virgil

Just as the legal ownership of an assault weapon or a high capacity does not reflect the actual cause of the murders. I am applying their same failed logic. But let's discuss it. Blacks accouned for 52% of total murders, Cauc.-45% and other-3%. This is with a % of population 72% Cauc and 13% Black. 15% other. Apply "their" logic to those numbers and what would the results be? You're trying to make an argument that seems to imply that race is the 'cause' of gun crimes. I'm not going to dignify that by engaging. I do agree that legal ownership of AR's and high capacity magazines does not cause crime. But, their availability does make a criminal far more deadly.

Have they done anything illegal?

If you can't find any quotes, how is it that you guys are all so comfortable stating exactly what 'their' agenda is? And, as far as the first part of your post, statistics do not imply cause. They imply correlation. Your interpretation of the statistics lead to your perceived cause.

As far as who these anti gun people are, I can only say that if the shoe fits ..... wear it. If you can't recognize an antigun fanatic, then you likely are part of them. If they are bogeymen, then so be it. I have other names for them that are less complimentary. As far as the quotes, I think I did say that "you will have a hard time getting them to admit that". I that is because most of them haven't even thought all that deeply about where their line of thought logically leads them. Great answer, thanks.

.

Good luck with that plan hunter49. 'Downstate' pays far more to NYS in taxes than it receives, while 'upstate' pays less and receives more.

Statistically speaking and since infringing on rights is no longer an issue, All African Americans should have all their ability to own a fiream removed. Statistically they are far more likely to commit a crime and commit murder and commit murder with a firearm. Culver, you're kidding, right?

How far indeed. What would it take in the minds of your typical anti gun person to satisfy them that guns would no longer be used in crimes. Their answers would be, "The total elimination of firearms in private hands". That is how far they really want to go. Never mind all this picking around the edges, assault rifles and magazine sizes and such. If you want to know how far they really want to go, it is the complete elimination of privately owned firearms ..... period. And if somehow they were to magically make that happen, there are many other things that they would eventually want outlawed because they are lethal and will be used in criminal ways. These people do not think in normal or realistic ways. There is no logic or reasoning used. They do actually believe that anti-social evil can be controlled by controlling the rights of the general population. So I think that the answer to your question, in the minds of the antis, is that there is no limit that is "too far". You will have a hard time getting them to admit that, but the truth is that they have no concept of "too far". Doc, who are these bogeymen that you keep referring to as 'they'. And, do you have any quotes from any of them to back up any of the statements you just made?

I just closed on a re-fi last night at 3.5% for 20 years. Shaved 2 1/2 years of the term and lowered the payment by $200 per month. Nothing out of pocket. Seems to be the only opportunity to save a few bucks these days. If you're in the position to refinance, do it.

Please, explain how another law is going to prevent any of these criminals from giving a damn about the law and adhering to that one, while they break the ones already in place. I think that if there were a paper trail for after market sales, straw purchases would be curbed. If a gun that turns up as part of a crime can be traced back to it's original owner, straw buyers would think twice.

I see it for what it is, just something to discourage people to buy a gun by any means other than a shop, and it will have no effect whatsoever on those purchasing illegal guns on the black market. But, isn't this how a lot of guns are making it onto the black market in the first place? It seems to me that it's hard to make the argument that all of the proposed gun laws will only affect law abiding gun owners, but to oppose an obvious route for legally purchased guns to become illegally possessed.

Yes, it was a NY law. Didnt cover other private sales. So, undocumented after-market sales are only illegal at gun shows, but perfectly legal anywhere else in NYS? That seems bizarre to me. What is the argument in favor of keeping the after-market sales so unregulated?

Actually, you cannot sell privately at a gun show in NY without a background check. This was the case BEFORE NYSAFE went into effect. This is a NYS law? Does that apply only to gun shows? What about sales out of the trunk of a car? What about in other states?

Ants, I think you're a bit confused regarding the 'gun show loophole'. The laws that exist for registered dealers and people in the business do not apply to ordinary citizens when conducting private sales. This is from Wikipedia regarding 'gun show loophole': U.S. federal law requires persons engaged in interstate firearm commerce, or those who are "engaged in the business" of dealing firearms, to hold a Federal Firearms License and perform background checks through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System maintained by the FBI prior to transferring a firearm. Under the terms of the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986, however, individuals "not engaged in the business" of dealing firearms, or who only make "occasional" sales within their state of residence, are under no requirement to conduct background checks on purchasers or maintain records of sale (although even private sellers are forbidden under federal law from selling firearms to persons they have reason to believe are felons or otherwise prohibited from purchasing firearms). Those seeking to close the "Gun Show Loophole" argue that it provides convicted felons and other prohibited purchasers (i.e., domestic abusers, substance abusers, those who have been adjudicated as "mental defectives," etc.) with opportunities to evade background checks, as they can easily buy firearms from private sellers with no accountability or oversight. Use of the "Gun Show Loophole" has been advocated by terrorists. In the summer of 2011, Adam Gadahn declared that "America is absolutely awash with easily obtainable firearms." He also incorrectly claimed that, "You can go down to a gun show at the local convention center and come away with a fully automatic assault rifle, without a background check, and most likely without having to show an identification card," Gadahn urged Western extremists to follow this path. Subsequent news analysis indicated that individuals could not actually buy a fully automatic assault rifle at gun shows, although purchases of semi-automatic handguns and extended magazines remain legal without a criminal background check.[10][11]

Something's fishy about this article- aside from the fact that it was VJP that posted it. If this group has been training jihadists for four generations, where are the reports of them having taken any action? And, the 'source' for this article clearly identifies himself as an NYPD informant and makes his own identity obvious by describing himself in detail. It would seem to me that this 'source' would be putting himself in extreme danger by making himself known as an NYPD informant.

88, thanks- it's nice to see someone actually putting the time in to find actual facts to make an intelligent statement, as opposed to a lot of the nonsense that gets thrown around. Ants, yes, I was actually referring to the gun show loophole as far as the secondary sales market. I'm still curious as to why there would be any opposition to closing that loophole. And Woofer, nice job with the 'Leroy' example- you never disappoint.

The best way to what??? Are any of your comments on these subjects ever anything but silly cliche's? Really, you have an incredible knack for killing an intelligent conversation.

I think it would be interesting to look at ways to prevent legally purchased guns from becoming illegally possessed guns.

I would assume that the overwhelming majority of the guns used in crimes are illegally possessed. And, I'm assuming that you'd want to use that statistic to prove that it is not the law abiding gun owners who are committing these crimes. But, wouldn't that just strengthen the argument for closing the secondary sales loopholes? I've always been curious about the reasons for resisting closing those loopholes.

I used to go every year. Is the guy still there selling the Radke minnow fishing lures and doing the demo in the stell water tank?

Evolution has been sientificly proven to be impossible. i think it was Louie Pastuer that proved life can ONLY come from life... matter can NOT create life... which obviously disproves evolution i think its sad that we have begun to forsake the truths that our forfathers the founders of this nation "held to be self evident" That is quite possibly the most ridiculous and hilarious statement that I've ever read or heard. Thank you.

As an Islander fan, it's hard to feel sorry for you guys. But, I can certainly empathize with the frustration. If it'll make you feel any better, you can claim Rickety Dipietro and his eight years and $35 million off waivers for nothing.....please.

Does anybody really think that the cost of a hunting license is actually keeping anyone from taking up hunting?

I can't imagine that a simplified process will lead to an increase in utilization. But, if the simplified process is less labor intensive and less costly, I could see why it would have a positive economic impact.

Got it. Thanks.