APD: '80% of Confiscated Guns are Stolen' Sen Fort Blames Guns Everywhere Bill

Why do i think these #s might be a little fudged?

 

If they are stolen wouldn't you want to make some reasonable effort to return them to their owners? Like if person xxx says my firearm xxx with serial no. xxx was stolen be on the lookout.


??

 

I'm missing the correlation between reducing the number of places that are off-limits to carry and the influx of stolen guns from outside of the state...

 

Criminals use stolen guns? Who knew?

 

My wife had a revolver stolen years ago and was contacted by APD. They had recovered it. She filed dozens of forms, visited APD, called, etc. They finally admitted they had destroyed the revolver 9-10 months AFTER she formally requested the return if her property.

 

Exactly. If they've been able to determine that 80% of what APD has been illegally holding is stolen, my question is how many per month has APD been able to return to their rightful owners?

 

Boolean Mode <click>


Let "A" be Sen. Fort's bandwagon efforts and anti-rights rhetoric

A <== Sen. Fort will rail​

Let "B" be the "reverse iron pipeline" of stolen guns entering Georgia

A + B <== Sen. Fort railing occurs as stolen guns enter Georgia​

But Sen. Fort notices and rails about it too

A + AB <== Sen. Fort railing about stolen guns entering Georgia among other rhetoric​

Meanwhile...
Let "C" be the number of legal carriers exercising their rights
Let "D" be the deterrent effect on crime arising from self-defense
Let "E" be the community effects arising from legal guns "everywhere"

E = CD <== Net effect of legal carriers within a community​

Leaves us with

A + AB + E​

Sen. Fort notices that too and rails against it, not because of the net community effect which results, but rather merely because an effect exists

A + AB + AE <== Sen. Fort also rails about "reverse pipeline everywhere"​

Distributive Law:

A + A(B + E) <== Sen. Fort railing about something​

Absorption Law:

A + A(B + E) = A​

∴ Sen. Fort will rail against of the actions of legal carriers regardless


Let "F" be "Fort-Orrockian" arithmetic wherein (2 + 2) / 9 million = 397% when your grandchildren are answering polls at the bar
Let "G" be the grassroots legislative efforts of the citizenry itself (such as GCO)
So....

AB + AF(C + D + E) + AF(E) <== Sen. Fort trying to get more places off-limits because of stolen guns and legal carriers​

Substitution:

AB + AF(C + D + CD) + AF(CD)​

Distributive Law:

AB + AF((C + D + CD) + CD)​

Associative Law:

AB + AF(C + D + CD + CD)​

Commutative Law:

AB + AF(C + CD + D + CD)​

Associative Law:

AB + AF(CD + C + CD + D)​

But legal carriers do not buy / use / import / etc stolen guns...

AB + AF(0D + 0 + 0D + D)​

AB + AF(D) <== Sen. Fort railing about stolen guns, and applying Fort-Orrockian arithmetic to the deterrent effects of self-defense everywhere​

Distributive Law:

A(B + F(D))​

We know from prior proofs that the single most unique feature of Fort-Orrockian arithmetic is that is always produces a meaningless result, so substituting...

A(B + 0(D))​

A(B + 0)​

A(B)​

AB​

∴ Sen. Fort is merely railing about the "reverse iron pipeline" REGARDLESS of the actions of legal carriers or the effect the actions of legal carriers have within the community


So to answer your question RDTM, there IS no correlation.


Furthermore, since we've all been alerted to the "Iron Pipeline" of "illegal guns constantly leaving Georgia", any influx is overwhelmingly "netted out" by the "rivers of stolen guns" leaving the State.

 

Maybe the real issue isn't "guns in the streets." Maybe the real issue is gang violence. Whataya think about that, Senator Fort? How about trying to deal with the cause of the problem instead of the symptom? But we all know it's much easier for politicians to deal with misdirection. After all, it's kind of like having built-in job security, isn't it?

 

The "Guns Everywhere" Act did not (and does not) apply to criminals importing stolen firearms, neither does it "enable" any such thing, Mr. Fort.

 

If 80% of APD's impound lots were filled with stolen motor vehicles, would Sen. Fort try to shut down the freeways?


...gotta keep all them stolen cars off the streets...
...all those illegal cars and stolen vehicles should be destroyed instead of returned...
...our road system and open freeways encourage criminals to bring stolen vehicles here...
...instead of shutting down where criminals can drive cars, they're adding lanes and expanding existing roadways...
...you can buy a stolen car right off the interwebznet with nothing more than a stolen credit card...

 

"...allow criminals to drive stolen cars to the airport, to churches, to restaurants and bars, and even to your child's school..."

 

There's a study for the next round of "gun deaths" numbers. After accounting for suicides, self defense shootings, and suicide by officer, and accidents, what percentage of the remaining "gun deaths" involved legally* obtained firearms.

*Private transaction, dealer sales, inherited, or gifted to a non-prohibited person

 

Perhaps you are assuming logic?


"...freeways don't kill people... stolen cars without background checks on freeways kill people..."

 

Logic? It's AGENDA, not logic!

 

Or, more succinctly, the problem is recidivism(repeated or habitual relapse, as into crime). For example, the US Dept of Justice once tracked the re-arrest, re-conviction, and re-incarceration of former inmates for 3 years after their release from prisons in 15 states in 1994.

The 272,111 offenders discharged in 1994 had accumulated 4.1 million arrest charges before their most recent imprisonment and another 744,000 charges within 3 years of release. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recidivism#Recidivism_rates

But remarkably, many re-offenders are re-offending and re-arrested and re-convicted when they should have been serving jail sentences for their previous convictions, if those jail sentences weren't shortened or changed into stints of parole/probation. It is frequent that convicts go through several cycles of this, yet the conviction/release/re-conviction cycle continues.
Think of it this way, how frequently do we read of news reports of violent crime where the perpetrator hasn't had multiple convictions of violent crimes?

 

Call it 73.9%. FortOrrockian arithmetic means it represents at least 300%.