Who was safer after this? Who was more free?
No one.
From TMJ4, TV station in Wisconsin:
Man injured in shooting at Blue Note Tavern
MILWAUKEE - The Milwaukee Police Department is investigating an early morning shooting outside the Blue Note Tavern near Hopkins and Hampton on the city's north side.A man, 26, was shot during an argument at about 1:15 Sunday morning. He is expected to survive.
Officers are still looking for suspects.
So which new law made this happen? Or is there more to the story than posted here? So what did this have to do with the new ccw laws in Wisconsin?
ReplyDeleteGuess you've never been to the Northside of Milwaukee. Gun laws mean nothing in that neck of the ghetto.
ReplyDeleteI've been to the north side of Milwaukee.
ReplyDeleteI would say that it can be a rough area, but I would not agree that gun laws mean nothing.
Guns are now more easily acquired and more widely carried than before. There is an attitude that is more widespread than it had been that guns are a solution to problems, that shooting is an acceptable means to resolve conflicts, including perceived threats.
Guns are the problem, not the solution.
So what were the recent changes in legislation that made the ghetto more ghettoey?
ReplyDeleteThere was nothing in the article to suggest that the shooter had a carry license. Dog Gone, the simple fact is that bad people do bad things, and no measure of regulation will stop them. Imprisonment will. Leave good people alone!
ReplyDeleteIf it were harder for bad people to get guns, there's be less trouble. Why is that so difficult for you, Greg?
ReplyDeleteBecause your proposals will only make it harder for good people. Bad people will get them the same way that they do now.
ReplyDeleteWrong. My proposals would make it harder for criminals to get guns from you law-abiding gun owners, something which now is easy. Think about it, your guns would be registered to YOU, and you'd be responsible for them. You could not give or sell any of them to another person without a background check and transference of registration. Straw purchasing would no longer be an easy way to make money.
ReplyDeleteYou don't think those would make for improvement?
Not to mention it would make it easier to get your damn guns back if they were found in the possession of a criminal.
ReplyDeleteCourse, you'd better be able to document how that happened, including a police report at the time they went missing.
Greg Camp said...
Because your proposals will only make it harder for good people. Bad people will get them the same way that they do now.
Can you back that up with anything credible Greg? Because in countries where they have done what we propose, including Canada which is closer to where I'm sitting right now than you are, the opposite is demonstrably true.
There are fewer guns used in crimes and there are fewer guns used in violence, and there are fewer criminals with guns.
So by all means, feel free to back up that claim of yours that as many bad people will get guns the way they do now.
Please. I haven't seen you dodge providing a source - a CREDIBLE source - yet this morning, but the day is young, and I've only been up a short while.
And of course I'm still waiting for you to provide all - hell, ANY - credible sources for all those other claims you've made.
YOU NEVER DO. Because they are stupid and factually inaccurate, and you either don't understand the difference between fact and fiction, or you don't care - or both.