Saturday, June 22, 2013

The 6 Biggest Lies about Background Checks

Salon

“Only honest people who follow the law will be affected” 

Only people who follow the law register their cars and get driver’s licenses too.  Also affected by Universal Background Checks, and adversely, will be those who claim to conduct ostensibly legal, anonymous sales of firearms to complete strangers.

Universal Checks are not going to end violent crime, but they will make transfers of firearms to prohibited persons easier for law enforcement personnel to detect, deter, and punish.

Dispelling these myths underlines the point that there is no good reason for blocking efforts to ensure the legality of a firearm transfer.

And our inability to curb illegal transfers hurts us beyond our borders.  Many countries not only find the current ease of access to firearms in the U.S. bizarre; they also find it irritating that firearms made in the U.S. reach their shores and contribute to their violent crime.

Recent statistics have shown that since 2000, the rate of firearms-related homicides has decreased.  It might be difficult to prove, but one has to wonder if the background checks that have been required since approximately the same time have played a role.

The fact that only law abiding citizens will obey laws doesn't mean we shouldn't have laws.

But when it comes to gun control this is even more important because almost all guns used in crime start out the lawful property of someone. Proper gun control laws will make it more difficult for those guns to slip into the criminal world.

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.

13 comments:

  1. The flaw in your thinking is that law-abiding people are the primary problem. Thugs are the primary problem. Upon conviction, they should be put away for a long time. That will solve the problem of crime.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That will solve the problem of crime.

      Which would be great, if "gun control" advocates were actually interested in trying to "solve the problem of crime," rather than to "solve the 'problem' of people equipped and empowered to defend their lives and liberty."

      Delete
    2. How about if we lived in a society that was more preoccupied with educating our young as opposed to punishing criminals for crimes that cannot be undone no matter how severe the sentance, or controlling the lives of innocent people? Woulden't that prevent crime, or is that incompatible with the Party line?

      Delete
    3. Kurt, you put a lot of stock in the black and white delineation between criminal gun owners and lawful gun owners. The fact is most of the mass shootings and much of the everyday violence is done by supposedly law abiding gun owners, you know the ones I call hidden criminals.

      Delete
    4. The fact is most of the mass shootings and much of the everyday violence is done by supposedly law abiding gun owners . . .

      As it turns out, Mikeb, "mass shootings and much of the everyday violence" are crimes, thus by definition making the perpetrators criminals, as well. You're not very good at this, are you?

      . . . you know the ones I call hidden criminals.

      Fear not, I'm quite aware of your humorous concept of "hidden criminals."

      Delete
    5. Do I have to remind you of the concept of innocent until proven guilty? You lawful gun owners are fucking up every day with your precious guns and even after doing the most horrendous acts with them it still requires a lengthy trial before you can be called criminals.

      What's laughable is that you think it's black and white, good guys and bad guys. That's why I provided you the very useful "hidden criminal" category.

      Delete
    6. Do I have to remind you of the concept of innocent until proven guilty?

      Nope--you're the one who routinely needs that reminder.

      You lawful gun owners are fucking up every day with your precious guns . . .

      "[We] lawful gun owners?" In what way have I been "fucking up"--any day, let alone "every day"? I am far too intelligent to accept any blame for the behavior of others who have nothing to do with me. People are defined by their conduct. People who engage in predatory violence are fundamentally different from those who do not.

      That's why I provided you the very useful "hidden criminal" category.

      Um--"very useful" for what? Decorating my toilet paper with before I use it? Or just for the amusement value?

      Delete
    7. There's nothing useful in your proposed category. Everyone is potentially a hidden criminal. If we must infringe on rights because of hidden criminals, then we will live in a police state. Besides, again, as always, you failed to recognize that the percentage of gun owners who "fuck up" is less than one tenth of one percent of total gun owners per year.

      Delete
    8. You're kidding yourself, Greg. There are a half-a-million gun crimes a year. You think they're all done by folks already convicted of other felonies?

      And those aren't the only ways people "fuck up" with guns.

      Your "less than one tenth of one percent" is bullshit and you know it.

      Delete
    9. Is the less than a tenth of a percent bullshit as far as quantifying that way of fucking up? Or is it actually a valid quantification as far as it goes?

      And fine, what other ways do people "fuck up" and what are the numbers for that?

      Finally, going back to your first comment, when did Greg say that all gun crimes were done by folks with felony convictions? He never said that. He just said that your hidden criminal concept was useless because the hidden criminals couldn't be reliably identified in advance.

      Why do you have to misrepresent what Greg argues and snarkily call his comments bullshit without providing your own numbers? Do you not have anything to back up your position except for insults and vigorous assertions?

      Delete
    10. Has anyone else noticed the delicious irony of Mikeb and his "hidden criminal" silliness, basically saying that a clean background check is not a useful indicator of suitability for gun ownership--coupled with his shrill, hysterical demands for more background checks?

      Delete
  2. Universal Checks are not going to end violent crime, but they will make transfers of firearms to prohibited persons easier for law enforcement personnel to detect, deter, and punish.

    It also makes it is easier to punish transfers to non-prohibited persons. The law doesn't differentiate the status of the buyer at all. Same jail time for selling to a squeaky clean choir-boy as selling to a drug dealing gang-banger. Yeah, I'd say this law "affects" the law-abiding. They like to dispel myths by creating myths of their own.

    ReplyDelete
  3. "Universal Checks are not going to end violent crime, but they will make transfers of firearms to prohibited persons easier for law enforcement personnel to detect, deter, and punish."

    Mike, the problem is that right now we are accomplishing only one out of the three goals listed above. As you've said before, you dont really care about punishment as long as the sale doesnt go through.

    ReplyDelete