79-year-old Abraham Dickan walked into the store and opened fire with an illegal gun. For now, it's the scene of a crime but gun control advocates are calling it a sign of the times.
"What this showcases...is how easy it is for someone to possess a gun that is illegal," says Angelo Roefaro, New York State Coordinator for Mayors Against Illegal Guns.
The Coalition says the shooting begs the question, how did a 79-year-old man get his hands on the weapon? They say it could be an example of the loophole law. People cross state lines and buy guns with cash, no questions asked. The Coalition says illegal gun trafficking can happen anywhere.
The New York State Rifle and Pistol Association says loophole law or not, it's up to law enforcement to crack down on who is carrying the gun.
The article provides links to the background stories. Basically, the guy was an angry and unfit gun owner. When his pistol permit was revoked he didn't miss a beat. He picked up an unlicensed gun to continue his aggressive behavior.
What's your opinion? Is it too easy for a guy like this, who is obviously dangerous, to arm himself? Is that just a small price we must pay for the rest of us to enjoy the 2nd Amendment?
What do they mean by "loophole law?" Is that just another way to describe the ease with which disqualified people can cross state lines to buy guns more easily? Or is there more to this "law?" Either way, can we all agree that they're really overusing the word "loophole?"
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
But if the gun was illegal, how was there a loophole?
ReplyDeleteWhere was Eddie Eagle when Mr. Dickan needed his sage counsel?
ReplyDeleteAccording to a related article, the local police chief (New York Mills) did not know that Dickan had threatened (apparently repeatedly) AT&T employees prompting the revocation of his pistol permit. This is the same AT&T that has happily allowed the Bush administration (and quite possibly the Obama administration) to wiretap other citizens who were not, in fact, threatening them--or anyone else.
"There isn't a loophole," says Tom King, President of the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association. "It's not a gun issue, it's an enforcement issue."
Well, shucks, he's right! And the best way to make sure that nobody has any illegal guns is to conduct house to house, room by room searches of every habitation in the state--as well as all manufacturing, commercial and farm buildings--to ensure that all guns are properly stored and secured. Amen.
Of course there is a loophole. Every time, and it is very very often, that gun control fails then there must be a loophole.
ReplyDeleteI mean, it couldn't be that criminals don't obey those silly laws could it? It must be a loophole.
Typical liberal response: always blame someone else for your failures.
I say we go further and use MikeBs victim is responsible theory. Had those people switched to Verizon, they wouldn't have been there. I know, its Apple's fault. We must close the iPhone loophole. Racists!
From the article:
ReplyDelete"They say it could be an example of the loophole law. People cross state lines and buy guns with cash, no questions asked."
"Police are still looking for where Dickan obtained the gun he used in Thursday's shooting."
1) We again see the now-standard procedure of gun control advocates: No one yet really knows the facts, yet they claim that it "could" be be due to their cause du jour. At least they said "could" -- that's more honest than some others.
2) It's already illegal for people to "cross state lines and buy guns with cash, no questions asked" from a gun dealer. I think that they meant to say "gun show" (the cause du jour) somewhere, but someone forgot.
And, as usual, Dickan was a law abiding citizen until he turned violent over a FRIGGING PHONE BILL and then became homicidal after having his GOD GIVEN right to a handgun yanked for being a bully with said handgun.
ReplyDeleteIt would be really nice if everybody that owns a gun, legally or otherwise, could be fitted with, like, oneathem explody dyepacks that they put on banknotes. Then when they became weregunners they would be easily identifiable.
Fishy Jay: “I think that they meant to say "gun show" (the cause du jour) somewhere, but someone forgot.”
ReplyDeleteAnd even then they would forget to mention that even the private gun show sellers need to ask the question if they are a resident of the state. I’m not sure where they are getting this “no questions asked” line from.
Uhh, if he crossed state lines and committed a felony, that is not a loophole.
ReplyDelete"It would be really nice if everybody that owns a gun, legally or otherwise, could be fitted with, like, oneathem explody dyepacks that they put on banknotes. Then when they became weregunners they would be easily identifiable."
ReplyDeleteGood idea. We just recognize your ilk by the smell.
No doubt about it, they're over-using the word "loophole."
ReplyDeleteOh, noes! FatWhiteMan said something mean AND personal about me. Quick, mikey, rat him out to Mikeb30200. I know how much it twists your knickers when people are impolite on this blog. Oh, drat, I forgot, that's only when it's anti-assholeswithgunz folks who are making the comments. Nevamind.
ReplyDeleteBTW, Mikeb30200; the fact that a loophole in one state allows someone from another state to commit a felony--in two states--does not make it less/more than a loophole.
If the act in question is already a felony then NO LOOPHOLE EXISTS!
ReplyDeleteApparently democommie is unable to understand this simple fact.