State Sen. Russell Pearce, who authored Arizona’s anti-immigration law, SB1070, stuck a provision in the bill that “pushes” local police departments to resell confiscated weapons to authorized gun dealers. Not satisfied that one Phoenix, Arizona suburb, Peoria, found a loophole in his law and passed a measure to continue destroying the weapons, a moonstruck Pearce now plans to “fix” that loophole in the next legislative session.
You would think that based on all the shootings I was able to Google, just in Arizona alone, some sanity might prevail and they would curtail all these insane gun laws that have been passed recently. In April of 2010, Arizona State Sen. Pearce once again authored, and Governor Jan Brewer readily signed, a bill allowing people to carry a concealed weapon without requiring a permit. Some fanatics never learn.The Chaska, Minn. Police Chief doesn’t think that confiscated weapons should be recirculated in the market, as does the Peoria, Ariz. City Attorney. Peoria Police Chief, Larry Ratcliff, provides an illustration where weapons used in Las Vegas and Washington, D.C. crimes were traced to resales from Memphis, Tenn. Law enforcement. An Apache Junction, an Ariz. Police Captain commented, although they are not big “moneymakers,” you can make a “couple dollars” out of them.
Arizona is also known for supplying assault rifles to the Mexican drug cartels, although these sources scream vehemently that they aren’t aware they are going across the border. That kinda cinches the case for stronger gun laws doesn’t it?
Read earlier posts on gun control here.
COMMENTS WELCOMED
5 comments:
Unfortunately Mr Dunning, your statement about gun shows is entirely false. Authorized agents are FFL holders such as gun stores. FFL holders may NOT sell a gun without an NICS check even at a gun show. Your so-called "loophole" is simply a private sale from one individual to another. And even those are limited by law. You may not sell to a known felon nor may you sell to anyone from out of state.
The only benefit of destroying confiscated guns is to the gun manufacturers.
Your arguments don't really cinch any case for gun control, as I fail to see how a Google search that returns pages regarding film making, crimes in non-Arizona states, or gang violence (which will happen regardless of what laws take away a citizens ability to defend themselves) really apply.
One of the articles you links to discusses a reporter qualifying for his permit to carry concealed, after unsuccessfully attempting to purchase handguns without a purchase permit, showing that the gun sellers were acting entirely responsibly.
I don't think you have the slightest idea what you're posting about.
Yeah, wow. Maybe you should step away from the keyboard until you get a grip on yourself. Why exactly should a police organization have to pay to destroy firearms that someone might pay to buy?
Disarming the public because the criminals are criminal is foolish.
You know I really loved the "assault rifle" bit...
Yes there are a lot of REAL select fire ASSAULT RIFLES in the hands of the Mexican Cartels.
They were originally sold to the MEXICAN GOVERNMENT. So yes, the guns did come from the US, but the original buyer was NOT the CARTEL.
How do we know this? Because select fire ASSAULT RIFLES have been illegal to sell to anyone in the US if they are manufactured after 1986.
And those full auto AK's? Please, those come from central and south America. The world price for an AK is around fifty bucks, the American price for a true full auto AK is in the thousands.
Hell, only around 5 thousand firearms confiscated in Mexico were positively traced back to the US. That accounts for 90% of all traces conducted. Unfortunately it only accounts for 17% of total firearms seized...
Can you not do math because you are stupid, or are you stupid and just can't do math?
I'll ignore your gun show loophole fantasy, since it's already been addressed. Instead, I'll look at something else.
There's something funny going on in the logic here... I've never quite understood the desire to destroy firearms used in crimes.
We're talking about inanimate objects here, not bloodthirsty animals that "have to be put down." The obsession with destroying inanimate objects that have been used by a criminal reeks of totemic mysticism. By this logic, we should burn all money that has been found to be used by a drug dealer. Those dollars have been supporting addiction and violence, after all. They need to be destroyed, so that they aren't used for that again.
In short, it doesn't make any sense.
Doesn't it make more sense to get criminals' firearms and get them to law-abiding citizens, you know, so they can defend themselves? It sounds like a good way for a poor man to defend himself.
Post a Comment