
I remember way back when I was listening to conservative talk radio (trying to get my political bearings) G Gordon Liddy would admit on the air that his wife bought and owned all his guns. Nobody knocking down his door over this.

I'm not sure why the liberals need to take action on this alone. Looks like both sides of the aisle would benefit from a country that was less violent. I probably misunderstood the comment though.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11389
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #783 on: March 23, 2018, 07:25:07 AM »
I'm still trying to understand where the impression that liberals don't want straw purchasing to be treated as a serious crime comes from.  The people who have worked hard to ensure that it's difficult to prosecute straw purchasers are gun advocates who are most often found on the right end of the spectrum.

RetiredAt63

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8793
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #784 on: March 23, 2018, 07:42:20 AM »
From an earlier question:
Firearms and violent crime in Canada, 2012
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2014001/article/11925-eng.htm
The information is there if people look for it.

Chris22

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3131
  • Location: Chicago NW Suburbs
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #785 on: March 23, 2018, 08:04:44 AM »
I'm still trying to understand where the impression that liberals don't want straw purchasing to be treated as a serious crime comes from.  The people who have worked hard to ensure that it's difficult to prosecute straw purchasers are gun advocates who are most often found on the right end of the spectrum.

You keep saying that, but your wording is at best imprecise, at worst intentionally confusing. Gun advocates are all in favor of proscuting people who break gun laws. They are not in favor of removing the privacy or rights of lawful gun owners to make it easier to catch those breaking the law. Thereís a difference, whether or not you choose to acknowledge it.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11389
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #786 on: March 23, 2018, 08:19:36 AM »
I'm still trying to understand where the impression that liberals don't want straw purchasing to be treated as a serious crime comes from.  The people who have worked hard to ensure that it's difficult to prosecute straw purchasers are gun advocates who are most often found on the right end of the spectrum.

You keep saying that, but your wording is at best imprecise, at worst intentionally confusing. Gun advocates are all in favor of proscuting people who break gun laws.

Gun advocates have ensured that straw purchasers will not be prosecuted by increasing the difficulty to do so, out of fear that a government boogeyman will take all their guns.  Then they complain about how prosecutors don't make a point of pursuing charges that are extremely time consuming and difficult to prove in court.  Budget and time are not unlimited, so I ask again:

What crimes do you believe that prosecutors should stop pursuing in order to spend the additional time you've made necessary to prosecute  straw purchasers?  Alternatively, do you support an extra tax necessary to pay for the additional resources and time that the system you support has made necessary for this prosecution?  If neither of these . . . how can you argue that you're in favor of prosecuting at all?

Chris22

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3131
  • Location: Chicago NW Suburbs
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #787 on: March 23, 2018, 08:24:48 AM »
I'm still trying to understand where the impression that liberals don't want straw purchasing to be treated as a serious crime comes from.  The people who have worked hard to ensure that it's difficult to prosecute straw purchasers are gun advocates who are most often found on the right end of the spectrum.

You keep saying that, but your wording is at best imprecise, at worst intentionally confusing. Gun advocates are all in favor of proscuting people who break gun laws.

Gun advocates have ensured that straw purchasers will not be prosecuted by increasing the difficulty to do so, out of fear that a government boogeyman will take all their guns.  Then they complain about how prosecutors don't make a point of pursuing charges that are extremely time consuming and difficult to prove in court.  Budget and time are not unlimited, so I ask again:

What crimes do you believe that prosecutors should stop pursuing in order to spend the additional time you've made necessary to prosecute  straw purchasers?  Alternatively, do you support an extra tax necessary to pay for the additional resources and time that the system you support has made necessary for this prosecution?  If neither of these . . . how can you argue that you're in favor of prosecuting at all?
Traffic enforcement and marijuana interdiction.  I just voted to make pot legal in Chicago. That should free up plenty of time.

Jrr85

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1103
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #788 on: March 23, 2018, 10:01:58 AM »
I'm still trying to understand where the impression that liberals don't want straw purchasing to be treated as a serious crime comes from.  The people who have worked hard to ensure that it's difficult to prosecute straw purchasers are gun advocates who are most often found on the right end of the spectrum.

You think gun advocates are in control of Chicago and Maryland? 

A Definite Beta Guy

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 609
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #789 on: March 23, 2018, 10:26:10 AM »
I'm still trying to understand where the impression that liberals don't want straw purchasing to be treated as a serious crime comes from.  The people who have worked hard to ensure that it's difficult to prosecute straw purchasers are gun advocates who are most often found on the right end of the spectrum.

Cause straw purchasers are people with generally clean (or cleaner records) that often have media-friendly narratives and personalities. They also are susceptible to bullying by the gun criminals.

Like, you don't want to be the guy who throw a woman in jail because she bought a gun for her drug-dealing boyfriend, who beat the crap out of her until she bought the gun.

"GuitarStv throws battered housewives in jail" is a great way to lose your re-election bid.


Also, there's the question about proving intent. Might not be worth the prosecutor's time. A good example might be perjury, which my lawyer friends tell me is an obviously serious crime, but difficult to prove (and thus rarely prosecuted).

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11389
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #790 on: March 23, 2018, 10:36:41 AM »
I'm still trying to understand where the impression that liberals don't want straw purchasing to be treated as a serious crime comes from.  The people who have worked hard to ensure that it's difficult to prosecute straw purchasers are gun advocates who are most often found on the right end of the spectrum.

You think gun advocates are in control of Chicago and Maryland?

Difficulty prosecuting straw purchasers is not limited to these two locations in the US.

Under current Texas law (for example) it's legal to:
- Sell a firearm to a person that the transferor knows intends to use in the commission of a crime
- Transfer a firearm to a person they know is a felon, subject to an active domestic violence protective order, and/or with a serious history of dangerous mental illness (https://www.txgunsense.org/articles/stop-straw-purchases)

It's extremely difficult to prosecute straw purchases when they're not breaking the law, and last I checked Texas was not known as being a liberal stronghold.

Chris22

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3131
  • Location: Chicago NW Suburbs
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #791 on: March 23, 2018, 11:19:57 AM »
I'm still trying to understand where the impression that liberals don't want straw purchasing to be treated as a serious crime comes from.  The people who have worked hard to ensure that it's difficult to prosecute straw purchasers are gun advocates who are most often found on the right end of the spectrum.

You think gun advocates are in control of Chicago and Maryland?

Difficulty prosecuting straw purchasers is not limited to these two locations in the US.

Under current Texas law (for example) it's legal to:
- Sell a firearm to a person that the transferor knows intends to use in the commission of a crime
- Transfer a firearm to a person they know is a felon, subject to an active domestic violence protective order, and/or with a serious history of dangerous mental illness (https://www.txgunsense.org/articles/stop-straw-purchases)

It's extremely difficult to prosecute straw purchases when they're not breaking the law, and last I checked Texas was not known as being a liberal stronghold.

Those are still federal crimes though.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11389
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #792 on: March 23, 2018, 11:36:00 AM »
I'm still trying to understand where the impression that liberals don't want straw purchasing to be treated as a serious crime comes from.  The people who have worked hard to ensure that it's difficult to prosecute straw purchasers are gun advocates who are most often found on the right end of the spectrum.

You think gun advocates are in control of Chicago and Maryland?

Difficulty prosecuting straw purchasers is not limited to these two locations in the US.

Under current Texas law (for example) it's legal to:
- Sell a firearm to a person that the transferor knows intends to use in the commission of a crime
- Transfer a firearm to a person they know is a felon, subject to an active domestic violence protective order, and/or with a serious history of dangerous mental illness (https://www.txgunsense.org/articles/stop-straw-purchases)

It's extremely difficult to prosecute straw purchases when they're not breaking the law, and last I checked Texas was not known as being a liberal stronghold.

Those are still federal crimes though.

Right.  So why were we talking about Chicago then?  That damned federal government must not be doing it's job.  It's still liberal right?  All three branches?

 . . . and I'm still trying to understand where the idea that liberals don't want straw gun purchases prosecuted came from.  I mean, the places you're bitching about not caring about straw purchasers (Illiniois and Maryland) have enacted state laws to punish them . . . while a stalwart bastion of gun freedom and the NRA like Texas hasn't bothered to make it illegal.  I guess because they care so much.

Chris22

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3131
  • Location: Chicago NW Suburbs
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #793 on: March 23, 2018, 11:42:48 AM »
I'm still trying to understand where the impression that liberals don't want straw purchasing to be treated as a serious crime comes from.  The people who have worked hard to ensure that it's difficult to prosecute straw purchasers are gun advocates who are most often found on the right end of the spectrum.

You think gun advocates are in control of Chicago and Maryland?

Difficulty prosecuting straw purchasers is not limited to these two locations in the US.

Under current Texas law (for example) it's legal to:
- Sell a firearm to a person that the transferor knows intends to use in the commission of a crime
- Transfer a firearm to a person they know is a felon, subject to an active domestic violence protective order, and/or with a serious history of dangerous mental illness (https://www.txgunsense.org/articles/stop-straw-purchases)

It's extremely difficult to prosecute straw purchases when they're not breaking the law, and last I checked Texas was not known as being a liberal stronghold.

Those are still federal crimes though.

Right.  So why were we talking about Chicago then?  That damned federal government must not be doing it's job.  It's still liberal right?  All three branches?

 . . . and I'm still trying to understand where the idea that liberals don't want straw gun purchases prosecuted came from.  I mean, the places you're bitching about not caring about straw purchasers (Illiniois and Maryland) have enacted state laws to punish them . . . while a stalwart bastion of gun freedom and the NRA like Texas hasn't bothered to make it illegal.  I guess because they care so much.

Did you read the article I linked?  The straw purchaser was prosecuted and convicted and sentenced to...parole. Does anything about that suggest they are serious about stopping the crime? 

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11389
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #794 on: March 23, 2018, 12:27:14 PM »
Did you read the article I linked?

Yes.  I'm starting to wonder if you did though.


The straw purchaser was prosecuted and convicted and sentenced to...parole. Does anything about that suggest they are serious about stopping the crime?

From the Chicago police report:
ďThe felony arrest is not expected to result in jail time, but will result in a permanent revocation of her FOID card.Ē

We have a situation where an arrest of a straw purchaser was possible because of gun registration, and where gun registration will be used to prevent this person from performing a straw purchase again.  I don't know why additional jail time wasn't given to the woman.

I'd still say that the probation and loss of the ability to buy guns in Chicago is better than absolutely nothing happening in Texas.  I'd say that having a gun registry to prove ownership was invaluable in actually catching the straw purchaser.  I'd also say that having a method of preventing a straw purchaser from buying a gun legally again is great.

I am still trying to understand why you believe that liberals don't want straw purchasers to be prosecuted.



So, to recap . . .
- gun registries make it easier to catch straw purchasers
- gun registries make it easier to prevent people who break the law from buying guns again
- states that enact more gun laws prosecute straw purchasers more harshly than states that do not

TrudgingAlong

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 170
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #795 on: March 23, 2018, 12:53:10 PM »
Why do you think jail time is always warranted? A felony on your record, parole (with all its limits), and revocation of FOID card (I'm not sure what this is, but if it's related to the right to own a gun, seems appropriate) is potentially the right response. Jail is expensive, and not really where I'd throw a first time offender depending in the circumstances. I mean, I'm all for coming down hard on parents who do not secure their weapons, but jail time is probably not the best answer in most cases, and likely compounds the negative situation more than anything.

TexasRunner

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 733
  • Location: Somewhere in Tejas
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #796 on: March 23, 2018, 01:29:29 PM »
I'm still trying to understand where the impression that liberals don't want straw purchasing to be treated as a serious crime comes from.  The people who have worked hard to ensure that it's difficult to prosecute straw purchasers are gun advocates who are most often found on the right end of the spectrum.

You think gun advocates are in control of Chicago and Maryland?

Difficulty prosecuting straw purchasers is not limited to these two locations in the US.

Under current Texas law (for example) it's legal to:
- Sell a firearm to a person that the transferor knows intends to use in the commission of a crime
- Transfer a firearm to a person they know is a felon, subject to an active domestic violence protective order, and/or with a serious history of dangerous mental illness (https://www.txgunsense.org/articles/stop-straw-purchases)

It's extremely difficult to prosecute straw purchases when they're not breaking the law, and last I checked Texas was not known as being a liberal stronghold.

This is blatantly false....

http://lawcenter.giffords.org/private-sales-in-texas/

From NRA's own site:
Quote
It is unlawful to sell, rent, loan or give a handgun to any person if it is known that the person intends to use it unlawfully.  It is unlawful to knowingly sell, rent, give or offer to sell, rent or give any firearm to a person under 18 years of age, without the written consent of his parent or guardian. It is unlawful to knowingly or recklessly sell any firearm or ammunition to any person who is intoxicated.
https://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/state-gun-laws/texas/

Your intentional lying is really quite aggravating...


Edit to add the actual penal code in case the above was not enough...
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/PE/htm/PE.46.htm
Quote
Sec. 46.06.  UNLAWFUL TRANSFER OF CERTAIN WEAPONS.  (a)  A person commits an offense if the person:

(1)  sells, rents, leases, loans, or gives a handgun to any person knowing that the person to whom the handgun is to be delivered intends to use it unlawfully or in the commission of an unlawful act;

(2)  intentionally or knowingly sells, rents, leases, or gives or offers to sell, rent, lease, or give to any child younger than 18 years of age any firearm, club, or location-restricted knife;

(3)  intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly sells a firearm or ammunition for a firearm to any person who is intoxicated;

(4)  knowingly sells a firearm or ammunition for a firearm to any person who has been convicted of a felony before the fifth anniversary of the later of the following dates:

    (A)  the person's release from confinement following conviction of the felony; or

    (B)  the person's release from supervision under community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision following conviction of the felony;
« Last Edit: March 23, 2018, 01:32:21 PM by TexasRunner »

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11389
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #797 on: March 23, 2018, 02:18:58 PM »
I didn't double check the website I referenced.  Thank you for pointing out my error, and I apologize if you feel personally mislead.


It is indeed a misdemeanor in Texas to act as a straw purchaser, punishable by a maximum of to one year in jail / a fine of up to $4,000.

This works on the honor system, since there is no law requiring a background check you can always claim that you didn't know the person you were buying the gun for was a criminal or planned to use it for anything bad.

TexasRunner

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 733
  • Location: Somewhere in Tejas
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #798 on: March 23, 2018, 02:50:25 PM »
I didn't double check the website I referenced.  Thank you for pointing out my error, and I apologize if you feel personally mislead.


It is indeed a misdemeanor in Texas to act as a straw purchaser, punishable by a maximum of to one year in jail / a fine of up to $4,000.

This works on the honor system, since there is no law requiring a background check you can always claim that you didn't know the person you were buying the gun for was a criminal or planned to use it for anything bad.

Except when you fill out ATF form 4473 and it asks "Are you buying this weapon for anyone other than yourself" and you lie...

It is not legal to buy a gun for another person, plain and simple.  As Chris22 has stated, its simply not prosecuted.  I'll leave the discussion of why the current laws are not enforced to others to discuss, but if we aren't willing to enforce the current written law it seems rather... backhanded, to ask for more regulation.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11389
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 11 School Shootings in 26 Days
« Reply #799 on: March 23, 2018, 03:29:43 PM »
I didn't double check the website I referenced.  Thank you for pointing out my error, and I apologize if you feel personally mislead.


It is indeed a misdemeanor in Texas to act as a straw purchaser, punishable by a maximum of to one year in jail / a fine of up to $4,000.

This works on the honor system, since there is no law requiring a background check you can always claim that you didn't know the person you were buying the gun for was a criminal or planned to use it for anything bad.

Except when you fill out ATF form 4473 and it asks "Are you buying this weapon for anyone other than yourself" and you lie... It is not legal to buy a gun for another person, plain and simple.  As Chris22 has stated, its simply not prosecuted. 

Sure, you lie on the form.

Then when caught, you say that you sold the gun privately.  In most states that's where the case ends.  That's the 'honor system' part I was talking about, because it's next to impossible to prove that you're not telling the truth without transfer of ownership being recorded somewhere and without requirement to do a background check.

This is why it isn't prosecuted.  Because there's no way to prosecute it.


I'll leave the discussion of why the current laws are not enforced to others to discuss, but if we aren't willing to enforce the current written law it seems rather... backhanded, to ask for more regulation.

Why isn't it prosecuted?  It turns out that without good record keeping (like a registry), it's very, very difficult to catch people making straw purchases.  It's not a matter of will to enforce current law, it's inability to do so.  In this case, more regulation would make it possible to enforce the current law.

It seems rather . . . disingenuous, to argue for the need to do something while vehemently arguing that the tools necessary to do it can never be obtained.