Cop Shooter's Gun Could Have Been Bought For As Little As $30

[ellisonz]

By Graham Rayman Thu., Feb. 2 2012 at 1:56 PM

​The revolver used in the shooting of Police Officer Kevin Brennan has a controversial history, and a reputation as a poorly made street gun that was likely passed from hand to hand over a period of many years and may have been used in other crimes before it got to would-be killer Luis Soto.

The RG 40, a .38-caliber revolver with a two inch barrel, and its brethren are cheap, easy to use knockoffs of a standard Colt design. Critics say the weapon have no useful purpose other than to kill people at close range.

Firearms experts say the company which distributed the weapon, RG Industries, a Florida subsidiary of the German manufacturer, Rohm, went out of the gun business in the mid-1980s, so the weapon that Soto used to shoot Brennan could be more than two decades old.

----------

On internet bulletin boards, the guns are valued at rock bottom prices--anywhere from $30 to $80 and nicknamed "Rotten Gun," "Real Garbage, and "Reagan Gun." (John Hinckley used a .22 caliber version of the gun in his 1981 assassination attempt.)

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2012/02/cop_shooters_gu.php

Officer Brennan, 29, of New Hyde Park, N.Y., a ruddy-cheeked, dark-eyed father of a baby girl, was shot point-blank in the head behind his right ear on Tuesday night as he struggled with the suspect, Luis Ortiz, 21, in a hallway of an aging housing project in Bushwick, Brooklyn, the authorities said. He was in critical but stable condition Wednesday afternoon at Bellevue Hospital Center in Manhattan.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/02/nyregion/suspect-in-custody-in-case-of-officer-shot-in-the-head.html?src=mv&ref=nyregion

[baldguy]

1. This is the reason such weapons exist.

If there wasn't a market - which is supported by the NRA & the gun lobby - for cheaply made, inexpensive murder weapons, this officer and many others would be alive today.

[ManiacJoe]

3. Would I be correct in assuming that your crystal ball was not purchased at Walmart?

[baldguy]

5. Same place you got your joke book.

[TPaine7]

8. Making it harder for the poor to exercise their rights is sooooo liberal!

All rights should by denied the poor; some rights should be granted the middle class; all should bow to the 1%.

The 1%, and especially the 1% of the 1%, should be able to own and carry weapons anywhere, even in special areas not subject to the Constitution. Like New York City, LA and New Jersey.

[baldguy]

9. Cheap guns make it easier for them - and everybody else - to be indiscriminately murdered.

You think cops & children have a "right" to be murdered? You think poor people don't have the right to live - unless they succumb to RW propaganda & get a gun?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

11. Reasonably priced firearms make it possible for the poor to protect themselves

Something you apparently vehemently oppose.

California requires weapons to be certified to be allowed to be sold. Its a scam and it raises the price of firearms. Then again there is a long history of classism and racism in the gun control laws of the US.

[baldguy]

14. Easily available guns don't protect minority communities, they destroy them.

Dumping MORE guns there only makes the destruction worse.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

15. So firearms and effective self defense should only be available to whites?

Poor and minority communities have many issues. They were not caused by firearms. In them, the thugs have money and can buy high end guns as part of their gangster bling. The single mother being threatened cannot afford a high end weapon and needs some effective and affordable.

My complaint about the very low cost pistols is not the cost or availability, but their reliability. If you need to use a firearm, it has to work. That particular model of pistol is derided not due to its cost, but its high failure rate.

[friendly_iconoclast]

18. Guns don't do jack to destroy communities unless a Luis Soto misuses them.

Blaming inanimate objects for pervasive poverty, crime, corruption and economic inequality makes for good headlines and poor actual results...

[jeepnstein]

22. What are you really trying to say?

Please don't start spouting off that people who live in certain "kinds" of places aren't trustworthy enough to own a firearm.

Nobody is dumping anything. As a matter of fact New York has some of the most stringent anti-gun laws on the books. If the shooter had simply obeyed one of a legion of laws he was breaking the officer would have never been shot. It's the suspects' fault, plain and simple. He pulled the trigger. He owns that bullet. Some poor guy who obeys the law scraping by on minimum wage and who can't afford a new Colt didn't do it. Shooting a cop is about as illegal as it gets in New York. He apparently didn't have a problem breaking that law so what makes you think any law would keep him from being a violent plague on society?

[baldguy]

24. Oh! Give me a break. The entire basis of pro-gun propaganda revolves around the idea

That certain "kinds" of people aren't trustworthy. Otherwise you'd have no excuse to own a gun. Period. It's a vicious cycle of stupidity feeding off fear feeding off stupidity.

Reality is that the people most in favor of stricter gun laws ARE THE PEOPLE LIVING IN URBAN MINORITY NEIGHBORHOODS SUFFERING WITH HIGH CRIME RATES. And criminals can get guns more easily simply BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY IN CIRCULATION. The more guns you & other "gun enthusiasts" have, the easier it is for criminals to get guns. which gives you an excuse to have more guns.

As a "gun enthusiast", whenever a gun is used to kill innocent people, or police officers, or when there's a massacre at a school, you should look upon these incidents with pride and say "That's the America I've been working for!" Because it's the truth.

[jeepnstein]

29. That's odd.

Having spent a wee bit of time in "urban minority neighborhoods" I can say that pretty much everyone there is packing. And I do mean everyone, from the Barber, to the Preacher, to the street corner thug drug dealer. I have yet to hear someone say, "Here, take my gun and protect me." They are pretty much fed up with the plague that is killing their children, turning their neighborhoods into ghost towns, and gets them all tarred with the same broad brush of suspicion. Politicians promise to save them, but politicians lie all the time. And that promise to "get all those illegal guns off the streets" is just a hollow slogan. And all those community leaders really are are politicians. I wonder what Malcom X, or Dr. King, would say about the current state of affairs? But now I'm getting all cranked up and weird in a radical sort of way so I'll get off my soap box.

The thing that is destroying "those kinds of neighborhoods", and my own for that matter, is the trafficking in illegal street drugs. It breeds a special kind of businessman who is bent on turning a profit because losing money results in a very painful kind of business transaction. They'll do anything. And they're generally young enough to think they're ten feet tall and bullet proof. Doesn't matter if they're dealing crack, powdered cocaine, methamphetamine, pills, heroin; you name it. It really gets fun when the pusher is also addicted. Nothing in this world is more fun than a hillbilly with ten grand in his pocket, a loaded gun, and a handful of pills. At least we have the luxury of space so they're not all piled up on one another.

[baldguy]

33. Nobody likes living in a war zone.

But I've got news for you: the drugs didn't create that war zone. THE GUNS DID. And if the drugs weren't there, the guns still would be. You - or more likely, the RW & the NRA - would just dream up some other capricious excuse to be armed.

More guns has never helped reduce crime; they only make the crimes more deadly.

[TheWraith]

37. You're completely and totally wrong.

"the drugs didn't create that war zone. THE GUNS DID. And if the drugs weren't there, the guns still would be."

The drugs are why the guns are there. Try reading about the history of prohibition in this country: when you create a black market for something people want, it fosters violence because there is no restraint among the purveyors. Take away the profit motive, and there is no longer anything to fight about. That's why when alcohol prohibition ended, the murder rate in the US dropped by a third almost overnight. Your position is what, that in the absence of gangs warring over the drug trade, brown people are going to be brainwashed into shooting each other for no reason by the NRA? A gun isn't a mystical object that forces the person holding it to kill.

[baldguy]

42. Do you really believe that other industrialized countries don't have their own drug problems?

Because they certainly don't have the gun problem we do. Their criminals seem to by quite alright without guns, thank you very much. They have the same black market for drugs, the same type of criminal element and the same propensity for violence that any other capitalist economy generates.

What they don't have are GUNS. And the outrageous murder rate that goes along with them - and what America seems to tolerate, just as long as it's confined to underclass minorities that live in our inner cities.

The RW & the NRA certainly aren't offering any solutions to America's problem with gun violence other than to demand more guns. They barely even recognize that there IS a problem.

[liberal_biker]

46. Seriously?

You may want to take a look at Columbia, for example. way more drugs than the US and a firearms homicide rate which is second only to South Africa.

Incidentally, no, not every other nation has the same black market for drugs, the same type of criminal element or the same propensity for violence. Not even close bud. In fact, we have far fewer people affected by crime than most of the western world - including, yes, such places as Canada. Don't take my word for it - go here: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_tot_cri_vic-crime-total-victims

The US is not as bad as you think it is, and quite honestly, once you're outside the inner cities and you remove the drug-related homicides from the totals, you'll find that the US is pretty damned peaceful and crime free.

Murders per capita? The US isnt even in the top 25. Murders with firearms? Yeah, we've got about 9800 p/year (lets say 10K for ease of math), but that, overall is a pretty low per-capita rate - 1 in 300,000 people, or if you prefer, a .3 per 100K people. In other words, pretty fucking low. Sure, the 10K sounds like a lot, until you remember we are the 3rd most populous nation in the world. 3rd my friend - behind China and India. There's no other nation really even close.

Take the time to actually learn the facts. I think you'll quickly discover that most of what you hold dear as truth is really nothing of the sort.

[baldguy]

48. So, lets just get rid of the inner cities & the ugly brown people who live there

And everything will be OK?

And you're calling ME racist?

[liberal_biker]

49. Not even close to what I said

Read it again until you understand it. Do not misrepresent very clear English and pull your poutrage on me. I won't stand for it.

[PavePusher]

60. The only person who brought up race was... oh. You.

[DanTex]

75. I see you still haven't figured out the difference between a developed nation...

...and a developing nation.

You see, 100% of the examples that pro-gunners bring up of nations with high murder rates and strict gun laws are lesser developed nations. The reason that the US isn't in the top 25 in terms of homicide rate is because of nations like Honduras and El Salvador that are not remotely comparable to the US in any way.

If you compare the US to other developed nations (e.g. Canada, UK, France, etc.) you find that the US has by far the highest homicide rate, and the reason is due to gun homicides. In order to avoid the obvious fact that gun availability is responsible for at least some of this difference, pro-gunners have to resort to trying to draw analogies with places like Mexico or Columbia.

As far as comparing overall crime rates, if you were familiar with criminological research, you would know that these broad comparisons are often complicated by the fact that different countries have different standards for certain crimes like assault, which doesn't have a clear definition. Nevertheless, you are quite right that, compared to other developed countries, the US does not have an extraordinarily high rate of violent crime in general -- we fall somewhere in the middle.

But, when it comes to homicide, we are tops by a comfortable margin. This is because guns have the effect of making crime more lethal. A situation or crime that might have lead to an injury in another country can easily escalate to the level of a shooting in the US, and thus, despite having a similar rate of overall crime, we have far more homicide.

Oh, and another thing that surprises me very little is that you aren't much of a mathematician. 10K per year out of a population of 300M is actually 1 in 30K, or 3.3/100K. This may seem like very little to you, but people familiar with crime statistics will recognize that this is actually very high by international standards.

Ironically, in addition to leading the developed world in homicides, the US ranks near the bottom in student performance in math and sciences. One can only imagine that if more Americans were capable of thinking rationally and scientifically, we'd be less likely to buy into transparent propaganda from the gun lobby, and more likely to adopt sane gun laws that might bring our homicide rate in line with the rest of the developed world.

[ellisonz]

77. Oh DanTex...

...you try so hard to bring reason to this group and with so much talent. If only the gun debate was allowed in the main forums...

[DanTex]

80. Thanks!

Trying to bring reason to this group is sure an uphill fight (kind of like the fight against the NRA). It's fun though, and interesting in a way. I'm glad some people are paying attention.

[gejohnston]

82. He is actually one of the few

that tries to bring reason. Most antis don't even try.

[Straw Man]

47. Not as severe, no.

Many have gone for quasi-legalization, which has eliminated much of the illegal trade and its attendant violence. There is also plenty of non-gun violence.

America's non-gun murder rate outstrips total murder rate of many nations. We are a violent society. Economic disparity, which encompasses gangs and the drug trade, is mostly to blame.

But you would prefer to ignore that and disarm everybody, which would leave the old and weak totally helpless at the hands of the young and strong.

[liberal_biker]

38. Really?

You really think without the drugs, the guns would cause the crime? Seriously?

Yeah - ok...you just go on believing that....yep - people in poor neighborhoods would just shoot each other for the hell of it just because guns were around....

[baldguy]

44. Crime is caused by poverty, not drugs. And we will always have poverty.

Guns don't eliminate crime, they just make crime more deadly.

If you believe that drugs cause crime, or that a gun will keep you safe, then you're living in a fantasy world.

[liberal_biker]

55. I know a lot of people believe that...

but I don't quite buy it. Poverty does not create crime. Far more crime has been committed in the pursuit of wealth than the ability to merely eke out a living.

Does poverty lead to some crime? Sure. Does it cause it? I doubt it.

Never believed guns eliminated crime and I do not believe anyone has ever said they would. Guns do, on the other hand, give a person yet one more tool with which to deal with criminals.

Drugs do not cause crime, but drug laws do. See the prohibition era for this nation's first lesson in this reality - why we forgot it is beyond me.

Nobody has claimed a gun would keep you safe. In fact, it has been clearly stated many MANY times that guns are merely a tool which MAY save you - nothing more.

[Atypical Liberal]

65. Poverty does not cause crime. DISPARITY OF WEALTH CAUSES CRIME.

Poverty does not cause crime.

Desperation and envy cause crime.

When everyone is poor, people just struggle on with their lives as they see it as just the way life is. Tough, but fair and equal.

But when people struggle in poverty and see that others live lives of ease, that is what incites greed, envy, and desperation.

When people see that a better life is available, some people will do anything to attain it.

[Callisto32]

52. The PEOPLE DID.

Guns create FUCK ALL.

You know it.

Deal with it.

[Atypical Liberal]

63. This right here is what is wrong with the gun control crowd.

But I've got news for you: the drugs didn't create that war zone. THE GUNS DID.

This right here is what is wrong with the gun control crowd.

This is completely, 100%, absolutely incorrect.

The illegal drug industry is a business that is forced to operate outside the law. This means that business disputes have no recourse in courts of law. Consequently, they are settled outside the law. That means violence.

There has been organized crime for most of recorded history.

The very word "thug" dates to 13th century India, where gangs of criminals would roam and rob and create mayhem.

This sort of thing has been happening long before there were guns.

[liberal_biker]

34. Arguably you're correct

Those "kinds" of people who are not trustworthy are those who have demonstrated, through their actions, that they are not trustworthy - people like criminals and politicians for example.

Yes, baldguy, those people exist. That is a plain fact of life. They come in all shapes, sizes, colors and political stripes - just like the rest of us.

Personally, I have zero issues with a manufacturer producing an inexpensive but effective firearm for the, shall we say, fiscally challenged. If one can be produced which is safe to use and reasonably reliable, great.

Criminals can get guns because they are criminals. The amount in circulation has little to nothing to do with it. Sure, they wouldn't have guns if guns didn't exist, but lets try to stay somewhat within the bounds of reality shall we?

[Callisto32]

51. O! Muse!

Sing in me, and through me tell the story of a man skilled in all manner of contending....

[Atypical Liberal]

62. How fucking PATRONIZING!

>Easily available guns don't protect minority communities, they destroy them.

Yeah, those people living in minority communities are just a bunch of dumbfucks who need people smarter than they are to tell them what's best for them, because they are too stupid to figure out how to properly own firearms themselves.

Jesus fucking christ could you get even more patronizing?

I can't believe you can post shit like this.

Why don't you just call them savages that can't be trusted with weapons? Sounds like the goddamn KKK.

[liberal_biker]

64. Disgusting isnt it?

Yet we're the ones with the problem...go figure.

[PavePusher]

72. See posts 48 & 60... n/t

[SteveW]

66. I think "minorities" and others can decide that without your guidance. nt

[DragonBorn]

87. Umm?

Well as a minority I'm glad we have old white men to tell us poor stupid minorities whats best for us. How about you let these communities decide whats best for them instead of dictating it from outside. Or are you claiming to know better what its like to grow up in the ghetto than someone who has?

What should be the base price for a handgun $50, $100, $250?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

89. Why do you assume the poor are inherently murderous? n/t

[Callisto32]

25. Right.

Only the wealthy should have access to century-old defensive technology....

No doubt you feel your position is "progressive."

[PavePusher]

32. If he won't or can't provide enough police to make immediate improvement....

and still wants to restrict the commoners ability to defend themselves...

then, yeah, not sure what other explaination fits.

What should the Citizens do while waiting for improved policing?

[baldguy]

35. So, you believe only liberals can be racist & classist? Sounds like Rush Limbaugh.

That's his district. He was born there. He grew up there & pastored there. He lives there today. If he didn't represent & support his constituent's views, he wouldn't keep getting reelected.

[PavePusher]

39. Nice Strawman, but I never said or implied anything like that.

I'll repeat the question: What are Citizens supposed to do while waiting for improved policingpolice response?

[baldguy]

40. Just who do you think "the commoners" you referenced are?

And who are you applying that condescending attitude to?

And why are you such a fan of the police now? A real red-blooded American gunslinger doesn't rely on the police to protect him, does he?

[liberal_biker]

43. Calm down...

I think your anger is making it difficult for you to respond.

What Pave originally said was this:

"If he won't or can't provide enough police to make immediate improvement, and still wants to restrict the commoners ability to defend themselves..."

The "he" referenced in that statement is Pittsburgh Councilman Rickey Burges. The link, which you provided incidentally, shows Mr. Burges rather condescendingly suggesting the NRA and guns are solely responsible for crime. He seems to think there are no other causes, such as drugs, poverty, etc...

Pave then very clearly and politely asks what other alternative people have.

[baldguy]

45. The RW, the NRA & other "gun enthusiasts" don't offer any alternatives either, other than MORE GUNS.

And any rational person knows MORE GUNS isn't a solution. MORE GUNS only makes things worse.

[liberal_biker]

50. What that "rational person" seems to "know"....

...does not seem to be borne out by facts.

First off, neither the NRA nor gun enthusiasts are obligated to provide an alternative. Why you seem to think it lands on their shoulders is beyond me.

Second, in terms of your claim that more guns only makes things worse, it would appear the exact opposite is true.

Right now (and no, I'm not providing links as this has been discussed repeatedly and was in all the papers/websites/broadcast/etc) we are at a point in our nation where gun ownership is at an all time high - and growing - and yet, crime is at a low we've not seen since the 50s - and DROPPING.

Now, I want to be clear, I am most emphatically not stating that more guns = less crime. I am stating that more guns does not equal more crime.

[PavePusher]

59. I was evoking the "condescending attitude"...

promoted by the apparent majority of pro-Citizen-Disarmament supporters, including both the good mayor and yourself, that mere Citizens can't be trusted.

I am a supporter of good police. Always have been. But I am also aware of their limitations and yes, I am responsible for myself until help can arrive.

Who's "slinging" guns? Not very responsible, and rather damaging to the guns.

[liberal_biker]

67. I don't give a damn what his constituent's views are.

You don't get to make up facts. Yes, it really is possible that everyone who voted for him is dumb as a box of rocks.

For another example of such an incredibly stupid constituency, take a look at the 18th Congressional District of Texas.

[baldguy]

30. The "Liberals are the real enemies of the poor" RW talking point

really makes you sound like Rush Limbaugh.

[Callisto32]

41. That wooshing sound was the point flying over your head.

My point is that you AREN'T being liberal. And that hurts the poor...

[rl6214]

57. Which orafice did you pull that one out of?

Nothing of the sort was said and if you got that out of it, what other conspiracy theories do you believe in? Seen bigfoot lately or maybe some Roswell space aliens?

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

27. Absolutely!

Only criminals with enough money to spend should be able to shoot cops.

[baldguy]

31. Since you don't seem to be reading any of the other posts, here they are:

baldguy

24. Oh! Give me a break. The entire basis of pro-gun propaganda revolves around the idea

That certain "kinds" of people aren't trustworthy. Otherwise you'd have no excuse to own a gun. Period. It's a vicious cycle of stupidity feeding off fear feeding off stupidity.

Reality is that the people most in favor of stricter gun laws ARE THE PEOPLE LIVING IN URBAN MINORITY NEIGHBORHOODS SUFFERING WITH HIGH CRIME RATES. And criminals can get guns more easily simply BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY IN CIRCULATION. The more guns you & other "gun enthusiasts" have, the easier it is for criminals to get guns. which gives you an excuse to have more guns.

As a "gun enthusiast", whenever a gun is used to kill innocent people, or police officers, or when there's a massacre at a school, you should look upon these incidents with pride and say "That's the America I've been working for!" Because it's the truth.

baldguy

26. TRMS: With Pittsburgh Councilman Rickey Burgess, May 6 2011

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#42939091

I guess he's racist against minorities & classist against the poor too, huh?

Anyone who believes assertions like the ones you've made is sick & twisted, blinded by RW dogma with no basis in reality.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

36. Well then...

...let's all just unite against anything that smacks of anything pro-gun.

The entire basis of pro-gun propaganda revolves around the idea... That certain "kinds" of people aren't trustworthy. Otherwise you'd have no excuse to own a gun. Period. It's a vicious cycle of stupidity feeding off fear feeding off stupidity.

Quite so, except YOU are the one spreading the "propaganda".

Have a nice day.

[krispos42]

84. What should the minimum price for a handgun be?

Give me a number.

You're the Congress, and you have the ability to introduce legislation putting a minimum retail price on all handguns.

What it is?

[PavePusher]

91. Completely false, of course.

What the "NRA & the gun lobby" support are cheaply made, inexpensive defensive weapons.

Because defense should have to cost an arm and a leg.

[doc03]

2. Should the Second Amendment only apply to people that can

afford a $1100 Kimber?

[gejohnston]

4. naww just people who

wear tweed while hunting with their engraved Holland & Hollands.

[slackmaster]

6. It's an absolute travesty that those crime-prone poor people and minorities have access to guns

Also dumb white guys with bad haircuts. I hope this problem is addressed before it's too late.

[ellisonz]

10. Snarky...

...always an appropriate reaction to such threads.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

12. Considering what the folically challenged poster lead with, its appropriate

Ridicule is often the best response to idiocy.

[ellisonz]

13. And aloha to you too!

[ProgressiveProfessor]

16. Imua & Malama Pono

[Simo 1939_1940]

7. Gotta love those "critics", dontcha?

Critics say the weapon have no useful purpose other than to kill people at close range.

Couldn't possibly be used to defend against an attacker in close proximity, eh?

The same "critics" claim that "assault weapons" have no useful purpose than to kill people quickly at longer range.

The only useful purpose of a Springfield XD is to kill at 25 - 50 yards.

To borrow a term from a distinguished member of the forum........the emotwaddle never ends from this group.

[ileus]

23. no guns kill people...you miss the point.

[Clames]

17. This...

...seems to have the ring of truth to it.

"Nothing unusual about it being an older gun," a retired police officer says. "You can pass all the laws in the world, it's not going to stop people from getting firearms."

Emphasis mine. Seems like common sense that criminals do criminal things and don't let laws inconvenience them.

[friendly_iconoclast]

19. No shit. Someone willing to execute a uniformed cop won't be fazed in the least by any gun law.

[Fredjust]

20. But...

easily obtained and extremely cheap death spewer (that as probably bought thanks to gun show loophole) makes it a simple matter for violent criminals and people with mental health conditions to get their hands on them. Another reason to ban "Saturday Night Specials!"

[rl6214]

58. Was there supposed to be a sarcasm thingy at the end or are you really being serious?

[SteveW]

70. Some misperceptions, here...

"easily obtained and extremely cheap death spewer (that as probably bought thanks to gun show loophole)...."

A $50 gun and a $1,000 gun are just as easily obtained under the law; the cost factor will deter the poor and the not-so poor from obtaining the $1,000 gun. (Years ago, my Dad could only afford a cheap .32 which could barely hit an oil drum at 25 feet; later he obtained better weapons; and I cannot afford a $1,000 gun, so I got a perfectly safe, accurate and well-made Ruger .357 for under $250.)

Do you have proof that crims and thugs get their guns primarily at gun shows? Surveys of gun-wielding crims indicates that few obtain their guns at gun shows; if you've ever been to one you will note the police presence, both uniformed and in plain clothes).

Be on notice that "Saturday Night Specials" is considered a racist term in some quarters, having been derived from the expression: It's gonna be a N______ Town, Saturday night (as in rambunctious, riotous partying, fighting, etc.).

Also be on notice that most gun-control laws derived from the Jim Crow-era of Southern politics, which sought (you guessed it) to disarm blacks. Such laws have also been adopted in Northern cities, often substituting Italians as the bogie de jour (SEE: NYC's Sullivan Laws).

[ileus]

21. what a story....an old cheap gun was used to kill a cop.

should we confiscate all firearms by companies that went out of business?

[jeepnstein]

28. He's not quite dead yet...

[chrisa]

53. The bullet never entered his brain.

I think he will be fine.

[jeepnstein]

56. He's getting better...

[pipoman]

76. Do you think he'll go for a walk?

[ileus]

61. my bad...

[Atypical Liberal]

68. You can buy a brand new HiPoint C9 9mm handgun for $100.

You can buy brand-new HiPoint C9 9mm handguns all day long for $100:

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=271891120

Heaven forbid that poor people be able to afford the tools that allow them to be able to defend themselves from violence.

[Atypical Liberal]

69. Can't have poor people buying guns.

[ellisonz]

73. I like the font they chose...

...when the gunners appropriated Norma Rockwell

[Atypical Liberal]

74. Thank you.

I made it myself just for you.

[Glassunion]

71. I wonder if the firearm was more expensive

would that have prevented the officer from being shot?

The article is a tad misleading because the street price of a firearm is higher than what you will find on gun auction sites. Going way back to when I used to live in a not so savory part town, I was offered a firearm for $450, that I could legally buy(if i was old enough) for less than 1/2 that. They never arrested the dude selling guns in my old neighborhood. My mom called the police twice on the guy.

An RG in decent shape can sell for over $100 on auction sites. This was an auction from last November. http://www.gunauction.com/closed/BidHistory.cfm?ItemNum=10646863 for the exact same firearm.

On top of that the entire article is 100% speculation. What I want to know is how much was the firearm purchased for and from who was it purchased? Answer those two questions and you can possibly find a solution.

[ellisonz]

78. More expensive firearms...

...would likely reduce the number sold over time.

Where do you think that guy obtained firearms for sell?

[Glassunion]

79. Depends...

You could say the same for a lot of things. Should all things that someone "feels" is bad be priced so high that only the wealthy should have access to it?

1. How much should a firearm cost? If a firearm costs $100 to manufacture, how much should a manufacturer charge a retailer for the item and in turn the customer?

2. I don't know where this guy got his firearm. No one here does. Nor does the person that wrote the article. It is all speculation based on a single premise that is a huge "what if". Any article that has the word "could" in the title, is in all likelihood complete speculation.

My wife just purchased a firearm for $300 yesterday. Would you say it was too expensive?

[ileus]

81. too cheap you could afford it...only the 1% deserve the 2A.

I actually have a RG22 revolver. It was my grandfathers, my grandparents were beyond dirt poor. No indoor plumbing poor...this 22 was his what we'd call house gun now. He died in 1986...at one point in his life someone knocked on the door, when he answered it there was no one there...he walked out on the porch and someone shot him in the chest with a shotgun. You know you're poor when you know there's a real threat to your life and all you can afford is a 50 dollar pistol.


I know a local dealer that has told me he can't keep Hi-points in stock he sells every one he receives. FWIW...

[slackmaster]

83. It would reduce the number of firearms in the hands of some of the people who need them most.

Poor people who live in high-crime neighborhoods.

[oneshooter]

85. But don't they have the police to "protect and serve" them?

What would they need a firearm for if the goverment takes their money and promises to "protect and defend" them?

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

In case it's needed

[liberal_biker]

86. Yeah - that's been tried....

A few southern states tried to limit the only permissible handguns to either Colt or Smith and Wesson so as to set a floor on pricing that kept "the wrong people" from getting them....

Those laws got tossed on a state level and on a federal level its a total non-starter.

[DragonBorn]

88. Elitism is not a liberal value

Are you suggesting only the wealthy own firearms? What do you suggest a base price should be?

[ellisonz]

90. No.

I'm suggesting the gun nuts bear the burden for fixing the system. Sorry if you don't like that, but many of us think the way things currently are is insanity.