search
top

For the record …

… despite the fact that I’ve said I can live with some gun control, I still think it’s pretty much useless. While I think we will have to live with background checks, if you look at the statistics, the number of criminals who obtained firearms through straw purchase increased by just about the same number as the decrease in criminals who got their firearms through licensed dealers before the Brady Act went into effect.

Now the gun control folks think they need to shut down straw purchasing, but of course ignore the fact that it will just probably increase theft and gun smuggling.

But the technology exists to screen at point of sale without affecting my ability to go into a gun shop, pay money, and walk out with my purchase. Shutting down other avenues would mean some serious infringements, and shutting down straw purchases is probably not even possible. Even if you could do it however, the demand would be satisfied through other channels. Trying to keep guns out of the hands of criminals who demand them is a losing battle. The public demands we make a token effort, and I doubt the courts would invalidate and instant background check as an unconstitutional infringement. But I think it’s important to point out that the token effort is still mostly useless. Where there’s demand for a product, someone will step up to supply that demand. Even if banned civilian sales entirely, there’s always smuggling. It’s not hard to make guns, or smuggle them. We certainly see it done regularly with illegal drugs. Guns aren’t materially different.

5 Responses to “For the record …”

  1. straightarrow says:

    “… despite the fact that I’ve said I can live with some gun control,……”

    I know you think you are being reasonable. Would you think I was if I said “despite the fact that I said I could live with some rape, murder, robbery in contravention of the law …..blah, blah, blah. You get the idea. Gun control is illegal. It is not a matter of whether you can live with it. It is a matter of why you would be willing to accept it.

    Rape, murder, robbery are also illegal, and while we may never be able to completely eradicate them, I don’t feel the need to be “reasonable” and support acceptance of “some” of it. See the difference?

  2. Sebastian says:

    I would be perfectly happy in a world where arms were treated like toasters, but I don’t think we’ll ever live in that world. I’d be thrilled of the Supreme Court were even to rule that I have a right to own a real assault rifle.

  3. straightarrow says:

    Well we certainly never will live in that world if we state up front that we are willing to accept less.

    When you bought your last gun did you go in and offer $300 more than its price? NOoooo! Because the dealer would know what you were willing to give up for what he was willing to give up. In the case of gun control, they don’t want to give up anything, but they will take everything you will.

  4. Jym says:

    Straightarrow, do you pay your income taxes? If so, according to some, you’re perfectly willing to to accept “reasonable” illegal robbery.

  5. straightarrow says:

    I don’t eat fish, Jym. Keep you red herring.

    You know perfectly well what I am saying. If Sebastian went into that gun shop and offered a $300 overpayment up front, that would become the bottom line price. Why would he do that? He wouldn’t.

    Why would he do that with his rights? I don’t know.

top