Gun Control Would Address Declining Crime Rates With Irrelevant Laws

Firearm homicides 1993-2011Bureau of Justice StatisticsIt's honestly a strange time for politicians to push ever-tighter restrictions on gun controls. Even if you're the sort of person who thinks that everybody's personal liberty should be restricted if somebody, somewhere, misbehaves, a report released today by the Bureau of Justice Statistics makes it apparent that crimes committed with firearms continue their steady, two-decade decline. In terms of specific policy, the recent focus on restricting "assault weapons" makes no sense in an environment in which the preferred weapon for committing those diminishing crimes is the handgun. And the recent obsession with extending background checks on people making legal gun purchases is a true head-scratcher, since most criminals don't buy their guns legally, with fewer than one percent acquiring their weapons at much-demonized gun shows.

Some important highlights from Firearm Violence, 1993-2011:

  • Firearm-related homicides declined 39%, from 18,253 in 1993 to 11,101 in 2011
  • Nonfatal firearm crimes declined 69%, from 1.5 million victimizations in 1993 to 467,300 victimizations in 2011
  • From 1993 to 2011, about 70% to 80% of firearm homicides and 90% of nonfatal firearm victimizations were committed with a handgun
  • In 2004, among state prison inmates who possessed a gun at the time of offense, less than 2% bought their firearm at a flea market or gun show and 40% obtained their firearm from an illegal source

For those specifically, and understandably, concerned about Newtown-style mass killings, there may be some comfort in knowing, "The number of homicides at schools declined over time, from an average of 29 per year in the 1990s (school year 1992-93 to 1999-00) to an average of 20 per year in the 2000s (school year 2000-01 to 2009-10).

For people interested in the defensive use of firearms, the report notes, "In 2007-11, about 1% of nonfatal violent crime victims used a firearm in self defense." In raw numbers, that's 235,700 incidents of armed self-defense. As we know, though, laws around the country can sometimes make it risky to defend yourself with a gun, potentially creating the risk of arrest and prosecution, so people may well be less likely to report such incidents than they are to report victimizations.

Sources of guns used by prison inmatesBureau of Justice StatisticsThe report says that 40 percent of prison inmates obtained their guns illegally, but that's not the whole story. A vanishingly tiny percentage of prison inmates armed themselves at those gun shows that, we're told by politicians, are bazaars of lethal armament for criminals. Another 0.6 percent stocked up at flea markets. Aside from the explicitly illegal sources for 40 percent of guns are another 37.4 percent of acquisitions from "family or friend." Would anybody care to venture a guess as to how amenable to regulation the families and friends of violent criminals are likely to be?

And "military-style semiautomatic or fully automatic" firearms, of the sort targeted by Sen. Feinstein at the federal level, and by new laws in Colorado, Connecticut and New York, make up a whopping 3.2 percent of the weapons possessed by federal inmates, and 2 percent of the weapons possessed by state inmates, at the time of their offense.

This is not to say that there's nothing troubling to be found in the report. Murders and violent crimes are inherently troubling. It would be great to see them entirely disappear. It's also disturbing to see how much more at risk African-Americans are for homicide than are other ethnic groups. But the rate has gratifyingly dropped for everybody. Even if you believe that individual rights are subject to restriction to address abuses by some (and that such restrictions would actually have an effect), it's hard to see a pressing need for tough new laws to address a diminishing problem of crime committed with firearms. And that push for restrictions becomes preposterous when it's targeted at non-issues, like the use of "assault weapons" in crimes or the nonexistent flow of firearms to criminals from gun shows.

Don't miss Reason TV's Gun Fiction vs. Gun Facts: What Gun Control Supporters Don't Know:

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Paul.||

    Mostly topical:

    Seattle Times decides money in politics no longer important:

    NRA lobby outspent by state gun-control group

    Money battle is not what’s important

    As lobbying funds go, the amounts that each group spent — $16,666 by pro-gun-control supporters and $14,966 by the National Rifle Association — were insignificant [“Gun-control supporters outspent NRA lobby in Olympia this year,” NWMonday, May 6].

    http://blogs.seattletimes.com/.....rol-group/

  • ||

    I don't even think these people are conscious of their own double standards and hypocrisy. I think it's become such an ingrained part of their existence that it's completely invisible to them. What total scum.

  • InlineSkate||

    Don't you know it's for the public good when leftist groups do it.

  • itsnotmeitsyou||

    Of course they're not. It was the same thing that happened when it came out that warmists outspent big oil in the climate change debate. When it was assumed that big oil was using its "unlimited resources" to outspend the poor little non-profit do-gooders, there were campaigns, memes, talks, etc about all the evil oil barons using the brute force of wealth to block all the "earth saving" programs and laws.

    Of course, once some real numbers were brought to light and it was apparent that greenies far outspent oil companies in lobbying and propaganda, all of a sudden the amounts didn't matter.

    I can't figure out how their heads don't implode.

  • ||

    Because they don't care. To you or me, it is incomprehensible to not feel shame if we are completely hypocritical and inconsistent and deceptive and mendacious. But they don't care. All they care about is TEAM and all its attendant battles with the other TEAM.

  • robc||

    T vs F

    I think Myers-Briggs is mostly bullshit, but it does provide some insight.

    And right there is one big insight.

    Thinkers look at the numbers and try to draw correlations and causation and reach conclusions.

    Feelers use the numbers as a weapon to support their feelings and when they dont apply, they dont apply.

  • itsnotmeitsyou||

    That's gotta be it. I know a few lefties that are very intelligent human beings, yet they are capable of sustaining inhuman levels of cognitive dissonance.

    Once, my wife had to use a gun to defend herself. No shots fired, she just had to pull it. The guy ran away. One of our lefty friends said that she shouldn't have done that because "she was just making a dangerous situation more dangerous". YEAH, more dangerous for the bad guy. The concept that she didn't get raped/mugged/murdered because SHE was the one with the gun didn't even seem to penetrate his skull. I had to walk away, I was speechless at how he could be so dense.

  • Brandon||

    Speaking of double standards and hypocrisy, Dunphy is on fire in this thread:

    http://reason.com/blog/2013/05.....nt_3733348

  • Enough About Palin||

    Why anyone would read the shit that comes out of that twink's mouth is a mystery to me.

  • Mainer2||

    The length and breadth and depth of my lack of interest in Dunphy is beyond measure. Why you care is beyond my ability to comprehend.

  • KPres||

    "I don't even think these people are conscious of their own double standards and hypocrisy."

    Jesus, man. They don't think there's anything wrong with double standards or hypocrisy! They hate you, and so they want to take away what you like. Period. And they're not going to let the laws of reason stand in the way of that.

    Seriously, you give them way too much credit.

  • Brandybuck||

    Governor Meg Whitman disagrees.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    They were hoping gun control was going to ride into law on a wave of sentiment and sensationalism, not facts and statistics. Feelings were going to be the fuel for this, not logic.

  • Tim||

    Feelings? Nothing more than feelings?

  • albo||

    Facts were never a part of the argument from Day 1.

  • ||

    This is not to say that there's nothing troubling to be found in the report. Murders and violent crimes are inherently troubling. It would be great to see them entirely disappear. It's also disturbing to see how much more at risk African-Americans are for homicide than are other ethnic groups. But the rate has gratifyingly dropped for everybody. Even if you believe that individual rights are subject to restriction to address abuses by some (and that such restrictions would actually have an effect), it's hard to see a pressing need for tough new laws to address a diminishing problem of crime committed with firearms.

    It's not about actually making any difference, it's about two things: Congressman Fuckface getting to grandstand while protecting the children and liberals having the psychological validation that government works and is doing something to make them feel safe.

  • ||

    Don't forget CONTROL and sticking it to the other TEAM.

  • Tman||

    Seriously though, I'm sorry but there isn't anything troubling in that report that is news, per se.

    We already knew that certain minorities in low income neighborhoods commit more crimes than white people in suburbs. This is not news.

  • albo||

    shutupshutupshutup you racist

    There are some things we cannot discuss.

  • Enough About Palin||

    What's sad to me is how black culture has stagnated. It used to drive culture and style in America. It's as if it stopped evolving in 1990. It's reached the point where I see the kids in my neighborhood and wonder why it is they don't realize they are a walking cliche'.

  • ||

    But but, the children!

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Tuccille doesn't even think of them.

  • Paul.||

    Think of them, Tuccille does not.

  • UnCivilServant||

    What children? Child fatalities are a statistically insignificant blip. School busses kill more children than guns do.

  • prolefeed||

    a report released today by the Bureau of Justice Statistics makes it apparent that crimes committed with firearms continue their steady, two-decade decline.

    The graph doesn't look "steady" to me. It shows a large drop from '93 to '99, a smaller rebound up to '06, then a decline back to the '99 rate.

  • Scotticus Finch||

    This is what I was thinking. "Fuck off, slavers," etc., but the data seem to indicate a plateau since about 1999.

  • Scotticus Finch||

    The link to bjs.gov (heh heh) won't load yet, but maybe total violent crime continued to decline from '99? The graph in the blog post only shows homicides.

  • Paul.||

    It shows that gun control worked. Up through the 90s, we compromised and compromised, then we said "enough" and gun crime stopped declining.

    Clearly, we need more compromise.

  • Live Free or Diet||

    Pollen season's tough on me this year. I almost answered before I caught the sarcasm.

  • Paul.||

    Wecome to Hit & Run.

  • ||

    You can all breathe a sigh of relief because the squeeze is not getting back to DC until at least the 21st, which menas I won't fire Judge Judy until the following weekend, earliest.

  • nilecroc||

    Why stop at guns? Why not ban cars as well? What, a guy can't get a gun, but he can get a half a ton piece of metal that can achieve 80+ mph?

  • Paul.||

    You joke. Politicians have been trying to get people out of their cars for two decades, but damn that car lobby.

  • Juice||

    Half ton? Like a Smartcar? Try two tons for the average auto.

  • UnCivilServant||

    Every time I see a smartcar trundle along, I burst out laughing. There has not been a more comedic object invented in the past century. Just the mention of it caused a slight chuckle. Thanks for the smile.

  • Lord Humungus||

    based on the chart, it has been the godlike rise of Obama that lead to the recent declines.

  • albo||

    "In 2007-11, about 1% of nonfatal violent crime victims used a firearm in self defense." In raw numbers, that's 235,700 incidents of armed self-defense

    Is that all of them, including just brandishing a gun, or just "shots fired?"

  • Bobarian||

    Not all of them, definitely, because some unknown (but high) percent never get reported. Reported incidents are probably much more likely to involve actual use of the weapon.

  • ||

    The hatred for guns is 100% cultural. To a gun-hater, guns are a totem of stupid rednecks who hate being told what to do, and there is no place for people like that when you are trying to create the New Soviet Man. Sure, these STUPID REDNECKS are endangering OUR CHILDREN by their failure to conform, but that's not the point. Their failure to conform is the problem.

  • Pro Libertate||

    You're brilliant. No, really. You have a cunning plan to introduce a firearm that's cool to lefty culture. What would such a weapon look like?

  • ||

    I might be able to sell cap-and-ball revolvers to hipsters, don't you think? Especially if I mounted the sights on the side for irony purposes.

  • Pro Libertate||

    A steam-punk gun?

  • Zeb||

    Sure, just glue some old clock parts to it and you're good to go.

  • Tim||

    Bill Maher.

  • SugarFree||

    What would such a weapon look like?

    A bright blue anal plug.

  • Tim||

    You are worse than Hitler.

  • Tman||

    That's easy.

    The Point of View Gun
    The Point of View Gun

    With its logic circuits fully committed to calculating the Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything, the computer Deep Thought had a lot of spare time on its hands.

    Much of this time was spent watching endless re-runs of cartoons and sitcoms on pan-dimensional TV, but not all of it. Sometimes Deep Thought would accept commissions to undertake minor calculations. Minor, at least, for the second greatest computer in the history of the universe.

    One such commission was the Point of View Gun.

    The Point of View Gun conveniently does precisely what its name suggests. That is if you point it at someone and pull the trigger, they instantly see things from your point of view. It was designed by Deep Thought, but commissioned by a Consortium of Intergalactic Angry Housewives, who after countless arguments with their husbands were sick to the teeth of ending those arguments with the phrase "You just don't get it, do you?"

  • Rich||

    Like any weapon not cool to lefty culture.

    It's the *target* that makes all the difference.

  • ||

    Good point. What kind of gun did Patty Hearst have?

  • Pro Libertate||

    Yes, excellent. Weapons wielded by the just are always acceptable. What was Che's weapon of choice?

  • Zeb||

    Well, then they should probably love the A to the motherfuckin' K.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Well, yeah. Maybe rainbow-colored, to celebrate Obama's freeing of the gays.

  • Enough About Palin||

    "What was Che's weapon of choice?"

    Cowardice?

  • Bobarian||

    Roland's Thompson gun?

  • Pro Libertate||

    There you go. Instead of a sight, the progressive pistol will have a screen that will replace the target with a hated Republican, like a Koch.

  • Bobarian||

    The pink hand-grips are a start.

    The obama targets don't appear to be working so well, though. Maybe a limbaugh target?

    And it definitely needs to be organic and carbon neutral. /derp

  • KPres||

    "What would such a weapon look like?"

    Well, iPhones got them to be OK with sweatshops. iRevolver? All white with aluminum unibody construction?

  • itsnotmeitsyou||

    This is brilliant. We need to infiltrate Apple and get them into the gun business. We could have a whole "iShoot" line of products.

    Come out with increasingly powerful guns (they can all look the same, so just different calibers will be fine). Eventually, you get up to the iAssault and then tease (leak) plans for a iMG but also let it leak that it's just a plan because full autos are banned. WATCH how fast that ban gets repealed.

  • General Butt Naked||

  • Pro Libertate||

    I'm in.

  • Zeb||

    Well, maybe 98%. I live in a fairly rural, but also relatively liberal area. So there are loads of people who hunt and shoot and have lots of guns, but also lots of people who like to think that they are enlightened and awesome for voting D and generally fall into the cultural anti-gun position. It is fun to watch some of the latter people try to square their image of gun people with reality when confronted with someone they know and are friendly with around town driving around with a rifle in their car.

  • General Butt Naked||

    Wasn't there a story a few years back of star wars geeks buying old mausers to look like han solo's gun, but not plugging the barrels?

    They were basically open carrying at conventions in some of the most restrictive cities in America.

    I don't know if star wars geeks lean more left or right in their politics.

  • Contrarian P||

    Yeah, but now you have to wait for the green skinned alien to shoot first!

  • UnCivilServant||

    Nonsense, you can just CGI it in later.

  • robc||

    Actual quote from my Mom yesterday talking about the 2 year old that got shot here in KY:

    "The parents were at fault, but I hate that the anti-gun people are using this to try to pass laws."

    THIS is why I continue to live in KY. Apparently all the women in the county it happened (which is where my Mom grew up) are complaining about the gun control freaks abusing the story.

    Okay, probably the men too, but I thought it was notable about the women.

  • Irish||

    Ann Althouse kicked the New York Times in the nuts for trying to make a story about those dumb Kentucky hicks not knowing what's good for them.

    Basically, people in that town told a Times reporter to go fuck himself (albeit in a nice, southern sort of way) so he wrote an article about how those hicks totally don't get how this is a symbol of the evils of gun culture.

  • Tman||

    Great minds, etc...

  • Juice||

    Kentucky is the south?

  • Irish||

    It's pretty much even with Virginia. Was the capital of the Confederacy not in the South?

  • Zeb||

    More sort of in the middle, I'd say. Depends on what you mean by "the south" I guess. People don't normally call CA, AZ and NM the south, do they?

  • robc||

    Burkesville, KY? Hell yes.

    Louisville? Mostly southern, but with a strong midwestern influence.

  • Paul.||

    Kentucky is the south?

    ONce you get south of Ft. Thomas, yes.

  • Tman||

    Supposedly there was a camera crew from Germany filming the funeral and they got their asses handed to them by some locals.

    http://www.althouse.blogspot.c.....ed-as.html

  • Irish||

    Someone from the town showed up in the comments and said the following:

    Gabriel, the reporter that is telling his side of the story, failed to mention some important facts. The reason no one would speak with him, is because he came during the funeral. Family and friends gave many interviews in the days leading up to the funeral. Gabriel was chasing grieving family and friends as they exited the funeral. These people had just gone through two hours of horror. They were trying to get to their cars to go to the cemetery. This man continued to chase everyone down. The family ask him to stop harassing people. If Gabriel had wanted some interviews. He should have came to Burkesville before the actual funeral.
    Then we have the German Cameraman. He had been in Burkesville for a couple days. Many of the locals had been interviewed, as well as the family. The family made one request to this cameraman, they ask to please not video the grieving parents or the little girls casket. The cameraman and his sidekick refused to leave. They were ask over and over. I personally ask them to leave. I tried to block there view and the cameraman smacked my hand. Now he supposedly has gotten a warrant for someone putting there hands on him. Come on!! He smacks a woman for blocking his view, but cries when someone allegedly touches him.

    1/2

  • Irish||

    2/2

    If you ask me, the crew from Germany and Gabriel were very disrespectful. And as far as this article claiming he was the only person reporting this, really? Use Google and see what you find. I don't think there is a news station that hasn't covered it. Actually the only story Gabrial is reporting is, no one would cooperate and that everyone was rude. Watch the interviews with the other stations, the ones that came before Saturday. And as far as being rude, could you imagine walking to your car after a funeral and being jumped by a reporter? I think rude would be most peoples reaction.

    - Christy Appleby

    Fuck this guy. He's the worst sort of scum. He's like the Westboro Baptist Church but with a press pass.

  • Tman||

    Knowing some of the people I do in Kentucky, the Germans are lucky that's the worst that happened to them.

    I'm actually surprised that it didn't escalate further.

    But holy shit, filming a two year olds funeral against the family's wishes?

    Please go die in a fire.

  • robc||

    Yep. There are many, many places around there that the bodies would never be found.

  • General Butt Naked||

    I don't think they realize that these reporters were acting in this manner because they wanted to be treated rudely.

    They want to push the "progressive do-gooder is hounded and beaten by the backwards redneck troglodytes" angle as part of the larger narrative. An all-inclusive narrative, not just the story around gun culture.

    The best way to do this is to control the story. You, as a reporter, show yourself to be the finder of truth and bringer of justice, when in reality you baited the local population into nearly assaulting you with your disgusting actions. As for the locals, you don't show the time and patience the gave in dealing with you. No, you show them punching a cameraman and issuing threats.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-VA)||

    The left wing conspiracy is all out to get you, GBN. Don't let them take you alive.

  • Irish||

    Nothing about that made it sound like a conspiracy. His point is that reporters are assholes, something that seems indisputable.

    Shut the fuck up, you immense gaping asshole.

  • ||

    Why do you people continue to engage with Tulpa?

  • Acosmist||

    Projecting Tulpa is projecting.

  • robc||

    THESE ARE MY PEOPLE.

    I mean seriously so. I am probably related to every person in that county. Usually, two or three times.

    The Sparks place is just down the road from where my Mother grew up.

    After the funeral service, two men advanced across North Main Street toward a single television crew present, from the German network RTL, and punched the cameraman, bloodying his face and knocking him down.

    Sniff. I couldnt be prouder.

    Okay, thats probably (probably?) assault, but Id like to see if they could find a jury of his peers who would convict.

  • robc||

    I had to google to see which funeral home it was. There are two and both are on North Main.

    Not that it matters to anyone else, but I was trying to get a picture of the events in my head.

  • Tim||

    Now ist der time on Sprocket vhen ve dance.

  • General Butt Naked||

    I had the voice of Werner Herzog in my head for ze germans, but he seems pretty cool, so that sucks.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-VA)||

    So much for opposing initiation of force, eh robc?

  • Irish||

    I tried to block there view and the cameraman smacked my hand. Now he supposedly has gotten a warrant for someone putting there hands on him. Come on!! He smacks a woman for blocking his view, but cries when someone allegedly touches him.

    Sounds like the cameraman initiated contact. Don't want your ass kicked, don't touch a woman without her consent.

  • robc||

    ???

    I said it was assault didnt I?

    And if you read the details, the cameraman hit a woman first.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-VA)||

    After saying it was assault you said you were proud of them.

    And sorry if I don't consider a comment by someone named "Christy Appleby" in response to a news article must be the pure unvarnished truth. Pushing someone's hand out of the way of your camera isn't nearly on the same level as getting your face punched, either.

  • robc||

    I can be proud of rogues and outlaws. If you dont understand that, you dont understand America.

    That doesnt mean I wouldnt vote to convict myself. But I doubt 12 random people in Burkesville would.

    Any reason to trust Trip Gabriel more than Christy Appleby?

    Amusingly, that is the one person mentioned that I dont know or dont know relatives of. I think everyone else interviewed/quoted I know their families.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-VA)||

    If you're proud of cattle smugglers and tax dodgers, I can understand if not share your feelings. If you're proud of coercers, sorry I don't understand how a libertarian can be such. Coercion perpetrated by private entities is just as bad as coercion perpetrated by govt.

    As a law-abiding American, I find that incredibly insulting. We are a nation of laws. Without a respect for just laws, there can be no freedom.

  • robc||

    The law is a ass.

    I respect the respectable laws.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-VA)||

    How someone can give a firearm to a five year old is beyond me. Maybe it's a cultural thing as I did not grow up in a remotely pro-gun environment, but seriously! Do we trust five year olds with anything else that can kill people? If anyone's blinded by their culture I'd have to think it's the people who grew up with such attitudes around them.

  • robc||

    I called the parents idiots in yesterdays thread. Of course you dont give a 5 year old something that can kill without proper supervision.

    Notice the last 3 words.

    And that was the mistake, not the existence of the firearm in the home or the 5 year old being trained to use it properly (which he wasnt, obviously).

    Yes, its cultural, because everyone there grew up with guns and learning to shoot and they never shot their little sister. And everyone will be a little more diligent going forward, at least for a few years.

    Although its statistically unlikely, it wouldnt surprise me at all if 100% of the households in Cumberland Co, KY had a firearm in them. Including those that arent allowed to own a firearm due to convictions.

    The real number is not that far off of 100%.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-VA)||

    Once again, no one here seems interested in how those "off the street" or "black market" firearms became available in those venues. They're simply written off as "not something the law can fix".

    Would anybody care to venture a guess as to how amenable to regulation the families and friends of violent criminals are likely to be?

    You start, Tucille. Oh wait, you have nothing but vague innuendo and guilt by association. Just because you have a family member or friend who ultimately goes on to commit a violent crime does not mean you have no respect for the law.

  • Irish||

    Once again, no one here seems interested in how those "off the street" or "black market" firearms became available in those venues. They're simply written off as "not something the law can fix".

    What if it is something the law can't fix? Sort of like how the law has attempted to fix the manufacture and transport of drugs and has failed miserably.

    As an aside, is it possible for you to write a sentence in which you don't come off like a pompous jackass?

    You start, Tucille. Oh wait, you have nothing but vague innuendo and guilt by association. Just because you have a family member or friend who ultimately goes on to commit a violent crime does not mean you have no respect for the law.

    Yeah, but if you're giving a gun to someone who you know has a history of violent crime (and most people who commit violent crimes are those with a violent history) then it isn't so much 'guilt by association' as it is 'guilt by willful irresponsibility.'

  • Tulpa (LAOL-VA)||

    What if it is something the law can't fix?

    We'll cross that bridge when we come to it. First let's consider legislation to reduce firearm thefts and consequence-free straw purchases rather than dismissing it out of hand as "not a problem".

    Yeah, but if you're giving a gun to someone who you know has a history of violent crime (and most people who commit violent crimes are those with a violent history)

    Not sure about that parenthesized part.... certainly the first time you commit a violent crime you don't have a history of violent crime. And of course, it's possible that friends and maybe even family aren't familiar with your rap sheet if they don't have to do a background check.... part of what Toomey's bill was intended to remedy.

  • robc||

    let's consider legislation to reduce firearm thefts

    Theft is already illegal. Problem solved.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-VA)||

    Like the law against killing people means you don't need to train drivers to drive safely.

    Owning a gun is a responsibility. Making sure it's secured when you're not in immediate control of it is the least you can do.

  • robc||

    There is no more responsibility involved in owning a guy than in owning a hammer or a shoe.

    Use it safely.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-VA)||

    So I guess you have no problem with Fast+Furious? At least no more problem than if the ATF allowed hammers and shoes to be smuggled across the border.

  • robc||

    My problem is with the ATF participation.

  • itsnotmeitsyou||

    Irish, seriously dude, don't. Just don't. Tulpy poo is going to bait you into talking about his retarded storage law. He loves re-hashing that pile of shit no matter how many times we bitchslap him over it.

  • robc||

    And it is retarded.

    Im not responsible for the use of any item stolen from me. I have no obligation (other than to myself) to go to any special means to protect it from being stolen.

    If I leave my car unlocked with the keys inside and someone kills someone on a joyride with it, I AM NOT RESPONSIBLE IN ANY WAY WHATSOEVER. The thief is entirely responsible.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-VA)||

    Black and white thinking FTL. It's possible for more than one party to be responsible for a misdeed. Perhaps with different levels of responsibility, but it's not a 0 or 1 proposition.

  • robc||

    Yes it is. But not in the case of theft.

    The thief is entirely responsible (well, I guess if one person stole it and another person was driving, that would be shared). So see, not a 0 or 1.

    The owner is a 0, however.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-VA)||

    Depends on how much the owner did to prevent the theft.

    And of course a car is much less useful than a gun for killing people and much harder to keep without getting caught after stealing it.

  • Enough About Palin||

    "And of course a car is much less useful than a gun for killing people and much harder to keep without getting caught after stealing it."

    That's some dumb shit, especially the last part. In my neighborhood, thugs steal cars and then HIDE THEM IN ABANDONED GARAGES to be used in the perpetration of future crimes.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-VA)||

    Kind of hard to concealed-drive the car, though.

  • robc||

    Depends on how much the owner did to prevent the theft.

    Car unlocked, keys in ignition.

    Zero percent responsibility for owner.

  • General Butt Naked||

    I thought he moved on to Daily KOS, or someplace that would be more likely to furnish him with the sob sisters he needs, after his precious gun control legislation crashed and burned.

    I'm sure Dianne Feinstein has a bony, emaciated shoulder for you to cry on.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-VA)||

    You've fallen pretty damn far, GBN. You used to be reasonable and now you're just slandering me like SF and Epi. We all have our choices to make in life, I guess.

  • General Butt Naked||

    You've gone around the bend on the gun control thing, and that's a fact.

    The pro-second amendment supporters have WON (for now) and you're angry and disappointed.

    You not only want to give in to the left's demands, but also mandate government agents into my home so that I can express my rights. How should that be addressed? I'm not going to negotiate that point. Ever.

    It's an idea so far from liberty that any freedom oriented person should treat it with disdain and ridicule, as an argument implies a modicum of respect for said idea.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-VA)||

    I am a Second Amendment supporter, and none of the legislation I support would prevent anyone who is not already prohibited by existing law from getting or using a firearm, or magazines, or ammunition that they want. So fuck off with your slander.

  • Rebekah||

    So what exactly about the words "shall not be infringed" do you not understand?

    You're trying to turn a right into a privilege contingent upon allowing agents of the state to determine whether you're exercising that right safely. We've gone too far down that slippery slope already, and you want us to go farther.

    Fuck you in your authoritarian ass.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-VA)||

    You're trying to turn a right into a privilege contingent upon allowing agents of the state to determine whether you're exercising that right safely.

    The "agents of the state" (some of whom aren't actually agents of the state, they're FFLs) don't make that determination. The objective criteria are written into law and all the inspector does is verify that these criteria are satisfied by the storage container, at a time of the firearm owner's choosing.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-VA)||

    And I'm not "giving in" to the left's demands. I support making a deal where we get back way more than we give, and the "give" involves merely ensuring that existing laws are followed in a small subset of firearm transfers.

  • Enough About Palin||

    "shall not be infringed"

    Dumbass.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-VA)||

    It's not being infringed. Nothing in my proposal would prevent anyone from keeping or bearing any arms they chuse, it would only prevent them from leaving them laying around to be stolen.

  • Enough About Palin||

    So infringed then.

  • wheelock||

    Hey. Just an off-hand idea. Instead of armed agents of the state violating your privacy to check if your guns are locked up, we demand that police records of all stolen serials are made publicly accessible? The asshole that doesn't care if he's buying stolen property won't care of course, but I sure as hell would. This would overnight make selling a stolen gun a much less lucrative business and would diminish the problem you are supposedly so concerned about without all the disregard for the constitution. If course this would constitute the state actually giving a shit, which is unlikely.

  • Tulpa (LAOL-VA)||

    Go to Daily Kos and talk about the second amendment conferring an individual right and see how many times you get "bitchslapped". The fact that most people here disagree doesn't make my point mistaken.

  • General Butt Naked||

    Oh, so you went over there and didn't get the support you expected. Dang, what a shame.

  • UnCivilServant||

    Read Heller and McDonald, see how much the Supreme Court disagrees with the "Collective Right" nonsense.

    Also, "The right of the People" reaffirms the individual rights of said people. There is not one collective right enumerated in the constitution, only individual rights and enumerated powers.

  • robc||

    OT, but I think it explains things, there is a weird Burkesville custom that I have never heard of applying anywhere else, including other parts of KY (I could be wrong, I would love if anyone else can verify this occurring elsewhere).

    Weddings do not involve sending out invitations. Locals just show up. Everyone knows who is getting married and where and they show up if they want or not.

  • Paul.||

    Weddings do not involve sending out invitations. Locals just show up. Everyone knows who is getting married and where and they show up if they want or not.

    That's the way wedding should be, even for the groom.

    "Ok, I'll marry you, fuck... just tell me the day before and I'll be there."

  • rickraul102||

    my best friend's step-mother makes $84/hr on the laptop. She has been without work for 9 months but last month her income was $20795 just working on the laptop for a few hours. Read more on this site.... WWW.DAZ7.COM

  • GILMORE||

    silly writer thinks gun control is about 'crime'? lol. the control-freaks want more control... crime prevention is simply a superficial excuse trotted around to justify CONTROL for its own sake. we could be living in a crime-free nirvana and they'd still find reasons for restricting people. it is their nature

  • Tejicano||

    There is one point that I doubt many on the left can comprehend. There are a number, not everybody but a significant number, of gun owners like me. People who have real conviction in their belief that freedom is worth risking one’s life. I first took the oath of enlistment on the day after I turned 17 when I signed up for four years in the US Marines with a Guaranteed Combat Arms contract – that is my level of conviction.

    Lefties cannot imagine that there are real people like this. People who will not be cowed. People who really will not kneel. People who are well armed, well trained, and willing to use those arms to defend their freedom regardless of the outcome. Sounds corny as Hell but that’s where it is.

    I am glad to see that the side of reason in this debate has gained the upper ground so I have less to be concerned about. But the lefties are damned fools if they think I would be surrendering my arms should the tables get turned.

  • bobh||

    Crime doesn't have much to do with the issue, it's only the excuse. Gun control is about people control.

    “They have the guns and therefore we are for peace and for reformation through the ballot. When we have the guns then it will be through the bullet.”
    Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement