Gun Rights: Should you be allowed to own an RPG? - Page 73 - Miata Turbo Forum -Boost cars, acquire cats.

Welcome to Miataturbo.net   Members
 


Current Events, News, Politics Keep the politics here.

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 06-17-2016, 11:50 AM   #1441
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 24,838
Total Cats: 1,605
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by samnavy View Post
I love all the Youtube clips where a video crew goes to colleges and ask random questions of people walking in the quad... really hard questions too, like "Who did we fight in the Revolutionary War?" and "Who won the Civil War?" and "Who is the current Vice President?"
The answers: white males, white males, and a white male.

Sounds to me like the video crew needs to check their privilege and stop their victim-shaming.
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2016, 09:35 AM   #1442
Boost Czar

iTrader: (60)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 70,425
Total Cats: 1,426
Default

whoops.

Politics: While showing how easy it is to buy an AR-15, CBS News may have violated federal gun control laws | Best of Cain

Quote:
CBS News sent a producer into a gun store in Alexandria, just outside of Washington D.C. Per Virginia law, she provided two items to prove state residency - a drivers license and voter ID card - as well as her passport to prove U.S. citizenship.

She filled out some federal and state forms requiring her name, date of birth, social security number and a few basic questions about any past criminal activity or current restraining orders. And she passed a brief electronic background check

All told, it took 38 minutes and $1,030 for her to walk out of the store legally armed with a rifle, 100 rounds of ammunition and a 30-round magazine.
...

Quote:
“Ms. Paula Reid came into the shop with cash, claiming she wished to purchase an AR-15 to, ‘undergo training,’” Ryan Lamke, SpecDive’s general manager, told the Washington Free Beacon. “She refused basic, free instruction of firearms safety under the pretense that she was using the firearm for training with a NRA certified instructor.”

“Due to the information provided in the CBS News report filed today, I suspect Ms. Reid committed a straw purchase and procurement of a firearm under false pretenses.”

SpecDive owner Jerry Rapp said that Reid misleading the store about her intention to give the gun over to a third party was a clear violation of the law.

“The law is very clear. When you knowingly attempt to purchase a firearm with the intent of giving it to another person, you are trying to bypass the legal pathway to firearms ownership,” he said. “This, in itself, is a very serious crime. I do not see how any member of the press can get away with potentially committing a felony just to boost their ratings and mislead the general public.”
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2016, 03:06 PM   #1443
Crumple Zone Tester
iTrader: (6)
 
mgeoffriau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 7,529
Total Cats: 393
Default

I thought a straw purchase was one individual purchasing a gun with the intention of giving it to someone who could not have legally made that same purchase or is not legally eligible to own the gun. If the other party could have legally made that purchase, it's not a straw purchase.
mgeoffriau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2016, 04:45 PM   #1444
Senior Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,398
Total Cats: 56
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mgeoffriau View Post
I thought a straw purchase was one individual purchasing a gun with the intention of giving it to someone who could not have legally made that same purchase or is not legally eligible to own the gun. If the other party could have legally made that purchase, it's not a straw purchase.
Not according to the Supreme Court in Abrimski V. United States [2014]; Abramski v. United States : SCOTUSblog

Overview for you; https://www.thetrace.org/2015/12/str...an-bernardino/

However, in the case above I doubt she'd ever be indicted/convicted because there was no criminal intent.
bahurd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2016, 06:05 PM   #1445
Elite Member
iTrader: (19)
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 5,220
Total Cats: 339
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bahurd View Post
Not according to the Supreme Court in Abrimski V. United States [2014]; Abramski v. United States : SCOTUSblog

Overview for you; https://www.thetrace.org/2015/12/str...an-bernardino/

However, in the case above I doubt she'd ever be indicted/convicted because there was no criminal intent. she is part of the elitist media.
Fixed that for ya.
rleete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2016, 07:26 PM   #1446
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 24,838
Total Cats: 1,605
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rleete View Post
Fixed that for ya.
I always chuckle a bit when people portray those of us in the media, particularly broadcast media, and particularly TV, as "elite."


Edward R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite were elite. But the sun has set on that era.
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2016, 11:56 PM   #1447
Crumple Zone Tester
iTrader: (6)
 
mgeoffriau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 7,529
Total Cats: 393
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bahurd View Post
Not according to the Supreme Court in Abrimski V. United States [2014]; Abramski v. United States : SCOTUSblog

Overview for you; https://www.thetrace.org/2015/12/str...an-bernardino/

However, in the case above I doubt she'd ever be indicted/convicted because there was no criminal intent.
Huh. Interesting.

So how do gifts work into this, then? If I buy a gun to give to my friend (who could legally purchase and own said gun), is that legal?
mgeoffriau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2016, 12:17 AM   #1448
Junior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 159
Total Cats: -10
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mgeoffriau View Post
Huh. Interesting.

So how do gifts work into this, then? If I buy a gun to give to my friend (who could legally purchase and own said gun), is that legal?
It comes down to packaging.
Giving a gun to a relative is illegal.
Giving a hamper that has a few mags, bullets, jerky, beer with an AR15 all wrapped up with a little ribbon is perfectly fine.
adryargument is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2016, 12:26 PM   #1449
Moderator
iTrader: (9)
 
sixshooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 13,713
Total Cats: 1,060
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Perez View Post
Oh, no doubt, the number of deaths caused by a firearm is quite small as compared to the total population. And, again, I go back to my earlier statement that most people who get murdered (regardless of the instrument) tend to deserve it.

The Accessibility of Firearms and Risk for Suicide and Homicide Victimization Among Household Members: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis | Annals of Internal Medicine
(Cliffs: if you're a scumbag, you're more likely to be shot.)



I just find it fascinating to look at the numbers in relative terms, by comparing the number of firearm-related murders per xxx people within the US to that of other developed nations...




... and THEN look at this in the context of statements such as "The US does not have a gun problem."

Well, I guess it depends on your definition of "problem," really.
We don't have a gun problem. We just have a problem.
Check out this table (I'd love to imbed it):
Countries Compared by Crime > Violent crime > Rapes. International Statistics at NationMaster.com
sixshooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2016, 12:49 PM   #1450
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 24,838
Total Cats: 1,605
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sixshooter View Post
I think this is the one you meant to link to: All countries compared for Crime > Violent crime > Rapes per million people

The link you gave was absolute numbers, not per-capita adjusted. So the US is obviously #1 in it simply because of the immense size of our population, and because of the noted exclusion of certain other large countries due to unreliable reporting.



So the number of rapes per capita in the US is right between Belgium and New Zeland, which is reasonable company to be in. Then put that information into this context:




As compared to its rape-neighbors, the US experiences roughly 5x the number of firearm homicides per capita. That's more than just a general violence problem.
Attached Thumbnails
Gun Rights: Should you be allowed to own an RPG?-80-blob_d16c25162889cdac297190030bcf7004edfed502.png  
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2016, 12:54 PM   #1451
Crumple Zone Tester
iTrader: (6)
 
mgeoffriau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Jackson, MS
Posts: 7,529
Total Cats: 393
Default

I wonder how our gun violence rates would compare if we stopped The War on Drugs™.
mgeoffriau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2016, 03:11 PM   #1452
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: TAMPA, FL
Posts: 469
Total Cats: 12
Default

Honestly, it's nothing to do with the war on drugs. The war on drugs is bad... but IMO the main cause of gun violence (and high crime in general) is that there are a bunch of big city jurisdictions where they practice catch and release law enforcement. Hordes of drug dealers blasting each other over turf is a 90s thing.

Some of it is overworked prosecutors/judges, some of it is soft judges, some of it is incompetence or laziness and some of it is just bad sentencing laws. But the end result is that you see guys running around committing crimes... and you look at their scoresheet and their priors and you're like "how in the **** is this guy not in prison for life already?" If you go to the average rural jurisdiction and shoot someone but they survive, you get charged with attempted murder, you get life in prison, that's it. You do it in Chicago, you can get plead down to aggravated assault and get sentenced to a year in county, a couple months with good behavior. Project Exile was supposed to help put guys like that in federal prison for long stretches (on felon w/ gun charges) but Obama discontinued that program. Because gun control is about annoying guys like me, not putting criminals in prison.

I can't even count the number of defendants I saw (back when I did crim law) that were in their 20s and 30s and had just gotten a pass, and then another pass and then another... and this whole time they're learning from trial and error how to commit crimes better and better. By the time they finally win the reverse lottery and commit a crime in a jurisdiction with harsh sentencing laws and a hanging judge, they've often racked up 100s of victims.
AlwaysBroken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2016, 03:29 PM   #1453
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: TAMPA, FL
Posts: 469
Total Cats: 12
Default

Why do you guys keep quoting international crime comparisons? It's apples to oranges all the way down. The comparisons literally mean nothing.

Different countries have different cultures, different notions of what behavior is acceptable (especially where sex is concerned) and different rates of reporting, different attitudes of law enforcement to victims and offenders, etc. Once you dig down below the surface you quickly learn that even superficially similar countries have wildly different attitudes, policies, etc. I'm not even talking about crazy sharia law bullshit or asian cultures, I'm talking about European and South American countries that seem superficially similar to ours. They're not.

Reading up on the Julian Assange case, I learned a bit about the rape laws of Sweden. There are things that are illegal (and classified as rape) in Sweden that would make most Americans say "that's not rape! that's insane!" Sweden has a much more female dominated society than the US. This affects all sorts of things like who initiates sexual contact, expectations of parties, what constitutes consent, etc. When Sweden says "we had this many rapes" it means a completely different thing from when the US says it or Saudi Arabia or South Korea says it.
AlwaysBroken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2016, 03:42 PM   #1454
Supporting Vendor
iTrader: (31)
 
Savington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 13,517
Total Cats: 875
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Perez View Post
So the number of rapes per capita in the US is right between Belgium and New Zeland, which is reasonable company to be in.

...

As compared to its rape-neighbors, the US experiences roughly 5x the number of firearm homicides per capita. That's more than just a general violence problem.
Yep. The same data exists for burglary and assault rates. The US is square in the middle of the Western world when it comes to violent crime. Our homicide rates, OTOH, outstrip everyone's by a mile.
Savington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2016, 04:46 PM   #1455
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 24,838
Total Cats: 1,605
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Savington View Post
Our homicide rates, OTOH, outstrip everyone's by a mile.
Very true. In relative terms, the homicide rate in the US is quite high (5x that of comparable nations), and yet in absolute numbers it's extremely low (3 per 100,000).

According to people who value private gun ownership highly, 3 per 100,000 is an acceptable loss rate.

According to people who have strongly negative opinions towards law enforcement, a rate of .002-.003 per 100,000 is an unacceptably high rate of police-involved shootings.

It's hard to have reasonable conversations about things like guns when the people on the various sides of the conversation are speaking a different language and using different systems of mathematics.
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2016, 06:40 PM   #1456
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: TAMPA, FL
Posts: 469
Total Cats: 12
Default

If you're honestly trying to have a conversation about guns, then why are all the gun control proposals floated in the past decade aimed at things that don't make a difference except to inconvenience the law abiding?

All I've seen so far from this administration has been:
-discontinue Project Exile, probably the only federal gun control program that actually did any good in terms of getting dangerous scumbags off the streets.
-ask for bans on "assault weapons" (whatever that term means this week) even though rifles are used in under 5 percent of homicides and scary looking semiauto rifles even more rarely
-sell actual assault rifles to mexican cartels, which were used in a ton of crimes, including murders of US citizens
-claim to be asking for background checks (which we already have) but actually trying to pass a law making it illegal to let your friends shoot your guns at the range.
-trying to make everyone on the "terror watch list" and "no fly list" a prohibited person... even though none of the actual terrorists were on a watch list... and a ton of people on the lists aren't terrorists or criminals. For example one guy had his passport stolen by a terrorist (the terrorist subsequently got arrested) but the guy whose identity he stole is now permanently on the watch list because his name is a "known alias of a terrorist"- nevermind that the terrorist himself is sitting in a federal prison and the only person using that alias is the actual person whose name it is. And of course none of these lists have an appeals process or a way to get off the list- the criteria is basically "if the FBI feels like it"

Anyway, my point is that there are tons of good ideas already out there to lower crime (including gun crime) but all we get is a giant middle finger directed at legal gun owners.
AlwaysBroken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2016, 06:43 PM   #1457
Supporting Vendor
iTrader: (31)
 
Savington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 13,517
Total Cats: 875
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Perez View Post
Very true. In relative terms, the homicide rate in the US is quite high (5x that of comparable nations), and yet in absolute numbers it's extremely low (3 per 100,000).
If our homicide rate is 5x that of comparable nations, I'm not sure you can call the resulting absolute number "extremely low". More on that later in this post.

Quote:
According to people who value private gun ownership highly, 3 per 100,000 is an acceptable loss rate.
I would like to think that there are law-abiding gun owners who like their guns, want to buy more, and still think that gun violence is a problem in America today. I think those people are out there, and I bet they think 3/100,000 is too many.

Quote:
According to people who have strongly negative opinions towards law enforcement, a rate of .002-.003 per 100,000 is an unacceptably high rate of police-involved shootings.
First, my opinions on law enforcement are generally positive, no doubt as a result of being born white and raised in an affluent area.

Second, I believe you've misquoted your stat by 100x. .002 per 100k is 2 deaths per 100 million people, or roughly 7 deaths a year at the hands of police. The police have killed ~500 people so far this year, which puts the running per-capita death rate at ~0.3 per 100k people per year. In absolute terms, that's quite a low figure.

But is it actually low? How do we define "low" here? Can you call 0.3 a low number when it's 20 times the death rate of Denmark and France, 25 times the rate of Sweden, 100 times the rate of Finland, and 200 times the rate of England/Wales?
Savington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-19-2016, 08:00 PM   #1458
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Marylandistan
Posts: 689
Total Cats: 32
Default

This is long but worth a watch. It is related but indirect.

stratosteve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2016, 12:31 AM   #1459
Elite Member
iTrader: (7)
 
samnavy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: VIRGINIA BEACH, VA
Posts: 5,879
Total Cats: 148
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mgeoffriau View Post
Huh. Interesting.

So how do gifts work into this, then? If I buy a gun to give to my friend (who could legally purchase and own said gun), is that legal?
Yes, purchasing a gun to give as a gift has always been legal. The status of your friend is immaterial to whether the concept of purchasing a gun as a gift it legal. A straw purchase only applies during the initial purchase of the gun. If you initially buy it legally, then you've BOUGHT IT LEGALLY. If you sell/transfer/gift later, nothing about the the fact that it was a legal initial purchase changes.
If you gift a gun that you legally bought to a person you knew to be prohibited, that is not a straw purchase, but you would be in violation of the GCA.

Quote:
Originally Posted by adryargument View Post
It comes down to packaging.
Giving a gun to a relative is illegal.
Giving a hamper that has a few mags, bullets, jerky, beer with an AR15 all wrapped up with a little ribbon is perfectly fine.
Completely wrong. You can't play bullshit games like that. When it comes to firearm law, it's either legal or it isn't.

It's perfectly legal to purchase a firearm with your own money with the sole intention of giving it as a gift. PERIOD.

There are other legal issues to take into consideration when gifting a firearm to someone, but the act in and of itself is cool. Other things to consider have to do with state of residence transfer laws, prohibited (or hopefully not) status, taxes (if you're giving somebody a $50k heirloom shotgun, they'll need to claim it), and a few other things.

"Straw purchasing" comes down to question 11a on the 4473. Are you the buyer or not?
https://www.atf.gov/file/61446/download

Read Question 11a, then scroll down later in the document where it describes how to answer each question and read the instructions for 11a. It's right there in the instructions that it's perfectly legal to buy a gun as a gift.
"You are also the actual trasnsferee/buyer if you are legitimately purchasing the firearm as a gift for a third party."


samnavy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2016, 10:35 AM   #1460
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joe Perez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 24,838
Total Cats: 1,605
Default

Happy Monday, all.

First off, Sav was correct above, in that I misplaced a decimal point while doing the math. The average annual rate of police killings in the US (all killings, not just from firearms) is .02-.03 per 100k, and that is unacceptably high. Contrast this to the overall homicide rate of around 3 per 100k, which is acceptably low.


Anyway, it's summer, and with that comes ice cream and doublethink. So here's an article from the relatively conservative USA Today, proving that gun control laws are effective at reducing overall homicide rates: Study: States with more gun laws have less gun violence

And one from the relatively liberal Washington Post, proving that gun control laws are ineffective at reducing overall homicide rates: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...tate-gun-laws/
Joe Perez is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Turbo 1995 Miata Low mileage Clean Tekel Cars for sale/trade 29 02-05-2016 05:16 PM
IT Pros: HELP! Al Jazeera something something Brighthouse Account sixshooter Insert BS here 11 09-01-2015 11:51 AM
Who's Idea was it to give cops taser guns RicanmiataRacer Insert BS here 10 03-04-2007 03:07 PM
Is the SMT6 comparable to the Emanage Blue/Emu/MS? Mex Prefabbed Turbo Kits 1 09-28-2006 05:15 PM
FS: Turbo XS H34 BOV BrokeEnthusiast Miata parts for sale/trade 1 09-06-2006 11:16 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:29 AM.