The problem is, the way to reduce crime is to reduce gun control - and even encourage law abiding citizens to carry, but that just doesn't sound politically correct or logical to a person like you. So I can provide you ideas to improve things but you will just reject it because it comes off as a paradox.
-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Shooting at Florida Wendys
Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
The problem is, the way to reduce crime is to reduce gun control - and even encourage law abiding citizens to carry, but that just doesn't sound politically correct or logical to a person like you. So I can provide you ideas to improve things but you will just reject it because it comes off as a paradox.
Zenmervolt
Elite member
Training I can see. Same with licensing.
Registry, never. There has never in the entire course of recorded history been a firearms registry that did not lead to an all-out ban or confiscation. Never.
ZV
JulesMaximus
No Lifer
No, I'm not assuming anything. My point is that gun control isn't very effective at preventing criminals from owning or using guns. In fact, it's almost completely worthless in that respect.
Zenmervolt
Elite member
State-maintained, and it applies only to FFLs. If I buy from a private party, the sale is not legally required to be reported and is not listed in any registry. In WA you can buy all the guns you want from private parties and there is zero registration.
What people call a "registry" is, in reality, a sale record for FFL dealers. It is not a true registration system since if one sells one's weapon in a private sale neither party has to record the sale and the weapon does not need to be registered to the new owner.
ZV
While you may reduce some illegal guns, you will completely remove the legal guns and take away the ability to defend ones self, family, and property from law abiding citizens. You endanger them for what?
If criminals knew you didn't have any guns to protect yourself with, how would that help reduce crime?
JulesMaximus
No Lifer
True, a friend of mine had a gun locked in the trunk of his car which was stolen over 10 years ago. He got the car back 3 days later but the gun was missing so he filed a police report...they gave him a bunch of crap about it but took the report.
Then about two months ago a pair of Los Angeles County Sheriff Officers showed up at his house asking about the gun. He explained that the gun was stolen, that he had filed a stolen gun report and showed them the paperwork (somehow that information didn't make it into the database). Apparently, they had recovered the gun and were running it through ballistics to see if it matched up to any shootings.
My friend got the gun back about a month later after they confirmed that it hasn't been used in any crimes.
Zenmervolt
Elite member
Then you explain that you sold the gun. It's that simple. If you're really paranoid, you can call your local police and let them know that you have just sold a weapon legally in a private party transfer and want it recorded that the firearm with the serial number XXXXXXX no longer belongs to you.
I say again, the "registry" is not a registry. It is only a sales record for FFL dealers. It cannot be relied upon to accurately reflect ownership information.
ZV
JulesMaximus
No Lifer
You'd be a fool not to though. See my post above for an explanation as to why.
In CA it is illegal to transfer a gun without going through a transfer process with a firearms dealer doing the background check and the purchaser must go through the waiting period. I personally think this is a good thing. I wouldn't want to sell a gun to someone and find out later that he shot up a Wendys with it.
Zenmervolt
Elite member
We'll have to simply disagree.
ZV
rh71
No Lifer
PRECISELY the reason we don't need more people with guns. Stolen, lost, etc. People for guns - how can you as a human being trust other human beings? You know you don't.
All the talk of feeling safer if you're allowed to carry serves only yourself. And that's the only person you can trust. Unfortunately you can't be responsible for everyone else too.
I know I quoted you but this is directed at anyone supporting "strict gun controls".
http://www.ncpa.org/pub/st/st176/s176c.html
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/493636.html
http://www.fraserinstitute.org...srelease.aspx?nid=3958 (note specifically england and whales)
Even if you take a site like this one endorsed by the Brady's:
http://www.commondreams.org/pr...ases/jan99/011899a.htm
If you ACTUALLY READ THE ARTICLE it states that reducing sales to one gun per person per month would reduce crime because of reduced trafficing to people illegally buying firearms. Their definition of "lax" CCW permit is if someone wants a box of handguns they can pick them up all day. Obviously, this is a stupid law because these guns are going to be resold illegally. However, even a site known to support the ban of handguns has to admit that the only problem with firearms is when they get to a person that probably would not have been able to buy the gun legally. If you can figure out how to keep people from illegally getting guns then feel free to ban it. Until then leave legal purchases alone.
Zenmervolt
Elite member
Call it paranoia if you like, but I see absolutely no reason in the world why the government or anyone else needs to know how many guns I have and what kind they are. I have no problem at all with selling a gun to a private party without documentation as long as it is legal to do so.
I will gladly accept the potential hassle in order to maintain some semblance of freedom.
ZV
lozina
Lifer
Interesting that you chose not to emphasize that part of my post in it's entirety, including "from police and military arsenals".
So I have to ask you, do you also want to ban guns from the police and military?
Because that's the only way you would not be contradicting yourself.
After all, the police and military are staffed by humans too. And you yourself said you can't trust other humans.
JulesMaximus
No Lifer
The problem I have with that is you don't know who you are selling a gun to. You could be selling it to a guy who supplies gangs with guns. No, I don't agree with a policy of zero documentation or background checks for new guns sales or for used gun sales.
rh71
No Lifer
It's real simple, the more people who have them, the more available they are to anyone. That includes all humans. While I don't by default trust every cop I come across, I know that they've come to bear their weapon through the proper channels. You put Joe Neighbor out there who is often irresponsible, I'm not so sure the next guy with a gun is quite the same as an officer with a gun. Multiply this by the population that will be gung-ho on getting guns the day it's allowed.
I'm in 7-11 and a guy pulls a gun... say I have a gun too - how am I supposed to know if he's trying to stop a shoplifter or if he's the one robbing everyone because he was able to lift it from his drunk buddy at poker night? Mass chaos. Vigilantes stay home. Leave it to the cops. You want to start policing things yourself, just take a second and think of how many other people will want to police a situation themself.
But as long as YOU have a gun, everything's alright, right?
Zenmervolt
Elite member
Careful there. I never said zero background checks. I said zero registry. There's a world of difference between those two. I am perfectly fine with background checks or a permit to own pistols.
I would not sell face-to-face to anyone who did not hold a valid Washington CPL (Concealed Pistol License). (This is because out-of-state personal sales are illegal, but if out of state sales were legal, any valid CPL would suffice IMO.) But if that person has a CPL, then I do know who I'm selling the gun to. I'm selling the gun to someone who has already had their background check done. There is absolutely zero additional safety involved in running another background check in that scenario.
There are plenty of ways to have an effective background check without instituting a registry of the weapons themselves.
ZV
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
-
-
