CDZ The best strategy, disarming law abiding gun owners, or keeping criminals locked up.

Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by 2aguy, Oct 14, 2019.

  1. 2aguy
    Offline

    2aguy Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    74,993
    Thanks Received:
    13,662
    Trophy Points:
    2,180
    Ratings:
    +56,115
    Another story about releasing violent gun offenders is in the press today. This time, it is Washington D.C. complaining about the policy of releasing violent, repeat gun offenders over and over again. This policy is in place in the major cities....including Detroit, D.C., Baltimore, Chicago, St. Louis.....all of the places where there are a lot of gun crimes and murders. New York, which had better policies in place after Rudy Guilliani, is now going back to those same policies....catch and release of violent gun offenders.

    So...My strategy is simple...keep violent gun criminals locked up in jail....this worked in the past, it works now. Can someone on the other side explain how releasing repeat gun criminals will lower the gun crime rate?
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
    • Agree Agree x 2
  2. miketx
    Online

    miketx Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2015
    Messages:
    69,058
    Thanks Received:
    7,862
    Trophy Points:
    1,870
    Location:
    near Throckmorton TX
    Ratings:
    +78,712
    It will lower the crime rate by giving cockroach democrats more chances to call for more gun control after one of their releasees murder. Until all the guns are gone and we resort to knives and hammers to kill with.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  3. candycorn
    Offline

    candycorn Alis volat propriis

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2009
    Messages:
    56,166
    Thanks Received:
    6,318
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Ratings:
    +24,316
    A mixture of harsher sentences for gun crimes and much more invasive background checks is needed. Neither of which disarm anyone.
     
  4. 2aguy
    Offline

    2aguy Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    74,993
    Thanks Received:
    13,662
    Trophy Points:
    2,180
    Ratings:
    +56,115

    Incorrect.....invasive background checks violate several Rights, the 2nd, the 4th, and the 5th at a minimum....also, the only reason to have invasive background checks is to later demand gun registration.

    We currently have all the laws we need to arrest and imprison criminals who use guns illegally.......background checks that track private gun ownership are no different than requiring people to state who they vote for. The Secret Ballot is used to protect people from persecution.....gun ownership can be attacked when gun ownership is known by the government....
     
  5. miketx
    Online

    miketx Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2015
    Messages:
    69,058
    Thanks Received:
    7,862
    Trophy Points:
    1,870
    Location:
    near Throckmorton TX
    Ratings:
    +78,712
    I know you won't do it but tell us how to make background checks more invasive and how that will help if it's possible. You people are always long on how to fix things and very short on specifics.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  6. Porter Rockwell
    Online

    Porter Rockwell VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    3,394
    Thanks Received:
    147
    Trophy Points:
    75
    Ratings:
    +1,139
    I think it is a simplistic answer to simply keep people who used guns from being able to own one upon release. So, the best way (on this count) is to make sure that every person sent to prison is rehabilitated before releasing them.

    A term of time does not rehabilitate a person. Prisoners should have to meet certain markers in order to get out of prison. A GED, drug rehab, anger management, seminars in job finding techniques, balancing a checkbook, applying for credit, housing, etc. along with interviewing techniques and housekeeping skills should be taught before releasing people from prison.

    Still, I could stop most of these people from committing acts of violence long before they become adults. We really should be doing that. Instead, our society are the ones responsible for creating criminals.
     
  7. Porter Rockwell
    Online

    Porter Rockwell VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    3,394
    Thanks Received:
    147
    Trophy Points:
    75
    Ratings:
    +1,139
    Background checks have proven to be as worthless as tits on a boar hog. They are an invasion of privacy; they make a mockery of the Fourth Amendment and do not stop crime.

    I could offer something much better without the cost and no gun control. The solution, however, doesn't fit on a bumper sticker.
     
  8. candycorn
    Offline

    candycorn Alis volat propriis

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2009
    Messages:
    56,166
    Thanks Received:
    6,318
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Ratings:
    +24,316
    Background checks have kept weapons away from 1.8 million people who shouldn’t have had the guns. They work as well as they can; which is why we need to strengthen them.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  9. 2aguy
    Offline

    2aguy Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    74,993
    Thanks Received:
    13,662
    Trophy Points:
    2,180
    Ratings:
    +56,115

    That number is a lie.....

    At Townhall: When Democrats Push For Universal Background Checks, The Danger Of A National Gun Registry Looms - Crime Prevention Research Center

    One talking point we’ll likely hear many times in the next few weeks: Background checks have stopped 3.5 million dangerous or prohibited people from buying guns. That is simply false.

    There have been 3.5 million initial denials, but at least 96% and probably over 99%, of those denials are mistakes. The system relies largely on identifying phonetically similar names, causing false positives that overwhelmingly discriminate against poor and middle-income blacks and Hispanics. It’s one thing to stop a felon from buying a gun. But it’s quite another to stop someone from getting a gun because their name resembles a felon’s.

    If politicians want background checks to stop criminals from getting guns, rather than create headline-driving, racially-biased false-positives, there is a simple fix: require that the government does background checks in the same way that the government forces private companies to do background checks on employees – make them use all the information available, including exact names and birthdates.

    In New York City and Washington, D.C., background checks on private gun transfers cost at least $125. These costs present a genuine obstacle to poor people living in high-crime, urban areas. The law-abiding potential victims of violent crimes are the least able to afford these costs. Gang members won’t pay them. Democrats who think that voter ID laws are unfairly onerous for poor minorities ought to appreciate the obstacles presented by background check fees. . . . .
     
  10. JoeB131
    Online

    JoeB131 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2011
    Messages:
    114,343
    Thanks Received:
    9,453
    Trophy Points:
    2,055
    Location:
    Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
    Ratings:
    +30,135
    We lock up 2 million people... we don't have enough room to lock people up for "merely having a gun".
     

Share This Page