I think I've figured out why Northern states are anti-gun

Here's something else to notice. Look at the pattern of conservatism to progressive liberalism that runs from Nevada to Kansas.
Start with Nevada (liberal), then Utah (conservative), Colorado (liberal), then Kansas (conservative).
What do they have in common? Nevada and Colorado had economies traditionally based on mining, Utah and Kansas had economies traditionally based on settler farmers.

The pattern even extended into California, in older times, but that has changed due to tremendous levels of foreign immigration and changing nature of the agricultural economy.
Going West, the mining mountains of California tended to host miners with a very "liberal culture" (though they did not stay there very long and most only stayed for the Gold Rush), then the interior Central Valley had farmers (conservative), and then heading to the coast, San Francisco, it became very liberal progressive again.

 

you'd be hard pressed to find a bigger anti gun whore than Saul Cornell. Maybe Josh Sugarmann. Cornell has no credibility whatsoever. Most gun banners are passing laws designed to restrict people JUST LIKE THEMSELVES, from owning guns. They know they are incompetent to bear arms and are terrified to use them. SO they want the government to prevent them from owning stuff that terrorizes them.

 

pure bunk-it ignores the numerous state and f federal laws being violated.

 

Federal laws broken:
Out of state resident buying a handgun without an FFL: felony
Out of state resident buying a handgun with the intent to resell or otherwise transfer the handgun to another person who the transferor knows or has reason to believe is ineligible for any reason to purchase or otherwise receive a handgun: felony
Out of state resident buying a handgun with the intent to transport the handgun out of the state to be resold or otherwise provided to another person who the transferor knows is ineligible to purchase or otherwise receive a firearm: felony
Possibly: Buying, selling or possessing stolen goods.

What's the magic felony law that won't be ignored?

And every single state is its own largest source of guns to criminals.

https://www.atf.gov/resource-center/firearms-trace-data-2018

 

You seem to be trying to change the topic of discussion in this thread.

Forgive us if we refuse to argue with you about an issue that is off-topic here.

(And like I repeatedly tell people in other threads, just because a thread is posted in a section of the forum about something, does not mean that thread is a free-for-all discussion about anything having to do with the title of the section. When you have a thread within a section, the topic of the thread is more specific than the title of the section. This is really something that should be obvious to everyone, though apparently it isn't)

 

Being able to buy handguns in bulk increases the incentive for violating those laws.

 

I don't believe the Founding Fathers would have been in favor of allowing lax gun laws to undermine the security of a free state.

 

I think that you underestimate how important it was to the Founding Fathers for individual American citizens to have the absolute right to own firearms.

Please remember that in the 18th century there were no established police forces and violent crime was as prevalent as any time in our nation's history.

Additionally, many people relied on their rifle, musket or shotgun for food as modern day Americans rely on their grocery store and carrying a pistol at that time was as common as carrying a cell phone today.

With the French, Spanish, English and Native Americans sharing the same land mass, the need to quickly rally a defensive militia was even more essential in preserving the security of our newly formed nation than today.

Even though, today, we have established police forces across the land, the reality that you're on your own when faced with a criminal threat is no different today than it was in Colonial Times.

I also hope you will remember that our Founding Fathers were in a sense revolutionaries and abhorred the intrusion of Big Government into any facet of our daily lives so, no, our Founding Fathers had already experienced "common sense gun laws" under British rule and wanted no part of them in their newly formed country.
That's why the right of individual Americans to own firearms ranked second only to our right to free speech under the Bill of Rights.

Thanks,

 

Underestimate?
No.
Choose to ignore? Choose to not understand? Choose to misrepresent? Choose to misstate?
Yes.

 

I try to keep my Posts as civil and respectful as possible.
Even though there is nothing disrespectful in the phrases you thought were more appropriate, I thought that I would start with "underestimate" to better understand the opinions of @Galileo .

 

That's very undestanding of you.

 

I try...

As 2nd Amendment supporters, I think that we can be more persuasive by way of calm, honest and rational debate.
Since the facts are on our side, we can afford to be "understanding".

 

Sadly, it does not matter how many times you present facts to a troll, and concretely demonstrate the fallacy of their 'arguments', they remain a troll.

 

I don't assume that everyone who supports additional gun control is a troll but I do believe that you're more likely to persuade a gun control advocate if you present credible facts in a calm, polite and respectful manner.