Joe Dees wrote:
>
> >Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 21:53:06 -0400
> >From: "Michael S. Lorrey" <retroman@turbont.net>
> >To: extropians@extropy.org
> >Subject: Re: GUNS: Re: Brady law has not affected homicide rates
> >Reply-To: extropians@extropy.org
> >
> >Joe Dees wrote:
> >>
> >> >Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 06:57:16 -0700 (PDT)
> >> >From: Brian D Williams <talon57@well.com>
> >> >To: extropians@extropy.org
> >> >Subject: GUNS: Re: Brady law has not affected homicide rates
> >> >Reply-To: extropians@extropy.org
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >From: "Joe Dees" <joedees@addall.com>
> >> >
> >> >>They DO, however, buy them at places where the Brady checks are
> >> >>not in force, such as gun shows. The only sensible response to
> >> >>this fact is to expand the checks to cover those areas also.
> >> >
> >> >Do you have a cite for this? I thought not....
> >> >
> >> >In Illinois you have to have a license to purchase a gun, yes, even
> >> >at gun shows. It is illegal for anyone to sell a gun to anyone not
> >> >posessing a valid FOID card. Now where are the hoods in Chicago
> >> >getting them?
> >> >
> >>From gun shows and dealers in states, such as my own (Florida) with more
> >relaxed laws; they are bought in such places and moved to venues with
> >more restrictive laws to make black market money. It's the economics of
> >supply and demand. I. for one, would prefer criminals, the unbalanced
> >and the irresponsible to have to buy their illegal guns from outside of
> >the country, not just out of state (in some states); anything that makes
> >it harder for such people to get their hands on a tool for committing
> >easy and rapid long range mass murder has to be a GOOD THING.
> >
> >Guess what Joe: Gun registration, and Brady checks at gun shows won't
> >end ANY of the illegal trafficking that occurs, so why do keep beating
> >that dead horse???
> >
> It will get rid of some of it (the guns bought by middlemen to sell at hiked prices to criminals). I KNEW you'd reply; you just LUV to see that GUNS prefix on a message doncha? You also know that my approach is to have purchase-prohibited lists that everyone must check; dealers, gun shows, flea markets, pawn shops, private sales, whatever, with toll-free numbers and websites requiring authorization by both buyer and seller to check, to avoid blackmail-type scenarios, and that charged or convicted violent criminals, the certified mentally challenged, emotionally unstable or deranged, and those under restraining orders should be included on the list, which should of course be appealable by due process.
I know that thats what you'd like to do for a start. I'm sure, like
Dianne Feinstein, "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate to ban
them all, I'd do it in a minute." (at the same time that she is the only
person in San Francisco with a concealed weapons permit, even after
committing several gun safety violations on nationwide television, and
endangering a room full of reporters with a fully loaded and unsafed
AK-47, with her finger right on the trigger.)
> Minors already cannot purchase, so that's not an issue.
Then why is there so much gun violence by minors, according to your gun
control buddies?
> I also like the idea of ballistically fingerprinting each new gun.
WHich goes to show you know absolutely NOTHING about guns, because it is
supremely easy to alter the 'ballistic' fingerprint of a gun.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:35:32 MDT