Gun Laws in America

jlew24asu wrote:

prove it. and no one here wants a ban on ALL guns. of course thats unrealistic.

Here are some interesting facts to play with:

Washington, D.C.'s ban on handgun sales took effect in 1977 and by the 1990s the city's murder rate had tripled. During the years following the ban, most murders--and all firearm murders--in the city were committed with handguns.

Chicago imposed handgun registration in 1968, and murders with handguns continued to rise. Its registration system in place, Chicago imposed a D.C.-style handgun ban in 1982, and over the next decade the annual number of handgun-related murders doubled.

California increased its waiting period on retail and private sales of handguns from five to 15 days in 1975 (reduced to 10 days in 1996), outlawed "assault weapons" in 1989 and subjected rifles and shotguns to the waiting period in 1990. Yet since 1975, the state's annual murder rate has averaged 32% higher than the rate for the rest of the country.

Maryland has imposed a waiting period and a gun purchase limit, banned several small handguns, restricted "assault weapons," and regulated private transfers of firearms even between family members and friends, yet for the last decade its murder rate has averaged 44% higher than the rate for the rest of the country, and its robbery rate has averaged highest among the states.

The overall murder rate in the jurisdictions that have the most severe restrictions on firearms purchase and ownership--California, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and Washington, D.C.--is 8% higher than the rate for the rest of the country.

New York has had a handgun licensing law since 1911, yet until the New York City Police Department began a massive crackdown on crime in the mid-1990s, New York City's violent crime rate was among the highest of U.S. cities.

The federal Gun Control Act of 1968 imposed unprecedented restrictions relating to firearms nationwide. Yet, compared to the five years before the law, the national murder rate averaged 50% higher during the five years after the law, 75% higher during the next five years, and 81% higher during the five years after that.

callen wrote:

Felony to be caught with a gun....pay people fair amount for what they have....done...finito....fertich...listo.

Too many people living in fear but sounds good.

jlew24asu wrote:

good thing we have police around.

Do police prevent crime where you live? They only respond to calls where I'm from. Self-defense and crime prevention are issues I need to address for myself. If you are relying on police protection you're either naive or live in an area where your cop to citizen ratio must be extraordinarly high.

jeffbr wrote:

What do you mean? Do you know how hard it is to get the BATFE to give you a federal stamp permitting you to buy a full automatic weapon? VERY few people get them. You've made it sound like anyone can go to a gun show and get a fully automatic firearms, which is definitely not the case.

thread and you'll see I'm agreeing with this (your) statement.....I actually thought no one could get a fully automatic weapon.

jlew24asu wrote:

personally I hate guns. They are intended for one purpose. To Kill. I would like to see extremely tough gun laws. much tougher then the ones already in place. and an all out ban on assault weapons like machine guns.

the second amendment right is as outdated as catholic priests not being allowed to marry. we shouldnt have the right to bear arms. it should be a privilege to those who qualify.

Not to be deriding, but seriously...."I hate guns?" Like, I hate drunk drivers, and like *twirling hair* I hate slow drivers, and like, it's all so stupid, and mean and like.

Machine guns are banned. But they shouldn't be. Why? Because those that want one for unlawful purposes will get them. You may not want people to have them, but they exist. Unless you somehow destroy every single machine gun and then kill everyone who knows how to make them, you will NEVER stop them from getting into the hands of people who want them bad enough. So since these unsavory individuals can get them, I say let us law abiding citizens have them so we can defend ourselves if something like Katrina happens in our neighborhood.

Everyone always says they hate guns and the NRA, but they never figure out how to prevent the wost among us from getting guns. It's like the drug debate. I think the fact that drugs are illegal is a joke. The same logic applies to guns.

I think taking an anti-second amendment position is basically a cop out...it's not based on logic, it's to make us feel good.

KidCarnivore wrote:

I know it's late to jump into this thread, but I'm surprised that it hasn't been mentioned that there is an inherent trust in the government that is required to ban guns. By banning guns, you are essentially trusting the government to acquire all guns (not just those belonging to copliant citizens), you are trusting the government to protect you better than you can protect yourself, and you are trusting the government to not betray you or take away any more of your rights (no one can seriously believe this).
I don't trust the government to do any of those things. With intense gun laws, all we would do is create a dangerous black market (similar to the black market we have created for drugs).

Thank you, I was going to bring up this point, because it's an important one....totally agree with you.

anybody ever seen the movie Heat? those were some bad ass guns,...

jlew24asu wrote:

you make much better points than Hawk. and yes there would be a need for public accountability for the government to gradually destroy and phase out assault weapons.

with that said I dont realistically ever seeing ALL guns be totally banned, and dont think they should be. just a ban on "assault" weapons and very tough laws to obtain a non assault weapon. (dont ask me about categories, I dont know)

It would take a long time for positive changes to take place, possible a generation.


To say drugs/guns should be legal because there is a black market is the most asinine I ever heard. but I'm just one guy on a message board.

"Assault weapons" are not machine guns. As have been stated, machine guns are already banned.

You wanna know the criteria for a weapong being deemed an assault weapon?

if it has a bayonette (sp? sorry, that's bad) lug
it has a folding stock
it has a pistol grip
a big magazine

I know you are not a lefty jlew, but seriously, I think the left has you hook line and sinker on this issue. it's style over substance. the term "assault weapon", i'm guessing most people associate with machine guns. With an "assault weapon" you pull the trigger, and one bullet comes out. with a machine gun (which are illegal but I think they should be legal) you press the trigger once, and lots of bullets come out.

As with any issue, when people become informed, I think they favor the conservative side...learn about guns, and you will become enlightened my friend