HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » Gangs or narcotics cited ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 09:39 AM

 

Gangs or narcotics cited in 43 of the slayings

http://www.buffalonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20121231/CITYANDREGION/121239857/1174

Buffalo ends year with 50 homicides
Gangs or narcotics cited in 43 of the slayings


In so many of these cases, the victim will have an extensive criminal record and enemies from associations with gangs and/or the illegal narcotics trade, Buffalo Chief of Detectives Dennis J. Richards said.

Finally an interesting analysis of who is being killed and why. Hidden criminals (LOL)? Prior records? CCW? Maybe lifetime NRA memberships? Probably not PBA members. (Just a guess.) Single parent households? Poverty? High school diplomas?

This is 86% of last years homicides tied to gangs and narcotics. I'm sure the situation is similar in Chicago, Detroit, NYC.........

18 replies, 1729 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 18 replies Author Time Post
Reply Gangs or narcotics cited in 43 of the slayings (Original post)
Remmah2 Jan 2013 OP
flamin lib Jan 2013 #1
Remmah2 Jan 2013 #2
flamin lib Jan 2013 #3
Remmah2 Jan 2013 #4
flamin lib Jan 2013 #5
Remmah2 Jan 2013 #6
flamin lib Jan 2013 #7
gejohnston Jan 2013 #9
flamin lib Jan 2013 #11
gejohnston Jan 2013 #12
flamin lib Jan 2013 #13
gejohnston Jan 2013 #14
flamin lib Jan 2013 #15
gejohnston Jan 2013 #16
flamin lib Jan 2013 #17
ileus Jan 2013 #8
flamin lib Jan 2013 #10
loknar Jan 2013 #18

Response to Remmah2 (Original post)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 09:52 AM

1. I think we can assume that they didn't purchase thru a FFL w/NICS check.

So should the "private seller" loophole be closed? If so, how can it be enforced?

While criminal on criminal crime isn't as repugnant as bystander injuries the collateral damage is a problem desperately needing attention.

TRMS had stats that said between 2009/2010 twice as many pre-schoolers were shot than active duty police officers. That's just fucked up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #1)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 10:06 AM

2. Private sales are NFG. Yes to NICS check for firearm transfers.

 

In NY I'm pretty sure handguns can not be privately sold. All have to be transferred from permit to permit. So a straw buy in NY of a handgun is impossible within the state. At NY gun shows all dealers are licensed FFL's, all firearms require a NICS check.

So the brakes have to be put on outside the state. FOID yes, NICS check yes, registration NO.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Remmah2 (Reply #2)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 10:30 AM

3. So all gun owners must be licensed and can only sell to other licensees?

I could be down with that if it were uniform from state to state. CC permits are nutz. I can get a CC in TX thru UT over the 'net w/o a range test and it's good in all CC states.

Would a universal licensing act be palatable to most gun owners? Would it be retroactive? How did NY handle existing owners & guns?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #3)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 11:09 AM

4. Enforcement would have to handled on a case by case basis.

 

Suppose you had somebody who had a firearms that did not get a FOID and was found. If this person was found and a crime was not involved then detain the firearm, issue an appearance ticket and have person secure a FOID. Return the firearm. No criminal intent, no problem; pay court cost and civil penalty. Once this person is on the radar, if they did not get the FOID, no return of firearm. If multiple occurances happen then a civil penalty could turn it into a criminal penalty. If a crime is not being comitted then it is a civil penalty.

Storage, if you're not in the house, firearms and ammo left home are of no use. Keep them locked up. You wouldn't leave money or jewlery on the table at home unattended. If you're at home and the firearms is attended/supervised then it does not need to be in the safe. However if you own several firearms not every last one should be unsecured.

If a crime involves a firearm (with conviction); then it is a criminal penalty with probably permamant loss of FOID and ownership. If a person is a violent felon then never any firearms in that residence even if another person has a FOID.

CCW's should be continued to be state by state, but each state should be able to manage their CCW process, and they should have a CCW process in place. In NY they still totally exclude non-state CCW's. In other states if you have a CCW then reciprocity is accepted. But damn it, everyone needs to have a background check and there needs to be life long training.

Some are calling for anal retentive laws with storm trooper enforcement. This would include criminalizing and confiscation of property of otherwise benovelant people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Remmah2 (Reply #4)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 11:24 AM

5. Sounds good. Register owners instead of guns.

My guns are all in a safe bolted to the wall in an up-stairs closet with the key hidden at the other end of the house. Ammunition is in locked boxes stored elsewhere. Don't have a 'protection' gun.

The problem with gun safety legislation is that it's written by people with limited knowledge of firearms. Those with the experience and knowledge steadfastly refuse to take part preferring to belittle any who do.

I've been trying to engage the usual suspects here for years to no avail.

We will all get what we deserve for not being active in the process.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #5)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 11:57 AM

6. BOTH sides are responsible for the extreme differences.

 

Sort of like physics, action and reaction. Each side acting and each side reacting.

All states license doctors, nurses, teachers, architects, etc. Professional licenses and/or registration. To keeps a license you have a criminal background check every three years. My professional engineering license in Pennsylvania only cost $25 for 3 years. It's really only the admin cost to process the paperwork and not a fund raising fee/tax scheme. Along with the three year registration cycle I'm also required to obtain continuing education credits, 12 hours/year. Persons who wants a FOID would pay an admin fee as well as attend training? The training could be modestly diverse as well to allow for different firearm sub-disciplines. Hunting/self-defense/target shooting could be three starter sub-groups. All would involve safety/storage the balance of the training could be on hunting law changes, carry law changes, proper care and maintenance (to prevent accidents.) As a professional engineer I'm allowed to teach classes as well as sit in them. Veteran gun owners should be able to give to the class as well as sit thru it. Service hours for qualified veteran owners could also be accumulated for teaching non or new gun owners safety basics. Not the technical aspects of shooting but pure safety around them of what to expect to separate the facts from myths. (I've worked with my kids high school rifle team in this capacity.)

The admin fee would not be an opportunity to overcharge FOID people either. They couldn't charge a prohibitive application and maintenance fee (read NYC). Admin fees could not be artificially inflated as a revenue enhancement tool.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Remmah2 (Reply #6)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 02:06 PM

7. Both sides are not responsible. The pro gun side is content to sit on the sidelines

deriding those who are interested in curbing gun violence as ignorant gun grabbers. Those who want to do something about gun violence and the unavoidable collateral damage are left on their own without the expertise and experience that might result in actual progress.

BOTH SIDES ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE. One side is profoundly irresponsible. The other is lacking in expertise and wandering in the wilderness.

I like owner registration. Try floating it as an OP here in the gungeon ans see how much positive re-enforcement you get.

Seriously, start a thread. I'll look for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #7)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 02:26 PM

9. I think the point he was making was

that the prohibitionists have been proclaiming that each increment is a good "first step" while publicly supporting prohibition. The reason is because it is really a culture war and not so much about public safety. While I think that reasonable people on both sides can work out logical regulation. If the polls are to believed, the NRA misrepresent the majority of gun owners who would like to see some more regulation. The other side seems to be dominated by prohibitionists who described semi autos as being the same as autos. That was the point behind coining the "assault weapon" term to begin with. Australian prohibitionists are today ranting about "hand machine guns hidden in glove boxes" to describe pistols and maybe double action revolvers.

Many scholars have suggested that Americans' positions on gun control are the product of culture conflicts. This assertion has been largely based on associations of gun control opinion with membership in social groups believed to be hostile, or favorable, towards gun ownership, rather than with direct measures of the cultural traits thought to mediate the effects of group membership on gun control opinion. Data from a 2005 national telephone survey were analyzed to test competing theories of why people support handgun bans. Instrumental explanations, which stress belief in a policy's likely effectiveness, accounted for less than 25 percent of the variation in support. The results supported the culture conflict perspective. Those who endorsed negative stereotypes about gun owners, and who did not believe in the need to defend their own homes against crime (versus relying on the police) were more likely to support handgun bans.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047235209000932

That does not mean I would not support regulation changes, including having a national FOID, or having each state adopt FOIDs for their rules, with safety training as part of the process. I am simply not naive enough to believe:
that any gun law will reduce the murder or violent crime rate.
that gun control is about safe streets and public safety and not a culture war

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #9)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 04:55 PM

11. How do you feel about the OP's suggestion of registering owners?

I am really weary, as a gun owner, of the rest of my clan suffering from cranial rectum inversion.

I've said it here for years; it's gonna happen, it'll probably be not good by any standard but it's gonna happen. Election is over and gun violence is the new shiny squirrel.

So, how about registering owners and NICS checks for owner to owner transfers? If you think it will work how do you deal with existing owners/guns?

I await your response.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #11)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 05:54 PM

12. OK

I'm OK with it especially with the training part. I took a Florida CCW class full of former New Yorkers, which is a large percentage of Florida. For the live fire, the trainer provided some Colt .38 revolvers. The instructor, myself, and a redneck had to show the rest how to open the cylinder to load them.
NICS checks or keep FOID information. Seems redundant. R2 has a reasonable idea on how to do it. If you require it for ammo and component purchases, that would speed up compliance. To buy online, type in your FOID number for the ammo to show up. Canada does something like that with buying guns online. You type in your PAL number along with payment and shipping information. Canada Ammo, or whomever, verifies the number with the RCMP and your gun comes to your door. Lie to them, the cops come to your door.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #12)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 05:58 PM

13. Great, I look forward to your active participation inacting the licensing of all gun owners. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #13)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 06:16 PM

14. as soon as we get the reasable pro control people

to distance themselves from the prohibitionists. There are some reforms I would like to make to NFA as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #14)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 06:53 PM

15. So, your answer is to let "them" take control of the issue.

Well, they will and it won't be pretty. Why not be part of leadership on the issue? Just think of how powerful a cohesive package of proposals with justifications and anticipated outcomes would be for people looking for answers to real and imaginary fears.

Lead, follow or just let "them" write the laws to control your guns.

Make a choice and live with the outcome.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #15)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 07:35 PM

16. It is how to do it

the reasonable people, the non cultural warriors, are the fringe. That is why it would be hard to work with the people. Any idea on what to do with that? There are some concessions I would want from them as well. So how are reasonable people on both sides supposed to unify against the Nugents and Feinstiens of the issue?

Just think of how powerful a cohesive package of proposals with justifications and anticipated outcomes would be for people looking for answers to real and imaginary fears.
We did that from the 1930s-1960s. The culture warriors still wanted bans. Political cartoonists pushed the anti gun meme mixed with anti rural and anti working class bigotry as well. Herb Block was the prime example. The NRA paid him royalties reprint the cartoons for their own propaganda with undertones of elitist=liberal. If I understand Dr. Kleck's results correctly, that is the real reason. "gun nut" is code for Ford drivers with Mossbergs who wear camo or cowboy boots. "responsible Sportsmen" is code for BMW drivers with H&Hs and wear tweeds. Am I saying there is a certain amount of classim and regional bigotry in the gun control movement? Yes I am. A TV pundit violates DC gun laws, even after MPD told them not to, in front of a couple of million witnesses and he is not in jail?

Both of us would be fighting a two front war. The prohibitionists who view us as bloodthirsty troglodytes, and the Ted Nuget crowd that will call us Fudds. I don't mind being called a Fudd, but the Prohibitionists will take advantge to divide and conquer. Illinois is not backlash against the NRA's excesses, it is capitalizing on a national tragedy go for broke for the big prize.

Those are the hurdles you, R2, SafeinOhio, or any nonhardliner face. You think if we would have "hey let's get ahead of this and offer a regulation scheme, the antis will be cool with it and view us as good responsible people." I find it naive. Fact is, they hate the larger culture and all of its symbols. For the lack of a better word, the goal is to eradicate a culture.

Ultimately, is how to get everyone on board, including gun owners who are rightfully suspicious of concessions without compromise, and sit down with a fringe of the gun control movement.

My question is how do you do this without viewed as appeasement by both sides. I can deal with Nugent's scorn, being taken advantage of by Bloomberg et al is quite another. Any ideas?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #16)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 10:02 PM

17. Well, to begin with those who know firearms and shooting should lead instead of waiting

until outrage hands us something that's a lose/lose.

Go to the table and be part of the discussion. Send your suggestions to VP Biden. Send them to your Reps and Senators.

I think it far more naive to think somebody else will do it for you.

There is a wide void between either extreme. Fill that void-and it really is a void-with your input.

First define some issue like the OP did: gun violence is a drug crime problem. Given that drug crime isn't going away soon, how to minimize the carnage? Evaluate how guns are available to people who are by any definition not law abiding citizens and offer solutions from your unique point of view.

Drug dealers not your thing? How about suicides? How about dumb asses who shoot themselves "cleaning" their guns?

Find some aspect that you think you have meaningful input for and be heard by those who make decisions.

Fill the void.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Remmah2 (Original post)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 02:12 PM

8. The guns made them do it...

See how simple the answer is....always blame the object, never the operator.

Guns kill people for drugs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ileus (Reply #8)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 04:48 PM

10. Read the rest of the thread please. See if you agree with the OP's suggestions. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Remmah2 (Original post)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 10:27 PM

18. Obviously just your typical, assault weapon wielding, tax paying, small dicked, insecure white males

 

better go after them immediately so they can't do any more harm.
edit:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread