The Anti Gun movement kills its own arguments

all gun rules affect anyone who wants or owns a gun.

 

Pro-gun people shouldn't be allowed to own guns, or people who would vote against unconstitutional, ineffective and unenforceable gun laws shouldn't own guns?

 

trust me Ron, based on your lies about being an FBI agent you wouldn't be able to meet the DOJ standards

 

you are absolutely wrong again. Registration has no impact on criminals

 

No they don't. A criminal selling a gun to another criminal will not be affected by an UBC. An active shooter will not be effective by a "gun free zone" sign. A felon will not be affected by a registry requirement.

 

right now criminals can't buy a gun from tens of thousands of gun dealers.

if we pass UBC they wont be able to buy a gun from anyone who respects American law.

so yes, UBC will affect the lives of criminals.

 

meanwhile you want to make it much easier for criminals to get guns, by ending background checks.

if we end background checks, criminals will buy guns at Walmart and Target.

 

well we know that the brady bill has not decreased violent crime. so you are not being truthful

 

that assumes that they won't ever be prosecuted for being felons in possession so once again you are wrong. remember, right now they get their guns through walmart (does Target even sell guns) through straw buyers. How is that going to change?

 

if we end background checks, criminals will simply go to the local gun store or Walmart and buy guns.

right now they can't do that.

 

no, their girlfriends just buy the guns for them.

 

What make you think that sales from anyone who respects American law to criminals is a significant source of guns to criminals now, or that those who would get a gun that way wouldn't turn to an alternative method like straw purchases, corrupt FFLs, illegal street sellers or theft?

If only those who respect American law would be affected by a UBC, why not offer direct access to NICS for those sellers? That would be a lot cheaper to implement than a UBC where an FFL must be involved.

 

if even 10% of guns possessed by criminals comes from private sales, UBC would be worth it.

 

Can you show me a post where someone actually suggested ending the background check process and overturning the Brady Act? I've seen lots of posts where they've shown that it isn't actually enforced, or that a UBC would do any good, but nothing that meets your claim above that we want to end background checks.

 

I do-it violates the tenth and second amendment. states have the power to do it though

 

But there's no barrier to entry for any other source of illegal guns. If, for arguments sake, that 10% of guns in the hands of criminals came from good guys through private sales, there's no reason to believe that completely eliminating that source would reduce the number of guns sold to criminals by 10%, as they would simply shift to straw purchases, corrupt FFL diversions, illegal street sales and theft.

Just what is the percentage of sales from good guys to bad guys in private sales?

 

More facts not in evidence

 

i bet they enjoyed the fact that i made up a make believe position.

LOL!!!!!!

 

Care to reference one of those posts?

 

You start with a false premise. There is not statistically a significant loss of innocent lives.
By far, our gun homicide stats show that both the victim and the shooter have multiple arrest records which means the shooter had the gun illegally. Most of these are in high crime drug traffic areas.

As an innocent American, there is a 0.000008% chance of being a gun homicide victim.

Your view of a gun free society in generations to come is shared by many liberals in the US. This is exactly why there is such opposition to gun control measures because they are all just a means to an end. Give them an inch and they’ll take a mile. We know there will never be an end to gun control efforts until firearms are outlawed altogether at some point in the future.

 

Back to the thread....according to the Luca study waiting periods have a significant effect on decreasing homicides

 

and that flies in teh face of reality because so few people who commit homicides are even subject to a waiting period if one were in place. The DUKE study found that the waiting period was WORTHLESS in decreasing homicides

 

The Malhotra also disputes the duke study and shows why their methodology was flawed

https://arstechnica.com/science/201...ndreds-of-murders-according-to-45-year-study/

 

By whom? Murderers, or the government after due process for treason?

 

see above