HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » FBI Crime Stats: You are ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 09:59 AM

 

FBI Crime Stats: You are more likely to be killed by hands and feet than by a shotgun or rifle

The FBI has released their 2007-2011 “Murder Victims by Weapon” report. The results are contradictory to anti-gun industry claims that relaxing the ban on assault weapons will cause more crime.

The report indicates you are more likely to be killed by hands or feet than by a rifle or shotgun.

Since 2007 there has been a 16.2% decline in murders committed with personal weapons which are defined as “hands, fists, feet etc.” The number of murders of this type in 2011 totaled 728.

While gun ownership has dramatically increased since 2007, murders for both the shotgun and rifle categories have seen declines faster than the rate of personal weapons related crime.

The rates of decline for the shotgun and rifle categories are 22.1% and 28.7% respectively. In 2011 there were 356 shotgun murders and 323 rifle murders for a total of 679 murders.

Total murders by hands and feet in 2011 exceed the total number of murders by shotgun and rifle. Does that mean gloves and shoes need regulation because they are concealing deadly weapons? No, but it does mean that there is no need for any further regulation of long arms.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/27/fbi-crime-stats-you-are-more-likely-to-be-killed-by-hands-and-feet-than-by-a-shotgun-or-rifle/

94 replies, 7916 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 94 replies Author Time Post
Reply FBI Crime Stats: You are more likely to be killed by hands and feet than by a shotgun or rifle (Original post)
trouble.smith Nov 2012 OP
mikeysnot Nov 2012 #1
trouble.smith Nov 2012 #5
mikeysnot Nov 2012 #6
gejohnston Nov 2012 #10
mikeysnot Nov 2012 #13
oldhippie Nov 2012 #18
trouble.smith Nov 2012 #25
Eleanors38 Nov 2012 #58
mikeysnot Nov 2012 #61
GreenStormCloud Nov 2012 #62
Eleanors38 Nov 2012 #63
mikeysnot Dec 2012 #73
gejohnston Dec 2012 #74
PavePusher Dec 2012 #75
mikeysnot Dec 2012 #83
gejohnston Dec 2012 #84
mikeysnot Dec 2012 #85
gejohnston Dec 2012 #86
PavePusher Dec 2012 #87
Jenoch Nov 2012 #19
AtheistCrusader Nov 2012 #72
Starboard Tack Dec 2012 #77
oneshooter Nov 2012 #21
PavePusher Nov 2012 #64
Eleanors38 Dec 2012 #89
mikeysnot Dec 2012 #91
oneshooter Dec 2012 #93
mikeysnot Dec 2012 #94
oneshooter Dec 2012 #90
MotherPetrie Nov 2012 #2
trouble.smith Nov 2012 #4
discntnt_irny_srcsm Nov 2012 #12
Eleanors38 Nov 2012 #59
djean111 Nov 2012 #3
Remmah2 Nov 2012 #7
trouble.smith Nov 2012 #8
gejohnston Nov 2012 #9
sir pball Nov 2012 #11
mikeysnot Nov 2012 #14
DonP Nov 2012 #15
mikeysnot Nov 2012 #16
DonP Nov 2012 #17
doc03 Nov 2012 #26
oneshooter Nov 2012 #27
doc03 Nov 2012 #28
oneshooter Nov 2012 #30
doc03 Nov 2012 #32
oneshooter Nov 2012 #38
doc03 Nov 2012 #41
oneshooter Nov 2012 #45
sir pball Nov 2012 #68
gejohnston Nov 2012 #69
sir pball Nov 2012 #70
gejohnston Nov 2012 #71
GreenStormCloud Nov 2012 #29
doc03 Nov 2012 #31
GreenStormCloud Nov 2012 #33
doc03 Nov 2012 #34
gejohnston Nov 2012 #36
doc03 Nov 2012 #39
friendly_iconoclast Nov 2012 #50
mikeysnot Nov 2012 #51
Straw Man Nov 2012 #40
doc03 Nov 2012 #42
Straw Man Nov 2012 #43
ManiacJoe Nov 2012 #44
Clames Nov 2012 #35
doc03 Nov 2012 #37
Clames Nov 2012 #48
doc03 Nov 2012 #49
Jenoch Nov 2012 #20
ileus Nov 2012 #24
Atypical Liberal Nov 2012 #47
PavePusher Nov 2012 #65
oneshooter Nov 2012 #22
Atypical Liberal Nov 2012 #46
Eleanors38 Nov 2012 #60
ileus Nov 2012 #23
Warren Stupidity Nov 2012 #52
gejohnston Nov 2012 #53
Warren Stupidity Nov 2012 #54
Remmah2 Nov 2012 #55
gejohnston Nov 2012 #56
Warren Stupidity Nov 2012 #57
PavePusher Nov 2012 #67
PavePusher Nov 2012 #66
doc03 Dec 2012 #76
trouble.smith Dec 2012 #78
doc03 Dec 2012 #79
gejohnston Dec 2012 #80
doc03 Dec 2012 #81
gejohnston Dec 2012 #82
trouble.smith Dec 2012 #88
guardian Dec 2012 #92

Response to trouble.smith (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:18 AM

1. hand guns are the problem

and for some reason are not included in the gun stats.

regulate all gun ownership.

have a good day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikeysnot (Reply #1)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:44 AM

5. Hand guns are not the topic, long guns, i.e. assualt weapons are the topic

 

and all gun ownership is heavily regulated-especially handguns. Violent crime is on the decline in general but murders committed by long guns i.e. assault rifles in on the decline despite a dramatic increase in assault weapon sales/ownership during the same time period. The obvious point is that assault weapons are not the problem some of us would make them out to be. And I'm gonna have a great fucking day btw.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trouble.smith (Reply #5)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:51 AM

6. "The obvious point is that assault weapons are not the problem"

Tell that to the victims at virginia tech, the batman movie theater and Gabby Giffords.

Have a great fucking day playing with your guns....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikeysnot (Reply #6)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:57 AM

10. Giffords was shot with a standard pistol

so were the ones at VT.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #10)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:28 PM

13. Ohh god.

A bullet is a bullet, a gun is a gun.

Standard pistol?

Parse words much.

This idea that "only" x amount of gun deaths result from "long rifles" based on the length of the barrel, is ridiculous. And that more people die from hands and feet is a pathetic attempt to dilute proper gun control management discussions.

Revising reality to sooth your gun fetish is wasting my time.

So I will give you that in my error, I confused the one at NIU, he had a shotgun.

Long enough for you...?

I get all my gun nut on rampage massacres mixed up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikeysnot (Reply #13)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:00 PM

18. "I get all my gun nut on rampage massacres mixed up"

 

So, maybe we should disregard everything you have to say on the subject?

Man, talk about digging your hole deeper .......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikeysnot (Reply #13)


Response to mikeysnot (Reply #13)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 04:03 PM

58. "rampage massacres" mixed up? Are there that many? Check the facts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eleanors38 (Reply #58)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 04:54 PM

61. I'm sorry one is too many

you are confusing your opinion for facts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikeysnot (Reply #61)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 06:27 PM

62. Those are balanced by the people who use guns to protect themselves.

Every year there are tens of thousands of cases of people who use guns to prevent violent criminals from victimizing them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikeysnot (Reply #61)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 06:35 PM

63. The number of "mass shootings" is rather steady over the last several years...

It is hard to justify bans and controls (which have not been shown to be effective or even relevant) when an overwhelming social problem is not at hand. I don't like murders anymore than you. But these kind of events will continue to occur when no one really knows why they occur. Even knowing why doesn't guarantee -- or even show promise of amelioration -- that a solution will work.

The expression "even one is too many" is poor grounds for calling in the government to effect massive and sweeping social policy. The expression only serves to boost and purify one's moral standing in argument.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #10)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 05:44 PM

73. Please. Define "standard" for me?

30 round expanded clips that used to be illegal I would not posit as "standard".

Now as a life saving device I guess if your home was invaded by an army you might be able to defend you home.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikeysnot (Reply #73)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 06:12 PM

74. the pistol was a regular pistol used by many police departments,

the magazine, which is an accessory, was different. It was never actually illegal as long as you had a grandfathered one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikeysnot (Reply #73)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 07:46 PM

75. 30-round magazines have never been illegal, except in a very few locales and states. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PavePusher (Reply #75)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 07:41 AM

83. reality check

They were banned under the assault weapon ban that expired in 2004.

