Despicable Action At DNC

[esmith]

Even so, there is no question that these states laws are more lax than those in Chicago.

Well the only laws that Illinois has that some other states do not have are:
Firearms Owner ID card (do you think that would stop a criminal from having a firearm?)
For a private sale within Illinois one must contact the Department of State Police (DSP) with the transferee’s Firearm Owner’s Identification (FOID) Card number to determine the validity of the transferee’s FOID Card (except in the exceptions noted in Post #59). (note crime not to report lost or stolen firearm within 72hours in ILL)

Note: it is a Federal Crime to sell any firearm to a person who is not a resident of the sellers state unless the sale goes though licensee in both states. In light of this how are people going to another State and purchasing a firearm without breaking a Federal Law. Therefore the anti-gun groups do not have a leg to stand on in reference to the Chicago or other problem cities. See below:

A person may sell a firearm to an unlicensed resident of his State, if he does not know or have reasonable cause to believe the person is prohibited from receiving or possessing firearms under Federal law. A person may loan or rent a firearm to a resident of any State for temporary use for lawful sporting purposes, if he does not know or have reasonable cause to believe the person is prohibited from receiving or possessing firearms under Federal law. A person may sell or transfer a firearm to a licensee in any State. However, a firearm other than a curio or relic may not be transferred interstate to a licensed collector.

[18 U.S.C. 922(a)(3) and (5), 922(d), 27 CFR 478.29 and 478.30]
A person not licensed under the GCA and not prohibited from acquiring firearms may purchase a firearm from an out-of-State source and obtain the firearm if an arrangement is made with a licensed dealer in the purchaser's State of residence for the purchaser to obtain the firearm from the dealer.
[18 U.S.C. 922(a)(3) and 922(b)(3)]

A person may only acquire a firearm within the person’s own State, except that he or she may purchase or otherwise acquire a rifle or shotgun, in person, at a licensee's premises in any State, provided the sale complies with State laws applicable in the State of sale and the State where the purchaser resides. A person may borrow or rent a firearm in any State for temporary use for lawful sporting purposes.

[18 U.S.C. 922(a)(3) and (5), 922(b)(3), 27 CFR 478.29 and 478.30]

Want to try again?

 

[Underhill]

Well the only laws that Illinois has that some other states do not have are:
Firearms Owner ID card (do you think that would stop a criminal from having a firearm?)
For a private sale within Illinois one must contact the Department of State Police (DSP) with the transferee’s Firearm Owner’s Identification (FOID) Card number to determine the validity of the transferee’s FOID Card (except in the exceptions noted in Post #59). (note crime not to report lost or stolen firearm within 72hours in ILL)

Note: it is a Federal Crime to sell any firearm to a person who is not a resident of the sellers state unless the sale goes though licensee in both states. In light of this how are people going to another State and purchasing a firearm without breaking a Federal Law. Therefore the anti-gun groups do not have a leg to stand on in reference to the Chicago or other problem cities. See below:

Want to try again?

Your claims might have some teeth if the NRA actually allowed funding to enforce these federal laws. But they, along with republicans, have gutted funding for the ATF...

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/26/us/atf-layoffs/

 

[esmith]

Your claims might have some teeth if the NRA actually allowed funding to enforce these federal laws. But they, along with republicans, have gutted funding for the ATF...

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/26/us/atf-layoffs/

Your remarks might be relevant if we were talking about enforcement, but we weren't. But your response is typical of many that find when their argument is proven wrong they attempt to change the subject.
How about you just admit that all of the accusations by Chicago and other anti-gun groups are a invalid in this instance; this also includes you by the way.

 

[Underhill]

Your remarks might be relevant if we were talking about enforcement, but we weren't. But your response is typical of many that find when their argument is proven wrong they attempt to change the subject.
How about you just admit that all of the accusations by Chicago and other anti-gun groups are a invalid in this instance; this also includes you by the way.

First off, it wasn't my argument, it was the argument from your article you posted. This is the game the NRA plays. Chicago has a massive gang problem right now. Until they deal with that, gun legislation is going to be pointless. But, if you take a look at other cities where they have prohibitions on guns, and gang violence isn't as pronounced, like NYC, gun violence is way down.

This is called anecdotal evidence. Picking the worst (or best) examples and claiming it represents the issue.

Second, what good is any regulation if you don't enforce it so of course it's relevant. And while the right loves to talk about 'enforce the current laws on our books' (quoted from the Trump web site) they also love to de-fund the agency responsible for that enforcement. This obviously makes their entire argument disingenuous at best.

 

[esmith]

First off, it wasn't my argument, it was the argument from your article you posted. This is the game the NRA plays. Chicago has a massive gang problem right now. Until they deal with that, gun legislation is going to be pointless. But, if you take a look at other cities where they have prohibitions on guns, and gang violence isn't as pronounced, like NYC, gun violence is way down.

This is called anecdotal evidence. Picking the worst (or best) examples and claiming it represents the issue.

Second, what good is any regulation if you don't enforce it so of course it's relevant. And while the right loves to talk about 'enforce the current laws on our books' (quoted from the Trump web site) they also love to de-fund the agency responsible for that enforcement. This obviously makes their entire argument disingenuous at best.

Ok I'll play your game. What law does the State Of New York have that that Illinois doesn't have.that directly affects their gun and gang issues
Be very specific here. I am very very knowledgeable when it comes to Federal Firearm laws.

 

[Smart_Guy]

I don't think they ignored anyone. They only wanted to support a point and they used the right material for that. This is something everyone does, even here on RF.

