Some of our regulars think it's a big conspiracy. You know, when they're counting the guns they just hide the ones that come from NY.
Or, perhaps it makes good sense that a state with strict gun control laws does not supply its own guns used in crime.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
Mike,
ReplyDeleteThis shouldn't be a surprise. I have a friend in Jersey who drives to Delaware to buy smokes and avoid high taxes. Or this song was sung back before Roe v Wade when women would travel to where abortion was legal.
This is a common complaint. When a state passes strict gun laws, then suddenly becomes another state's fault because guns are brought in from another state. You can't really call it smuggling because there doesn't seem to be any effort to control it.
No effort to control it?
DeleteYou know, when they're counting the guns they just hide the ones that come from NY.
ReplyDeleteYeah, that's kinda what they did. According to ATF, the source state was identified in 4,973 firearms traces, 1,595 of those were traced to New York. An additional 54 came from CT, which requires a permit to purchase and another 69 came from CA, which also requires a permit.
The average "time to crime" which is actually time from first retail sale to trace is 13.70 years. I guess they use snails on that 'iron pipeline'.
There was a total of 8,790 firearms trace requests and with only a little more than half of those tracing back to the first retail sale, one could assume that the remainder that couldn't be traced were over 20 years old.
Of the firearms that were traced, 932 were sold within the previous three years, so you might have an argument for trafficking for those, and that would be assuming that none of those were stolen.
http://www.atf.gov/files/statistics/download/trace-data/2011/2011-trace-data-new-york.pdf
People are resourceful. And the last time I checked, criminals are people. That means criminals are equally resourceful. And I could argue that some criminals are actually more resourceful than most people.
ReplyDeleteWhat this story demonstrates is that criminals are resourceful and will acquire weapons no matter what we do. No matter what "barrier" we erect, criminals will find an alternate method to acquire weapons. Some techniques include stealing, smuggling, fake I.D.s (to pass background checks and purchase directly), straw purchasers (a friend with no criminal record buys a gun for a criminal), bribery (criminal bribes gun store employees, police, or government agents), blackmail (criminal blackmails gun store employees, police, or government agents), coercion (criminal threatens gun store employee, police, or government agent), and even manufacturing their own guns.
It is utterly impossible to eliminate firearms from criminals.
A much better approach? Apply resources to programs to change lives (for the better) before people turn to violent criminal behavior. And for the criminals who refuse to live better lives, armed citizens. Bonus: armed citizens are also able to stop (or at least slow down) wild animals when they attack people. No amount of gun control will ever stop dogs, coyotes, wolves, mountain lions, bears, wild hogs, or whatever else from attacking and harming people.
- TruthBeTold
Two clarifications:
Delete(1) I stated that it is utterly impossible to eliminate firearms from criminals. It is also utterly impossible to stop any motivated criminal from acquiring a firearm. Let that sink in. All motivated criminals who want firearms for violent purposes will acquire them no matter what laws we have on the books.
(2) And for criminals who refuse to live better lives, armed citizens will stop them. Why does that unfortunate solution hold so much promise? Because citizens are everywhere ... unlike the tiny number of law enforcement officers who cannot possibly be everywhere all the time.
- TruthBeTold
"It is utterly impossible to eliminate firearms from criminals."
DeleteThat's ridiculous. All guns used in crime start out the lawful property of guys just like you. By strictly controlling you guys, the flow could be cut down almost to nothing.
Mikeb, you're forgetting our long and porous borders. Guns will come in if your side succeeds in its evil.
DeleteCriminals could and would still build their own weapons, as they do in other countries. They'd also buy them from corrupt cops and soldiers, steal them from them, still manage to steal them from stores and lawful owners, and smuggle them from uncontrolled areas of the globe.
DeleteWe see all of these things happening in other parts of the world, there's no reason to think it would be different here.
Even if you could magically eliminate all civilian owned firearms tomorrow and forever, that fails to address other "distribution channels" that are readily available to criminals which I mentioned above.
DeleteOur government banned narcotics decades ago and yet any illegal narcotic that you desire is readily available in any city. Government cannot strictly control everything, everywhere. In fact government cannot strictly control anything. Just as government cannot reduce the supply of illegal narcotics, government cannot reduce the supply of firearms available to criminals.
So don't tell me that gun control is about reducing guns in the hands of criminals. That is simply not true.
- TruthBeTold
Gun control is about reducing the guns in the hands of criminals, exactly.
DeleteNo, Mikeb, as you've said before, gun control is about controlling law-abiding citizens in the hopes that they won't get pissed off and pass guns to criminals.
DeleteI keep wondering why all those guns don't stay at home to cause mayhem. Travelling is tiring. It's easier to act locally.
ReplyDeleteIt's not a big conspiracy. That implies an integrate and carefully laid out plan with lots of high level players. No, this is simply MAG engaging in childishly amateur, highly transparent manipulation of the ATF report. Look at the link I provided in the other thread that is directly from the ATF. MAG took that graphic and blotted out the 1500 guns from New York, and changed the graphic from "top 15 states" to "top 10", so that they don't have to show all this guns flowing from California (a state with stricter laws). If it were a big conspiracy the ATF wouldn't highlight their disclaimer of what trace data should not be used for. To say it is a conspiracy gives your side waaaay too much credit.
ReplyDeleteSure TS, they're all so stupid compared to you. Everyone's an idiot on the other side.
DeleteThey're not idiots. They are doing the best they can with data stacked against them in order to manipulate low information voters.
Delete