Peter1x9
(281 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-26-11 02:56 PM
Original message |
100% of criminals support a ban on guns. |
|
Criminals don't like it when the people they choose to rob/rape/carjack/murder/etc are capable of defending themselves.
|
ileus
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-26-11 03:01 PM
Response to Original message |
1. plus criminals don't want people being rude and tacky in public or private. |
chemp
(569 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-26-11 03:05 PM
Response to Original message |
2. or spitting on sidewalks. |
spin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-26-11 03:13 PM
Response to Original message |
3. Guns make the workplace dangerous for many criminals. |
|
In this video a criminal describes why he supports banning all guns. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngsKzdKNAmo
|
safeinOhio
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-26-11 04:23 PM
Response to Original message |
4. 100% of gun crime victims |
|
don't like easy access to handguns by criminals.
|
We_Have_A_Problem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-26-11 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
5. 100% of law abiding gun owners |
|
don't like criminals having firearms of any kind.
I don't consider having to steal a firearm to be easy access. I consider that a crime.
|
safeinOhio
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-26-11 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
|
no background checks on privates sales. Illegal and easy. I'm a legal owner and carry legally and would have no problem with my state registering all handguns. If crooks stole a gun, they'd have a more difficult time selling them and they could be traced back to the owner and returned.
|
We_Have_A_Problem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-26-11 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
7. What would you suggest be done about it? |
|
Straw purchases are a person who passes an NICS check buying a gun for someone who wouldn't. How are you going to stop that?
A private sale is just that - a private sale. Government has no authority to dictate how one sells his personal property. Besides, even if it could, there would be nothing to prevent the sale from taking place.
A crook would have no trouble selling it - especially to another crook. Seriously - if you're buying your guns from some guy on the street, are you REALLY worrying about where he got it?
|
safeinOhio
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-26-11 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
12. A straw purchaser can now just say |
|
"I sold it". No record needed. Pretty hard to enforce, that is why it is so common.
Personal property, like say real estate? Lots and lots of laws on the transfer of real estate.
Might not end all sales of stolen guns, but would make it more difficult and dangerous to do so. Even the possession of an unregistered handgun would be a crime as it is not now. Try to convict anyone that simply says, "I bought it legally in a private sale" with no proof or record to counter it.
Why, if you are legal to purchase a handgun, are you so against laws that would help protect that right?
Of course this argument has been repeated over and over again here and few if any will change their minds, including the majority of the public that support the regulation of private sales of handguns.
|
We_Have_A_Problem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-27-11 09:07 AM
Response to Reply #12 |
16. Real estate is a bit different. |
|
Most of those laws have to do with the fact that one has to somehow prove he owns the land. It isnt like you can throw a few hundred acres in your pocket. Those laws protect the owner far more than anything.
Registration has been deemed illegal by the USSC, and in fact, criminals would be exempt from it.
|
OneTenthofOnePercent
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-26-11 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
8. Unless you outlaw guns altogether... you can not get rid of Straw Purchases. |
|
Edited on Wed Oct-26-11 05:40 PM by OneTenthofOnePercent
Ultimately, banning private sales would mean all criminal gun procurement would then be classified as a straw purchase or theft/loss.
A straw purchase is done by someone who is legally able to buy the gun. As long as qualified citizens can legally buy guns via FFL transactions/transfers... there will always be some willing to use that power to buy on behalf of criminals. And a criminal's possesion of a gun is already against the law - so breaking another law to get that illegally possesed item (to enable further criminal action, no doubt) is simply another trivial matter to the criminal.
Even if you outlawed private sales they would still happen... the sale itself would just be illegal for BOTH parties instead of just the prohibited buyer. Remmeber, as stated above... some people with the ability to legally get guns will be supply source for illegal private sales. Said otherwise, "Criminals will be criminals."
In summary, as long as legal buyers for guns exist then a portion of those will supply the criminals. Unfortunately it is effectively impossible to evaluate a legal purchaser's intent or morals if they lie. I fail to see how your concerns have any realistic solutions aside from a blanket prohbition of firearms.
|
oneshooter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-26-11 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
9. "could be traced back to the owner" who could be charged with whatever crime was committed |
|
Edited on Wed Oct-26-11 07:38 PM by oneshooter
as an accessory, also be charged with failure to safely secure said handgun, he will also be liable for the misuse of said handgun and probably be sued by the victims.
Apparently this is needed :sarcasm:
The above has been proposed by several members of DU as needed to control the "spread of handguns"
|
one-eyed fat man
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-26-11 07:28 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
|
teenager takes the family car, gets drunk and plows into a minivan full of schoolkids you are the one who needs to go to jail?
|
safeinOhio
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-26-11 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
13. If you give him the booze and car |
|
you should. You will end up responsible for the cost anyway. It's your car and your teenager.
|
We_Have_A_Problem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-27-11 09:12 AM
Response to Reply #13 |
17. If i give it to him yes. |
|
However, if he does both without my knowledge or permission, its a different story. Hell, lets forget its a teenager. Lets say an adult rents a car and then goes out and gets drunk and kills someone. You want to hold Hertz responsible? Of course not. Reasonable people recognize the car was out of Hertz' control and they are not in any way culpable. The fault lies purely with the adult who made the choice to drink and drive.
Same with guns. Just because I may be the owner, if it is stolen from me, I am not in control of it and not responsible for its misuse.
|
oneshooter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-26-11 07:35 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
14. "So solly Chally" forgot the sarcasm thingy. n/t |
jpak
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-26-11 07:29 PM
Response to Original message |
oneshooter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-27-11 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
18. I agree, your post is. n/t |
We_Have_A_Problem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-27-11 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
19. Yep - your post sure is. n/t |
Glassunion
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-27-11 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
20. Well... That settles that... or sumthin' tsss ts tssss |
ileus
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-26-11 08:27 PM
Response to Original message |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed May 01st 2024, 03:29 PM
Response to Original message |