(01-25-2017 05:41 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 05:19 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Gun owners are law abiding citizens. This is what many of you have said all along. No law abiding citizen is going to knowingly sell a gun to a criminal.

Not sure what you are trying to say here but OK

Quote:No one is suggesting that we punish the seller for doing everything by the book. But if we could prove that a seller knowingly sold a weapon to a criminal, then we can eliminate that seller.

But a gun dealer selling to a criminal isn't a straw purchase. It's a totally separate violation of the law and there are already provisions for punishing both the dealer and the buyer with felony charges. Every law abiding gun owner I know and every gun rights organization, including the NRA, supports the vigorous prosecution of these kind of crimes and other violations of existing federal gun law, including straw purchases.
Here's what the NRA had to say about the gun violence in Chicago.....in 2013:
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20130501...ts-a-crime

Quote:If anybody in Chicago is culpable for the armed carnage on that city’s mean streets, it’s Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who never misses an opportunity to blame peaceable, law-abiding gun owners for the daily bloodletting by violent Chicago thugs.

Emanuel steadfastly refuses to demand application of tough federal laws that would surgically rid the streets of criminals who currently terrorize many Chicago neighborhoods. And that represents a kind of aggressive political malfeasance.

For Emanuel—a former U.S. congressman, former chief of staff in President Barack Obama’s White House and former Bill Clinton White House gun-ban guru—to intentionally blow off federal laws punishing illegally armed violent criminals is especially vile.

The reason is simple. If Chicago citizens knew the extent of existing harsh criminal sanctions and that those laws could readily be applied to prosecute real criminals, Emanuel’s endless call for new “gun control” would be seen for what it is: an evil campaign to disarm the innocent. And those federal laws apply equally in every corner of the nation.

Quote:So let me cite—from a federal public defender fact sheet—a few of the existing federal statutes dealing with armed criminals once they have their guns. I’ll give you the prison term first along with the citations in the United States Code (U.S.C.).

10 years—18 U.S.C. § 922(g)—for possession of a firearm or ammunition by a felon, fugitive, or drug user … And possession means touching a gun, any gun, handgun, rifle or shotgun. Any firearm that Sen. Dianne Feinstein would ban for us, is already an illegal gun for violent criminals.

10 years—18 U.S.C. § 922(j)—for possession of a stolen firearm.

10 years—18 U.S.C. § 922(i)—for shipment or transport of a stolen firearm across state lines.

10 years—18 U.S.C. § 924(b)—for shipping, transporting or receipt of a firearm across state lines with intent to commit a felony.

5 to 30 years consecutive mandatory minimum sentences—18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(1)(a)—for carrying, using, or possessing a firearm in connection with a federal crime of violence or drug trafficking.

The death penalty or up to life imprisonment—18 U.S.C. § 924(j)—for committing murder while possessing a firearm in connection with a crime of violence or drug trafficking.

15 years mandatory minimum—18 U.S.C. § 924(e)—for a “prohibited person” who has three prior convictions for drug offenses or violent felonies.

10 years—18 U.S.C. § 924(g)—for interstate travel to acquire or transfer a firearm to commit crimes.

So, if every possible aspect of acquisition, possession, transport, transfer of a firearm by criminals demands harsh and swift punishment under existing law, what is it that Emanuel, Bloomberg and President Obama really want?

You know who didn't? Your idol Obama.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/...ge-w-bush/

Quote:Syracuse University’s TRAC Reports recently revealed that Obama’s tough talk about increasing prosecution of federal gun laws was just that—talk. In fact, Obama’s annual prosecution of gun crimes has never reached the levels of prosecutions seen during George W. Bush’s last five years in office.

According to Yahoo News, one of Obama’s 23 executive directives in January 2013 was to “amp up prosecutions of federal gun laws.”

Yet TRAC Reports shows that prosecutions for gun violations actually began a decline in 2013. In fact, prosecutions in 2013 were lower than 2012. Gun crime prosecutions were even lower in 2014 and actually hit an all-time low for the Obama administration in 2015. For example, “during fiscal year (FY) 2014 the Justice Department said the government obtained 20.3 weapons convictions for every one million people in the United States… [and that dropped to] 19.1 weapons convictions for one million people in the United States during FY 2015.”

To put it another way, FY 2015 represents a 15.5 percent drop in prosecutions from 5 years ago and a 34.8 percent drop from the midway point of Bush’s eight years in office.

This is why you get called out for being an idiot.....you don't know anything concerning this issue beyond the leftist buzzwords. I suggest that if you want to offer "solutions" that you educate yourself beyond the tripe put out there by Salon, Vox, Huffpo, and Buzzfeed.

See now when I interject a coaching statement about Fit possibly being an idiot, The post somehow disappears.....

"Son don't be an idiot,.. I can't. coach an idiot!"

(01-25-2017 06:37 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Here's a big problem. We are not vigorously prosecuting crimes under current law. Do that first, and then start looking at whether we need more laws.

That is a logical solution. Why not do the exact same thing with immigration?


All I am saying is that it wouldn't hurt to add another layer of regulation to prevent small time criminals from buying a gun so easily.

(01-26-2017 02:37 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(01-25-2017 06:37 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Here's a big problem. We are not vigorously prosecuting crimes under current law. Do that first, and then start looking at whether we need more laws.

That is a logical solution. Why not do the exact same thing with immigration?


All I am saying is that it wouldn't hurt to add another layer of regulation to prevent small time criminals from buying a gun so easily.

Except what you proposed in this thread wouldn't solve that because criminals aren't buying guns from places that require you to show an ID.


Again.. I suggest that if you want to offer "solutions" that you educate yourself beyond the tripe put out there by Salon, Vox, Huffpo, and Buzzfeed.