That's because the damage is done now. Hundreds of years of allowing people virtually unrestricted access to most guns has flooded the country with firearms. Now there's no way to restrict guns without affecting only honest citizens, because the supply is high enough for any criminal to get whatever gun they want. The homicide rate per capita in the US is 4.14 deaths/100,000 people. The homicide rate in Canada is 0.76/100,000. We share the world's longest unguarded boarder. We share media. We have easy and open physical access to each other's countries. Why does America have over five times our murder rate?
You do realize that both violent crime and crimes involving firearms are trending downward annually, right? There is a saying that: Guns don't kill people, people kill people. A gun in the hands of a person with malicious intent kills people just like a knife, a club or a rock will. The issue isn't the presence of firearms in our society, it has more to do with social and cultural issues.
Out of pure exhaustion, I capitulate. There is no way to convince someone who's drank the Kool-Aid that easy access to guns within a society is not a good thing.
Some of this America vs. Canada shit on here is getting stupid. You can sit around and argue all day about whose system is better, but with the systems having been in place for as long as they have there is no way we can wake up one morning and decide to switch over. Also, Canada has 1/10th the population of the US so what works in Canada won't always work down here. And about this statistic of the US having one of the highest murder with firearm rates in the world. Click on this link from the same website: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita. For those who don't want to waste the time, it only goes up to 37 countries and in per-capita homicides the US doesn't make the list. As for the topic, the police and lawyers working on this case will be hard pressed to figure out what happened there, for us following on the news we will likely hear something very different than the true story. It is sad that someone died, and it is also sad that the news programs pick up on these stories just to get viewers.
Let's stop saying this because it simply isn't true, mmmmkay. The FBI estimates that there are over 200 million privately-owned firearms in the US. If you add those owned by the military, law enforcement agencies and museums, there is probably about 1 gun per person in the country. Read more: <a class="postlink" href="http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_guns_are_in_the_united_states_of_America#ixzz1ryq8Ann7" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_guns ... z1ryq8Ann7</a>
Our crime rate in general is higher than most modern societies. Could we focus on the socioeconomic issues which is the prevailing factor in crime rates across the board? Sure we could, but it's just easier to focus on the seemingly easier symptom of the problem, which I consider the gun issue not the cause.
Please guys, stop with all the sexy gun show lingo. Ill have to go buy me a new gun at Bill Goodman's with out even needing a background check.
A gun makes it easier to kill. Pulling a trigger is instant, you can't stop midway through and pull the bullet out of the air, and there's something more impersonal about it that probably makes it psychologically easier to shoot someone than to kill them in other ways. I don't blame guns at all, but I think you have to be a whole lot more pissed off to bludgeon someone to death than to shoot them.
I think we need to acknowledge that anything that facilitates turning a violent impulse into violent action might result in more dead people. Doesn't mean I think we should people's guns away; I do think you have the right to defend yourself. But, believing in rights doesn't mean believing there aren't negative consequences.
Acknowledging the fact doesn't warrant capitulating to the actions of criminals. Criminals might find ways to exploit unreasonable search and seizure laws but we but fuck if that means we should weaken them for it.
Really? I have my permit to carry and the only time I don't carry is when I'm in the shower and sometimes when I'm banging my wife. That said, an attacker with a knife scares me a 100x more than an attacker with a gun. If a guy with a knife is within 10 yards (7 yards is the accepted rule, but by then it's too late), you're pretty much fucked. Anyone who's gone through the proper training with their firearm will agree with that wholeheartedly. This is what a real knife attack looks like. We'd better ban knives. As a matter of fact, many more people survive gunshots than do survive stab wounds. That is fact. My best friend's dad is a guard at Oak Park Heights, which is a level 5 supermax prison. When I first got my permit to carry (in MN, we don't have to conceal), he asked me what I was carrying and I told him a 9mm with ball ammo. He laughed and told me that nearly 75% of the inmates there have wounds from 9mm ball. I now only use ball ammo at the range.
Just to clarify: This was not in PA. This was in AL, a state I wasn't even a resident of at the time. The suicidal girl did not kill herself or someone else, but she did give away all her valuables (including the gun) to a homeless dude before she slit her wrists and ended up in the psych ward again. Who knows what happened to that gun? As for the dude who bought the AK-47 (and yes, it WAS an AK-47) through his proxy purchaser, I can reasonably assume that he wasn't going to hunt deer with it. The gang tattoos on his face aren't well-accepted in hunting circles out in bumfuck AL. There was no background check to purchase those guns. It wasn't required in that state at that time. There was no waiting period. There was no concern about a barely-legal white girl rolling out of their dealership with not a single fucking clue about how that gun worked. Hell, it took me 30 minutes to figure out how to load the damn thing. I did some dangerous shit with a loaded gun because no one gave a shit if I understood the mechanics or not. That could've easily gone poorly if I'd had a smidge less common sense. Everything was legal and aboveboard. That is NOT okay. Guns are awesome things to own, awesome things to shoot skeet with, and gun conventions usually have the most awesome mullets in attendance. But that doesn't change the fact that too many people who own guns shouldn't be owning guns. And that's actually a fact, not an opinion. Zimmerman might've gotten his ass beat if he hadn't had a gun. But you know what? Both people would've walked away from that situation. Zimmerman and Martin being alive is always the better outcome, and I think we all can agree on that.
It's not legal to buy a handgun in a state that you arent a resident. The dealer fucked up. They also fucked up by letting a blatant straw purchase happen, which is a felony. From the ATF's website Q: From whom may an unlicensed person acquire a firearm under the GCA? 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]
Nope. Jefferson County, Alabama allows (or did, circa 2004) out-of-state students to purchase weapons because of some loophole that takes into account residency for education. I wasn't a resident, but I did spend January-May and August-December there. Totally legal. But it shouldn't have been. EDIT: Nevermind. Tl;dr: Human error still put an AK-47 on the street. A waiting period or a background check could've prevented that.
Unless this gun shop was a wholly illegal operation or you are just a whole lot older than I thought you were, none of what you are describing was legal, straw purchases became a federal crime in 1968, not running a background check became a federal crime for a Federally Licensed gun dealers (re:gun shops) in 94. Either way the laws weren't being enforced properly, what ever laws you seem to be suggesting at, limiting people access to guns, doesn't solve any of the issues brought up with your gunshop story. As one of the boards most outspoken members on women's issues and who apparently digs guns I wonder what your feelings are as far as women and the use of guns for self defense? Everyone around here always says "you couldn't even begin to imagine to know what it's like to be XYZ." What it's like to be gawked at and made feel uncomfortable and have the real possibility to be raped like women feel every day. I've always thought concealed carry laws, castle doctrine, and stand your ground laws would benefit women the most. I am not even equating these in any way with the Zimmerman case, as I really didn't even care to wade into the insane stuff I mentioned in my first post of this thread. Not to trying to be mean to you directly, but when ever I hear someone say "I am a gun owner/and or a member of the NRA and I support tighter/common sense* gun regulations" I immediately equate them with people who say "I have plenty of black friends.....but..... (some retard blather why blacks should act right)." *'common sense' as it's used in the media and politics today is just a buzz phrase that doesn't mean shit besides espousing what ever end of the political spectrum the user is on.