bpatus297 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

Of course it can be amended and taken out, but until it is, it's the law of the land. In 2019, the US had 39,707 deaths due to guns, that includes suicide. There are 330 million people in the US meaning there is a .000012% chance of being killed by a gun, again including suicide. I would say that the chance is even lower if you are not involved in certain activities such as gangs. I think your outside looking in view is a bit skewed, but I still stand by my view that the moral fabric of society is breaking down. There does seem to be a lack of respect for other people lately.

How then do you explain the data linked to in my earlier post, in which there were five other spike periods in violent crime worse than the current one, over the last 100 years?

I'm not talking about the past. I'm talking about today. What do those past periods have to do with today?

extender wrote:

2122M wrote:

Make it a requirement to register that gun with the purchaser. Then you can hold that person at least partially responsible for any crime committed with that gun.

That is not the way it works. Many legally obtained guns are stolen and end up the hands of people that shouldn't have them.

Here's a novel idea, prosecute the ones you catch, and not let them walk?

Aaron747 wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

How then do you explain the data linked to in my earlier post, in which there were five other spike periods in violent crime worse than the current one, over the last 100 years?

I'm not talking about the past. I'm talking about today. What do those past periods have to do with today?

Because your argument has been that the moral fabric of society is unraveling. That sounds like something new, which is odd, because it clearly isn't. This is a long-term issue that American society has never appropriately tackled, nor come close to solving. It's not anything new and putting it into a contemporaneous context is misleading.

2122M wrote:

Anyway, how are that many guns getting stolen? I thought the point of having a gun was that you could protect yourself from getting robbed. It seems that guns a pretty useless at that if all these guns on the street are stolen weapons.

2122M wrote:

Dieuwer wrote:

I suppose is all about training and being reasonable. After all, gun ownership is high in Switzerland too, but deaths are much less.

https://www.buzzworthy.com/switzerland-gun-laws/
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-21379912

Swiss gun laws are an interesting study. While it is easy to buy a gun there, there are lots of limits as to who can carry a gun in public. There are very few gun carry permits given in Switzerland, and they are only given to those who require it for work (security officers and the like). So while you can go buy lots of guns for hunting or sport, you can still be arrested for carrying a loaded weapon in public.

Also, all gun sales, including private sales, are tracked. You are required to submit lots of identifying information when you buy a gun, so that gun can be tracked back to you if necessary.

bpatus297 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

I'm not talking about the past. I'm talking about today. What do those past periods have to do with today?

Because your argument has been that the moral fabric of society is unraveling. That sounds like something new, which is odd, because it clearly isn't. This is a long-term issue that American society has never appropriately tackled, nor come close to solving. It's not anything new and putting it into a contemporaneous context is misleading.

I never said there were not problems before. I'm not talking about other periods, doing so is a strawman argument.

extender wrote:

2122M wrote:

Anyway, how are that many guns getting stolen? I thought the point of having a gun was that you could protect yourself from getting robbed. It seems that guns a pretty useless at that if all these guns on the street are stolen weapons.

Homes, cars... I can't go into a post office with one, or certain government buildings, so in the care they go for most people. I do lock mine up in a vehicle or in a safe at home.

2122M wrote:

So here's the plan. Like I said before, if your gun gets stolen and used to commit a crime, you can be investigated for that crime too. How did that gun get stolen? Did you not have it secured properly? Was it not locked away? Maybe if you just left your gun laying around or left it on the passenger seat of your car when you went to the post office and it got stolen, you shouldn't be considered a responsible gun owner and you lose your right to own a gun the same way any criminal would.

extender wrote:

2122M wrote:

So here's the plan. Like I said before, if your gun gets stolen and used to commit a crime, you can be investigated for that crime too. How did that gun get stolen? Did you not have it secured properly? Was it not locked away? Maybe if you just left your gun laying around or left it on the passenger seat of your car when you went to the post office and it got stolen, you shouldn't be considered a responsible gun owner and you lose your right to own a gun the same way any criminal would.

Not so fast, when your firearm is stolen, you file a police report. At that point, you're free and clear. Proving what you posted is difficult to do. You're treading in dangerous waters when you talk about losing your rights.

johns624 wrote:

LE needs to go after straw purchasers and the very, very small number of crooked gun dealers. That's where most criminals' guns come from. I remember reading years ago about a "kitchen table" gun dealer in Tennessee whose sales were traced to hundreds of crimes. He got 18 months. That's ridiculous. There are plenty of laws, just enforce them. Just attempting to buy a gun when you know that you can't, is a felony. Yet, it's never prosecuted. Go after them. Just like cops focus on drunk drivers, not everyone who buys and drinks alcohol.

extender wrote:

2122M wrote:

So here's the plan. Like I said before, if your gun gets stolen and used to commit a crime, you can be investigated for that crime too. How did that gun get stolen? Did you not have it secured properly? Was it not locked away? Maybe if you just left your gun laying around or left it on the passenger seat of your car when you went to the post office and it got stolen, you shouldn't be considered a responsible gun owner and you lose your right to own a gun the same way any criminal would.

Not so fast, when your firearm is stolen, you file a police report. At that point, you're free and clear. Proving what you posted is difficult to do. You're treading in dangerous waters when you talk about losing your rights.

2122M wrote:

If you had to pick his life vs a gun ownership liability law, which do you pick?

2122M wrote:

I 100% think you should be prosecuted if your gun got stolen because you were not taking gun security seriously. And if that gun gets used in a crime, you bear some responsibility.

Treading in dangerous waters? Really? Don't you think a innocent kid walking down the street in the south side of Chicago might be treading in dangerous waters too? If you had to pick his life vs a gun ownership liability law, which do you pick?

extender wrote:

2122M wrote:

I 100% think you should be prosecuted if your gun got stolen because you were not taking gun security seriously. And if that gun gets used in a crime, you bear some responsibility.

Treading in dangerous waters? Really? Don't you think a innocent kid walking down the street in the south side of Chicago might be treading in dangerous waters too? If you had to pick his life vs a gun ownership liability law, which do you pick?

Jurisprudence, fourth amendment, fifth amendment? Curb gun violence you say, start enforcing the laws.

extender wrote:

2122M wrote:

I 100% think you should be prosecuted if your gun got stolen because you were not taking gun security seriously. And if that gun gets used in a crime, you bear some responsibility.

Treading in dangerous waters? Really? Don't you think a innocent kid walking down the street in the south side of Chicago might be treading in dangerous waters too? If you had to pick his life vs a gun ownership liability law, which do you pick?

Jurisprudence, fourth amendment, fifth amendment? Curb gun violence you say, start enforcing the laws.

2122M wrote:

johns624 wrote:

LE needs to go after straw purchasers and the very, very small number of crooked gun dealers. That's where most criminals' guns come from. I remember reading years ago about a "kitchen table" gun dealer in Tennessee whose sales were traced to hundreds of crimes. He got 18 months. That's ridiculous. There are plenty of laws, just enforce them. Just attempting to buy a gun when you know that you can't, is a felony. Yet, it's never prosecuted. Go after them. Just like cops focus on drunk drivers, not everyone who buys and drinks alcohol.

100% agree. However, federal law currently prohibits the creation of a comprehensive central database of firearms or firearms purchasers that law enforcement could access when recovering a crime gun. Are you in favor of reversing that rule to help LE find and prosecute these bad apples?

edit: This would mean reversing the Dickey Amendment and the the Tiahrt Amendment, if you care to do the research on that.

Aaron747 wrote:

Negative, not a strawman. Spikes in violent crime like the one occurring now are a dataset, and data has to be analyzed in comparative contexts to be of any use. You are trying to simplify an issue that is by no means simple. That's known in critical thinking classes as 'fallacy of the single cause'.

MaverickM11 wrote:

The gun lobby has made it explicitly difficult to enforce gun laws. On purpose.

NIKV69 wrote:

Doesn't matter the two perps that shot this officer don't follow gun laws at all. Or any law for that matter.

2122M wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

Doesn't matter the two perps that shot this officer don't follow gun laws at all. Or any law for that matter.

That's right, and they will face the consequences for that. Isn't that what we all want?

NIKV69 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

Negative, not a strawman. Spikes in violent crime like the one occurring now are a dataset, and data has to be analyzed in comparative contexts to be of any use. You are trying to simplify an issue that is by no means simple. That's known in critical thinking classes as 'fallacy of the single cause'.

You are going to tell me that is someone that commits robbery and gets out with no bail is not going to have high % of doing it again? Doesn't take a critical thinking to figure out that is a bad idea.

MaverickM11 wrote:

The gun lobby has made it explicitly difficult to enforce gun laws. On purpose.

Doesn't matter the two perps that shot this officer don't follow gun laws at all. Or any law for that matter.

MaverickM11 wrote:

No one in the chain of command of those guns follow gun laws--several of them thanks to the gun lobby making it near impossible to enforce existing laws. Chicago knows the exact store(s) that are pumping out straw purchases that end up in Chicago crime scenes but they can't do anything about it. Again, on purpose.

2122M wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

Doesn't matter the two perps that shot this officer don't follow gun laws at all. Or any law for that matter.

That's right, and they will face the consequences for that. Isn't that what we all want?

NIKV69 wrote:

2122M wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

Doesn't matter the two perps that shot this officer don't follow gun laws at all. Or any law for that matter.

That's right, and they will face the consequences for that. Isn't that what we all want?

I sure hope so but you are putting the cart before the horse. Ideally I would like to have Ella French still alive.

NIKV69 wrote:

2122M wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

Doesn't matter the two perps that shot this officer don't follow gun laws at all. Or any law for that matter.

That's right, and they will face the consequences for that. Isn't that what we all want?

I sure hope so but you are putting the cart before the horse. Ideally I would like to have Ella French still alive.

bpatus297 wrote:

In 2019, the US had 39,707 deaths due to guns, that includes suicide. There are 330 million people in the US meaning there is a .000012% chance of being killed by a gun,.

Virtual737 wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

In 2019, the US had 39,707 deaths due to guns, that includes suicide. There are 330 million people in the US meaning there is a .000012% chance of being killed by a gun,.

If the chances are so low then there is also little need to keep a gun for self defense.

extender wrote:

MaverickM11 wrote:

No one in the chain of command of those guns follow gun laws--several of them thanks to the gun lobby making it near impossible to enforce existing laws. Chicago knows the exact store(s) that are pumping out straw purchases that end up in Chicago crime scenes but they can't do anything about it. Again, on purpose.

Proof? Links?

NIKV69 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

Negative, not a strawman. Spikes in violent crime like the one occurring now are a dataset, and data has to be analyzed in comparative contexts to be of any use. You are trying to simplify an issue that is by no means simple. That's known in critical thinking classes as 'fallacy of the single cause'.

You are going to tell me that is someone that commits robbery and gets out with no bail is not going to have high % of doing it again? Doesn't take a critical thinking to know it’s a bad idea

2122M wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

Doesn't matter the two perps that shot this officer don't follow gun laws at all. Or any law for that matter.

That's right, and they will face the consequences for that. Isn't that what we all want?

JJJ wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

2122M wrote:

That's right, and they will face the consequences for that. Isn't that what we all want?

I sure hope so but you are putting the cart before the horse. Ideally I would like to have Ella French still alive.

America would rather have "freedoms" than address inequality, access to education, mental health care and access to deadly weapons.

Hundreds of dead kids haven't changed that, I doubt one more police officer is going to.

The system is very much pointed at punishing the criminal, hard and fast.

JJJ wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

2122M wrote:

That's right, and they will face the consequences for that. Isn't that what we all want?

I sure hope so but you are putting the cart before the horse. Ideally I would like to have Ella French still alive.

America would rather have "freedoms" than address inequality, access to education, mental health care and access to deadly weapons.

Hundreds of dead kids haven't changed that, I doubt one more police officer is going to.

The system is very much pointed at punishing the criminal, hard and fast.

Virtual737 wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

In 2019, the US had 39,707 deaths due to guns, that includes suicide. There are 330 million people in the US meaning there is a .000012% chance of being killed by a gun,.

If the chances are so low then there is also little need to keep a gun for self defense.

Aaron747 wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

Negative, not a strawman. Spikes in violent crime like the one occurring now are a dataset, and data has to be analyzed in comparative contexts to be of any use. You are trying to simplify an issue that is by no means simple. That's known in critical thinking classes as 'fallacy of the single cause'.

You are going to tell me that is someone that commits robbery and gets out with no bail is not going to have high % of doing it again? Doesn't take a critical thinking to know it’s a bad idea

Of course I would not say that. But that has nothing to do with the dude saying we’re only now seeing a moral breakdown. Anyone who says that doesn’t remember the early 90s...or 80s...or 70s...or 30s...or 20s. That’s sorta the point.

bpatus297 wrote:

JJJ wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

I sure hope so but you are putting the cart before the horse. Ideally I would like to have Ella French still alive.

America would rather have "freedoms" than address inequality, access to education, mental health care and access to deadly weapons.

Hundreds of dead kids haven't changed that, I doubt one more police officer is going to.

The system is very much pointed at punishing the criminal, hard and fast.

Not lately, most prosecutors are simply not prosecuting cases and a lot of people who have committed violent crimes are being released from jail without bond. Not a whole lot of punishment happening at them moment.

bpatus297 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

You are going to tell me that is someone that commits robbery and gets out with no bail is not going to have high % of doing it again? Doesn't take a critical thinking to know it’s a bad idea

Of course I would not say that. But that has nothing to do with the dude saying we’re only now seeing a moral breakdown. Anyone who says that doesn’t remember the early 90s...or 80s...or 70s...or 30s...or 20s. That’s sorta the point.

I never said that "we're only now" seeing a moral breakdown. You are putting words in my mouth. I said we are seeing a breakdown of the moral fabric of society, never said it was the first time. I guess referring to me as "the dude" is your way of throwing shade since you don't agree with my opinion? I would never refer to someone as dude that I am not acquainted with.

Aaron747 wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

JJJ wrote:

America would rather have "freedoms" than address inequality, access to education, mental health care and access to deadly weapons.

Hundreds of dead kids haven't changed that, I doubt one more police officer is going to.

The system is very much pointed at punishing the criminal, hard and fast.

Not lately, most prosecutors are simply not prosecuting cases and a lot of people who have committed violent crimes are being released from jail without bond. Not a whole lot of punishment happening at them moment.

Do you have a source or citation for the statement 'not a whole lot of punishment happening at the moment'? Some percentages or other relevant data would be helpful.

Aaron747 wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

Of course I would not say that. But that has nothing to do with the dude saying we’re only now seeing a moral breakdown. Anyone who says that doesn’t remember the early 90s...or 80s...or 70s...or 30s...or 20s. That’s sorta the point.

I never said that "we're only now" seeing a moral breakdown. You are putting words in my mouth. I said we are seeing a breakdown of the moral fabric of society, never said it was the first time. I guess referring to me as "the dude" is your way of throwing shade since you don't agree with my opinion? I would never refer to someone as dude that I am not acquainted with.

In one response you referred to the moral breakdown seen 'lately', and in another you specifically said you were talking about 'now' versus the 'past'. Where were words put in your mouth? I responded to your exact statements. You also asked what relevance the past had, and I answered that too.

As for 'dude', it doesn't mean anything positive or negative. I'm from California, and my generation routinely refers to others as 'dude' in all kinds of contexts.

bpatus297 wrote:

2122M wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

Doesn't matter the two perps that shot this officer don't follow gun laws at all. Or any law for that matter.

That's right, and they will face the consequences for that. Isn't that what we all want?

