11, including child, 3, shot in Chicago park

WildCat said:
You'll have to figure out a way to prevent criminals from removing the serial numbers for that to have a chance of working. Maybe you want to ban files, angle grinders, etc. also?

Not to mention that the gun in the OP can't be traced at all, even if by some miracle the serial number hasn't been removed, because it hasn't been recovered and very likely won't be.
Click to expand...

To summarize your view:

Some criminals are clever enough to make their trails untraceable, therefore we shouldn't even try.
 
WildCat said:
It is quite useful, however, as a tool to confiscate them from the law abiding once lawmakers decide to make previously legal guns illegal.

I suppose this is where some pedantic posters get their underwear in a knot and declare that anything short of a police search isn't really confiscation.
Click to expand...
Actually, this is where a skeptical person would say take your paranoia and CT thinking to the appropriate thread.

People who think that way are exactly the kind of people who shouldn't own guns.
 
thaiboxerken said:
To summarize your view:

Some criminals are clever enough to make their trails untraceable, therefore we shouldn't even try.
Click to expand...
Few criminals are that stupid. A professional straw purchaser is certainly going to remove the serial numbers that can be traced back to him. As far as stolen guns go there's no real need to remove the serial number by the criminal wielding it, since the gun is illegal for them to possess whether or not it was stolen.

DavidJames said:
Actually, this is where a skeptical person would say take your paranoia and CT thinking to the appropriate thread.

People who think that way are exactly the kind of people who shouldn't own guns.
Click to expand...
It's happened just that way in Canada, the UK, and Australia. And in US cities like Chicago. There are bills pending in California which will ban most semi-automatic guns which are already required to be registered, and the registered owners will have to forfeit those guns or render them inoperable.

This is hardly "paranoia and CT thinking", it's the way it's actually been done and proposed to be done.
 
More killing and injured in Chicago and TM's are worried about Latinos in Florida.
 
WildCat said:
Few criminals are that stupid. A professional straw purchaser is certainly going to remove the serial numbers that can be traced back to him. As far as stolen guns go there's no real need to remove the serial number by the criminal wielding it, since the gun is illegal for them to possess whether or not it was stolen.


It's happened just that way in Canada, the UK, and Australia. And in US cities like Chicago. There are bills pending in California which will ban most semi-automatic guns which are already required to be registered, and the registered owners will have to forfeit those guns or render them inoperable.

This is hardly "paranoia and CT thinking", it's the way it's actually been done and proposed to be done.
Click to expand...
Most criminals are very stupid and why they are caught so easy, many commit a crime and then go to their Mother's house. They get caught cause they are dumb.
 
ABC10 said:
Most criminals are very stupid and why they are caught so easy, many commit a crime and then go to their Mother's house. They get caught cause they are dumb.
Click to expand...
80% of Chicago's gang murders go unsolved.

Maybe they're smarter here than elsewhere?
 
Distracted1 said:
Are you calling it a violation of the 4th amendment? There is that inconvenient "unreasonable" wording in there if you are.
Click to expand...
I don't think you understand what that word means from a Constitutional law context.
 
WildCat said:
I don't think you understand what that word means from a Constitutional law context.
Click to expand...
That may be true. I am not an attorney or Constitutional scholar, but my google search returned: "A search occurs when an expectation of privacy that society considers reasonable is infringed by a governmental employee or by an agent of the government."-
http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fourth_amendment

Certainly there is more to it than that. However, if it boils down to a question of whether or not our society considers it unreasonable to obligate responsible gun owners to demonstrate that responsibility- this member of society does not. If 51% of society consider it reasonable that gun owners have a duty to provide such evidence- does it become constitutional? if no, why not?
 
Last edited:
WildCat said:
Since there is not a single gun store in Chicago, 100% of them were sold somewhere else.
Click to expand...

Same thing in NYC and almost all guns used in crimes here come from the south. It's about time Virginia and Florida start taking responsibility for their crimes.
 
Why is it that we constantly see people who want gun control draconian type laws, not blame the criminals? Yeah, it's Florida and Virginia's fault that NYC has crime....:rolleyes:
 
Distracted1 said:
However, if it boils down to a question of whether or not our society considers it unreasonable to obligate responsible gun owners to demonstrate that responsibility- this member of society does not. If 51% of society consider it reasonable that gun owners have a duty to provide such evidence- does it become constitutional? if no, why not?
Click to expand...

That's not the question. The question is if society deems what property you possess is private and under what circumstances that expectation remains. In other words, does it violate societal norms for me to come in to your home uninvited to inventory your underwear drawer? Does it violate societal norms for me to look under a public bathroom stall for me to see what underwear choice you made today? Does it violate societal norms for me to notice your underwear is hanging out of your pants while I'm standing behind you?
 
Cylinder said:
That's not the question. The question is if society deems what property you possess is private and under what circumstances that expectation remains. In other words, does it violate societal norms for me to come in to your home uninvited to inventory your underwear drawer? Does it violate societal norms for me to look under a public bathroom stall for me to see what underwear choice you made today? Does it violate societal norms for me to notice your underwear is hanging out of your pants while I'm standing behind you?
Click to expand...
Yes, yes, and no.

Nor does it violate societal norms to expect you to demonstrate continued possession of a weapon as lethal as a firearm.
 
Distracted1 said:
Yes, yes, and no.

Nor does it violate societal norms to expect you to demonstrate continued possession of a weapon as lethal as a firearm.
Click to expand...
There's that pesky 2nd Amendment... which is despised as much as the 1st Amendment by the same people.
 
WildCat said:
There's that pesky 2nd Amendment... which is despised as much as the 1st Amendment by the same people.
Click to expand...
As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, then-Secretary of State:
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Why do you suppose the part prior to ",the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" was included at all?

What about the part prior to "militia, being necessary........."?

Could it be that I don't despise it, but actually read it differently than you do?
 
Last edited:
Distracted1 said:
As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, then-Secretary of State:
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Why do you suppose the part prior to ",the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" was included at all?

What about the part prior to "militia, being necessary........."?

Could it be that I don't despise it, but actually read it differently than you do?
Click to expand...
So who are "the people" mentioned? Are they different people than "the people" mentioned elsewhere in the Constitution?

I suppose that comma confuses the hell out of you too.
 
triforcharity said:
Why is it that we constantly see people who want gun control draconian type laws, not blame the criminals? Yeah, it's Florida and Virginia's fault that NYC has crime....:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Do you really find a law requiring a gun owner to fill out some forms and get a yearly registration (much as is required to operate a motor vehicle) to be worthy of the descriptor "Draconian"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom