Khalil Marbley is an eight time felon with an extensive criminal history. Released on electronic monitoring in Chicago gun case.
https://cwbchicago.com/2021/08/8-time-felon-a-serial-escapee-gets-electronic-monitoring-for-new-gun-case.html |
This is not correct. Except for some exceptions related to active members of the armed forces, it is not possible to legally take possession of a handgun in Indiana if you you are not a resident of Indiana. This is true for all states actually. There is some responsibility on the part of the private seller to verify that the buyer is a resident of Indiana. And if the buyer is a resident of Indiana, and if the seller believes that the buyer intends to illegally transfer the gun (as in a straw purchase), then the seller may refuse to sell or face criminal charges. |
PP referred to cities, not states as a whole. Cities with the most gun violence are overwhelmingly D. |
That P-PP referred to “jurisdictions.” |
I mean, what do they think is going to happen? He’s going to wake up tomorrow as a Boy Scout?? Are they serious? I can’t even with these idiot liberals. |
You realize that the statistics show that your gun is far more likely to be used to kill / injure someone in your home than as part of any “self defense” scenario, right? |
You’d really need to see statistics where the gun is properly secured and the owner has training for that to be a fair statement. Oh wait, we have those statistics. It’s Switzerland. And hint: they don’t have a problem with their firearms. |
Yes, of course. Do you realize it’s not wise to live your life by statistics? |
Are you saying the NRA/Gun Lobby would be cool with those being legal requirements? Yeah, didn’t think so. |
Last time I checked, abortion rights (the right to terminate your unborn fetus) are not in the bill of rights. So there is a difference. A rather large one. Roe v. Wade set a precedent, but no federal U.S. Congress has pushed forth an amendment or law speaking directly to the age at which an unborn fetus is considered a human and no longer “part” of the host woman’s body and delineating a rightful women’s choice vs. murder of a child. Come talk to me when they do. Also, abortion is a willful action taken by at least two people (at least most of the time) to terminate a life (be it human or pre-humans). Owning a gun is a willful action but in and of itself does not harm anyone. The gun has to be loaded, and aimed, and fired at another human or in the vicinity of people or property to cause harm. Lots of actions none of which related directly to the act of legally purchasing or illegally obtaining a firearm. The crime and the shame is not gun ownership, it is illegal gun usage. The crime and shame (if you believe it is a crime and a shame) of abortion, is the act of abortion itself. |
^ You could make laws like if someone’s unsecured firearm is used to commit a crime then they do the same time as the person who pulled the trigger. I’d vote for that (as a conservative).
Of course, that’s probably not a big deal since the left doesn’t seem to want to lock up criminals anyway. |
Correct. They don’t care about taking guns away from criminals or punishing criminals for crimes. They care solely about getting guns out of the hands of people who are not criminals to begin with. And the easiest way to do that is by doing what states like CA, MA, NJ, MD and NY are already doing - by making formerly legal guns illegal, in order to turn their owners into brand-new criminals by virtue of new laws which outlaw things people who weren’t criminals already owned. It’s positively Randian. I can easily imagine Professor Ferris explaining it to Hank Reardon in so many words. |
Totally true. If you saw blacks roaming around with AR-15s in their cos-play, pretend-soldier camo (see: chubby incel Kyle Rittenhouse, as just one example of many) Republicans would quickly find a way to clamp down on guns. All of a sudden, gun control would become a matter of "national security." |
You've completely missed the point. You are counting on the gun buyer, who is a criminal, to be honest, and to voluntarily, and without prompting, disclose that they are from out of state, which would then establish to the seller that it's an illegal sale. A criminal who wants a gun won't do that. And currently there is nothing requiring a private Indiana gun seller to verify that the buyer is a legal Indiana buyer. So, it's don't ask/don't tell. That is exactly how thousands of unscrupulous gun sellers flourish, feeding an epidemic of gun crime. If we instead made it absolutely mandatory for every gun transfer to undergo a background check and kept a persistent database of all serial numbers and gun transfers and analytical capability for tracing guns from scene of crime to sources in the sales chain, as well as ability for looking for anomalous and suspicious behavior in buyers and sellers. Without pieces like that, there is no hope of stemming the illegal trade in guns. |
nope, nobody cares, the only ones running in fear is bloomberg and the karens |