Would the shooting have happened if they faced consequences for the felonies they were on probation for?

2122M wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

2122M wrote:

That's right, and they will face the consequences for that. Isn't that what we all want?

Would the shooting have happened if they faced consequences for the felonies they were on probation for?

We have the highest incarceration rate in the world and the highest rate of gun violence in the developed world. Might be safe to say that more people in jail does not equal less gun crime.

bpatus297 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

Not lately, most prosecutors are simply not prosecuting cases and a lot of people who have committed violent crimes are being released from jail without bond. Not a whole lot of punishment happening at them moment.

Do you have a source or citation for the statement 'not a whole lot of punishment happening at the moment'? Some percentages or other relevant data would be helpful.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2 ... o-decades/

https://www.manhattanda.org/d-a-vance-e ... d-massage/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va ... secutions/


https://cortlandstandard.net/2021/06/26 ... s-planned/
https://www.wsj.com/articles/bail-refor ... 1581348077

bpatus297 wrote:

JJJ wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

I sure hope so but you are putting the cart before the horse. Ideally I would like to have Ella French still alive.

America would rather have "freedoms" than address inequality, access to education, mental health care and access to deadly weapons.

Hundreds of dead kids haven't changed that, I doubt one more police officer is going to.

The system is very much pointed at punishing the criminal, hard and fast.

Not lately, most prosecutors are simply not prosecuting cases and a lot of people who have committed violent crimes are being released from jail without bond. Not a whole lot of punishment happening at them moment.

Aaron747 wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

Do you have a source or citation for the statement 'not a whole lot of punishment happening at the moment'? Some percentages or other relevant data would be helpful.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2 ... o-decades/

https://www.manhattanda.org/d-a-vance-e ... d-massage/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va ... secutions/


https://cortlandstandard.net/2021/06/26 ... s-planned/
https://www.wsj.com/articles/bail-refor ... 1581348077

Drug offenses, prostitution, and break-ins are not the violent crimes you spoke of, but whatevs.

bpatus297 wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

bpatus297 wrote:

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2 ... o-decades/

https://www.manhattanda.org/d-a-vance-e ... d-massage/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va ... secutions/


https://cortlandstandard.net/2021/06/26 ... s-planned/
https://www.wsj.com/articles/bail-refor ... 1581348077

Drug offenses, prostitution, and break-ins are not the violent crimes you spoke of, but whatevs.

Just giving you the information you asked for, showing that prosecutors are not prosecuting cases. If you think that it stops with those offenses, you are wrong. Of course it's okay, it's just prostitution (tied to human trafficking), drug offenses (because it's all just simple possession, right?), and break-ins are nothing to fret over.

extender wrote:

This past weekend, one police officer was killed and another critically wounded in Chicago. They had pulled over a vehicle with three occupants. French, 29, and her partner — who were part of a three-officer car assigned to the Community Safety Team — were shot during a traffic stop after 9 p.m. at 63rd Street and Bell Avenue. Two brothers, Emonte Morgan, 21 and Eric Morgan have been charged with murder.

The first officer to be shot was French's partner that was hit three times. When French came to his aid, she was shot in the head by Emonte Morgan. Both have been apprehended and are due in court today.

Sad all around, and for so many reasons.

-Emonte was a convicted felon, and could not posses a firearm.
-They had obtained the gun from a straw purchaser in Indiana.

Jamal Danzy is charged with purchasing the gun from a licensed Hammond gun dealer, knowingly transferring a firearm to an out-of-state resident and knowingly disposing of a firearm to a convicted felon, Brown said in the press conference.
Link

-Emonte had no respect for life.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TpNvVW6DN84

These tragedies will continue until an effort is made to clean up and go after the criminals, not enacting more laws that are useless.

When the Mayor of Chicago went to the hospital, the officers turned their backs.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

Since when is murder covered by the Second Amendment? I didn’t know you would support that hideous version of rights? No one here, in support of the 2A, has argued it gives people the authority to commit murders. Interesting progressive view of the Bill of Rights.