Repeal the Second Amendment Now

[jg121783 3,921]

16 minutes ago, JimandChristy said:

Criminals have a monopoly on gun ownership in Europe but for some strange reason gun violence is significantly lower.

I'll stick with an example closer to home and that's Chicago.

[Merle 458]

10 minutes ago, jg121783 said:

I'll stick with an example closer to home and that's Chicago.

So it's the propensity of the citizenry to commit crime that is different between 2 different parts of the world where criminals have monopoly on gun ownership.

[smilesammich 10,727]

15 minutes ago, jg121783 said:

I'll stick with an example closer to home and that's Chicago.

 

4 minutes ago, Merle said:

So it's the propensity of the citizenry to commit crime that is different between 2 different parts of the world where criminals have monopoly on gun ownership.

Quote

Chicago’s reputation for strict gun laws is rooted in its 1982 ban on handguns. When the U.S. Supreme Court’s District of Columbia vs. Heller  decision in 2008 struck down a similar ban in the District of Columbia, Chicago was the only major city left with a blanket handgun prohibition. The distinction didn’t last long.

In 2010, the high court followed up Heller with a ruling in McDonald vs. City of Chicago which nullified Chicago’s ban. At that, the concealed carry of firearms was still outlawed in Chicago as it was throughout all of Illinois.

Two years later, however, the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the Illinois concealed carry ban as unconstitutional and the state soon after became the last in the nation to approve concealed carry.

As we noted last year in fact-checking Trump’s Chicago-bashing:

With that, Chicago lost its status -- or its stigma, depending on your perspective -- of having the strictest gun possession laws in the United States. In comparably sized big cities like New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco, the city administers the concealed-carry permitting process. In Illinois, the Illinois State Police processes applications, so it can be argued that Chicago has less autonomy in restricting concealed carry within its borders than do other cities.

We also noted last year that the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which advocates for stricter gun laws, found Illinois’ firearm laws too lenient in several ways, all of which still apply:

Illinois’ gun laws still are considered among the most restrictive when compared with other states. The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which advocates for gun control, gives Illinois a B+ and ranks it No. 8 in the nation on its "Smart Gun Laws" report card. The group lauds Illinois for, among several rules, requiring firearm owners to obtain a Firearm Owners’ ID card that includes a background check and imposes a waiting period on firearm purchases.

But it also knocks Illinois for not requiring registration of firearms, for its lack of restriction on the purchase of multiple firearms and for not allowing local jurisdictions to regulate firearms. In other words, Illinois could make its gun laws much more strict than they are.

Seven states receive higher grades than Illinois in the latest Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence ratings.

Update

In last year’s fact-check, we noted that Trump’s statement also could have been interpreted as Chicago having strict gun laws because it imposed strict penalties on those who violate them or use guns in crimes. Even staunch gun rights advocates have argued that this approach can be an effective crime deterrent where restrictions on lawful gun ownership are both unconstitutional and ineffective.

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel had for several years pushed unsuccessfully for a new state law containing harsher penalties for repeat gun offenders. A 2014 reportby the Chicago Sun-Times found that lenient sentencing for gun offenders was a factor in repeat offenses. That was where things stood when Trump made his statement in 2016.

That changed on June 23, when Gov. Bruce Rauner signed into law a bill that, among other things, increased the minimum sentence for repeat gun offenders from three to seven years. Thus even the argument that Chicago favors getting tough on lawful gun owners over cracking down on gun criminals no longer applies.

http://www.politifact.com/illinois/statements/2017/oct/03/sarah-huckabee-sanders/chicago-toughest-gun-control-claim-shot-full-holes/

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

14 hours ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   Such as...

DACA

[Dashinka 24,799]

Interesting, even with their wiggling and obfuscations the UK (specifically England and Wales) still has higher rats of violent crimes than the US.

 

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/jun/24/blog-posting/social-media-post-says-uk-has-far-higher-violent-c/

[Steeleballz 7,550]

6 hours ago, IDWAF said:

DACA

 

   Try as I might, I fail to see how DACA compares to the Patriot act. 

 

   To be clear, I was referencing how our constitutional rights have been eroded by legislation. I'm not defending Obama. I'm sure there are  just as many examples from the Obama presidency as there are from the Bush years. I just don't care for throwing names out there without listing some. Obama did sign the Freedom act, which is basically the Patriot act Jr.  

[MacUK 983]

6 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

Interesting, even with their wiggling and obfuscations the UK (specifically England and Wales) still has higher rats of violent crimes than the US.

 

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/jun/24/blog-posting/social-media-post-says-uk-has-far-higher-violent-c/

You did read to the end of that article didn't you?

The meme said "there are over 2,000 crimes recorded per 100,000 population in the U.K.," compared to "466 violent crimes per 100,000" in the United States. Our preliminary attempt to make an apples-to-apples comparison shows a much smaller difference in violent crime rates between the two countries, but criminologists say differences in how the statistics are collected make it impossible to produce a truly valid comparison. We rate the claim False.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

4 minutes ago, MacUK said:

You did read to the end of that article didn't you?

 

 

 

    This article has come up several times that I recall. The part quoted below is the important and often overlooked disclaimer. It's simply an apples to oranges comparison. 

