Pres. Obama to announce new gun push - Page 26

bynmdsue · 21st April 2013, 07:19 PM

Is it starting to seem like people don't understand that there already are background checks in place for the majority of transactions?

elbe · 21st April 2013, 07:23 PM

Originally Posted by bynmdsue

Is it starting to seem like people don't understand that there already are background checks in place for the majority of transactions?

I don't know, it sure seems like most people seem to get that just fine, they just aren't big fans of the gaps in the system.

thaiboxerken · 22nd April 2013, 06:47 PM

Originally Posted by triforcharity

In no terms, except one that you're making up. Did you not read? Everyone agreed BEFORE HAND that the vote had to be 60 to pass. For ALL of them amendments of this bill.

Everyone agreed that the votes had to have the save number of votes as a filibuster to pass. Sounds like overcoming a filibuster to me.

triforcharity · 22nd April 2013, 06:51 PM

Nope. Sorry. Go read again the link I already posted. It'll help with your continued misunderstanding

NWO Sentryman · 25th April 2013, 02:17 PM

Interesting article on Gun Culture in the US: http://www.businessweek.com/articles...-does#r=lr-fst

Playing up the "moral panic" angle of no assault weapons ban somehow turning people into Horned Reapers... stay classy.

uke2se · 25th April 2013, 02:58 PM

Originally Posted by NWO Sentryman

Interesting article on Gun Culture in the US: http://www.businessweek.com/articles...-does#r=lr-fst

Playing up the "moral panic" angle of no assault weapons ban somehow turning people into Horned Reapers... stay classy.

Good article, thanks.

Ranb · 25th April 2013, 04:45 PM

Originally Posted by NWO Sentryman

Interesting article on Gun Culture in the US: http://www.businessweek.com/articles...-does#r=lr-fst

From the article;

Quote:

Luke Chicoine, an economist at the University of Notre Dame, estimates that the expiration of the federal assault weapons ban led to at least 2,684 additional homicides in Mexico.

How did the expiration of the 1994 AWB in 2004 lead to any additional homicides? No one had their semi-auto firearm confiscated as a result of the ban, sales dramatically increased as a result of the bill passing the first vote. Sales of post-ban semi-auto rifles remained brisk during the ten years the ban was in effect. The AWB expired with a whimper as far as I can tell. The guns sold after the sunset did not get more lethal and the export controls did not change as a result of the sunset. So how did Chicoine come up with this claim?

Ranb

uke2se · 25th April 2013, 07:16 PM

Originally Posted by Ranb

From the article;

How did the expiration of the 1994 AWB in 2004 lead to any additional homicides? No one had their semi-auto firearm confiscated as a result of the ban, sales dramatically increased as a result of the bill passing the first vote. Sales of post-ban semi-auto rifles remained brisk during the ten years the ban was in effect. The AWB expired with a whimper as far as I can tell. The guns sold after the sunset did not get more lethal and the export controls did not change as a result of the sunset. So how did Chicoine come up with this claim?

Ranb

http://www.econ-jobs.com/research/32...-in-Mexico.pdf

Giz · 25th April 2013, 07:37 PM

Originally Posted by uke2se

http://www.econ-jobs.com/research/32...-in-Mexico.pdf

That whole study can be refuted with "correlation does not equal causation". It makes John Lott's work look statistically rigorous.

uke2se · 26th April 2013, 05:31 AM

Originally Posted by Giz

That whole study can be refuted with "correlation does not equal causation". It makes John Lott's work look statistically rigorous.

I especially enjoy how you show this with evidence.

WildCat · 26th April 2013, 05:42 AM

Originally Posted by uke2se

I especially enjoy how you show this with evidence.

The study assumes that if a murder occurred with a weapon banned under the AWB it wouldn't have occurred at all, which is nonsense. It's like saying that if the car that ran over the pedestrian was a Toyota the accident wouldn't have happened if Toyotas were banned, when in reality it would have just been some other brand of car running them over.

Then in those other studies there's the typical nonsense such as including suicides in the gun deaths to pad the numbers, even though other equally lethal methods of suicide are readily available. And not counting a gun as having been used defensively unless it's actually been used to shoot someone.

Lies, damn lies, and statistics.

Ranb · 26th April 2013, 06:00 PM

Originally Posted by uke2se

http://www.econ-jobs.com/research/32...-in-Mexico.pdf

I did not see where the author of the report considered any causes of the higher homicide rate other than the availability of assault weapons. He fails to mention that the supply of semi-auto weapons did not decrease as the result of the AWB. An M-1a without a bayonet lug and an AR-15 without a threaded muzzle/bayonet lug is just as lethal as an assault weapon defined by the AWB of 1994. It is easy to add on the banned features of a post ban rifle if they are wanted, especially for criminals that import them over the border.

Ranb

NWO Sentryman · 27th April 2013, 06:49 AM

What if the Obama Administration decided to push for Australia style gun laws, and argued that because the republicans were unwilling to compromise, they would now face stricter laws?

uke2se · 27th April 2013, 08:17 AM

Originally Posted by Ranb

I did not see where the author of the report considered any causes of the higher homicide rate other than the availability of assault weapons. He fails to mention that the supply of semi-auto weapons did not decrease as the result of the AWB. An M-1a without a bayonet lug and an AR-15 without a threaded muzzle/bayonet lug is just as lethal as an assault weapon defined by the AWB of 1994. It is easy to add on the banned features of a post ban rifle if they are wanted, especially for criminals that import them over the border.

Ranb

Perhaps you should write an article refuting his?

uke2se · 27th April 2013, 08:19 AM

Originally Posted by NWO Sentryman

What if the Obama Administration decided to push for Australia style gun laws, and argued that because the republicans were unwilling to compromise, they would now face stricter laws?

That would be funny at first, but would probably end in bloodshed.

Giz · 27th April 2013, 08:25 AM

Originally Posted by NWO Sentryman

What if the Obama Administration decided to push for Australia style gun laws, and argued that because the republicans were unwilling to compromise, they would now face stricter laws?

He can't get minor changes passed. What makes you think he could get major changes? (and IF he could get the major changes... I think he would already be going for them)

Ranb · 27th April 2013, 09:18 AM

Originally Posted by Giz

He can't get minor changes passed. What makes you think he could get major changes? (and IF he could get the major changes... I think he would already be going for them)

Take another look at that bill. It had many changes in it. They need to go at this one by one, not all at once. Gun owners are gaining back their rights little by little at the state level. If anyone wants to make changes, then it is best that they do it slowly.

Ranb

WildCat · 27th April 2013, 09:18 AM

Originally Posted by NWO Sentryman

What if the Obama Administration decided to push for Australia style gun laws, and argued that because the republicans were unwilling to compromise, they would now face stricter laws?

What on earth makes you think he could get those laws passed when he couldn't even get the background checks through Congress?

NWO Sentryman · 27th April 2013, 09:43 AM

Originally Posted by WildCat

What on earth makes you think he could get those laws passed when he couldn't even get the background checks through Congress?

He could get out a massive Anti-gun campaign in between now and 2014, and the new congressmen could be more willing to pass such laws, or at least tax gun ownership out of existence and restrict advertising for guns the same way tobacco ads are restricted. Michael Bloomberg's campaign worked.

Given that US schools are panicking and armouring their pupils with bulletproof uniforms and backpacks, perhaps the Obama administration could find some success there.

WildCat · 27th April 2013, 10:32 AM

Originally Posted by NWO Sentryman

He could get out a massive Anti-gun campaign in between now and 2014, and the new congressmen ~~could be more willing to pass such laws, or at least tax gun ownership out of existence and restrict advertising for guns the same way tobacco ads are restricted. Michael Bloomberg's campaign worked~~ will be overwhelmingly pro-gun as a result.

ftfy

Originally Posted by NWO Sentryman

Given that US schools are panicking and armouring their pupils with bulletproof uniforms and backpacks, perhaps the Obama administration could find some success there.

Where are you getting this nonsense?

NWO Sentryman · 27th April 2013, 10:37 AM

Originally Posted by WildCat

Where are you getting this nonsense?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013...ms-gun-control

WildCat · 27th April 2013, 10:41 AM

Originally Posted by NWO Sentryman

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013...ms-gun-control

The article text doesn't support the claim in the headline, let alone your hysterical claims.

I guess that's why you couldn't quote anything, correct?

Giz · 27th April 2013, 12:10 PM

Originally Posted by NWO Sentryman

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013...ms-gun-control

300 bullet proof backpacks bought, privately, from a potential pool of a hundred million customers. This is the equivalent of crazed doomsday peppers.

Even for the guardian, printing this as 'news' is embarrassing.

Nessie · 27th April 2013, 12:18 PM

"However, until the U.S. sees its 13,000 annual shooting deaths as a problem meriting serious gun-ownership restrictions, nothing much will change."

http://www.businessweek.com/articles...ulture-does#p2

triforcharity · 27th April 2013, 03:53 PM

Expressing an opinion? Ok. I see lots of those every day. Does he cite some evidence, or something of value?

21st April 2013, 07:23 PM	#1002
elbe Illuminator Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: near a man named leroy brown Posts: 3,553	Originally Posted by bynmdsue Is it starting to seem like people don't understand that there already are background checks in place for the majority of transactions? I don't know, it sure seems like most people seem to get that just fine, they just aren't big fans of the gaps in the system.
	__________________ "If ever I stray from the path I follow take me down to the english channel, throw me in where the water is shallow, and then drag me on back to shore." realityisnotadditive... blog... thingy...

22nd April 2013, 06:47 PM	#1003
thaiboxerken Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 20,955	Originally Posted by triforcharity In no terms, except one that you're making up. Did you not read? Everyone agreed BEFORE HAND that the vote had to be 60 to pass. For ALL of them amendments of this bill. Everyone agreed that the votes had to have the save number of votes as a filibuster to pass. Sounds like overcoming a filibuster to me.
	__________________ All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine

22nd April 2013, 06:51 PM	#1004
triforcharity Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: The South! Posts: 12,155	Nope. Sorry. Go read again the link I already posted. It'll help with your continued misunderstanding
	__________________ "The horse has been led to the water, the horse is in fact standing up to its knees in the water, but the horse is telling you in a loud voice that there's no water to be had....he's still so very thirsty!" ~alienentity

25th April 2013, 02:17 PM	#1005
NWO Sentryman Proud NWO Gatekeeper Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Quantum Gate to the NWO Posts: 3,772	Interesting article on Gun Culture in the US: http://www.businessweek.com/articles...-does#r=lr-fst Playing up the "moral panic" angle of no assault weapons ban somehow turning people into Horned Reapers... stay classy.
	__________________ If I now say "dominoes", you won't think "pizza". Will you? - FireGarden on the Middle East

25th April 2013, 02:58 PM	#1006
uke2se Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 5,126	Originally Posted by NWO Sentryman Interesting article on Gun Culture in the US: http://www.businessweek.com/articles...-does#r=lr-fst Playing up the "moral panic" angle of no assault weapons ban somehow turning people into Horned Reapers... stay classy. Good article, thanks.
uke2se Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 5,126

21st April 2013, 07:19 PM	#1001
bynmdsue Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 1,385	Is it starting to seem like people don't understand that there already are background checks in place for the majority of transactions?

25th April 2013, 04:45 PM	#1007
Ranb Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: WA USA Posts: 4,101	Originally Posted by NWO Sentryman Interesting article on Gun Culture in the US: http://www.businessweek.com/articles...-does#r=lr-fst From the article; Quote: Luke Chicoine, an economist at the University of Notre Dame, estimates that the expiration of the federal assault weapons ban led to at least 2,684 additional homicides in Mexico. How did the expiration of the 1994 AWB in 2004 lead to any additional homicides? No one had their semi-auto firearm confiscated as a result of the ban, sales dramatically increased as a result of the bill passing the first vote. Sales of post-ban semi-auto rifles remained brisk during the ten years the ban was in effect. The AWB expired with a whimper as far as I can tell. The guns sold after the sunset did not get more lethal and the export controls did not change as a result of the sunset. So how did Chicoine come up with this claim? Ranb
	Last edited by Ranb; 25th April 2013 at 04:46 PM.

25th April 2013, 07:16 PM	#1008
uke2se Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 5,126	Originally Posted by Ranb From the article; How did the expiration of the 1994 AWB in 2004 lead to any additional homicides? No one had their semi-auto firearm confiscated as a result of the ban, sales dramatically increased as a result of the bill passing the first vote. Sales of post-ban semi-auto rifles remained brisk during the ten years the ban was in effect. The AWB expired with a whimper as far as I can tell. The guns sold after the sunset did not get more lethal and the export controls did not change as a result of the sunset. So how did Chicoine come up with this claim? Ranb http://www.econ-jobs.com/research/32...-in-Mexico.pdf
uke2se Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 5,126

25th April 2013, 07:37 PM	#1009
Giz Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: UK/US Posts: 3,420	Originally Posted by uke2se http://www.econ-jobs.com/research/32...-in-Mexico.pdf That whole study can be refuted with "correlation does not equal causation". It makes John Lott's work look statistically rigorous.

26th April 2013, 05:31 AM	#1010
uke2se Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 5,126	Originally Posted by Giz That whole study can be refuted with "correlation does not equal causation". It makes John Lott's work look statistically rigorous. I especially enjoy how you show this with evidence.
uke2se Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 5,126

26th April 2013, 05:42 AM	#1011
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 48,985	Originally Posted by uke2se I especially enjoy how you show this with evidence. The study assumes that if a murder occurred with a weapon banned under the AWB it wouldn't have occurred at all, which is nonsense. It's like saying that if the car that ran over the pedestrian was a Toyota the accident wouldn't have happened if Toyotas were banned, when in reality it would have just been some other brand of car running them over. Then in those other studies there's the typical nonsense such as including suicides in the gun deaths to pad the numbers, even though other equally lethal methods of suicide are readily available. And not counting a gun as having been used defensively unless it's actually been used to shoot someone. Lies, damn lies, and statistics.

26th April 2013, 06:00 PM	#1012
Ranb Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: WA USA Posts: 4,101	Originally Posted by uke2se http://www.econ-jobs.com/research/32...-in-Mexico.pdf I did not see where the author of the report considered any causes of the higher homicide rate other than the availability of assault weapons. He fails to mention that the supply of semi-auto weapons did not decrease as the result of the AWB. An M-1a without a bayonet lug and an AR-15 without a threaded muzzle/bayonet lug is just as lethal as an assault weapon defined by the AWB of 1994. It is easy to add on the banned features of a post ban rifle if they are wanted, especially for criminals that import them over the border. Ranb

27th April 2013, 06:49 AM	#1013
NWO Sentryman Proud NWO Gatekeeper Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Quantum Gate to the NWO Posts: 3,772	What if the Obama Administration decided to push for Australia style gun laws, and argued that because the republicans were unwilling to compromise, they would now face stricter laws?
	__________________ If I now say "dominoes", you won't think "pizza". Will you? - FireGarden on the Middle East

27th April 2013, 08:17 AM	#1014
uke2se Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 5,126	Originally Posted by Ranb I did not see where the author of the report considered any causes of the higher homicide rate other than the availability of assault weapons. He fails to mention that the supply of semi-auto weapons did not decrease as the result of the AWB. An M-1a without a bayonet lug and an AR-15 without a threaded muzzle/bayonet lug is just as lethal as an assault weapon defined by the AWB of 1994. It is easy to add on the banned features of a post ban rifle if they are wanted, especially for criminals that import them over the border. Ranb Perhaps you should write an article refuting his?
uke2se Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 5,126

27th April 2013, 08:19 AM	#1015
uke2se Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 5,126	Originally Posted by NWO Sentryman What if the Obama Administration decided to push for Australia style gun laws, and argued that because the republicans were unwilling to compromise, they would now face stricter laws? That would be funny at first, but would probably end in bloodshed.
uke2se Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 5,126

27th April 2013, 08:25 AM	#1016
Giz Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: UK/US Posts: 3,420	Originally Posted by NWO Sentryman What if the Obama Administration decided to push for Australia style gun laws, and argued that because the republicans were unwilling to compromise, they would now face stricter laws? He can't get minor changes passed. What makes you think he could get major changes? (and IF he could get the major changes... I think he would already be going for them)

27th April 2013, 09:18 AM	#1017
Ranb Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: WA USA Posts: 4,101	Originally Posted by Giz He can't get minor changes passed. What makes you think he could get major changes? (and IF he could get the major changes... I think he would already be going for them) Take another look at that bill. It had many changes in it. They need to go at this one by one, not all at once. Gun owners are gaining back their rights little by little at the state level. If anyone wants to make changes, then it is best that they do it slowly. Ranb

27th April 2013, 09:18 AM	#1018
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 48,985	Originally Posted by NWO Sentryman What if the Obama Administration decided to push for Australia style gun laws, and argued that because the republicans were unwilling to compromise, they would now face stricter laws? What on earth makes you think he could get those laws passed when he couldn't even get the background checks through Congress?

27th April 2013, 09:43 AM	#1019
NWO Sentryman Proud NWO Gatekeeper Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Quantum Gate to the NWO Posts: 3,772	Originally Posted by WildCat What on earth makes you think he could get those laws passed when he couldn't even get the background checks through Congress? He could get out a massive Anti-gun campaign in between now and 2014, and the new congressmen could be more willing to pass such laws, or at least tax gun ownership out of existence and restrict advertising for guns the same way tobacco ads are restricted. Michael Bloomberg's campaign worked. Given that US schools are panicking and armouring their pupils with bulletproof uniforms and backpacks, perhaps the Obama administration could find some success there.
	__________________ If I now say "dominoes", you won't think "pizza". Will you? - FireGarden on the Middle East Last edited by NWO Sentryman; 27th April 2013 at 09:44 AM.

27th April 2013, 10:32 AM	#1020
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 48,985	Originally Posted by NWO Sentryman He could get out a massive Anti-gun campaign in between now and 2014, and the new congressmen ~~could be more willing to pass such laws, or at least tax gun ownership out of existence and restrict advertising for guns the same way tobacco ads are restricted. Michael Bloomberg's campaign worked~~ will be overwhelmingly pro-gun as a result. ftfy Originally Posted by NWO Sentryman Given that US schools are panicking and armouring their pupils with bulletproof uniforms and backpacks, perhaps the Obama administration could find some success there. Where are you getting this nonsense?

27th April 2013, 10:37 AM	#1021
NWO Sentryman Proud NWO Gatekeeper Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Quantum Gate to the NWO Posts: 3,772	Originally Posted by WildCat Where are you getting this nonsense? http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013...ms-gun-control
	__________________ If I now say "dominoes", you won't think "pizza". Will you? - FireGarden on the Middle East

27th April 2013, 10:41 AM	#1022
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 48,985	Originally Posted by NWO Sentryman http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013...ms-gun-control The article text doesn't support the claim in the headline, let alone your hysterical claims. I guess that's why you couldn't quote anything, correct?

27th April 2013, 12:10 PM	#1023
Giz Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: UK/US Posts: 3,420	Originally Posted by NWO Sentryman http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013...ms-gun-control 300 bullet proof backpacks bought, privately, from a potential pool of a hundred million customers. This is the equivalent of crazed doomsday peppers. Even for the guardian, printing this as 'news' is embarrassing.

27th April 2013, 12:18 PM	#1024
Nessie Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: At the bottom of a dark Scottish loch. Posts: 4,774	"However, until the U.S. sees its 13,000 annual shooting deaths as a problem meriting serious gun-ownership restrictions, nothing much will change." http://www.businessweek.com/articles...ulture-does#p2
	__________________ Audiophile/biker/sceptic

27th April 2013, 03:53 PM	#1025
triforcharity Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: The South! Posts: 12,155	Expressing an opinion? Ok. I see lots of those every day. Does he cite some evidence, or something of value?
	__________________ "The horse has been led to the water, the horse is in fact standing up to its knees in the water, but the horse is telling you in a loud voice that there's no water to be had....he's still so very thirsty!" ~alienentity