Are revolvers the most reviled of firearms available?

I heard Brady has "half a mind" to get his job back.

 

And I still disagree with you but that is what the ignore button is for.

Rich.

 

And the low number of investigations, and abysmal number of prosecutions, indicate that there is no actual interest in preventing prohibited individuals from acquiring firearms. Therefore the existing background check system in the united states pertaining to firearm purchases serves no point in existing, and should simply be done away with.

 

Thus confirming that there is no actual legitimacy in the current setup with regards to firearms ownership, acquisition, and possession. There is simply no appetite on the part of united states authorities to prosecute these individuals when they commit such offenses, so there is no legitimate point in the background check system even existing to begin with.

 

They are denied a firearm. Otherwise, they would be able to buy one from a dealer. What’s so hard to understand ? With universal checks, it becomes more difficult. So, you want to prosecute. school bus drivers too ?

 

Given that straw purchases, illegal street sales and theft would still be available as guns sources, and that the majority of guns in criminals' hands come from these sources, getting denied just means that the criminal, who is left free, will simply access one of these other sources.

Failing a pre-employment background check is not a crime. Lying on the Form 4473 is a felony. I live in a state that manages the gun purchase background check, using NICS and various state databases. We still fill out the Form 4473 to buy a gun. It's still a felony to lie on that form.

 

All illegal sales start with a legal sale .
Unless people are stealing them from the factory, requiring background checks each step of the way works in other countries just like universal healthcare. Gun cultist won’t be convinced otherwise till they are personally involved in a tragedy. Have a good day...moving on.

 

In transit diversions are a problem, but straw purchases are the biggest problem. They do start with a legal sale, where the non-prohibited buyer passes the background check, but then sold/transferred to a prohibited buyer by the original sell without a background check on purpose. That's already a felony. Adding a misdemeanor charge for not having a background check won't impede those sales, nor will it impede theft or street sales of the millions of guns already in the hands of criminals.

 

Incorrect customs has intercepted thousands of firearms being smuggled into the U.S. and considering by their own estimates they only catch 10% of what's being smuggled.

Not without a central database of who is buying each firearm at every step.

Legal firearm owners know this comment is not only insulting, it is totally false.

 

They are denied the legal purchase of a firearm being sold by a federally licensed firearms dealer. They are not denied physical access to a firearm through other means, however, thus meaning nothing of substance has actually occurred.

The state of California proves otherwise, as the majority of firearms found in the possession of criminals were sold within the state of California, in full compliance with all firearm-related restrictions. Therefore the phrase "more difficult" is devoid of meaning or a method of measuring the end results, as it does nothing to actually prevent the illegal acquisition of firearms. If the criminal element is still acquiring firearms, regardless of the firearm-related restrictions in place, then they are not serving a legitimate reason in their existence since what they are seeking to prevent is continuing in an entirely unimpeded manner.

So-called "universal" background checks do not address any underlying problem, it merely creates a false sense of security, by presenting the illusion that something is being done.

In the united states, is it currently a felony-level offense to commit perjury on the forms involved with a background check for simple employment?

 

On average, developed Countries with stronger gun laws including private sales regulation have fewer gun deaths and on average and states in the US with stronger laws including universal background checks do better, including California. That’s statistical evidence that’s been consistent for decades. Your comments are just opinions.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/27/sta...ms-deaths-heres-how-your-state-stacks-up.html



https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/14/...ath-rates-the-us-is-in-a-different-world.html

 

comprehensive firearm registration.

It's a mistake to compare other countries to the US, because other countries didn't start with 400 million unregistered guns. If you want to call the studied opinion of the criminal justice experts at the Department of Justice who said that UBCs cannot be effective without a reduction in straw purchases and comprehensive firearm registration, feel free. It won't help your credibility.

California has a UBC and firearm registration, yet ATF records show consistently year to year that the majority of weapon used in criminal acts and traced by the ATF still originate in California. For most years in the last decade 2/3 of traced guns come from California.

Since 2000, California has had a lower homicide rate than Texas just three times.[/QUOTE]

 

First, the united states is not any other country, developed or otherwise, so cease comparing it to any other country. The two are incompatible with one another.

Second, if background checks on private firearm transaction work so well as is being claimed, why do more firearms found in the possession of criminals within the state of California, ultimately come from the state of California to begin with, rather than from any other state? Explain such.

 

You have No stats , no facts to back up these assertions, just opinion. If more guns and fewer regs meant fewer gun crimes, we’d would have the fewest gun casualties in all the developed nations. We don’t. The record is there.

Keep disregarding that California gun laws meant a reduction in gun crimes. Stats don’t lie. You can pretend they don’t exist.
More guns, more gun crimes while more regulation, fewer gun crimes in states and developed nations.

“Gun violence across California dropped 56% from 5,500 gun deaths in 1993 to 2,935 in 2010, according to a study , which took into account California’s expanded population from about 30 to 37 million people over the same period.”

 

Yada yada.
Every ligit study shows just what my references stated.
You have no facts and no evidence to back up that we are somehow impervious to gun violence because we have more guns. It is just NRA orchestrated BS. The logic escapes gun cultist....but that’s why we call it a cult. Cults are devoid of evidence and facts. We’d lead the world in gun safety if arming anyone was true.

 

Really then why did violent crime drop after Florida allowed concealed carry?

Your false thoughts are not based in reality.

 

Those studies are undermined by the findings of the ATF.

The ATF has demonstrated, numerous times, that so-called "universal" background checks on private firearm transactions, along with registration requirements, permits to purchase firearms, permits to own firearms, firearm rationing schemes, waiting periods, and numerous other firearm-related restrictions, do absolutely nothing to impede the illegal acquisition of firearms by prohibited individuals. It has demonstrated this fact over and over again, every single year it releases its trace data and shows more firearms found in the possession of the criminal element in the state of California, were sold in the state of California than in any other state in the country.

There is nothing on the part of yourself, no evidence, no study, no theory, that can disprove this confirmed fact. The ATF itself states that you are factually incorrect, therefore your opinion means nothing.

 

More yada and no evidence. That’s just you talking....where are the numbers. The numbers don’t lie. It’s not rocket science. This nation leads the industrialized world in gun violence and has the most lenient national gun regulations and the most guns. According to the NRA we should be he safest. Yet, we have as many gun deaths some years as automotive deaths in some states .....auto is dropping and gun deaths closing in. Our regulations are misplaced.
http://vpc.org/regulating-the-gun-industry/gun-deaths-compared-to-motor-vehicle-deaths/

 

Of course you’d say that. You don’t even bother to look at the posted evidence. You’ve posted nothing but opinion. Where does the AFT post the comparative FACTS refuting my evidence.

 

From reference
21 states, have more gun deaths then auto accidents deaths.
Discraceful.

Alaska: 145 gun deaths, 87 motor vehicle deaths

Arizona: 927 gun deaths, 857 motor vehicle deaths

Colorado: 663 gun deaths, 545 motor vehicle deaths

District of Columbia: 86 gun deaths, 37 motor vehicle deaths

Georgia: 1,391 gun deaths, 1,289 motor vehicle deaths

Idaho: 213 gun deaths, 212 motor vehicle deaths

Illinois: 1,179 gun deaths, 1,075 motor vehicle deaths

Indiana: 818 gun deaths, 774 motor vehicle deaths

Louisiana: 896 gun deaths, 807 motor vehicle deaths

Maryland: 546 gun deaths, 480 motor vehicle deaths

Michigan: 1,095 gun deaths, 1,014 motor vehicle deaths

Missouri: 943 gun deaths, 801 motor vehicle deaths

Nevada: 429 gun deaths, 319 motor vehicle deaths

New Hampshire: 122 gun deaths, 107 motor vehicle deaths

Ohio: 1,211 gun deaths, 1,137 motor vehicle deaths

Oregon: 497 gun deaths, 380 motor vehicle deaths

Pennsylvania: 1,390 gun deaths, 1,287 motor vehicle deaths

Tennessee: 1,020 gun deaths, 1,000 motor vehicle deaths

Utah: 337 gun deaths, 261 motor vehicle deaths

Vermont: 69 gun deaths, 49 motor vehicle deaths

Virginia: 889 gun deaths, 789 motor vehicle deaths

Washington: 702 gun deaths, 583 motor vehicle d

 

Right on its own site dedicated to trace data.

https://www.atf.gov/resource-center/firearms-trace-data-2017

Data for the state of California:

https://www.atf.gov/docs/undefined/cawebsite17183919pdf/download

For the given year, the ATF traced forty one thousand, five hundred and twenty seven firearms found in the illegal possession of criminal individuals.

Of that amount, forty three percent of the total number, seventeen thousand, three hundred and ninety seven firearms, were traced back to the state of California as being the state in which they were originally sold, despite all of the firearm-related restrictions it currently has in place, demonstrating their uselessness in preventing criminal access to firearms.

If the firearm-related restrictions being championed by yourself truly worked, such would not be the case. There is no legitimate excuse for so many firearms sold in compliance with the firearm-related restrictions of the state of California, to wind up in the possession of those who cannot legally possess them, if these same firearm-related restrictions truly work as it being claimed by yourself and others. What has been demonstrated should not have been physically possible, and yet it was indeed possible because it did occur.

 

Most people never see a gun too. Until the bullet tears thru flesh

 

The above figures include firearm-related incidents that amount to suicides, not simply homicides.

Separate the figures and come back with homicides exclusively, not simply lumping all firearm-related deaths under the same term and treating them as if they were no different from one another. There is no legitimate reason for including homicides and suicides together.

 

More yada.