  

Quote

As Bier put it, "The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports defines a ‘violent crime’ as one of four specific offenses: murder and non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault." By contrast, "the British definition includes all ‘crimes against the person,’ including simple assaults, all robberies, and all ‘sexual offenses,’ as opposed to the FBI, which only counts aggravated assaults and ‘forcible rapes.’ "

Once you know this, Bier wrote, "it becomes clear how misleading it is to compare rates of violent crime in the U.S. and the U.K. You’re simply comparing two different sets of crimes."

 

[jg121783 3,921]

21 hours ago, smilesammich said:

Chicago’s reputation for strict gun laws is rooted in its 1982 ban on handguns. When the U.S. Supreme Court’s District of Columbia vs. Heller  decision in 2008 struck down a similar ban in the District of Columbia, Chicago was the only major city left with a blanket handgun prohibition. The distinction didn’t last long.

In 2010, the high court followed up Heller with a ruling in McDonald vs. City of Chicago which nullified Chicago’s ban. At that, the concealed carry of firearms was still outlawed in Chicago as it was throughout all of Illinois.

Two years later, however, the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the Illinois concealed carry ban as unconstitutional and the state soon after became the last in the nation to approve concealed carry.

As we noted last year in fact-checking Trump’s Chicago-bashing:

With that, Chicago lost its status -- or its stigma, depending on your perspective -- of having the strictest gun possession laws in the United States. In comparably sized big cities like New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco, the city administers the concealed-carry permitting process. In Illinois, the Illinois State Police processes applications, so it can be argued that Chicago has less autonomy in restricting concealed carry within its borders than do other cities.

We also noted last year that the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which advocates for stricter gun laws, found Illinois’ firearm laws too lenient in several ways, all of which still apply:

Illinois’ gun laws still are considered among the most restrictive when compared with other states. The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which advocates for gun control, gives Illinois a B+ and ranks it No. 8 in the nation on its "Smart Gun Laws" report card. The group lauds Illinois for, among several rules, requiring firearm owners to obtain a Firearm Owners’ ID card that includes a background check and imposes a waiting period on firearm purchases.

But it also knocks Illinois for not requiring registration of firearms, for its lack of restriction on the purchase of multiple firearms and for not allowing local jurisdictions to regulate firearms. In other words, Illinois could make its gun laws much more strict than they are.

Seven states receive higher grades than Illinois in the latest Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence ratings.

Update

In last year’s fact-check, we noted that Trump’s statement also could have been interpreted as Chicago having strict gun laws because it imposed strict penalties on those who violate them or use guns in crimes. Even staunch gun rights advocates have argued that this approach can be an effective crime deterrent where restrictions on lawful gun ownership are both unconstitutional and ineffective.

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel had for several years pushed unsuccessfully for a new state law containing harsher penalties for repeat gun offenders. A 2014 reportby the Chicago Sun-Times found that lenient sentencing for gun offenders was a factor in repeat offenses. That was where things stood when Trump made his statement in 2016.

That changed on June 23, when Gov. Bruce Rauner signed into law a bill that, among other things, increased the minimum sentence for repeat gun offenders from three to seven years. Thus even the argument that Chicago favors getting tough on lawful gun owners over cracking down on gun criminals no longer applies.

That's all well and good. Too bad the liberals in Chicago and DC ignore what the courts say and do what they want. Try exercising your second amendment right in either one of these cities and see what happens. My point still stands. Despite court rulings Chicago is still a victim disarmament zone.

[Dashinka 24,799]

32 minutes ago, MacUK said:

You did read to the end of that article didn't you?

 

 

I did, and after they did everything they could to massage the numbers they conclude that it is unfair to make a comparison.  In that case, why are we getting all these comparisons to Western European countries when it comes to anything?

[Dashinka 24,799]

26 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

    This article has come up several times that I recall. The part quoted below is the important and often overlooked disclaimer. It's simply an apples to oranges comparison. 

  

 

Yes, and even as they normalized the categories, England and Wales still had higher numbers, just not as high as the initial comparison, so they concluded that this is a pointless comparison.  If this is the case, why does the MDL insist on always comparing the US to Western Europe when it comes to crime stats?

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

5 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

Yes, and even as they normalized the categories, England and Wales still had higher numbers, just not as high as the initial comparison, so they concluded that this is a pointless comparison.  If this is the case, why does the MDL insist on always comparing the US to Western Europe when it comes to crime stats?

The same reason we all mention things that fit our line of thinking/beliefs.  Even if it’s not 100% true.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

10 hours ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   Try as I might, I fail to see how DACA compares to the Patriot act. 

 

   To be clear, I was referencing how our constitutional rights have been eroded by legislation. I'm not defending Obama. I'm sure there are  just as many examples from the Obama presidency as there are from the Bush years. I just don't care for throwing names out there without listing some. Obama did sign the Freedom act, which is basically the Patriot act Jr.  

The question was about Obama doing end runs on several hot button issues.  You asked such as.  DACA was the first one that came to mind due to recent events.

[TBoneTX 46,125]

20 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

higher rats of violent crimes

Criminally elevated rodents?

[eieio 1,594]

Thanks to Trump and his Supreme Court appointee.....the 2nd amendment is safe for now.