Pro-gun article

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Giantone

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/24/op...oney.html?_r=2&

Make Gun Companies Pay Blood Money
GUN manufacturers have gone to great lengths to avoid any moral responsibility or legal accountability for the social costs of gun violence — the deaths and injuries of innocent victims, families torn apart, public resources spent on gun-related crime and medical expenses incurred.

But there is a simple and direct way to make them accountable for the harm their products cause. For every gun sold, those who manufacture or import it should pay a tax. The money should then be used to create a compensation fund for innocent victims of gun violence.
This proposal is based on a fundamentally conservative principle — that those who cause injury should be made to “internalize” the cost of their activity by paying for it. Now, gun manufacturers and sellers are mostly protected from lawsuits by federal law.
As it happens, a model for this approach already exists. Under the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, those injured by vaccines are eligible for compensation from a fund financed by an excise tax on the sale of every dose of vaccine. In creating this no-fault system in the 1980s, Congress sought to provide care for those injured by vaccines while protecting manufacturers from undue litigation

This is old and stupid. I guess we should attach this too alcohol sales, cars, knifes, and anything where there are victims of a product killing another person.

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by firstdown

This is old and stupid. I guess we should attach this too alcohol sales, cars, knifes, and anything where there are victims of a product killing another person.

Yes, let's remove any personal responsibility from poor decision making.

[HailGreen28]

Another post by an anti-gun nut with so many logical failures:

Originally Posted by Giantone

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/24/op...oney.html?_r=2&

Make Gun Companies Pay Blood Money
GUN manufacturers have gone to great lengths to avoid any moral responsibility or legal accountability for the social costs of gun violence — the deaths and injuries of innocent victims, families torn apart, public resources spent on gun-related crime and medical expenses incurred.

We have an entire industry of car insurance set up to cover "the social costs" of the automobile industry. Imagine if instead of the great sums of money we all pay insurance, taxes were raised on cars to cover the same amount. What do you think would happen to car sales? Yeah, same thing this proposal's backers want for gun sales. Except for those playing or actually dumb of course.

Originally Posted by Giantone

But there is a simple and direct way to make them accountable for the harm their products cause. For every gun sold, those who manufacture or import it should pay a tax. The money should then be used to create a compensation fund for innocent victims of gun violence.

Guns are bought for legitimate purposes, like marksmanship, hunting, and self defense. Why not financially go after the people who actually use guns to commit crimes? Why not keep them "accountable"?

Originally Posted by Giantone

This proposal is based on a fundamentally conservative principle — that those who cause injury should be made to “internalize” the cost of their activity by paying for it.

Epic logical fail here. This proposal doesn't go after those who cause injury. By taxing all gun sales, it shifts the costs to the vast majority of gun owners, who use guns and DON'T cause injury.

Originally Posted by Giantone

Now, gun manufacturers and sellers are mostly protected from lawsuits by federal law.

Lol. The same law that protects every other industry, where unless the company is negligent in the product it makes (defects, deceptive advertising, etc.) whackos can't try penalizing the industry out of business.

Originally Posted by Giantone

As it happens, a model for this approach already exists. Under the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, those injured by vaccines are eligible for compensation from a fund financed by an excise tax on the sale of every dose of vaccine.

Another epic fail in logic. In the case of bad vaccines, the company that made the defective drug is at fault. In the case where someone misuses a working gun, that individual is at fault. The same way that if someone tampered with or deliberately misused (forcefed, misprescribed, etc) a medicine, THEY would be at fault, NOT the drug company.

Originally Posted by Giantone

In creating this no-fault system in the 1980s, Congress sought to provide care for those injured by vaccines while protecting manufacturers from undue litigation

Because medicine is a trickier thing, with people's different reactions to drugs, unforeseen combinations of circumstances, disease evolution, etc. And there's always the uncertain balance in public interest between getting a needed cure out quickly vs. safely. None of which apply to guns, therefore the above mention of the vaccine policy does not follow.

The above proposal is just another poorly thought out rationalization, to try taxing the sale of guns by law abiding people out of existence. Typical.

Overthemountain had a better proposal. Go after the people who actually cause harm. Going back to the vaccine analogy, which is flawed but just to contrast, vaccine companies pay for harm they actually inflict themselves. Contrasting cars is kinda flawed too, there's nothing constitutional about owning one, but look at how with insurance you cause harm your rates go up. Giantone's proposal would shift that cost away from those who actually cause harm to EVERYBODY.

It's hard to take anti-gun groups seriously about stopping gun violence, when their target is all gun owners rather than the people who actually cause harm.

[Giantone]

Bill Clinton ......8/28/2013


"“A great democracy does not make it harder to vote than to buy an assault weapon,”

Read more: Bill Clinton calls for action in March on Washington speech - Jennifer Epstein - POLITICO.com

[Giantone]

Richmond rally supports more checks for gun purchases - Richmond Times-Dispatch: Central Virginia



Posted: Friday, August 23, 2013 12:00 am | Updated: 12:54 am, Sun Aug 25, 2013.
Richmond rally supports more checks for gun purchases BY MARK BOWES Richmond Times-Dispatch Richmond Times-Dispatch
The father of a young boy fatally shot in the Newtown massacre last year stopped in Richmond on Thursday as part of a “No More Names” national bus tour to drum up support for universal background checks for gun purchases.
“It’s something that shouldn’t have happened,” said Neil Heslin, whose 6-year-old son, Jesse Lewis, was one of 20 students and six adults fatally shot at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. “It’s something that can’t happen again. It’s something that’s got to be changed, and we can help prevent that.”
Speaking to a sparse crowd — perhaps 15 local supporters — Heslin said one of the simplest things that could be done “to prevent guns from falling into the wrong hands” is for Congress to pass legislation that would expand background checks for all firearm transactions, including private sales.
“Background checks are not something that’s treading on anybody’s Second Amendment rights,” he added. “It has nothing to do with taking guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens.
Echoing a repeated complaint from New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, whose Mayors Against Illegal Guns organization is sponsoring the 25-state national bus tour, Heslin said many guns that show up on the streets of New York and are used in crimes come from Virginia and North Carolina. “Background checks would help cut down on that,” he said.
In a news release distributed at a rally in Byrd Park, Mayors Against Illegal Guns — citing ATF data — said the number of guns sold by Virginia firearms dealers in 2009 that were trafficked to other states and recovered at crime scenes was 130 percent more than the national average and 422 percent more than in states that require background checks for private handgun sales. The number of firearms was not provided.
Eleven people, nine from the Richmond area, stood behind Heslin as a show of support and held signs that read, “Guns kill our children,” “Demand Action to End gun violence,” and “An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.”

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Richmond rally supports more checks for gun purchases - Richmond Times-Dispatch: Central Virginia



Posted: Friday, August 23, 2013 12:00 am | Updated: 12:54 am, Sun Aug 25, 2013.
Richmond rally supports more checks for gun purchases BY MARK BOWES Richmond Times-Dispatch Richmond Times-Dispatch
The father of a young boy fatally shot in the Newtown massacre last year stopped in Richmond on Thursday as part of a “No More Names” national bus tour to drum up support for universal background checks for gun purchases.
“It’s something that shouldn’t have happened,” said Neil Heslin, whose 6-year-old son, Jesse Lewis, was one of 20 students and six adults fatally shot at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. “It’s something that can’t happen again. It’s something that’s got to be changed, and we can help prevent that.”
Speaking to a sparse crowd — perhaps 15 local supporters — Heslin said one of the simplest things that could be done “to prevent guns from falling into the wrong hands” is for Congress to pass legislation that would expand background checks for all firearm transactions, including private sales.
“Background checks are not something that’s treading on anybody’s Second Amendment rights,” he added. “It has nothing to do with taking guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens.
Echoing a repeated complaint from New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, whose Mayors Against Illegal Guns organization is sponsoring the 25-state national bus tour, Heslin said many guns that show up on the streets of New York and are used in crimes come from Virginia and North Carolina. “Background checks would help cut down on that,” he said.
In a news release distributed at a rally in Byrd Park, Mayors Against Illegal Guns — citing ATF data — said the number of guns sold by Virginia firearms dealers in 2009 that were trafficked to other states and recovered at crime scenes was 130 percent more than the national average and 422 percent more than in states that require background checks for private handgun sales. The number of firearms was not provided.
Eleven people, nine from the Richmond area, stood behind Heslin as a show of support and held signs that read, “Guns kill our children,” “Demand Action to End gun violence,” and “An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.”

He said the guns from dealers which in that case a back ground check has to be done so I don't get his point. They say they want back ground checks then he uses data to prove his point but cited facts that actually show the back ground check don't stop gun crimes.

I'm sure none of the 12 people attending figured that out.

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Bill Clinton ......8/28/2013


"“A great democracy does not make it harder to vote than to buy an assault weapon,”

Wow, it's not often Bill Clinton says something really stupid.

Last I checked, you need more to get an "assault rifle", than step up and state your name and address.

[Chico23231]

I don't understand the hate for the background checks at gun shows? Why not want to ensure criminals are not getting guns there and be consistent with law around the state at retails stores? Is it just contrite at this point? U think with all the mass shootings in the state and across the country we'd look to close the loophole.

[mlmpetert]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

I don't understand the hate for the background checks at gun shows? Why not want to ensure criminals are not getting guns there and be consistent with law around the state at retails stores? Is it just contrite at this point? U think with all the mass shootings in the state and across the country we'd look to close the loophole.

The "gun show loophole" is a misnomer. The vast majority of sales at gun shows are by gun dealers (FFLs) and therefore require a background check. Only guns sold or transferred between private individuals do not require background checks, regardless if at a gun show or at a police station.

A big problem with requiring private individuals to complete background checks when selling a gun is that it costs a lot. A background check for a private sale averages around $40. You can only hire a professional to do it. You have to go to the professional's place of business to do it, and some people don't live in areas with easy access to a FFL or have cars.

And like most restrictions, background checks primarily hurt poor people. A lot of shotguns are only worth $100 and your entry level handgun costs $150-$200. So your talking about a fee that is between 20-40% of a guns value. Even with a nice $500 dollar glock you are still looking an 8% fee.

What if you had to preform a "registration check" before selling a car to a private party that cost around 20-40% of car's value? What if you also had to travel 100 miles to complete the transaction with a car dealer? What if it was your granddad selling you your first car for a one dollar bill? Or what if you are a poor person who isn't married and you want to put the car in your baby mamma's name before your government deploys you to the Middle East? And what if 99.9% of all car accidents were from dealer sales, or illegally bought or stolen cars, yet private party sales were hit the hardest with fees and restrictions?

[RedskinRat]

Spot on! Don't believe the anti-gun hype!

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

I don't understand the hate for the background checks at gun shows? Why not want to ensure criminals are not getting guns there and be consistent with law around the state at retails stores? Is it just contrite at this point? U think with all the mass shootings in the state and across the country we'd look to close the loophole.

Study finds vast online marketplace for guns without background checks - Washington Post
Study finds vast online marketplace for guns without background checks


By Philip Rucker,August 05, 2013
The marketplace for firearms on the Internet, where buyers are not required to undergo background checks, is so vast that advocates for stricter regulations now consider online sales a greater threat than the gun-show loophole.
<A href="http://www.thirdway.org/publications/719" data-xslt="_http">A new study by Third Way , a center-left think tank with close ties to the Obama administration, found that thousands of guns, including so-called assault weapons, are for sale online and that many prospective buyers were shopping online specifically to avoid background checks.
The study focused on Armslist.com — a popular classified site similar to Craigslist.org that facilitates private sales of firearms and ammunition based on location — and analyzed listings in 10 states where senators voted against a background-check compromise this spring.

[RedskinRat]

Shocking. Gun ban lobby finds problem with <fill_in_the_blank> of guns.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

[mlmpetert]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Study finds vast online marketplace for guns without background checks - Washington Post
Study finds vast online marketplace for guns without background checks


By Philip Rucker,August 05, 2013
The marketplace for firearms on the Internet, where buyers are not required to undergo background checks, is so vast that advocates for stricter regulations now consider online sales a greater threat than the gun-show loophole.
<A href="http://www.thirdway.org/publications/719" data-xslt="_http">A new study by Third Way , a center-left think tank with close ties to the Obama administration, found that thousands of guns, including so-called assault weapons, are for sale online and that many prospective buyers were shopping online specifically to avoid background checks.
The study focused on Armslist.com — a popular classified site similar to Craigslist.org that facilitates private sales of firearms and ammunition based on location — and analyzed listings in 10 states where senators voted against a background-check compromise this spring.

I actually bought 2 firearms this week, both from internet initiated transactions. I would consider myself a firearms enthusiast and both guns were part of my firearms ''bucket list'', if you will. Finding specific guns online is 1000x easier than finding them at a store or getting lucky at a gun show. I guess we should thank al gore?

In va vaguntrader has more posters, but armslist has gotten a lot bbetter. What's crazy is I've seen a lot more firearms for sale on craigslist lately. things used to get flagged real quick, now you'll have guns sitting on there for several hours or even a couple days before they get flagged. Not sure what's changed? Greater social acceptance?

Also a neat tip for you craigslisters having trouble selling your prohibited items. Ill put a crap item for sale and then change it to the real item i want to sell after a couple of days.

So ill put an authentic wnba bball up for sale, then change it to a bushmaster ar15 a day later. When someone searches ar15 the next day, guess who's ad pops up? Ive had items last for weeks after I sell them doing this (I'm that dude who leaves sold items up and won't even reply to your inquiry to tell you its sold).

[mlmpetert]

In a speech before law enforcement officers at the Denver Police Academy, President Barack Obama called Colorado a model for the rest of the country for proving “what’s possible” in advancing gun control. (April 2013)

Obama: Colorado is model for nation on gun control | KDVR.com


Two Democratic lawmakers in Colorado, including the president of the state Senate, were recalled Tuesday in elections brought about by their support for tougher gun control laws. (September 2013)

Colorado state senators recalled over gun control support | Fox News

Yikes!

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

I don't understand the hate for the background checks at gun shows? Why not want to ensure criminals are not getting guns there and be consistent with law around the state at retails stores? Is it just contrite at this point? U think with all the mass shootings in the state and across the country we'd look to close the loophole.

The hate for back ground checks come from people who feel the goverment will use the data to track who owns guns. Not that the goverment would do that Hint NSA but that's their concerns. Hell, there have been news papers that have posted links to people who have a carry permit Too much? Newspaper prints names, addresses of 16,000 gun owners — MSNBC. What if some politicians decide they want to throw on a gun tax or confiscate ones guns all their info will be right there for the goverment to use. Not that the goverment would abuse their powers. NSA.