Nice try though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikeysnot (Reply #83)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 08:32 AM

84. those made before that were legal

and there was a huge supply of them, therefore not really banned.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #84)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:08 AM

85. Loop holes loop holes

Discussing guns is like playing twister on acid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikeysnot (Reply #85)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 09:13 AM

86. it pays to know the subject along with

the 5A, the large number in circulation, and what it would mean to declare all existing ones illegal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikeysnot (Reply #83)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:01 AM

87. Perhaps you can tell us....

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikeysnot (Reply #6)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:23 PM

19. There were no assault weapons used at Virginia Tech either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikeysnot (Reply #6)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 01:24 PM

72. Virginia Tech involved no 'assault weapons'.

It would be nice if you knew what you were talking about once in a while. His handguns had standard sized magazines, he simply reloaded 11 times.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trouble.smith (Reply #5)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 09:31 PM

77. Handguns are not the topic, but they cause most deaths. So they are the major problem.

So how about leaving the long guns and ditching the handguns? Is that what you would prefer?
Better still, keep them all if you want, but keep them away from other people. If everyone did that, we wouldn't have a problem.

Why should these assholes, who carry them around to shoot people, fuck it up for responsible gun owners, who keep their guns off the streets?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikeysnot (Reply #1)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 08:12 PM

21. What type of gun regulation/laws would you support?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikeysnot (Reply #1)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 12:22 AM

64. Nah, criminals are the problem, especially ones with long histories of misbehavior. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikeysnot (Reply #1)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 11:26 AM

89. "Hand guns are problem," then "regulate all"? LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eleanors38 (Reply #89)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 11:51 AM

91. Argument over The Walking Dead spurs man to shoot his girlfriend in the back

http://www.avclub.com/articles/argument-over-the-walking-dead-spurs-man-to-shoot,89544/

Eventually things became so "angry and bitter," Gelderman decided she had better return to Gurman's apartment to calm him down, only to find him waiting outside for her with a .22-caliber rifle. As she attempted to walk up the stairs into his apartment, Gurman shot her in the back, piercing her lung, shattering her rib, and piercing her diaphragm.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikeysnot (Reply #91)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 08:10 PM

93. Whats wrong? Not willing to answer a simple question, and start a conversation?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #93)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 11:13 AM

94. did you read it?

Maybe someone can read it to you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikeysnot (Reply #1)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 06:09 PM

90. What firearm regulations/laws would you support.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trouble.smith (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:25 AM

2. What a desperate sounding post title

 

Quoting the Daily Fucking caller is even more desperate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #2)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:40 AM

4. right, because they just make up FBI statistics.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trouble.smith (Reply #4)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 12:12 PM

12. But I do...

...enjoy irony, especially when it's an anti who's sole response is characterizing information as "desperate".

Desperate? Yeah, sure it is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #2)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 04:09 PM

59. Why doesn't MSM report the FBI figures? Is it because MSM is...

the only effective component in the gun-control outlook? (It can hardly be called a movement since there is little grass-roots support, activism, or donor base.) If it weren't for MSM and some high-profile celebrities (often protected by armed bodyguards), there would be little presence for even this "outlook."

Incidentally, gun-controllers often cite the Brady Center, a GOP-founded, GOP-led prohibitionist entity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trouble.smith (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:32 AM

3. Total deaths by firearms - 8,583 (2011) Total deaths by hands and feet - 728 (2011)

No need for any further regulation of long arms?
Get more of those long arms out into the public?
You don't think that regulation of long arms and guns in general has helped cut down on murders?
What a specious spin on statistics.
And maybe some of those hands and feet just couldn't get hold of a gun. Because of regulations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #3)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:51 AM

7. We need people control not gun control. nt

 

nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #3)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:54 AM

8. total deaths by rifles i.e. assault weapons plus any other hunting weapons-323

 

You don't think that regulation of long arms and guns in general has helped cut down on murders?

What I think is that it is absolutely clear by these statistics that this category of weapons does not pose the kind of imminent threat to public safety that some of you have made them out to be in order to justify banning them.

What a specious spin on statistics
My argument is a specious spin on statistics? Give me a break. I'm not the one peddling out right lies about assault weapons in order to support a case for banning them. you are two times more likely to be beaten to death than killed with ANY kind of rifle. Assault rifles are not the threat they have been made out to be. period.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #3)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:55 AM

9. most are domestic abuse

in a blind rage, making the availability of another weapon irrelevant.

No need for any further regulation of long arms?

no
Get more of those long arms out into the public?

straw man
You don't think that regulation of long arms and guns in general has helped cut down on murders?

no,
What a specious spin on statistics.

for example?
And maybe some of those hands and feet just couldn't get hold of a gun. Because of regulations.

most are domestic abuse in a blind rage, making the availability of another weapon irrelevant. That is equally true in Vermont as it is in DC.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #3)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 11:13 AM

11. Are you being deliberately obtuse?

You're the one with a "specious spin" on statistics, conflating {long guns} with {all guns}.

Looking at the numbers straight from the horse's mouth, no, further regulation of long guns is NOT needed - Louisiana, with no particular restrictions on long guns, had 10 rifle murders as opposed to 26 beating deaths in 2011; Wisconsin was 7 to 21. Factor of three. Knives are even worse...New Mexico is 2 to 21, Tennessee is 7 to 51! Maybe it's time to reassess the legality of folding Buck knives?

So. Are you actually concerned with reducing homicide rates or do you just want to push more controls on *all* firearms? I'm not going to argue that good regulations haven't and don't decrease murder rates. The issue is what's a "good" regulation. Long-gun regulations, including your no doubt beloved "assault weapons" sales-ban, have at best a minor influence on crime rates while building up quite a bit of momentum against the gun-control cause in general, and I'll oppose just about anything in that arena not only for my personal opinions but because the sooner you give it up, the better it will be for discussing handguns, which are the problem and are worth working on.

It's a bitter pill I know, you can't have all you cake, but try and be pragmatic and maybe we can work something out here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #11)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 03:31 PM

14. comparing domestic violence to gun murder

is desperate. You cannot control relations between couples, but you can control the ease of which guns are purchased, sold and transferred.

I am done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikeysnot (Reply #14)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 04:19 PM

15. Really? How many 4473s and NICS checks have you personally filled out and passed?

"...the ease of which guns are purchased, sold and transferred."

How many firearms have you bought, sold or transferred? Been to a lot of gun shows?

Or is all your expertise, like so many of our gun control fans, from reading all about how easy it is on a web site somewhere?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonP (Reply #15)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 05:03 PM

16. Aww did I upset you?

The canard that "Law abiding citizens" should be able to carry a device that main purpose is to take a life is absurd.

They are only law abiding until they break a law... with a gun.

Ross T. Ashley, 22, in January purchased the .40-caliber semiautomatic weapon used to kill 39-year-old officer Deriek W. Crouse. It was bought at a licensed Virginia gun dealer, but state police investigators did not release the dealer's name.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/13/virginia-tech-legal-handgun_n_1147121.html

(AP) MADISON, Wis. - An online weapons dealer who sold the handgun used in the Virginia Tech massacre and provided equipment in two other mass shootings has quietly closed up shop amid a flurry of complaints from customers who allege he failed to deliver orders after billing them.


http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57457366/gun-dealer-linked-to-3-mass-shootings-closes/

You are correct, guns are hard to get....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikeysnot (Reply #16)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 06:18 PM

17. Not upset, just checking the ignorance quotient - it's very high, congratulations

So, since you didn't bother to answer the simple question, and did a typical gun control "cut and paste" instead of a well thought out reply in your own words. You really only seem to know what you read in the newspapers and see on TV.

How very well informed you are on the subject!

In the real world you don't have a fricking clue as to what's involved in purchasing or selling a firearm. But you read somewhere that it's "easy" to do, so it must be true.

I'm going to guess that all you do about gun control is whine online about it too. But you can prove me wrong easily enough.

Some samples of the "repeal CCW petitions" you are circulating in your state? Any local gun control organizations you're a member of?

How about copies of the LTTE you've undoubtedly written and had published in papers about the evils of firearms and CCW in particular?

Membership checks to the Brady organization or voluntary contributions to the Joyce Foundation?

Or ... just another gun control keyboard commando with an inflated ego and self-satisfied superior moral stance over all of us gun owning neanderthals?

But you must be right, and the 49 states that passed it with bi-partisan votes and allow it now, are going to repeal it any minute now. Just take a deep breath and wait for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonP (Reply #17)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 09:56 PM

26. "In the real world you don't have a clue as to what's involved in

Last edited Wed Nov 28, 2012, 11:42 PM - Edit history (1)

purchasing or selling a firearm".
I'll tell you how easy it is, I can pick up our newspaper and buy a gun from someone in the classifieds, the local merchanette. I can go out on the street and buy or sell any legal gun to an individual legally with no paperwork background checks or anything.

removed craigslist

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #26)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 09:59 PM

27. What type of gun regulation/laws would you support?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #27)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:13 PM

28. You can't dispute my statement on the ease of buying or selling

firearms. So instead you want me to propose some law I support so you can argue a different point. I know the drill here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #28)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:25 PM

30. Not at all. Your complaint was about the ease of purchacing firearms. My question to you

was a way of getting your input on changes that can be made to resolve this problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #30)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:34 PM

32. I have lots of ideas but none would be acceptable on this forum.

No matter what you would propose here someone would claim it wouldn't work. Let's hear your input since you ask the question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #32)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 11:12 PM

38. I believe that allowing non FFl (private sellers) acess to the NCIS system

toward a long term solution. If the system could be set up where it is not a registry of owners. Currently there is only a sell/no sale with no other info but the name and B date of the buyer. Many anti gun people would like to make it a registry of gun owners, but that would be a violation of Federal Law.
Currently, under the Commerce Clause, the Federal Government can not make it a Federal law that it happens. It is up to the several states to pass their own laws regarding this. Some have, and to prevent FFl's from charging as much as $20 for a phone call have set reasonable rates into the law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #38)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 11:26 PM

41. I could agree with that. I trade or sell my guns to a dealer

because it gives me peice of mind that I didn't sell it to them if something does go wrong. I have sold a couple to people I know well and I keep a record of the serial number and who I sold it to just in case it turns up in the wrong hands later..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #41)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 08:01 AM

45. Also the individual states need to keep their records up to date.

Many, if not most states, are not keeping the records that they enter into the database up to date. This reduces the effectiveness of the NCIS program. I don;t really know what can be done about this on a federal level.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #38)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 12:26 PM

68. I'm willing to take it a step farther, actually.

ALL firearms transactions must be on a 4473 through an FFL. Create a new class of FFL that isn't allowed to maintain any inventory or conduct direct sales, but instead just call in an NICS check, sign off, and have the same recordkeeping requirements as any other dealer, for a statutorily-regulated reasonable fee ($10?). It would be a great cottage industry for retirees, and as much as I'd like to see NICS open to the public, even with a simple yes/no reply and legal protections against abuse you know that it would be abused. "Sorry, we can't give you the job/rent you the apartment/be friends with you - just because"; without recordkeeping on NICS you can't prove abuse.

I don't mind a paper trail on firearms; it would be immensely helpful to law enforcement and a pretty solid deterrent against diverting guns from legal ownership, while not being a registry or database where somebody can simply sit down and call up a list of weapons I own. TPTB would have to literally track every firearm ever sold, from the manufacturer on, to have a priori knowledge of who has what - but if they want to know the history of a particular gun, they can find it out. I always thought it was a good compromise, but never floated it till now. Thoughts?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #68)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 12:35 PM

69. interesting idea

could be worth looking in to, the feds could get around the commerce clause by blackmailing the states like they do with the drinking age. Although I like the "NICS approved" code on drivers licenses. The hard part is ensuring compliance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #69)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 01:02 PM

70. I kind of like the paper trail myself

My name is on more than one 4473 so there's no real anonymity for me; the DL scheme is good, but I trust my fellow men about as much as the gov...I'm willing to accept every purchase of mine going on record in order to get every sale of mine on record; even with some private NICS access, a less-than-noble person could just deny that I ever sold them anything and leave me on the hook to explain why that gun with the paperwork that stops at me was used in a crime.

Personally I always write up and keep bills of sale, and wouldn't sell to somebody who wasn't willing to sign it, but I'd rather have a stronger, more formal record. I can accept that unrecorded private sales are a legitimate problem wrt criminal access to weapons (not just in terms of direct sales to prohibited persons but also in sales to straw purchasers) and am willing to help plug that hole, just not by means of an active registry. Paper trails serve the exact same purpose for law enforcement with very few of the potential downsides.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #70)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 01:22 PM

71. the few I have sold,

I consigned to a local pawn shop. I do like the idea of being able to prove to the cops and ATF about the gun left at the crime scene.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #26)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:20 PM

29. Craigslist does not allow weapons to be sold on their site.

From Craigslist:

http://dallas.craigslist.org/about/prohibited.items
Weapons and related items, including firearms, ammunition, silencers, pellet/BB guns, tear gas or stun guns.

Proving, once again, that you don't know what you are talking about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #29)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:29 PM

31. I checked, you are right about Craigslist. But the IGA store up the road has at least

a half dozen guns for sale by individuals on their bulletin board. They are advertised in our local classifieds, the local mercanette, on store windows. I sold a Remington 870 12 ga. with a 20" smooth bore barrel just a few weeks ago to an individual we made the trade in the quick stop parking lot. Dispute any of that, you can't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #31)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:42 PM

33. Private individuals can't use the NICS system.

Since they are intrastate they are not governed by federal law. So such sales are legal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #33)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 10:55 PM

34. I was responding to another post that claimed it was somehow difficult to buy

and sell guns. I live in the WV, PA and Ohio tri-state area and I know there are lots and lots of sales between individuals among all three states every day. Is there any federal law against that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #34)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 11:06 PM

36. if they are not residents of the same state, yes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #36)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 11:12 PM

39. In that case that law is broken every single day around here. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #39)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 12:31 PM

50. Have you informed ATF of these illegal sales? If not, why not?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #39)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 01:15 PM

51. So much for the "law abiding" gun owner cannard....

..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #31)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 11:14 PM

40. Do tell.

I sold a Remington 870 12 ga. with a 20" smooth bore barrel just a few weeks ago to an individual we made the trade in the quick stop parking lot. Dispute any of that, you can't.

What efforts did you make to determine that he/she wasn't a "prohibited person" under Federal law?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Straw Man (Reply #40)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 11:36 PM

42. None I have known the guy for years and he will probably

never fire a round in it. I would feel better if I could run a background check on the buyer just for my own piece of mind. Myself I have never sold a gun to anyone I didn't know very well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #42)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 02:00 AM

43. Good answer.

I do the same, except for guns that I have sold online, which go to an FFL for transfer. I'd still like to see a non-intrusive way for non-FFLs to access the NICS, though. It would make my life easier and the country safer. Even something like the FOID card that some states have -- a kind of certification of pre-screening. An added incentive could be that it makes you exempt from NICS when you purchase from a licensed dealer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Straw Man (Reply #43)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 02:27 AM

44. Many private sellers use conceal weapon licenses of the buyer for this purpose.

The state has already done a background check although it may have been years ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #26)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 11:01 PM

35. Opportunity to educate doc here.

 

I'll tell you how easy it is, I can pick up our newspaper and buy a gun from someone in the classifieds, the local merchanette or even Craigslist.


http://www.craigslist.org/about/prohibited.items

Many laws, regulations and policies, in a variety of jurisdictions, regulate the goods and services that may be bought and sold. For your convenience, we have prepared a list of some of the types of prohibited and restricted items the advertisement for sale, offer, or exchange of which is not permitted on craigslist.

craigslist users remain responsible for complying with all applicable laws, regulations or restrictions on items, services, or manner of sale, payment or exchange, that may apply to transactions in which they participate -- including but not limited to those imposed by the state of California, where craigslist physically resides. We encourage you to research the applicable laws and regulations that may apply to your usage of and activities on and relating to craigslist.

Partial list of items for sale and services the advertisement of which is not permitted on craigslist:

Child pornography, obscene materials, offers or solicitation of illegal prostitution.
Weapons and related items, including firearms, ammunition, silencers, pellet/BB guns, tear gas or stun guns.
Items issued to United States Armed Forces that have not been disposed of in accordance with Department of Defense demilitarization policies.
Food stamps, WIC vouchers, SNAP EBT cards, SNAP or WIC foods, infant formula, etc and other items received from governmental agencies or programs.
Fireworks, including "safe and sane" fireworks or any destructive devices or explosives.
Alcohol or tobacco products. Controlled substances or illegal drugs, substances and items used to manufacture controlled substances and drug paraphernalia.
Prescription drugs and medical devices, including prescription or contact lenses, defibrillators, hypodermic needles or hearing aids. Nonprescription drugs that make false or misleading treatment claims or treatment claims that require FDA approval.
Blood, bodily fluids or body parts.
Household pets of any kind including dogs, cats, primates, cage birds, rodents, reptiles, amphibians, fish. Re-homing with small adoption fee OK. Pet animal parts, blood, or fluids are also not permitted, including stud/breeding service.
Restricted or regulated plants and insects, including noxious weeds, endangered plant species, or live insects or pests.
Pesticides or hazardous substances, or items containing hazardous substances including contaminated toys, or art or craft material containing toxic substances without a warning label.
Illegal telecommunications equipment, including access cards, signal jamming devices, password sniffers, unloopers, or cable descramblers
Stolen property, or property with serial number removed or altered. Burglary tools, including lock-picks or motor vehicle master keys
False identification cards, items with police insignia, citizenship documents, or birth certificates.
Counterfeit currency, coins and stamps, tickets, as well as equipment designed to make them. Counterfeit, replica, or knock-off brand name goods. Material that infringes copyright, including software or other digital goods you are not authorized to sell, warez, bootlegs.
Tickets you are not allowed to sell, including airline tickets that restrict transfer. Coupons or gift cards that restrict transfer or which you are not authorized to sell. Lottery tickets, sports trading card 'grab bags', raffle tickets, sweepstakes entries, slot machines, other gambling items.
Used or rebuilt batteries, or batteries containing mercury.
Used bedding and clothing, unless sanitized in accordance with law.
Non-packaged food items or adulterated food.
Bulk email or mailing lists that contain names, addresses, phone numbers, or other personal identifying information



Buying-guns-on-Craigslist seems to be a common theme with gun-control advocates who don't do their own research.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Clames (Reply #35)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 11:06 PM

37. I agreed I was wrong on Craigslist, so you don't have to beat that dead horse

anymore. Tell me what else was wrong in that post. Let's hear it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #37)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 10:01 AM

48. Your complaining about private sales.

 

Nothing illegal about that nor are there any laws that will stop it. Just makes you look like you are just posting here to be disruptive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Clames (Reply #48)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 12:23 PM

49. Yes I do think private sales should be illegal unless there was a way to run the a background check

on the buyer. I have sold a few guns that way myself but always to people I know are responsible. Some people wouldn't care as long as they had the cash though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikeysnot (Reply #16)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 07:42 PM

20. That link you provided was to a poorly written story.

The 'online' gun dealer never legally sold guns online. The only a gun could be delivered by the 'online' dealer was if he shipped the gun to a licensed gun dealer in the city where the gun buyer was located. At that point, it is no longer an online sale.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikeysnot (Reply #16)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 08:49 PM

24. The device you speak of is designed to save lives.

My daily rotation includes life saving devices, none were designed to kill, only defend and protect life.

of course these devices can be misused...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikeysnot (Reply #16)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 09:21 AM

47. That is true, but very rare.

 

They are only law abiding until they break a law... with a gun.

That is true, but it is also very rare.

Most people who commit homicide have extensive prior criminal histories. Very seldom does someone with a clean record just "snap" and kill people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mikeysnot (Reply #16)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 12:32 AM

65. Promoting the idea of "hidden criminals"?

 

Because they're the majority of murderers?

Pull the other one, it's got bells on....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #3)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 08:14 PM

22. What type of gun regulation/laws would you support?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #3)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 09:18 AM

46. Nope.

 

You don't think that regulation of long arms and guns in general has helped cut down on murders?
What a specious spin on statistics.
And maybe some of those hands and feet just couldn't get hold of a gun. Because of regulations.


Nope. It has nothing to do with regulations. There are very few on rifles.

The reason why rifles of all kinds, let alone assault rifles, are so seldom used in crime is simple: they are hard to conceal.

When committing a crime, one of the prime considerations is probably getting away with it. This implies stealth. Long arms are just not stealthy weapons. Thus they are a poor choice of weapon for people who are going to set out to commit a crime.

Now there are notable exceptions, such as the Beltway Snipers, Lee Harvey Oswald, the San Ysidro McDonald's massacre, and others, but nonetheless the use of long arms in crime is rare, as the FBI data shows.

This is important because it highlights that things like banning assault rifles are probably a waste of time. Even President Obama said as much during the debates when he noted that most of the crime was committed using handguns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to djean111 (Reply #3)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 04:12 PM

60. If you don't like the OP's flavor, then read #8. Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trouble.smith (Original post)

Wed Nov 28, 2012, 08:44 PM

23. 73% of violent crimes involve no weapon.

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=43


interesting that Rape and Robbery aren't considered violent crime...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trouble.smith (Original post)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 01:22 PM

52. I'll see your stat and raise you this one.

All firearm deaths
Number of deaths: 31,347
Deaths per 100,000 population: 10.2
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm

Right up there with motor vehicles, 34,485, and poisoning, 41,592.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #52)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 01:28 PM

53. once you subtract the suicides

justifiable homicides by cops and citizens alike, your number is much smaller.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #53)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 02:14 PM

54. Sure you can explain anyway anything you don't like.


Firearm—In 2009, 31,347 persons died from firearm injuries in
the United States (Tables 18 and 19), accounting for 17.7% of all injury
deaths that year. The two major component causes of all firearm injury
deaths in 2009 were suicide (59.8%) and homicide (36.7%). Firearm
injuries (all intents) decreased 1.9% from 2008 to 2009. The age adjusted death rate for firearm suicide did not change from 2008,
whereas the death rate for firearm homicide decreased 5.0% in 2009
from 2008.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr60/nvsr60_03.pdf

Suicide is a major factor, but I really doubt the homicide component is primarily 'justifiable homicides'. Unless you can prove that I suspect that is just wishful thinking on your part.

For whatever reason, gun deaths are major cause of morbidity. You cannot get away from that, it is a simple fact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #54)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 02:35 PM

56. I didn't say justifiable were a major part

or even primary, just that they had to be subtracted.
Even then, the suicides would still happen, and it is absurd to call suicide by gun "gun violence" unless you are willing to discuss rope violence in Europe, South Korea, and jumping out in front of train violence in Japan.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #56)

Thu Nov 29, 2012, 03:29 PM

57. "your number is much smaller"

whatever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #57)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 12:41 AM

67. Which, again, doesn't say what you want it to say. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #54)

Fri Nov 30, 2012, 12:40 AM

66. You've brought a strawman to a homo sapiens party....

 

...I really doubt the homicide component is primarily 'justifiable homicides'.


Since you are the only one to claim anything about "primarily", I rather doubt it too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trouble.smith (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 08:18 PM

76. I had two friends blow their brains out with a shotgun

and another person I worked with shot himself with a pistol. They never choked or kicked themselves to death. I also worked with three people that committed murder they used guns not their hands or feet. One of the kids in my high school shot his friend with a pistol by accident. His hands or feet didn't go off by accident.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #76)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 11:50 PM

78. This has what to do with the FBI statistics

 

that show you are extremely unlikely to be murdered with an assault rifle?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trouble.smith (Reply #78)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 12:16 AM

79. Your FBI statistics are about shotguns and rifles not

assault weapons. My point is the ready availability of firearms in this country certainly contribute to more deaths than we would have if there were no guns. Someone in a fit of anger may raise their voice or punch someone but when a gun is present on many occasions
it turns out a lot worse. Someone is depressed I would think would be more inclined to kill themselves with a gun than they would using another method. I suppose you will ask for links. There is no way I can site statistics on what doesn't happen. All I know is I have known several people that committed suicide and a three people that were murderers and they all used guns. I'll just say I think one or more of the them would still alive today if not for guns, there is no way to prove it though. Below is a discussion they had on the subject of guns on the Cycle today. One of them quotes statistics that a home with guns present is 12 times more likely to end in a death than one without in a domestic violence case.



http://video.msnbc.msn.com/the-cycle/50061344/#50061344

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #79)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 12:28 AM

80. "assault weapons" are a subset of

rifles and shotguns. That means even fewer people are murdered with "assault weapons". "Assault weapon" is simply a political and propaganda term coined by Josh Sugarmann with no technical definition. He coined it after he and Sarah Brady were ridiculed for using "semi-automatic machine gun", which is an oxymoron. That is also why the term is in quotes. that iisn't to say there is no such thing as an assault weapon, but it's ammo are considered destructive devices under NFA.
I'm guessing the statistic is made up.
Suicides are independent of means.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoulder-launched_Multipurpose_Assault_Weapon

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #80)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 12:38 AM

81. The usual thing here you change the argument to assault weapons

rather than if guns and the gun culture in this country contribute to more deaths.
I never mentioned one word about any assault weapon. End of discussion whenever the subject of guns come up the same people come out of the woodwork with their straw-man runaround.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #81)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 01:00 AM

82. to answer your question

the gun culture does not contribute to more deaths, other than accidents. It amounts to blaming a gun collector in Montana for Chicago's gang problem. That is how the rank and file of the gun culture views it. Quite frankly, they are right. Not that it matters anyway, because most people's view on guns are mostly based on culture than believing it would be effective in reducing violence. I see it here. That could be why I can rarely, if ever, find a fallacy free argument among them.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047235209000932


The point of the OP was that all long guns combined are rarely used in crime, "assault weapons" being a small set of that group, therefore an AWB would pointless other than theater, kind of like a crossbow (or compound bow depending on which account you read) ban after the college shooting and stabbing in Wyoming.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #81)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:05 AM

88. the OP is about shotguns and rifles, not handguns. It is you who has changed the argument.

 

as previously noted, assault rifles are a subset of rifles. The FBI does not specifically count assault weapon homicides so the best we can say is that given the fact that you are very unlikely to be murdered with a rifle or shotgun, we can deduce that it would be extremely unlikely that you would be killed with an assault rifle. We can further deduce that the antis have been overstating the danger posed by assault weapons in order to support their position that assault weapons should be banned.

We can take it one step further and deduce that the antis know god damned good and well that they're overstating the public safety risk posed by assault weapons because they know they have ulterior motives for desiring an assault weapon ban but they can't honestly come out and say what those ulterior motives are because Americans would be far less likely to agree with their position then.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trouble.smith (Original post)

Thu Dec 6, 2012, 12:17 PM

92. Obviously we need stricter extremity control laws

 

I recommend that all hands and feet be immediately amputated. Citizens can then apply for a permit/license to own a hand/foot. At which time, if approved after a stringent background check and demonstration of need, the individual may be allowed to purchase a prosthetic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread