The right to bear arms

mickeyrat

mcgruff10 said:

mickeyrat said:

mcgruff10 said:

callen said:

mcgruff10 said:

callen said:

dudeman said:

josevolution said:

So as I see it you pro gunners see no reason to put any more restrictions On the sales of any weapons , damn talk about living in the past when will you say enough is enough after how many more dead ...I say fuck you and your guns .....because as I see it that's exactly what you pro gunners are saying to us fuck you & more regulations ....

I'm pretty sure that mcgruff and I are both in support of gun reform. However, bans, registration and taxes on ammunition are not the miracle solution you expect them to be.

The second part of your post is very eloquent, too. Classy.

Apologies if you've already addressed but you good with gun registration and bullet scoring profiles on record?

i'm fine with gun registration and bullet scoring profiles (meaning they take one shot with your weapon and send the ballistics to the fbi? correct?)
if so we already do both of these in new jersey.

Yeah not familiar with official name of process.

Well this may be the ticket then. Owners responsible and able to trace. Keep rights to protect and hunt.

Now to get this done.

I definitely think it s needed in all 50 states. Tough to get it done with the NRA controllig congress.

Fixed that for you.

the nra obviously has a huge influence in congress but if people were that fed up with gun violence or lack of gun laws these republicans would have been voted out of office a long time ago. especially after the newtown tragedy. if it didn't change after that then I feel that nothing on the federal level will ever.

90+% of the public wanted something done. 75+% of NRA members agreed with at least some of it.

Wayne said no. Congress did nothing.

mcgruff10

mickeyrat said:

mcgruff10 said:

mickeyrat said:

mcgruff10 said:

callen said:

mcgruff10 said:

callen said:

dudeman said:

josevolution said:

So as I see it you pro gunners see no reason to put any more restrictions On the sales of any weapons , damn talk about living in the past when will you say enough is enough after how many more dead ...I say fuck you and your guns .....because as I see it that's exactly what you pro gunners are saying to us fuck you & more regulations ....

I'm pretty sure that mcgruff and I are both in support of gun reform. However, bans, registration and taxes on ammunition are not the miracle solution you expect them to be.

The second part of your post is very eloquent, too. Classy.

Apologies if you've already addressed but you good with gun registration and bullet scoring profiles on record?

i'm fine with gun registration and bullet scoring profiles (meaning they take one shot with your weapon and send the ballistics to the fbi? correct?)
if so we already do both of these in new jersey.

Yeah not familiar with official name of process.

Well this may be the ticket then. Owners responsible and able to trace. Keep rights to protect and hunt.

Now to get this done.

I definitely think it s needed in all 50 states. Tough to get it done with the NRA controllig congress.

Fixed that for you.

the nra obviously has a huge influence in congress but if people were that fed up with gun violence or lack of gun laws these republicans would have been voted out of office a long time ago. especially after the newtown tragedy. if it didn't change after that then I feel that nothing on the federal level will ever.

90+% of the public wanted something done. 75+% of NRA members agreed with at least some of it.

Wayne said no. Congress did nothing.

that's pretty sad. and what's even sadder is during the next election they weren't voted out of office.

gimmesometruth27

mcgruff10 said:

I posted the same article in another thread:
hmmmmmmm.......
SHOCK: AS AMERICANS BOUGHT 170 MILLION GUNS, VIOLENT CRIME FELL 51%
by AWR HAWKINS31 Aug 2015
On August 28, the NRA presented ATF and FBI data showing Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has fallen “51 percent.”

The NRA tweeted, “Since ’91, Americans have acquired over 170 million new firearms and violent crimes have declined by 51%.”

This information squares with the findings of a Congressional Research Service (CRS) study covering the slightly shorter period of time from 1994 to 2009. For those years, CRS found that Americans purchased approximately 118 million firearms, and the 1993 “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” rate of 6.6 per 100,000 fell to 3.6 per 100,000 by the year 2000. It eventually fell all the way to 3.2 per 100,000 in 2011.

That is more than a 50 percent reduction in “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide.”

Then, in 2009—the year the CRS study ended—Obama took office and gun sales began their climb to record levels, which made covering the gap between the 118 million guns that had been purchased by 2009 and the “170 million new guns” that Americans would own by 2015 an easy gap to bridge.

Breitbart News previously reported that there were 21,093,273 background checks for firearms in 2013 alone. And each of those checks were on buyers who could have legally purchased multiple firearms.

The overarching message is simple—more guns, less crime. Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has decreased as gun ownership has increased.

Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.

"awrhawkins@breitbart.com"

tells me all i need to know to know that this is bullshit.

mickeyrat

mickeyrat said:

jennycoyle said:

I found myself debating this issue with the American actor Mark Pellegrino the other day, which was quite bizarre but when talking about something like this the concept of celebrity is somewhat redundant, he was just another person with strongly held opinions with which I happened to disagree. Anyway, his defence of the right to bear arms is his staunch belief that guns in the right hands (those of responsible law-abiding citizens) are a force for good. For example, he suggested that had such a citizen been present during the cinema shootings fewer people might have died. He gave another example in which someone drove their car into a café in Texas and then started shooting people. Apparently there was a woman in the café who could have stopped him, had she not left her gun in her car. He himself claims to have chased off a robber from his apartment block using his own legally held gun.

Now I'm quite a naive idealist and my general view would be that I'd like to get rid of all guns. I do realise how unrealistic this is though and so it can be quite hard to combat Mark's view that the very fact that this would be impossible is the reason why it's so important for citizens to have the right to arm themselves.

Even if we then say ok we at least need better background checks, we all know that if someone wants a gun they'll find a way to get one. Sure all the kids have to do is take their parents guns, as I believe happened with a number of the school shootings.

So what's the answer???

Registration of all sales with serial # attached (there is a reason guns have them).
Universal backround checks for all sales.
Every weapon submits its "fingerprint" which is the bullet fired from it to FBI for cataloging. When that weapon is later used in crime and proven so , that person is held accountable. You no longer own that weapon for whatever reason and not inform authorities? Tough shit. You go to jail too.

parents of kids who steal the parents guns for crime are charged with same charges as kids.

Extensive training for each owner with regular retesting or recertification (thats what "well regulated militia " means in that amendment).

No more ccw "reciprocity" between states. you dont live in my state and want to carry here? Certify here.

Weapons ARE tools. Designed with the intent to cause bodily harm up to and including death. The seriousness of this fact as it applies to wider society far outweighs your haphazard, inapporiate storage and handling if these tools. If you cant show on a regular basis safe practice in all aspects of ownership then buy a bat or other means of protection.

Had hoped this might garner some kind of comment.

mcgruff10

gimmesometruth27 said:

mcgruff10 said:

I posted the same article in another thread:
hmmmmmmm.......
SHOCK: AS AMERICANS BOUGHT 170 MILLION GUNS, VIOLENT CRIME FELL 51%
by AWR HAWKINS31 Aug 2015
On August 28, the NRA presented ATF and FBI data showing Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has fallen “51 percent.”

The NRA tweeted, “Since ’91, Americans have acquired over 170 million new firearms and violent crimes have declined by 51%.”

This information squares with the findings of a Congressional Research Service (CRS) study covering the slightly shorter period of time from 1994 to 2009. For those years, CRS found that Americans purchased approximately 118 million firearms, and the 1993 “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” rate of 6.6 per 100,000 fell to 3.6 per 100,000 by the year 2000. It eventually fell all the way to 3.2 per 100,000 in 2011.

That is more than a 50 percent reduction in “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide.”

Then, in 2009—the year the CRS study ended—Obama took office and gun sales began their climb to record levels, which made covering the gap between the 118 million guns that had been purchased by 2009 and the “170 million new guns” that Americans would own by 2015 an easy gap to bridge.

Breitbart News previously reported that there were 21,093,273 background checks for firearms in 2013 alone. And each of those checks were on buyers who could have legally purchased multiple firearms.

The overarching message is simple—more guns, less crime. Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has decreased as gun ownership has increased.

Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.

"awrhawkins@breitbart.com"

tells me all i need to know to know that this is bullshit.

cnn better?
By CNN Staff
Gun-related homicides and crime are "strikingly" down from 20 years ago, despite the American public's belief that firearm crime is on the upswing, a new study said Wednesday.

Looking back 50 years, a Pew Research Center study found U.S. gun homicides rose in the 1960s, gained in the 1970s, peaked in the 1980s and the early 1990s, and then plunged and leveled out the past 20 years.

"Despite national attention to the issue of firearm violence, most Americans are unaware that gun crime is lower today than it was two decades ago," the researchers say.

