100 homicidal home invasions
- Blind groper
- Posts: 3997
- Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 3:10 am
- About me: From New Zealand
- Contact:
Re: 100 homicidal home invasions
There is probably no relationship between gun ownership and overall crime rates. BUT there is a direct relationship between gun ownership and gun crime, and especially gun homicide. Since gun homicide makes up two thirds of all homicides in the USA, the number of people with guns directly affects the homicide rate.
Seth keeps saying that banning guns will not matter since it is only criminals who use guns to murder, and criminals will always get guns.
He is wrong on both points. Non criminals become criminals by committing homicides, and that is thousands of cases each year. And criminals in countries where guns are tightly restricted do not carry guns. Only in the USA do we see large numbers of criminals carrying and using guns, out of the developed world.
Seth keeps saying that banning guns will not matter since it is only criminals who use guns to murder, and criminals will always get guns.
He is wrong on both points. Non criminals become criminals by committing homicides, and that is thousands of cases each year. And criminals in countries where guns are tightly restricted do not carry guns. Only in the USA do we see large numbers of criminals carrying and using guns, out of the developed world.
- Hermit
- Posts: 25806
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
- About me: Cantankerous grump
- Location: Ignore lithpt
- Contact:
Re: 100 homicidal home invasions
Nationally, annual road construction and maintenance in the USA costs about 150 billion dollars a year. The three biggest sources of funds are fuel taxes, federal government contributions and bond proceeds, amounting to 63%. Vehicle registration fees and charges contribute 13%.Seth wrote:Do you actually know why cars are registered? It has little to do with auto theft and everything to do with taxation. Autos use the highways, which cost money to build and maintain, so we register cars in order to impose taxes on the owners to pay for the infrastructure.
If you want to find out why motor vehicles are registered, direct your attention to safety inspections among other things.
And drivers must be appropriately qualified to drive motor vehicles for much the same reason.
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould
- Tero
- Just saying
- Posts: 51200
- Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
- About me: 15-32-25
- Location: USA
- Contact:
Re: 100 homicidal home invasions
Because the millions of guns you put out there allows the leakage to criminals.
Sounds like a reason to me. Make it hard for criminals. Machine shops are not going to custom make guns that easy.Yes, it does. That's unfortunate, but it's not a reason to ban guns.
Re: 100 homicidal home invasions
But it makes it easy for them to kill when they do get a gun, and they will ALWAYS be able to get a gun if they really want one.Tero wrote:Because the millions of guns you put out there allows the leakage to criminals.Sounds like a reason to me. Make it hard for criminals.Yes, it does. That's unfortunate, but it's not a reason to ban guns.
Who said anything about "machine shops?" You can buy a pre-programmed CNC machine that will manufacture as many AR-15 receivers as you have aluminum blanks for about $1500, and it's small enough to sit in your clothes closet. And converting it to manufacture some other gun is literally child's play, given how early our kids are programming sophisticated computer viruses.Machine shops are not going to custom make guns that easy.
Making guns is abysmally simple, particularly with modern CNC equipment and 3D printing. You can't stop it, you can't prevent it, you can't control it. It's going to happen whether you like it or not.
Besides, there's a thousand other kinds of weapons criminals can kill you with against which threat a handgun is the best defense, so all you are doing is disarming those who never break the law while trying vainly to keep those who do break the law from getting just one of a thousand different weapons.
Pointless futility and an insult to the rights of the law abiding.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S
"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke
"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth
© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.
"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke
"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth
© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.
Re: 100 homicidal home invasions
Bullshit!Blind groper wrote:There is probably no relationship between gun ownership and overall crime rates. BUT there is a direct relationship between gun ownership and gun crime, and especially gun homicide. Since gun homicide makes up two thirds of all homicides in the USA, the number of people with guns directly affects the homicide rate.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S
"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke
"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth
© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.
"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke
"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth
© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.
Re: 100 homicidal home invasions
I think you're talking about federal highway funding. At the local level registration, ownership and use taxes pay for many things including road maintenance and construction.Hermit wrote:Nationally, annual road construction and maintenance in the USA costs about 150 billion dollars a year. The three biggest sources of funds are fuel taxes, federal government contributions and bond proceeds, amounting to 63%. Vehicle registration fees and charges contribute 13%.Seth wrote:Do you actually know why cars are registered? It has little to do with auto theft and everything to do with taxation. Autos use the highways, which cost money to build and maintain, so we register cars in order to impose taxes on the owners to pay for the infrastructure.
Er, we don't have "safety inspections" anymore because it was found to be a complete waste of time and money. Now, when your broke-down POS car causes a problem the cops just give you a whopping fine and sometimes take your plates till you get it fixed.
If you want to find out why motor vehicles are registered, direct your attention to safety inspections among other things.
I'm fine with causing people to be "appropriately qualified" to carry a concealed firearm in public, which is why I recommend that gun safety and marksmanship training begin in all public schools in the first grade and continue through high school graduation. That way, in a couple of generations EVERYONE will be appropriately qualified to carry a concealed handgun.And drivers must be appropriately qualified to drive motor vehicles for much the same reason.
So, would you then say that if a person is "appropriately qualified" to carry a handgun in public he or she should be allowed to do so?
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S
"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke
"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth
© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.
"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke
"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth
© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.
- Tero
- Just saying
- Posts: 51200
- Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
- About me: 15-32-25
- Location: USA
- Contact:
Re: 100 homicidal home invasions
Looks like quite the operation to assemble less than 400 weapons. Due to the equipment and parts the ATF tracked them down.
https://www.atf.gov/news/pr/sacramento- ... mento-area
So, Seth, if your method is so simple, why didn't these people use it?
https://www.atf.gov/news/pr/sacramento- ... mento-area
So, Seth, if your method is so simple, why didn't these people use it?
- Hermit
- Posts: 25806
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
- About me: Cantankerous grump
- Location: Ignore lithpt
- Contact:
Re: 100 homicidal home invasions
The data are from the cost of local and state roads. LinkSeth wrote:I think you're talking about federal highway funding. At the local level registration, ownership and use taxes pay for many things including road maintenance and construction.Hermit wrote:Nationally, annual road construction and maintenance in the USA costs about 150 billion dollars a year. The three biggest sources of funds are fuel taxes, federal government contributions and bond proceeds, amounting to 63%. Vehicle registration fees and charges contribute 13%.Seth wrote:Do you actually know why cars are registered? It has little to do with auto theft and everything to do with taxation. Autos use the highways, which cost money to build and maintain, so we register cars in order to impose taxes on the owners to pay for the infrastructure.
That's something that has changed in recent years, but 18 states still require annual or biennial safety inspections.Seth wrote:Er, we don't have "safety inspections" anymore because it was found to be a complete waste of time and money. Now, when your broke-down POS car causes a problem the cops just give you a whopping fine and sometimes take your plates till you get it fixed.Hermit wrote:If you want to find out why motor vehicles are registered, direct your attention to safety inspections among other things.
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould
- JimC
- The sentimental bloke
- Posts: 74136
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
- About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: 100 homicidal home invasions
The key is restrictions to ownership which reduce the chances of massacres by disturbed individuals. You have enough of such massacres to realise that the ability of crazed loonies to get their hands on assault rifles and a shit load of other weapons is currently very high in the US. Some clever profiling could reduce this, without stopping Mr or Mrs Average from enjoying their very own arsenal...Seth wrote:
...and you want to restrict the rights of the law-abiding to possess firearms by blaming them for the actions of criminals using guns illegally...
The other issue, of criminals with guns, is simply a consequence of the large number of guns available. It is trivially easy in the US for a wannabe criminal to obtain a firearm; much harder (although obviously not impossible) in other jurisdictions. Other than making committing a crime while armed with a firearm have much higher penalties, there is probably no solution, given that it is clear that there is not going to be a large decrease in the pool of available firearms in your country anytime soon...
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!
And my gin!
- Blind groper
- Posts: 3997
- Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 3:10 am
- About me: From New Zealand
- Contact:
Re: 100 homicidal home invasions
Seth tells us that any criminal who wants a gun will get one, regardless of gun control laws. That is true to a point. But his point is purely theoretical.
Fortunately, this is a point that can be tested against reality. In countries with strong gun control laws, how many criminals carry guns? Answer, very very few. In countries with strong gun control laws, gun homicides are rare. In my country, it is 23 TIMES lower than in the USA.
Nor are those extra murders carried out by other means. Guns are simply the most lethal means of attempting murder, and result in more deaths. A recent mass attack in the USA with a person wielding a knife resulted in half a dozen people stabbed. All survived. If he had been using a gun, many would have died.
Not only that, but more would have been attacked. With a knife, you have to be right next to a person to attack that person. With a gun, you can also attack all those who are running away. Had that assailant been using a gun, who knows how many people would have died?
More guns means more deaths by murder.
Fortunately, this is a point that can be tested against reality. In countries with strong gun control laws, how many criminals carry guns? Answer, very very few. In countries with strong gun control laws, gun homicides are rare. In my country, it is 23 TIMES lower than in the USA.
Nor are those extra murders carried out by other means. Guns are simply the most lethal means of attempting murder, and result in more deaths. A recent mass attack in the USA with a person wielding a knife resulted in half a dozen people stabbed. All survived. If he had been using a gun, many would have died.
Not only that, but more would have been attacked. With a knife, you have to be right next to a person to attack that person. With a gun, you can also attack all those who are running away. Had that assailant been using a gun, who knows how many people would have died?
More guns means more deaths by murder.
Re: 100 homicidal home invasions
No it's not, it's entirely true.Blind groper wrote:Seth tells us that any criminal who wants a gun will get one, regardless of gun control laws. That is true to a point. But his point is purely theoretical.
And yet you still have gun crime.Fortunately, this is a point that can be tested against reality. In countries with strong gun control laws, how many criminals carry guns? Answer, very very few. In countries with strong gun control laws, gun homicides are rare. In my country, it is 23 TIMES lower than in the USA.
Which may be true but is not relevant to whether or not the potential victims have a right to be effectively armed for self defense against any such attack. Had even one of those victims been legally armed then the amount of injury would likely have been substantially reduced. And you make my point for me because the person was wielding a knife, not a gun, which would not have been prevented by banning guns now would it? Thus, all banning the lawful carrying of defensive firearms would have done is exactly what happened; a bunch of people were injured and put at risk of death because nobody who wasn't a criminal was armed with effective self-defense tools.
Nor are those extra murders carried out by other means. Guns are simply the most lethal means of attempting murder, and result in more deaths. A recent mass attack in the USA with a person wielding a knife resulted in half a dozen people stabbed. All survived. If he had been using a gun, many would have died.
Depends on who is holding the gun at the time.More guns means more deaths by murder.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S
"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke
"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth
© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.
"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke
"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth
© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.
Re: 100 homicidal home invasions
They did. That's rather the point.Tero wrote:Looks like quite the operation to assemble less than 400 weapons. Due to the equipment and parts the ATF tracked them down.
https://www.atf.gov/news/pr/sacramento- ... mento-area
So, Seth, if your method is so simple, why didn't these people use it?
First off, he's lying when he says manufacturing and selling unmarked firearms "poses grave danger to our communities." It doesn't pose any greater or lesser danger to anyone than any other firearm does because it is not the imprimus of the BATFE that makes a firearm not a danger to the community, it is solely and only who is in possession of the firearm and what they do with it that determines whether or not a firearm is a "grave danger" to any community. An unmarked firearm possessed by a law-abiding citizen is both perfectly legal and perfectly safe for the community. On the other hand, a marked and registered firearm possessed by a criminal is indeed a grave danger to the community, one which in many circumstances can only be mitigated or defended against by armed law-abiding citizens prepared to defend their communities against armed criminal activity.“Manufacturing and selling unmarked firearms is illegal and poses grave danger to our communities,” said ATF Special Agent in Charge Riehl. “These unmarked firearms used in violent crimes are difficult, if not impossible to trace back to perpetrators of the offense.”
And when the ATF agent says that unmarked weapons are "difficult, if not impossible to trace back to perpetrators of the offense" he's referring to the offense of illegally manufacturing unmarked firearms for sale, not the simple possession of an unmarked firearm by a law-abiding citizen.
The obvious irrelevance of this statement is that these particular guys were manufacturing unmarked firearms because they are criminals and didn't want the firearms traced back to them, which is the same thing as stealing a marked firearm and selling it to another criminal, something neither marking nor registration can prevent.
The only difference is that with a marked firearm the BATFE can "trace back" the firearm to the manufacturer, the original distributor, the original FFL gun dealer and the original Form 4473 purchaser, and only those persons. Whether any of those person committed a crime is entirely unknown to the BATFE, which makes their "traces" into little more than a fishing expedition. The illegal manufacturers were unknown to the BATFE until they mounted a long-term investigation to identify them, which is exactly how it's supposed to be done.
So, this incident just proves what I've been saying. If criminals want guns they can get them, or manufacture them illegally, and gun registration requirements will have absolutely no effect whatsoever on preventing them from doing so because they violate the law merely by possessing a firearm, registered or not, so the deterrent effect of registration laws is ineffective at keeping criminals from getting or manufacturing firearms.
The mistake they made (other than being illegal aliens and felons to begin with) is that they personally completed the operations to "make" the firearm, including (illegal) unlicensed gunsmithing (assembly of the parts) and drilling of the receiver. That made them the "manufacturer" of the firearm, whereas if they sold the blank and the buyer completed the operations at home, the resulting firearm (presuming it wasn't illegally assembled as an NFA item) would have been perfectly legal and neither suspect would have broken the law. You see, as the article points out it's not illegal to cast or machine a block of aluminum into the shape of a receiver so long as you don't take it to the point where it becomes a legal firearm receiver, which requires a manufacturing license, serial numbers, and paperwork filed with the government.According to the search warrant affidavit, once a customer purchased the firearm parts including a blank lower receiver, he was directed to Emiliano Cortez-Garcia who operated the drill press. Once Emiliano Cortez-Garcia had completed machining the lower receiver, he or Luis Cortez-Garcia would assemble the completed AR-15. Customers paid cash to receive a complete firearm that bore no serial number. No ATF paperwork or background checks were completed. During the course of the investigation, ATF conducted seven undercover purchases of AR-15 firearms.
Evidently they also went much, much further, to the point of not just providing blanks and equipment but actually assembling the receivers and barrels and other parts and selling the firearms as complete units, which is illegal. Or so it appears. It's not clear from the article exactly how this played out, although the article suggests that the suspects manufactured suppressor parts, which IS illegal to do at home without FIRST filing with the BATFE and getting permission to manufacture a suppressor. You can build your own silencer, but you have to get a permit for it BEFORE you begin manufacturing it because ANY PART of a suppressor is defined as a suppressor for the purposes of the NFA.
The feds have been trying to quash the "80 percent" receiver market for some time now, and they are not having much luck, fortunately. To do so they have twisted the definition of "commerce" all out of shape to get to people who are in fact "making" legal firearms for their own use. There is a legal distinction between "making" a firearm and "manufacturing" them, the distinction being whether or not the completed firearm enters commerce by being sold.
One such effort to quash the 80% market was that "machine shop clubs" started showing up where people would join a club that provided access to CNC machines, drill presses and other tools. Members of the club could then pay a per-hour fee to use the equipment to finish their 80% blanks (or anything else). The BATFE didn't like this because they want power and control over gun manufacturing so they twisted the meaning of "commerce" to include such clubs on the premise that by paying to rent the machinery there was a "for profit" commercial activity going on that turned the facility (and machinery) into an unlicensed firearms manufacturer even though no employee of the club ever touched the blanks and the owners of the blanks performed all the required labor to complete the legal firearm receiver. That's quite a stretch and is currently being challenged in court.
So, one result of this illegal suppression of lawful private, non-commercial gun-making was the invention and marketing of the low-cost dedicated CNC device I mentioned earlier that takes an 80% blank and mills out the required openings and holes with great precision in a matter of minutes and costs less than $2000, as opposed to $200,000 for a top-of-the-line CNC mill. An individual can buy the machine and by owning it bypass the "commerce" trap the BATFE set up to prevent law-abiding citizens from engaging in perfectly lawful gunmaking. The machine is merely an unregulated tool, the modern equivalent of a simple drill press and hand tools, which can also be used to finish a blank.
In fact I have more than one 80% kit sitting in my boxes of gun stuff that includes a set of steel templates that, when clamped to the blank, guide the drill bit to make accurate holes. The blank can in fact be completed with nothing more than an electric hand drill, some drill bits and a file. To complete the legal building of the firearm I need only obtain an upper receiver/barrel assembly, a trigger pack, a grip and a stock and I have a perfectly legal, and perfectly unmarked, AR-style rifle.
And I have them so that if someday someone comes and illegally confiscates my firearms I can make new ones, which is my right under the Constitution and is in fact why the BATFE lacks the authority to regulate or prohibit private, non-commercial gun-making.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S
"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke
"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth
© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.
"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke
"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth
© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.
Re: 100 homicidal home invasions
Which don't work.JimC wrote:The key is restrictions to ownership which reduce the chances of massacres by disturbed individuals.Seth wrote:
...and you want to restrict the rights of the law-abiding to possess firearms by blaming them for the actions of criminals using guns illegally...
Not really. Mass shootings are in fact reasonably rare, which is why they make the papers. What you don't hear about in the left-wing lamestream press are the times when a potential mass shooting is prevented by an armed citizen.You have enough of such massacres to realise that the ability of crazed loonies to get their hands on assault rifles and a shit load of other weapons is currently very high in the US.
But, with reference to those crazed loonies who DO get their hands on a firearm, they shouldn't. But preventing that is a difficult proposition because, as almost all of the mass shootings in the US have demonstrated, the "crazed loonies" obtained their firearms legally by buying them from a licensed gun dealer and passing a NICS background check, which means that all those hoops that are supposed to prevent crazed loonies from getting guns don't work. What works is a non-crazed-loonie armed citizen on the spot and ready to act if and when a crazed loonie opens fire. Only someone with a gun is going to stop a crazed loonie with a gun, and pretty much every single crazed loonie who has committed a mass shooting was pretty much finished shooting by the time the police arrived, at which most of them commit suicide before the police can shoot them.
There are exceptions of course, like Charles Whitman at the Texas tower incident, but it's worthwhile pointing out that in that instance the police didn't have ANY weapons capable of providing suppressive gunfire (they had pistols and shotguns) and it was armed Texas civilians with their scoped hunting rifles, from the racks in the back windows of their pickup trucks, who took Whitman under fire to keep his head down which allowed people to escape, the injured to be rescued, and ultimately allowed two police officers and an armed civilian to corner Whitman on the parapet and kill him.
I'm not entirely opposed to better efforts to identify the mentally ill, but the problem is that if one's gun rights are conditioned upon meeting a government-mandated sanity test it's far too easy for the government to manipulate the testing criteria to exclude almost everyone as a matter of policy. That, by way of example, is precisely why concealed carry was so rare prior to the "shall issue" movement. Most CCW laws (which have existed for a long time) were discretionary in nature, leaving the decision up to the local chief law enforcement official. One had to generally state a "need" to carry concealed in order to get a permit, and by and large, because the police brass don't want anyone but the police carrying weapons, no "need" short of a documented "hit" contract or political connections was sufficient to induce the official to issue a permit. As in Canada today, personal protection in the abstract was simply not accepted as a legitimate justification for being armed. One needed to have already been the victim of a violent crime and, moreover, the suspect had to still be at large, in order to qualify.Some clever profiling could reduce this, without stopping Mr or Mrs Average from enjoying their very own arsenal...
This exclusion of the average citizen from the right to be armed for effective self defense was nearly universal until Florida changed things beginning about 1985.
Now, in shall issue states (most of them) the issuing official must document a valid and legislatively-determined reason NOT to issue a CCW permit, which includes adjudication as a mental defective, involuntary commitment to a mental health facility, alcohol or drug misuse, domestic violence and a few other disqualifiers.
And that is the appropriate way to deal with it. One is presumed to be competent to exercise one's right to keep and bear arms unless and until one demonstrates that one is not competent to do so. We prefer that to the sort of prior restraint insisted upon by hoplophobes that implies that everyone is a potential crazed loonie until it's proven otherwise, which is of course an impossible task of proving a negative. This "common sense" approach to gun control is exactly the sort of mendacious and evil propaganda that hoplophobes trot out at every opportunity despite the ample evidence that people who go though the necessary background checks to get a CCW permit are far LESS likely to commit any sort of crime than the bitching hoplophobes themselves.
Yes, the existence of firearms on the planet does give criminals the opportunity to obtain them, which they do despite every law and regulation against them doing so. So what? That's a consequence of technology that can't be solved by lame attempts at prohibition, which as we should all know never works.The other issue, of criminals with guns, is simply a consequence of the large number of guns available.
The best solution is to let law-abiding citizens willing to go through the process of obtaining a CCW permit carry their guns in public and to encourage and support all law-abiding citizens who show an interest in doing so that the pool of (12 million) armed citizens carrying their guns in public, which is now 24 times larger than all the police officers in the US (about 500,000), continues to grow and grow, which increases the likelihood that one or more of them will be in a position to act with alacrity and effective speed whenever a crazed loonie starts shooting people, because when that happens the only thing that stops it is someone else with a gun.It is trivially easy in the US for a wannabe criminal to obtain a firearm; much harder (although obviously not impossible) in other jurisdictions. Other than making committing a crime while armed with a firearm have much higher penalties, there is probably no solution, given that it is clear that there is not going to be a large decrease in the pool of available firearms in your country anytime soon...
That's not just the best solution, it's the ONLY solution.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S
"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke
"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth
© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.
"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke
"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth
© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.
- Tero
- Just saying
- Posts: 51200
- Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
- About me: 15-32-25
- Location: USA
- Contact:
Re: 100 homicidal home invasions
All very interesting and actually some of your new stuff I've never read. So thanks for all the detail.And I have them so that if someday someone comes and illegally confiscates my firearms I can make new ones, which is my right under the Constitution and is in fact why the BATFE lacks the authority to regulate or prohibit private, non-commercial gun-making.
Disagree on the Constitution part.
Re: 100 homicidal home invasions
You're quite welcome. My purpose is always to educate and learn.Tero wrote:All very interesting and actually some of your new stuff I've never read. So thanks for all the detail.And I have them so that if someday someone comes and illegally confiscates my firearms I can make new ones, which is my right under the Constitution and is in fact why the BATFE lacks the authority to regulate or prohibit private, non-commercial gun-making.
Interestingly, unlike Marxism, the Constitution protects your right to disagree, and were someone to attempt to use force to suppress your right to disagree, I would be willing to step up and defend your exercise of that right using whatever degree of force is reasonable and necessary to vindicate that right, including exercising my right to keep and bear arms in defense of the right to disagree, which itself is protected by the First Amendment.Disagree on the Constitution part.
The 2nd Amendment is the one that protects all the others, you see. Without it, your disagreement can be suppressed with extreme prejudice by a despotic and tyrannical government...like those of the Soviet Union, Communist China, Venezuela and many others.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S
"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke
"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth
© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.
"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke
"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth
© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests