Gun Laws or Tax Laws?
Acorn recently drew a rash of right-wing scorn and repercussions because a video came out showing a couple of their people offered tax advice to investigators posing as a prostitute and a pimp. It was a knuckle-headed thing to do, and it was even mildly amusing, since the "pimp" looked like something out of a Halloween costume shop.
Yesterday, new videos came out, showing sellers at gun shows selling deadly weapons illegally. It's creepy to watch the video of people talking about "stopping power" and concealability while selling pistols to a guy claiming he probably couldn't pass a background check. It's not mildly amusing at all.
Which videos will get more attention from major media?
Labels: guns, journalism
posted by Dan at 10/09/2009 06:04:00 AM
6 Comments:
Gun control doesn't work, Dan.
Easy - the gun show videos, showing illegal activities on the part of Bloomburg's goons. Bloomburg's a proven and repeated liar, claiming the Tiahrt amendment does not do what by its own words it plainly does, and wants the amendment barred not because it prevents law enforcement from doing traces (it doesn't), but because he wants that info to file harrassment suits against gun manufacturers.
Given the Bloomburg tendency toward falsehood, why should I believe his videos weren't set up?
Lance, you should complete your sentence for accuracy: Gun control doesn't work in the United States. Like numerous other aspects of civilized society, most of the rest of the developed world manages civilian gun control, and experiences substantially fewer deaths from guns. We may be better than parts of the Mideast, however.
Yay us!!!
Like numerous other aspects of civilized society, most of the rest of the developed world manages civilian gun control, and experiences substantially fewer deaths from guns.
This is a typical half-truth. Gun death may be higher here, but violent crime rates reflect much less difference. The gun is just a tool, not a magical device. And Britain's experience, since they eliminated private wnership, has been to watch their violent crime rate - including gun crime - explode. Moreover, while "official" gun ownership rates in many countries may be very low, illegal possession in many of those same countries is quite common.
Most important, the US is not Europe. Not politically, culturally, nor historically, no matter how much many would wish it were.
Besides, the founders already made this policy decision, some 200+ years ago, with the benefit of their experience behind them. In my opinion, they made a wise one, one which we ignore at our peril. The 1st amendment, which we enjoy here, (and which the FTC seems so bent on gutting - do you have any doubt that FTC enforcement of its new rule will be politically motivated? I don't.) exists thanks to the 2nd amendment.
Just say thank you.
(Oh go ahead, you know you want to . . .)
You're welcome.
Gun death may be higher here, but violent crime rates reflect much less difference.
And this is a non-truth. You're welcome to believe that the Supreme Court upholdsthe First Amendment out of fear of rootin' tootin' gun totin' citizens if you want; but you might consider this:
Homicide – US had been consistently high in homicide rates than most of the Western countries from 1980 – 2000. Though the rate was cut almost in half in the 90s, it is still higher than all nations without political and social turmoil with the 2000 rate of 5.5 homicides per 100,000 people. Countries entrenched in turmoil like Colombia and South Africa, had 63 homicides per 100,000 and 51, respectively.
From these folks: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita
Here is an idea.
See if the dealer is recieving any Federal money, if he is then cut it off.
I will even take it a step further, if he did anything illegal, take away his license. Problem solved.
Post a Comment
<< Home