Just 3 Laws Would Reduce Gun Deaths 90%

Discussion in 'National Laws, Bills and Politics' started by Malum Prohibitum, Jan 5, 2017.

  1. 45_Fan

    45_Fan Well-Known Member

    7,958
    42
    48
    I think they missed the April-Fools edition.

    When major gun death demographics are black males ages 15-25 and white males 85+, I'm uncertain any level of background checks is going to magically fix those numbers.
     

  2. phaed

    phaed Active Member

    9,360
    2
    38
    bingo.

    also, from the article...
    [email protected]#%^

    i'm almost motivated to start digging...almost.
     
  3. mrhutch

    mrhutch Well-Known Member

    1,423
    188
    63
    Yes, because gangsters who steal weapons to sell to other thugs are going to run background checks before their transactions. Brilliant, why didn't we think of this?

    You know what would reduce gun deaths by 100%? We should make shooting people illegal! It's brilliant, I don't know why nobody has thought of this sooner. I'm writing my congressman.
     
  4. phaed

    phaed Active Member

    9,360
    2
    38
    the lead researcher is the VP of the Gun Violence Survivors Foundation, a "non-profit" created after Sandy Hook. looks like one of the Joyce foundation's babies.
     
  5. gunsmoker

    gunsmoker Lawyer and Gun Activist

    27,542
    685
    113
    I think just 3 new laws would eliminate GUN deaths by 90%.

    1-- Forbid all gun (including accessories and components) and ammo sales to non-LEO.
    2--- Confiscate all guns, ammo, and gun accessories from all non-LEO.
    3-- L.E. officers don't get to take their guns home. They stay at the precinct and get passed to the officers arriving for the next shift. Every round is accounted for following each shift

    Sure, we'd have to repeal (or ignore) the 4th Amendment, Second Amendment, the "Due Process of Law" clause... but in the big picture, this is the goal of the gun grabbers, and what they are willing to do to keep us "safe" from guns.


    P.S. I'm sure plenty of murders would still take place with the killers using other means. We'll see more stabbings, skull-cracking assaults with bats and clubs, firebombing of rival gang members' homes instead of drive-by shootings, etc.
     
  6. mrhutch

    mrhutch Well-Known Member

    1,423
    188
    63
    We'd still see plenty of shootings. Haven't you seen the stamped metal machine guns they confiscate from gangs in Australia, Japan, China, Brazil, etc? Building a gun isn't hard for those with the motivation to do so.

    Heck you can build a machine gun in your garage with a trip to home depot and a couple grand in power tools. If you pump them out and sell them for $500/each to gang members, and handload ammo, you'll be quite wealthy.
     
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2017
  7. Drew

    Drew Active Member

    1,883
    0
    36
    If we really want to eliminate gun deaths we should probably take them away from LEOs also.
     
  8. 45_Fan

    45_Fan Well-Known Member

    7,958
    42
    48
    5th amendment. ;)
     
  9. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    67,050
    1,428
    113
    Good find! :)
     
  10. moe mensale

    moe mensale Well-Known Member

    12,631
    1,711
    113
    This is what happens when medical types attempt to conflate a result (gun violence) with an underlying cause (anti-social behavior). The gun violence becomes a public health issue and the endemic anti-social behavior of certain groups and individuals gets ignored.

    Can we look forward to learned studies of "truck violence" in the near future?
     
  11. diamondback

    diamondback Well-Known Member

    1,224
    39
    48
    I think a don't breed them if you cant feed them law is a law that would greatly reduce crime over 15 years more than any mag ban or background check. we incent bad behavior in this country. When someone is on the dole long term they should be required to be on norplant or birth control. There should be a penalty for a pregnancy. I am not talking about the family where the bread winner has been laid off a few months and the woman gets pregnant. I am talking about the third generation single mom in the projects with no ambition, all her money comes from the taxpayer. They are committing fraud and places like Chicago are prime examples of this.
     
  12. phaed

    phaed Active Member

    9,360
    2
    38
    you are unhappy with what the government has done with the power you've given them. you now think giving them more power, to determine who can have children and who cannot, will fix it. this is not rational.

    you're right in that the government incentivizes that irresponsible behavior. therefore, the more logical approach would be to remove their power to incentivize.
     
  13. Drew

    Drew Active Member

    1,883
    0
    36
    Maybe you should consider moving to China.
     
  14. diamondback

    diamondback Well-Known Member

    1,224
    39
    48
    expect that one from the left.


    Welfare is not a right but a privilege and there is a correlation between poverty and crime in places like Chicago.
     
  15. phantoms

    phantoms Senior Mumbler

    6,208
    187
    63
    [sarcasm]Maybe we could just implant a combo GPS Tracker and Tazer in everyone at birth. That way if they get a call about a robbery, etc., they can just taze everybody in the area. see, I got it down to one law, no need for three. [/sarcasm]
     
  16. Fallschirmjäger

    Fallschirmjäger I watch the watchers

    12,835
    63
    48
    Just one law should be enough, "Don't murder people".
     
  17. diamondback

    diamondback Well-Known Member

    1,224
    39
    48
    Or don't breed em if you cant feed em.
     
  18. moe mensale

    moe mensale Well-Known Member

    12,631
    1,711
    113
    The state will ensure that she can feed them. As you said above: "...all her money comes from the taxpayer."
     
  19. diamondback

    diamondback Well-Known Member

    1,224
    39
    48
    That is what I am talking about. If you need the state to feed your kids ( long term) there probably is an issue that you should not be having them.