A matter of semantics
It just occurred to me that politicians want to get guns off the street by taking them away from people who own guns. Well, criminals do not own guns....they HAVE guns. How many of them have actually bought them in a legal fashion? And if they did buy one, they probably bought it from someone who stole it from someone else.
Not that this would matter one bit, but I thought I would mention it.
I think the number is somewhere around 93% of firearms used in crime are obtained illegally.
The gun control laws on the books are for the most part senseless. Here is a novel idea which actually repeats an on the books law.... If you own an "evil" rifle it is legal however if you have one and do not own it then it is illegal. No more senseless then what Senator Feinstein is proposing..........
Get criminals off the streets and "gun crime" will go down dramatically, along with "all crime".
What you say is too logical for many politicians to grasp.
I think we are missing their goal is to obtain a legal means to disarm the law abiding citizen to control (enslave), the criminal will have and always have a weapon the citizen on the other hand only wants to live in peace
96% from what I have been able to determine.
Originally Posted by pittypat21
I find great irony in the fact that one of the biggest gun grabbing groups out there is "Mayors against ILLEGAL guns." Well, then why are they trying to take them away from people who own them and use them LEGALLY??? Seems to me that ALL of their efforts are aimed against LEGAL gun owners. I don't think they really care about the criminals' guns.
We should start a group called, "Responsible Abiding Gun Enthusiasts Against Crime" or "RAGE Against Crime".
Politicians dont want "crooks" off of the street.
For one, if you do that, it's one step closer to removing them and it makes them uncomfortable.
Second...there is way too much money in it. Since most politicians are lawyers that used to make their living running crooks in and out of the system, there is no benefit to them practicing Justice, rather than "law".
And fact of the mattter is, many Mayors are too self absorbed and self important to have an original thought. They do what they are told to do, same as any other.
no one is interesed in reducing crime. Its big business. Think of all the jobs created fighting the war on drugs and keeping us all safe from the boogey man. How many cops live in your neighborhood? I have three
that park their cars out front within sight of my home.
without criminals, the lawyers, social workers, prison guards, police officers, judges, court reporter, news medial crime reporter, would be out of work. Without illegal drug and gun activity, the GDP of the State
of Florida would be half of what it is right now. Families would be without any source of income (drug dealers) and homes would be foreclosed, and legitimate businesses would lose customers and close.
The economic impact of eliminating crime would be catastrophic.....so its just easy passing a law that those of us here (the law abiding) will have to follow, and the cops will just have a new division:
The Illegal Assault Rifle - High Capacity Firearm Investigation and Enforcement Division: Poof...instant new jobs for the government workers. And the criminals will do what they always do: Pay no attention to the new law...they're probably laughing hysterically while the rest of us are in a panic.
Change "gun owners" to "gun possessers" and put an end to this issue. Now, on to the clip vs magazine thread.
Where are all these "guns on the street"? I have yet to see a gun sitting on the curb, just lookin' for trouble, in all the places I've ever been. Yes, the whole "get the guns off the street" argument is ridiculous, both practically and grammatically. Stop dumping the CRIMINALS on OUR streets, and I bet you'll see the "gun problem" disappear.
I wholehearted agree with getting guns off the street. They can damage expensive tires if run over.