A Pew survey of Americans in March found 56% believed gun-related crime is higher than 20 years ago and only 12% said it's lower. The survey said 26% believed it stayed the same and 6% didn't know.
The new study found U.S. firearm homicides peaked in 1993 at 7.0 deaths per 100,000 people. But by 2010, the rate was 49% lower, and firearm-related violence -- assaults, robberies, sex crimes -- was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993, the study found.

Those drops parallel an overall decline in violent non-fatal crime, with or without a gun, the study said.

In fact, gun-related homicide rates in the late 2000s were "equal to those not seen since the early 1960s," the study found.

Explanations for the drops the past 20 years aren't clear, the study said.


"Researchers have studied the decline in firearm crime and violent crime for many years, and though there are theories to explain the decline, there is no consensus among those who study the issue as to why it happened," the researchers say in a summary.

Despite the decline, the United States still has a higher rate of homicide than other developed countries, the study says. But America doesn't have a higher rate for all other crimes.

The United States also has a higher rate of gun ownership than any other developed country, the study said.

mcgruff10

gimmesometruth27 said:

mcgruff10 said:

I posted the same article in another thread:
hmmmmmmm.......
SHOCK: AS AMERICANS BOUGHT 170 MILLION GUNS, VIOLENT CRIME FELL 51%
by AWR HAWKINS31 Aug 2015
On August 28, the NRA presented ATF and FBI data showing Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has fallen “51 percent.”

The NRA tweeted, “Since ’91, Americans have acquired over 170 million new firearms and violent crimes have declined by 51%.”

This information squares with the findings of a Congressional Research Service (CRS) study covering the slightly shorter period of time from 1994 to 2009. For those years, CRS found that Americans purchased approximately 118 million firearms, and the 1993 “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” rate of 6.6 per 100,000 fell to 3.6 per 100,000 by the year 2000. It eventually fell all the way to 3.2 per 100,000 in 2011.

That is more than a 50 percent reduction in “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide.”

Then, in 2009—the year the CRS study ended—Obama took office and gun sales began their climb to record levels, which made covering the gap between the 118 million guns that had been purchased by 2009 and the “170 million new guns” that Americans would own by 2015 an easy gap to bridge.

Breitbart News previously reported that there were 21,093,273 background checks for firearms in 2013 alone. And each of those checks were on buyers who could have legally purchased multiple firearms.

The overarching message is simple—more guns, less crime. Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has decreased as gun ownership has increased.

Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.

"awrhawkins@breitbart.com"

tells me all i need to know to know that this is bullshit.

is Harvard bullshit?

http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/blog/2013/08/30/harvard-gun-study-no-decrease-in-violence-with-ban/
Harvard Publication On Gun Laws Resurfaces As Talks About Firearms Continue
A study comparing international gun laws shows that getting rid of firearms might not be the solution to reducing overall violence.

By Steve Annear | Boston Daily | August 30, 2013, 4:17 p.m.

As Boston—and the country as a whole—looks for ways to reduce gun-related deaths and violence, a study from 2007 published in a Harvard University journal is suddenly regaining increased attention for its claims that more control over firearms doesn’t necessarily mean their will be a dip in serious crimes.

In an independent research paper titled “Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?,” first published in Harvard’s Journal of Public Law and Policy, Don B. Kates, a criminologist and constitutional lawyer, and Gary Mauser, Ph.D., a Canadian criminologist and professor at Simon Fraser University, examined the correlation between gun laws and death rates. While not new, as gun debates nationwide heat up, the paper has resurfaced in recent days, specifically with firearm advocates.“International evidence and comparisons have long been offered as proof of the mantra that more guns mean more deaths and that fewer guns, therefore, mean fewer deaths. Unfortunately, such discussions [have] all too often been afflicted by misconceptions and factual error and focus on comparisons that are unrepresentative,” the researchers wrote in their introduction of their findings.

In the 46-page study, which can be read in its entirety here, Kates and Mauser looked at and compared data from the U.S. and parts of Europe to show that stricter laws don’t mean there is less crime. As an example, when looking at “intentional deaths,” or murder, on an international scope, the U.S. falls behind Russia, Estonia, and four other countries, ranking it seventh. More specifically, data shows that in Russia, where guns are banned, the murder rate is significantly higher than in the U.S in comparison. “There is a compound assertion that guns are uniquely available in the United States compared with other modern developed nations, which is why the United States has by far the highest murder rate. Though these assertions have been endlessly repeated, [the latter] is, in fact, false and [the former] is substantially so,” the authors point out, based on their research.

Kates and Mauser clarify that they are not suggesting that gun control causes nations to have higher murder rates, rather, they “observed correlations that nations with stringent gun controls tend to have much higher murder rates than nations that allow guns.”

The study goes on to say:

…the burden of proof rests on the proponents of the more guns equal more death and fewer guns equal less death mantra, especially since they argue public policy ought to be based on that mantra. To bear that burden would at the very least require showing that a large number of nations with more guns have more death and that nations that have imposed stringent gun controls have achieved substantial reductions in criminal violence (or suicide). But those correlations are not observed when a large number of nations are compared across the world.
.......
But when it comes to examining nations as a whole, the Harvard study suggests otherwise. “If more guns equal more death and fewer guns equal less death, areas within nations with higher gun ownership should in general have more murders than those with less gun ownership in a similar area. But, in fact, the reverse pattern prevails,” the authors wrote.

oftenreading

mcgruff10 said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

mcgruff10 said:

I posted the same article in another thread:
hmmmmmmm.......
SHOCK: AS AMERICANS BOUGHT 170 MILLION GUNS, VIOLENT CRIME FELL 51%
by AWR HAWKINS31 Aug 2015
On August 28, the NRA presented ATF and FBI data showing Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has fallen “51 percent.”

The NRA tweeted, “Since ’91, Americans have acquired over 170 million new firearms and violent crimes have declined by 51%.”

This information squares with the findings of a Congressional Research Service (CRS) study covering the slightly shorter period of time from 1994 to 2009. For those years, CRS found that Americans purchased approximately 118 million firearms, and the 1993 “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide” rate of 6.6 per 100,000 fell to 3.6 per 100,000 by the year 2000. It eventually fell all the way to 3.2 per 100,000 in 2011.

That is more than a 50 percent reduction in “firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide.”

Then, in 2009—the year the CRS study ended—Obama took office and gun sales began their climb to record levels, which made covering the gap between the 118 million guns that had been purchased by 2009 and the “170 million new guns” that Americans would own by 2015 an easy gap to bridge.

Breitbart News previously reported that there were 21,093,273 background checks for firearms in 2013 alone. And each of those checks were on buyers who could have legally purchased multiple firearms.

The overarching message is simple—more guns, less crime. Americans have purchased “170 million new guns” since 1991, and violent crime has decreased as gun ownership has increased.

Follow AWR Hawkins on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.

"awrhawkins@breitbart.com"

tells me all i need to know to know that this is bullshit.

cnn better?
By CNN Staff
Gun-related homicides and crime are "strikingly" down from 20 years ago, despite the American public's belief that firearm crime is on the upswing, a new study said Wednesday.

Looking back 50 years, a Pew Research Center study found U.S. gun homicides rose in the 1960s, gained in the 1970s, peaked in the 1980s and the early 1990s, and then plunged and leveled out the past 20 years.

"Despite national attention to the issue of firearm violence, most Americans are unaware that gun crime is lower today than it was two decades ago," the researchers say.

A Pew survey of Americans in March found 56% believed gun-related crime is higher than 20 years ago and only 12% said it's lower. The survey said 26% believed it stayed the same and 6% didn't know.
The new study found U.S. firearm homicides peaked in 1993 at 7.0 deaths per 100,000 people. But by 2010, the rate was 49% lower, and firearm-related violence -- assaults, robberies, sex crimes -- was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993, the study found.

Those drops parallel an overall decline in violent non-fatal crime, with or without a gun, the study said.

In fact, gun-related homicide rates in the late 2000s were "equal to those not seen since the early 1960s," the study found.

Explanations for the drops the past 20 years aren't clear, the study said.


"Researchers have studied the decline in firearm crime and violent crime for many years, and though there are theories to explain the decline, there is no consensus among those who study the issue as to why it happened," the researchers say in a summary.

Despite the decline, the United States still has a higher rate of homicide than other developed countries, the study says. But America doesn't have a higher rate for all other crimes.

The United States also has a higher rate of gun ownership than any other developed country, the study said.

Yes. This is the same point that I and others have made, once you also understand that crime is down in most countries. The last two sentences are also important to keep in mind.

mickeyrat

Murder peaked in the 90s? Huh. Right at the height of crack wars. What happened then as a result?

Oh thats right. BAN on uzis. Also a finite ban on "assualt rifles.

Moonpig

A picture of a dead child has began to mobilize people around the world to the growing humanitarian crisis, maybe the media should highlight mass shooting tragedies ............oh wait.

In all seriousness, with the way things seem to be in the US, there is a section of society who really don't give a shit, and for some reason they have been afforded a forum and are backed by a powerful lobby group.

Moonpig

for anyone with 13 minutes to spare, have a listen:

http://www.todayfm.com/mobile/index.php?id=21048

Pretty much sums things up

mcgruff10

mickeyrat said:

Murder peaked in the 90s? Huh. Right at the height of crack wars. What happened then as a result?

Oh thats right. BAN on uzis. Also a finite ban on "assualt rifles.

you realize uzis are legal to own since 2004? uzis weren't really used in that many crimes; rather they were dramatized by hollywood.
in 2013 murders in this country were the lowest since 1968.

dankind

Gruffy, Neither CNN nor Harvard make the leap that more guns equals less crime.

CNN reports that a study shows that gun-related homicides are down in the U.S. Then it goes on in its last two sentences to share that "the United States still has a higher rate of homicide than other developed countries" and that "The United States ... has a higher rate of gun ownership than any other developed country."

The student-edited paper that the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, which is known among its circle as a forum for conservative and libertarian legal scholarship, published in 2007 also doesn't state that more guns equals less crime, because in spite of their politics (Kates is a libertarian, and Mauser is a Canadian gun-rights advocate), they cannot prove that as a fact. What they can claim (again, not prove) is that according to their observations (which given their politics and the publication likely have some confirmational bias), more guns do not necessarily equal more crime and less guns do not necessarily equal less crime. I read the entire PDF. It's interesting, but the findings have to be taken with a grain of salt.

Anyway, who's with me and Andy Parker (father of Alison Parker) on Sept. 10 to do "whatever it takes ... to shame legislators into doing something about closing loopholes in background checks and making sure crazy people don’t get guns."

Pledge to act here: http://act.everytown.org/signup/day-of-action/?source=no_ETActPage&utm_source=_n_&utm_medium=_o&utm_campaign=WhateverItTakesHub.

Pledge to call Congress here: http://act.everytown.org/signup/day-of-action-calls/?source=no_ETActPage&utm_source=et_n_&utm_medium=_o&utm_campaign=WhateverItTakesHubPage.

Gruffy, I've read your posts. I know that you also think that there's a problem. I know that even you think we need to get Congress to act on this aspect (namely, gun safety and keeping psychos away from firearms). Hell, you had some good ideas about ways we can fix this. As a responsible gun owner, please call Congress and share them.

Let's remind Congress that they work for us and not the special interest groups and corporate lobbyists, especially on this issue. It's too important to ignore; it's literally a matter of life and death.

mcgruff10

"Anyway, who's with me and Andy Parker (father of Alison Parker) on Sept. 10 to do "whatever it takes ... to shame legislators into doing something about closing loopholes in background checks and making sure crazy people don’t get guns.""

I'm all for this bud! it's a tough uphill battle though. i'm from liberal new jersey where we have a ton of gun control laws that appear to be working. Like I've said, I just don't want to ban any guns or tax the hell out of ammo.
Maybe i'll run for congress...Do I have your vote?

dankind

mcgruff10 said:

"Anyway, who's with me and Andy Parker (father of Alison Parker) on Sept. 10 to do "whatever it takes ... to shame legislators into doing something about closing loopholes in background checks and making sure crazy people don’t get guns.""

I'm all for this bud! it's a tough uphill battle though. i'm from liberal new jersey where we have a ton of gun control laws that appear to be working. Like I've said, I just don't want to ban any guns or tax the hell out of ammo.
Maybe i'll run for congress...Do I have your vote?

This isn't about banning guns, which will never happen in our lifetime in this country. The NRA et al. are too big to let that happen. Do you actually worry about that?

If so, I'll equate it to the pro-choice people who worry that abortion will be banned on a national level. That will also never happen in our lifetime in this country. Planned Parenthood et al. are too big.

I can't vote for you, bud. Way out of my district -- plus you talk shit about Riot Act.

mcgruff10

dankind said:

mcgruff10 said:

"Anyway, who's with me and Andy Parker (father of Alison Parker) on Sept. 10 to do "whatever it takes ... to shame legislators into doing something about closing loopholes in background checks and making sure crazy people don’t get guns.""

I'm all for this bud! it's a tough uphill battle though. i'm from liberal new jersey where we have a ton of gun control laws that appear to be working. Like I've said, I just don't want to ban any guns or tax the hell out of ammo.
Maybe i'll run for congress...Do I have your vote?

This isn't about banning guns, which will never happen in our lifetime in this country. The NRA et al. are too big to let that happen. Do you actually worry about that?

If so, I'll equate it to the pro-choice people who worry that abortion will be banned on a national level. That will also never happen in our lifetime in this country. Planned Parenthood et al. are too big.

I can't vote for you, bud. Way out of my district -- plus you talk shit about Riot Act.

hey they banned a hell of a lot of guns here in new jersey so it can happen. And it happened in 1994.
I do talk shit about riot act....terrible record. pearl jam should reimburse me every time they play something shitty off that album.

mickeyrat

mcgruff10 said:

mickeyrat said:

Murder peaked in the 90s? Huh. Right at the height of crack wars. What happened then as a result?

Oh thats right. BAN on uzis. Also a finite ban on "assualt rifles.

you realize uzis are legal to own since 2004? uzis weren't really used in that many crimes; rather they were dramatized by hollywood.
in 2013 murders in this country were the lowest since 1968.

Tell that to local pd in my hometown who gathered them from project housing during that time frame. Both projects in seperate parts of the city have been torn down since.

One they described as uzi alley.



The full auto version is no longer legal for sale since 86 when it was outlawed , gasp, by Reagan!!!! So if as you say not many were used in crime why the need to outlaw them?

2004 the year the assault weapon ban was allowed to expire. Shame. We were on the right track.

mcgruff10

mickeyrat said:

mcgruff10 said:

mickeyrat said:

Murder peaked in the 90s? Huh. Right at the height of crack wars. What happened then as a result?

Oh thats right. BAN on uzis. Also a finite ban on "assualt rifles.

you realize uzis are legal to own since 2004? uzis weren't really used in that many crimes; rather they were dramatized by hollywood.
in 2013 murders in this country were the lowest since 1968.

Tell that to local pd in my hometown who gathered them from project housing during that time frame. Both projects in seperate parts of the city have been torn down since.

One they described as uzi alley.



The full auto version is no longer legal for sale since 86 when it was outlawed , gasp, by Reagan!!!! So if as you say not many were used in crime why the need to outlaw them?

2004 the year the assault weapon ban was allowed to expire. Shame. We were on the right track.

first off I've voted democrat every year since I was allowed to vote (1996) so I could care less that Reagan signed that bill into law; although it was a nice bipartisan comprise with republicans the majority in the senate and democrats controlling the house. a major reason the machine gun ban met so little resistance was a 1934 law passed a month after outlaws Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow were killed in a hail of machine gun bullets. It required machine gun owners to pay a hefty tax, be fingerprinted and be listed on a national registry. So in essence since it was so expensive to have a fully automatic weapon there were in fact not a lot here in the country.
And did you also know that the NRA backed this bill?
second, I have zero problem with fully automatic weapons being banned. There's no reason for a us citizen to have one.

mickeyrat

The greater point is the isnt a direct causal correlation with increased sales to lower crime.

Crime itself is seeing a decline for many reasons.

The articles you posted infer that the overall % of population THAT OWN GUNS has grown dramatically as the overall number of guns has. Its not factually true.

edit in caps

mickeyrat

http://www.newsweek.com/us-gun-ownership-declines-312822

mcgruff10

mickeyrat said:

The greater point is the isnt a direct causal correlation with increased sales to lower crime.

Crime itself is seeing a decline for many reasons.

The articles you posted infer that the overall % of population has grown dramatically as the overall number of guns has. Its not factually true.

wait I reread your comment a few times now; you are saying that the overall population of this country and number of guns in this country have not gone up?

And you are saying there isn't a direct causal correlation with increased sales to lower crime. But a lot of anti-gunners here say that the more guns equal more crime. So if we've added literally over 100 million guns and crime hasn't gone up then doesn't that prove that theory wrong?