 

[Underhill]

Ok I'll play your game. What law does the State Of New York have that that Illinois doesn't have.that directly affects their gun and gang issues
Be very specific here. I am very very knowledgeable when it comes to Federal Firearm laws.

NYS? They don't (well, they do, just nothing that would make much difference). NYC does.

You managed to miss my point completely. Guns are not the root cause of the problem in Chicago, gang violence is. In NYC, where the gang problems aren't as pervasive, guns and gun violence are less of an issue. Both cities have strict gun laws on the books. But see vastly different outcomes.

Gun laws are not for the worst of the worst in society. Gangs and hard core criminals can always get them. Gun laws are for those on the fringes of society. A person goes into a rage and wants to kill his wife, some young people go off their rocker and want to shoot up their school. These people are not criminals. Do not usually have ties with criminals. Even then, if they want them badly enough they will get them eventually. But if everyone kept their guns locked up, and waiting list and background checks gave them time to calm down or see reason, maybe for parents to get them treatment, the laws may be effective. Even then it won't stop everything but hopefully it would reduce the numbers.

 

[esmith]

NYS? They don't (well, they do, just nothing that would make much difference). NYC does.

You managed to miss my point completely. Guns are not the root cause of the problem in Chicago, gang violence is. In NYC, where the gang problems aren't as pervasive, guns and gun violence are less of an issue. Both cities have strict gun laws on the books. But see vastly different outcomes.

Gun laws are not for the worst of the worst in society. Gangs and hard core criminals can always get them. Gun laws are for those on the fringes of society. A person goes into a rage and wants to kill his wife, some young people go off their rocker and want to shoot up their school. These people are not criminals. Do not usually have ties with criminals. Even then, if they want them badly enough they will get them eventually. But if everyone kept their guns locked up, and waiting list and background checks gave them time to calm down or see reason, maybe for parents to get them treatment, the laws may be effective. Even then it won't stop everything but hopefully it would reduce the numbers.

Wait a minute you are contradicting your own post.

But, if you take a look at other cities where they have prohibitions on guns, and gang violence isn't as pronounced, like NYC, gun violence is way down.

This is called anecdotal evidence. Picking the worst (or best) examples and claiming it represents the issue.
.

So I will ask you again(but go with NYC.[my mistake]), What prohibitions on guns does NYC have that Chicago/Illinois doesn't have.
I will agree with you that it is the gangs in Chicago that are causing the problem. But guns locked up, waiting lists are not going to solve that problem. We do have background checks, but I think you mean for all sales of firearms; however I do not see how you would implement it for private sales. One must have access to State or FBI data base used in the check. In addition how are you going to insure that a background check is done on a private sale? Make the person go through the same procedures that a licensee does? Or do you want to register all firearms?

 

[Underhill]

Wait a minute you are contradicting your own post.

So I will ask you again(but go with NYC.[my mistake]), What prohibitions on guns does NYC have that Chicago/Illinois doesn't have.
I will agree with you that it is the gangs in Chicago that are causing the problem. But guns locked up, waiting lists are not going to solve that problem. We do have background checks, but I think you mean for all sales of firearms; however I do not see how you would implement it for private sales. One must have access to State or FBI data base used in the check. In addition how are you going to insure that a background check is done on a private sale? Make the person go through the same procedures that a licensee does? Or do you want to register all firearms?

Did you even read what I posted? I didn't claim NYC has any prohibitions Chicago doesn't have. I said gun laws have nothing to do with Chicago's problem. NYC and Chicago have very similar gun laws as I understand it. The problem isn't the laws, it's the gangs who will do whatever it takes to get guns, regardless of the law.

In NYS background checks have been implemented for all sales (unless to a family member). When I sold my .223 recently the buyer and I took it to the local gun shop, paid a small fee and he did the background check and paperwork. It wasn't all that difficult.

I have no problem registering firearms. I have no problem requiring owners to lock them up. I know you do. But I won't lose any sleep over it.

 

[esmith]

Did you even read what I posted? I didn't claim NYC has any prohibitions Chicago doesn't have. I said gun laws have nothing to do with Chicago's problem. NYC and Chicago have very similar gun laws as I understand it. The problem isn't the laws, it's the gangs who will do whatever it takes to get guns, regardless of the law.

In NYS background checks have been implemented for all sales (unless to a family member). When I sold my .223 recently the buyer and I took it to the local gun shop, paid a small fee and he did the background check and paperwork. It wasn't all that difficult.

I have no problem registering firearms. I have no problem requiring owners to lock them up. I know you do. But I won't lose any sleep over it.

My mistake. Sorry about that.

 

[Underhill]

My mistake. Sorry about that.

No worries. It happens.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

I have never been totally hostile of the Democrat Party until what happened at the Democrats Convention. When they only invite the mothers of those killed by the police and ignore the mothers or wives of Police Officers murdered in the past months then they, the Democrats, are a bunch of pandering (no words to describe).
I thought that this was supposed to be a Nation united not a Nation divided. But it appears that the Democrats are willing to stoop to the lowest levels to obtain votes.

Cmon now. There is so much juicy fat meat (metaphorically speaking) to bite into when talking about the DNC and how corrupt they are. And you go with the shallowest possible problem with no real depth and only ever registers on an emotional level? Be brave. Be bold. Talk about the corruption. Talk about how they committed election fraud, were caught and no one gave a flying ****. Talk about how there was a DNC walk-out of nearly half of the total crowd. Make fun of how the DNC chair is now going to be a main campaign adviser. Or how the previous DNC chair that stepped down for her is going to be her VP pick instead of literally anyone that matters.