You ever see a Rick Ross video? A pure unadulterated display of moral decay. I don't want to hear about what I can do to fix a problem with the inner city as long as people like this trash are held in high regard.

---

---

"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden

This board is the only place I am considered a bleeding heart lib. I don't really give a damn if people want to own guns. I just think its flat out too easy for criminals to get them. Shit like creating registry by serial number for guns and tracking the sales similar to automobiles is seen as an infringement. The reality is private citizen sales being largely unregulated effectively makes gun sales largely unregulated. It also eliminates a healthy opportunity to collect tax dollars which could positively impact communities. I just don't think that is terribly radical. It certainly doesn't bother my gun owning friends.

Wow, just watched one. Horribly sad!

On the gun issue, I'm going to disagree. The real problem, the way I understand it, is that there is about zero chance that a straw buyer will be caught and punished. We have laws on the books to try and keep guns out of the hands of those who shouldn't have them, but we put no resources into enforcing those laws. Cracking down on straw buyers would be a good start.

As to how to fix this problem, while I totally agree with you that large scale infringement of civil liberties isn't the answer, a vigorous police presence and response to black homicides is at least part of it. The book "Ghettoside" described this exact problem in Watts not that long ago: Blacks killed other blacks at alarming rates because there was little likelihood that they would be caught, much less punished for it. They enacted their own justice system to compensate for the fact that black murder cases just weren't a priority for the LAPD. And that led to a vicious cycle wherein people were afraid to cooperate with the police because they were afraid of being targeted themselves, making it almost impossible for police to find witnesses. Here's a good review of that book if you haven't read it: http://www.nytimes.com/...ovys-ghettoside.html

---

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.

I'm less concerned with requiring background checks on face to face sales than I am on transferring to a family member or even allowing a friend to borrow a gun for a match. I have yet to see a law that can address face to face sales that exempted these issues. But it still doesn't account for the fact most guns used in gun crimes by felons are not acquired through face to face sales, but by other means. Often stolen weapons that were originally purchased or a gun purchased through straw purchase. No new laws will prevent that. There are already laws for this, and in many cases, only investigated after the fact. You want to do something about this? Put more funding an resources to finding stolen guns (sting operations, etc). Sentence people convicted of gun crimes to very harsh sentences. While I'm not in of profiling law abiding gun owners, there could certainly be some rational profiling done. If a person living in section 8 housing or a poor part of town spends 10K on guns in a year at the same store, it can be determined with the resources available. Gun stores must maintain records for 15 years. Some gun stores even track sales per customer, though not required.

The reason gun dealers don't trust the ATF is because they give conflicting advice on matters of law to gun dealers, arrest people who didn't knowingly break any number of complex gun laws, and needlessly investigate law abiding citizens. Meanwhile gun shops are left with little guidance on how to prevent selling guns to potential criminals. Sure, they are given a lot of leeway to deny a sale if it seems suspicious. So here are two examples.

1. A grandma comes in an buys 10K worth of popular semi-auto rifles (likely a straw purchase for a family member who can't own a gun or a gift to her three boys who can). That doesn't pass a smell test, maybe they deny the sale and all is good.

2. A guy dressed like a gangbanger (and happens to be one) comes in, provides an ID and passes background check. But the sale just doesn't seem right, so denied. They can be sued for civil rights violations.

What would you have them do in these circumstance?

---

---

"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden

So, your issue is with private gun sales, right? Ok, you never raised that issue before. You blamed the relaxed gun laws in Indiana for causing guns to get into the hands of criminals in Illinois. But, that really isn't the issue, is it?

The guns were purchased legally in IN. There is nothing about IN law that is problematic. IN law is on par with the majority of states in the US. So, IN is not the problem.

The guns that were legally purchased in IN were then sold to thugs in IL. That is an IL problem, not an IN problem. So, why on earth are you blaming IN???

Now, back to the first point -- is your issue with personal/private gun sales? Do you think sales between private individuals should be regulated? If THAT is your issue -- guess what -- I agree. I have taken the position for some time that I feel ALL gun sales should be REQUIRED to go through an FFL holder and be subject to a background check. I don't care if I am selling my gun to some stranger or to my son, IMO, that sale should have to go through the same check that it would if sold through Gander Mountain (for example).

So, if I am reading you correctly, we are in agreement on that issue. Am I missing something?

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

The guns that were legally purchased in IN were then sold to thugs in IL. That is an IL problem, not an IN problem. So, why on earth are you blaming IN???

As it relates to gun shows. In IL an unlicensed dealer is subject to the same requirements as licensed dealers at gun shows. To my knowledge the same is not true of Indiana. So while Indiana law is on par with many other states it is NOT on par with its neighboring state which creates a huge problem specifically for Chicago. Given how easy it is to travel to and from Indiana from Chicago, criminals are exploiting those disparate laws.

Yes, we are very much in agreement on the need for regulation of private sales, but I would take a step further. I would create a database that requires sellers to enter the information of the new owner. It won't eliminate fraudulent sales with the use of fake identification, but its one additional barrier. At a minimum you can track the lifecyle of a gun. When and where did it perhaps go from a legally owned weapon to a "street weapon". With that type of data, hopefully in the future you can close those holes which in theory will protect the rights of law abiding owners. Unfortunately, the illegal secondary or tertiary market helps maintain a highly liquid and robust gun manufacturing market.

Yet never clarified where you live in Chicago, number of CPD you know, or how much time you spend on the high murder neighborhoods.

Central database of all gun sales? DOA. Not ever going to happen in my lifetime. Why in the hell should the gov't know what guns you own when the 2nd amendment was specifically designed so that citizens could raise arms against a gov't that becomes to tyrannical? Also what would such a lifecycle determine? I mean you can follow a paper trail, just not conveniently. Gun is used in a crime and the serial number matched, it can be traced at minimum to the original buyer via serial number inquiry to gun dealer, to original buyer. Admittingly, this is where things get tougher and for good reason. You want to ban private sales? That will likely happen in our lifetime, but that still wouldn't account for "stolen" or "lost" firearms that find their way into crimes. Again, stolen guns and straw purchases account for the vast majority of felons obtaining guns. Straw purchases being the largest. There is already the means to track straw purchases, and stolen guns aren't going to go away.

I also question your logic here about Indiana being a source. We already know that straw purchases account for the overwhelming amount of gun crime. So these would be purchases that go through the normal process. Meaning they would be included in this data.

You really should read the hard data and not cherry picked data before you come up with your assertions. See below.

https://www.atf.gov/...ebsite15pdf/download

Some items of note:
1. Sporter class guns (which you probably call an assault weapon) only 28 of 12,390 firearms recovered (note this is recovered,not necessarily used in a crime). Page 6 describe source.
2. 9MM and .22 accounted for the majority of gun crimes.
3. What? Only 191 guns were recovered in 2015 from a homicide. 3,489 were under investigation, meaning they were suspected of being tied to a crime, but not proven.
4. 4,231 guns were recovered with a source from Illinois. 1,158 was Indiana. Again, these are guns recovered, not necessarily used in a crime.
5. Time to crime is overwhelmingly over 3 years. With an average is nearly 12 years. That means these were possessed more than a decade before recovery.
6. Average year of possessor is 34 years.
7. A significant number of guns are simply found.
8. And the biggest one Weapons trafficking only accounted for 32 recoveries weapons selling only 33. So much for the theory the illegal black market for guns are pervasive.

Other data that can be found here. Illinois is the second largest source of guns for Wisconsin and Missouri. Damn those slack Illinois gun laws.

---

---

"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden

In Indiana, all dealers at gun shows are required to perform background checks. Indiana is one of 33 states (33 of them) that do not require background checks for individual-to-individual sales. This is true for 33 states, including Wisconsin, which, last time I checked, has the misfortune of bordering Illinois. So, again, the issue is not Indiana and there is no Indiana gun show loophole.


Creating a national registry is dead on arrival. I am not one of the conspiracy nuts in the LR who think the gubment is out to get them. But, I worked for the gubment and was a prosecutor, so, I know what the gubment will do with certain information. I don't trust the gubment that much. It's none of their damn business what I do in the bedroom or in the gun locker.

In addition, creating a national registry would do absolutely nothing to curb this violence. There are 300 million guns in the US right now. If you imposed restrictions on new sales, you would not stop firearms from being stolen and/or sold by the criminals.

---

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR

https://aminewswire.com/...higher-than-reported

Mission accomplished?