United States & Gun Control discussion.

I can see a magazine restriction being passed and not an AWB. Not that I support that, but I can see it happening as a back room compromise.

This issue's so emotional it can go in any direction.

Personally, I'm hoping that if anything goes through at all it's the universal background checks, enhanced and mandatory penalties, and other strategies that don't reduce availability of guns, ammo, or standard capacity magazines to law abiding citizens.
 
XL5gB.png


uIL59.png
 
These stats are fairly old but are pretty interesting and it wouldn't surprise me if they are using our laws/stats to "justify" the changes.

Firearms: Canada/United States Comparison

  • The rate of crime involving firearms is much lower in Canada than in the United States.
  • There are more than 30 times more firearms in the United States than in Canada. There are an estimated 7.4 million firearms in Canada, about 1.2 million of which are restricted firearms (mostly handguns). In the U.S., there are approximately 222 million firearms; 76 million of the firearms in circulation are handguns.
  • A much higherproportion of homicides in the United States involve firearms. For 1987-96, on average, 65% of homicides in the U.S. involved firearms, compared to 32% for Canada.
  • Firearm homicide rates are 8.1 times higher in the United States than in Canada. For 1987-96, the average firearm homicide rate was 5.7 per 100,000 in the U.S., compared to 0.7 per 100,000 for Canada.
  • Handgun homicide rates are 15.3 times higher in the United States than in Canada. For 1989-95, the average handgun homicide rate was 4.8 per 100,000 in the U.S., compared to 0.3 per 100,000 for Canada. Handguns were involved in more than half (52%) of the homicides in the U.S., compared to 14% in Canada.
  • Rates fornon-firearm homicides are nearly 2 times higher in the United States than in Canada. For 1989-95, the average non-firearm homicide rate was 3.1 per 100,000 people in the U.S., compared to 1.6 per 100,000 for Canada.
image22.gif

  • Between 1987 and 1996, firearm homicide rates increased in the United States but decreased in Canada. During this period, the overall homicide rates decreased in both the U.S. and Canada-11% and 13% respectively. The U.S. firearm homicide rates increased 2%, compared to a 7% decrease in Canada.
  • A greater proportion of robberies in the United States involve firearms. For 1987-96, 38% of robberies in the U.S. involved firearms, compared to 25% in Canada. Furthermore, the proportion of robberies involving firearms shows an increasing trend in the U.S. (from 33% in 1987 to 41% in 1996), compared to a decreasing trend in Canada (from 26% in 1987 to 21% in 1996).
  • Firearm robbery rates are 3.5 times higher in the United States than in Canada. For 1987-96, the average firearm robbery rate was 91 per 100,000 in the U.S., compared to 26 per 100,000 in Canada.
  • Rates for all robberies are 2.4 times higher in the United States than in Canada. For 1987-96, the average robbery rate was 238 per 100,000 in the U.S., compared to 101 per 100,000 in Canada.
Firearms Research Unit
Canada Firearms Centre
June 1998
http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/res-rec/comp-eng.htm
 
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/14/cuomo-new-york-guns/1833271/

ALBANY, N.Y. — New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo detailed his proposal to bolster New York's gun laws Monday night, with a full ban on assault weapons slated to take effect as soon as it is passed.
Both the Senate and Assembly are expected to vote on the proposal late Monday night.
Cuomo's bill — named the Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act, or NY SAFE — would enact a number of new measures, including a ban of all magazines that hold more than seven rounds and universal background checks for all gun sales, regardless if they are private, person-to-person sales.

:mad:
 
I'm done with this place. I will not register or hand in ANYTHING. :mad:

From what I read if you don't they throw you in the house with Bubba.

Where I live (name withheld) isn't much better.

Now more than ever Americans must contact their elected officials to curb any further infringement on their rights.
 
Beck is over the top so often, and occasionally completely inaccurate, that it requires separate research to fact check him, but he does have some decent food for thought. In this video (watch the video, don't just read), I believe he may have it exactly right.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...un-control-make-no-mistake-a-fight-is-coming/

I don't have any of the secondary effects, such as family members, to worry about. That said, I don't believe that armed insurrection is preferable or even necessary to destroy a gun ban of any kind. The way to win this argument is simple economics. Current estimates are that 75-80 million people in the US legally own a firearm. What kind of financial burden would it put on the courts if they had to literally try each case...and how many of those cases would be thrown out of court for violation of due process as the wait times for trials began to meet delays? How many judges and attorneys would be taken out of the system as gun owners themselves? Where would you put all the people found guilty? How much more backed up would the court system get as the appeals process continued to stack up? On the civil side, how many lawsuits would the US have to settle for wrongful imprisonment once the ban was reversed? We know that most people that have served in the military along with many family members are willing to fight and die for what we believe in. It's part of the job description. It's also true that financial impact provides much more leverage with governments than individual deaths, even in large numbers. There are other options that will, in the end analysis, be much more effective in eliminating a ban than to simply pick up our guns and fight it out.
 
New York (CNN) -- Lawmakers in New York are poised to pass a new set of gun laws intended to fortify the state's assault weapons ban, limit the number of bullets in magazines and strengthen laws that keep the mentally ill from firearms.
If passed, it would be the nation's first gun control bill since last month's massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, where a gunman killed 27 people, including 20 children.
New York's GOP-controlled Senate overwhelmingly approved the measure in a 43-18 vote late Monday night, one week after Gov. Andrew Cuomo spelled out tough new gun control proposals in his annual State of the State address.
Cuomo, a first-term Democratic governor, called for a tightening of the state's assault weapons ban, background checks for people who purchase guns in private transactions and more restrictions on high-capacity magazines.
A Democratic-controlled Assembly, which has been largely in favor of tight gun laws, is expected to pass the measure Tuesday afternoon.
The tentative deal would include a statewide gun registry and add a uniform licensing standard across the state, altering the current system, in which each county or municipality sets a standard.
Residents would also be restricted to purchasing ammunition magazines that carry seven bullets, rather than 10. It remains unclear what effect the measure will have on the state's already stringent approach to gun control.
"The changes in New York are largely cosmetic," said CNN Legal Contributor Paul Callan, who described New York's existing firearms regulations as "the toughest gun laws in the United States."
"The one change that arguably will have the greatest impact is the amendment to Kendra's Law, which will permit closer monitoring of the mentally ill," he said.
That 1999 law grants New York judges the authority to require residents to undergo psychiatric treatment if they meet certain criteria.
The proposed measures would extend Kendra's Law through 2017, expand outpatient treatment from six months to one year and require reviews before such treatment is allowed to end. Authorities could suspend or revoke licenses based on those reviews by mental health professionals.
The bill would also create mandatory life sentences for anyone who murders certain first responders, a provision that comes after two firefighters were killed in a shooting ambush as they battled a blaze in the town of Webster in upstate New York.
The vote coincides with a series of recommendations put together by Vice President Joe Biden meant to address the nation's gun violence.
Lawmakers in at least 10 other states are reviewing some form of new gun regulations in the new year.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/15/us/new-york-gun-bill/?hpt=po_c1
 
SAN ANTONIO -- A homeowner shot two men, killing one, when he heard someone breaking into his SUV.

It happened on Lightstone Drive near Stone Oak and Hardy Oak Boulevard shortly before 2 a.m. Police say the owner of a parked SUV heard someone attempting to break into it. That's when, according to police, he went outside and spotted someone inside his vehicle.

As he approached the vehicle the owner thought he spotted a gun. The SUV owner then fired at the suspect, hitting him one time in the upper torso. Police say the getaway driver then sped off. The SUV owner fired through the windshield killing the driver.

As of now, the owner is said to not be facing any charges because he was defending his property. The second suspect was taken to SAMM-C in critical condition.

http://www.woai.com/news/local/story...TXvVLo1xw.cspx
 
Back
Top