This is what happens when you include the world's largest gun retailer (Wal-Mart) on a panel about gun control. It is beneficial to them to eliminate the competition of gun shows, therefore they will work towards that goal. Hopefully this backfires on them.

From Wikipedia:

In contrast, a Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) report on “Firearms Use by Offenders” found that only 0.8% of prison inmates reported acquiring firearms used in their crimes "At a gun show," with repeat offenders less likely than first-time offenders to report acquiring firearms from a retail source, gun show or flea market. This 2001 study examined data from a 1997 Department of Justice survey of more than 18,000 federal and state prison inmates in 1,409 State prisons and 127 Federal prisons.[20][21] The remaining 99.2% of inmates reported obtaining firearms from other sources, including "From a friend/family member" (36.8%), "Off the street/from a drug dealer" (20.9%), "From a fence/black market source" (9.6%), "From a pawnshop," "From a flea market," "From the victim," or "In a burglary." 9% of inmates replied "Don't Know/Other" to the question of where they acquired a firearm and 4.4% refused to answer.[21] The Department of Justice did not attempt to verify the firearms reported in the survey or trace them to determine their chain of possession from original retail sale to the time they were transferred to the inmates surveyed (in cases where inmates were not the original retail purchaser).

But if you look at the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence view -- they consider any private sale of a firearm the "gun show loophole".

My question is the private sale of a knife a "knife show loophole"? What about crowbars or hammers? What about fertilizer and fuel oil?

The problem is not the gun; it is the person holding it.

Actually criminal use of fully automatic firearms is almost unheard of. These added gun "control" laws will just give the cartels something else to smuggle. The paradox is the cartels will smuggle in full automatic AK-47s, actually resulting in a higher prevalence of full automatic firearms in the hands of gangs and drug smugglers.

In other news, there was not a school shooting in California yesterday. Some reports say that there was, but this is obviously impossible since California has gun control.

Please forgive the length of this!

We’re calling for Gun Appreciation Day on the eve of Obama’s Inauguration

President Barack Obama and his sycophants aren’t pulling any punches while they attack our Second Amendment rights.

It’s about time we started fighting back and playing for keeps.

Liberals have cowed down too many of our supposedly conservative leaders. Instead of standing strong for our right to bear arms, they’re giving into the emotional whirlwind of the leftist PR storm for gun control.

It’s abundantly clear by now that it’s up to We the People to stand up and make our elected officials do their duty, and protect the Constitution.

That’s why we’ve brought together a broad coalition of grassroots conservative groups who are ready and willing to take on the Obama Machine, go toe-to-toe with establishment “moderates,” and repudiate the lies and misinformation spread by the liberal media.

FOUR EASY STEPS TO DEFEND GUN RIGHTS:

1- Go to GunAppreciationDay.com and sign the petition to defend gun rights

2- Go to our Facebook page and like us

3- Join the Facebook "event" page January 19 - Gun Appreciation Day

4- Then invite your friends to join!

We at Political Media, along with coalition members the Second Amendment Foundation, Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, Special Operations Speaks, Revolution SuperPAC, Citizens and Country, Social Security Institute, Committee to Draft Judge Andrew Napolitano, Conservative Action Alerts, Women Warriors PAC, and Conservative Action Fund are joining together to make a clear statement against the gun grabbing schemes of the left.

We’ve declared January 19th - two days before Obama’s Inauguration - to be Gun Appreciation Day. And we’re urging Americans nationwide to show their support for gun ownership.

We need every patriotic American to turn out en masse at gun stores, gun ranges, and gun shows from coast to coast.

The Obama Administration has shown that it is more than willing to trample the Constitution to impose its dictates upon the American people. If the American people don’t fight back now, Obama will gut our Second Amendment rights - just as he deviously gutted the First with Obamacare.

Make sure that the crooks in this Administration know that we won’t take this laying down. If you are at all able, block off some time on the 19th and take part in Gun Appreciate Day. Invite your family, friends, and neighbors, too - anyone who believes in our Founder’s views on the Second Amendment needs to be there. I hope you’ll join the movement as people form lines “around the block” at gun stores, gun counters, gun shows, and gun ranges to protest the Obama administration’s assault on gun rights.

We have never had a president who so callously disregards the Constitution, Congress, the courts, and the will of the American people.

And that’s why this outpouring of public support is so important for our constitutional safeguards to keep and bear arms. If, as this president claims, the American people are at risk from murderous rampagers, the logical solution is to extend our rights to protect ourselves with guns, not present a docile target.

Will you commit to standing up for the founding principles of our nation?

Are you willing to take action for the sake of our God-given rights enshrined in the Constitution?

Now more than ever, America needs dedicated patriots like you. For the sake of our Republic, please don’t leave the call unanswered.

Yours Truly,

Larry Ward
Chairman, Gun Appreciation Day

This line of argument has a couple of things to it that people rarely see, and little understand.

The first part is about Federal regulations.

Unless you are "in the business of selling firearms", BATFE does not now require you to either keep a "bound book", of legal import, regarding your transactions, nor does it require you to do background checks of anyone. This is actually one of the most sensible things there is in Federal regulations, because of two things: the private citizen cannot perform background checks (online agents are not reliable), and it acknowledges that SALE is not the only way a gun changes hands.

The second part is about the presumption of guilt and the limits of law enforcement.

Americans pay hundreds of billions of dollars for "law enforcement" - without paying too much attention as to how the money is spent - yet this system allows the innocent to be burdened by the direct action of the felon. The idea of requiring citizens to perform background checks stems from the idea that felons BUY guns from ordinary, but naive people. Law enforcement cannot keep the felon off the street, nor can it protect any individual directly, but this fantasy is maintained to the degree necessary to say that if it were not for Joe Sixpack selling to Tony Felon, the nation would be "safe".
Short story: at a gun show, just like everywhere else in America, background checks are required for dealers, as defined by law, to sell a gun. Each gun. Every gun.

And if you think a Federal background check is a good idea, ask yourself a few things:

1) Can use this check to find out about my neighbors, by just pretending I'm selling her a gun?
2) Can I falsify my identity during the background check, so that the state I'm in considers the transaction a crime and the person I am impersonating gets raided?
3) How does this check keep my gun from being stolen?
4) Do I really know what ways a person can possess a gun, other than by purchase?
5) Do I want to associate with the people pushing the idea that the burden of assessing someone else's guilt is mine?

Pawn shops that deal in firearms need to have FFLs and need to conduct background checks, just like any other firearms dealer. A pawnshop which sells a firearm without a check is breaking the law.

People, especially criminals, will tend to break the law - which leads me to believe, because not all of the gun control advocates can possibly be that stupid or blind to facts, that this is not about public safety, it's about eliminating private ownership of firearms. What I don't understand is the why.

I already posted why in another thread, GG. Because when only the police and military have guns, then we'll have a "police state". Then the people will be cowed into doing what they're told, because they'll have no way to defend themselves. The majority of the population is voting for this, just as the Austrians voted in Hitler in the late 30s. He didn't just roll in with armies and tanks and take over. He told copious amounts of lies to the general population, as did his supporters.

Google Kitty Werthmann, and read her story. She saw the whole thing. Her story ends: “Totalitarianism didn’t come quickly, it took 5 years from 1938 until 1943, to realize full dictatorship in Austria. Had it happened overnight, my countrymen would have fought to the last breath. Instead, we had creeping gradualism. Now, our only weapons were broom handles. The whole idea sounds almost unbelievable that the state, little by little eroded our freedom. This is my eye-witness account. It’s true. Those of us who sailed past the Statue of Liberty came to a country of unbelievable freedom and opportunity. America is truly is the greatest country in the world. Don’t let freedom slip away. After America, there is no place to go.”

Here's another excerpt from her story (again, please forgive the length. People need to be made aware):

“Before Hitler, we had very good medical care. Many American doctors trained at the University of Vienna. After Hitler, health care was socialized, free for everyone. Doctors were salaried by the government. The problem was, since it was free, the people were going to the doctors for everything. When the good doctor arrived at his office at 8 a.m., 40 people were already waiting and, at the same time, the hospitals were full. If you needed elective surgery, you had to wait a year or two for your turn. There was no money for research as it was poured into socialized medicine. Research at the medical schools literally stopped, so the best doctors left Austria and emigrated to other countries. As for healthcare, our tax rates went up to 80 percent of our income. Newlyweds immediately received a $1,000 loan from the government to establish a household. We had big programs for families. All day care and education were free. High schools were taken over by the government and college tuition was subsidized. Everyone was entitled to free handouts, such as food stamps, clothing, and housing. We had another agency designed to monitor business. My brother-in-law owned a restaurant that had square tables. Government officials told him he had to replace them with round tables because people might bump themselves on the corners. Then they said he had to have additional bathroom facilities. It was just a small dairy business with a snack bar. He couldn’t meet all the demands. Soon, he went out of business. If the government owned the large businesses and not many small ones existed, it could be in control. We had consumer protection, too. Austrian kids loyal to Hitler. We were told how to shop and what to buy. Free enterprise was essentially abolished. We had a planning agency specially designed for farmers. The agents would go to the farms, count the live-stock, and then tell the farmers what to produce, and how to produce it. In 1944, I was a student teacher in a small village in the Alps. The villagers were surrounded by mountain passes which, in the winter, were closed off with snow, causing people to be isolated. So people intermarried and offspring were sometimes retarded. When I arrived, I was told there were 15 mentally retarded adults, but they were all useful and did good manual work. I knew one, named Vincent, very well. He was a janitor of the school. One day I looked out the window and saw Vincent and others getting into a van. I asked my superior where they were going. She said to an institution where the State Health Department would teach them a trade, and to read and write. The families were required to sign papers with a little clause that they could not visit for 6 months. They were told visits would interfere with the program and might cause homesickness. As time passed, letters started to dribble back saying these people died a natural, merciful death. The villagers were not fooled. We suspected what was happening. Those people left in excellent physical health and all died within 6 months. We called this euthanasia. Next came gun registration. People were getting injured by guns. Hitler said that the real way to catch criminals (we still had a few) was by matching serial numbers on guns. Most citizens were law abiding and dutifully marched to the police station to register their firearms. Not long afterwards, the police said that it was best for everyone to turn in their guns. The authorities already knew who had them, so it was futile not to comply voluntarily. No more freedom of speech. Anyone who said something against the government was taken away. We knew many people who were arrested, not only Jews, but also priests and ministers who spoke up."

Think this can't happen here? I can only hope and pray that you're right, and that the American public won't allow it. But I wonder...

Sam Harris has his take here: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/the-riddle-of-the-gun

Fantasists and zealots can be found on both sides of the debate over guns in America. On the one hand, many gun-rights advocates reject even the most sensible restrictions on the sale of weapons to the public. On the other, proponents of stricter gun laws often seem unable to understand why a good person would ever want ready access to a loaded firearm. Between these two extremes we must find grounds for a rational discussion about the problem of gun violence.

Unlike most Americans, I stand on both sides of this debate. I understand the apprehension that many people feel toward “gun culture,” and I share their outrage over the political influence of the National Rifle Association. How is it that we live in a society in which one of the most compelling interests is gun ownership? Where is the science lobby? The safe food lobby? Where is the get-the-Chinese-lead-paint-out-of-our-kids’-toys lobby? When viewed from any other civilized society on earth, the primacy of guns in American life seems to be a symptom of collective psychosis.

Most of my friends do not own guns and never will. When asked to consider the possibility of keeping firearms for protection, they worry that the mere presence of them in their homes would put themselves and their families in danger. Can’t a gun go off by accident? Wouldn’t it be more likely to be used against them in an altercation with a criminal? I am surrounded by otherwise intelligent people who imagine that the ability to dial 911 is all the protection against violence a sane person ever needs.

But, unlike my friends, I own several guns and train with them regularly....

Jerry.
I just read that entire article by Sam Harris and have to thank you for posting it.
It said exactly what I've been saying to my pro gun-ban friends in much more concise and eloquent manner.

Thanks Sabrina,

I think the videos he linked in the article are well worth watching, especially the one on how classrooms of high school students, college students, adults can act to takedown an active shooter.

the thing I have recently been saying to any gun control advocate is simple: "How does the thing you are advocating, prevent X Incident from happening?"

I usually get a lot of dissembling and no answer. So I usually then say: "so what you really want is to repeal the 2nd Amendment, right? Why don't you just SAY that?"

When you even suggest that the reason to have a weapon is so that your government is respectful of you... you get an eyeroll...

essentially people have lived so well so long, that they can't remember a bad time, and so... don't wish to guard themselves from one.

It's the same reason that people build a house on a faultline, or near the ocean, when the ancient people have stone markers that tell them not to do that.

That is not mentioning the personal protection aspects.

So, let me see if I have this right:

Requiring a prospective employee to show they are permitted to be hired is racist, but requiring someone to show they may purchase a firearm is not?

essentially people have lived so well so long, that they can't remember a bad time, and so... don't wish to guard themselves from one.

I foresee a time in the near future when this will no longer be so...

and then, of course, it'll be too late.

My universal first question in response to these sorts of things is:

"What problem do you think this solves?"

(Eg. recent calls seen on Facebook for "drug tests for gun buyers" or "training for gun buyers".

Has there been an epidemic of death and mayhem caused by lack of training with firearms? Or by otherwise legal purchasers who caused problems because they smoked a joint or took speed (but not were drunk, because alcohol isn't in the "drug test" regime)?

Why, no. There hasn't.

Sure, some gun criminals are also drug abusers, but in almost call cases by the time they get that far they're already prohibited for a felony - and in any case they already commit one by lying on their 4473 form, which requires you to affirm you're not an abuser or addict...

Thus, since there's no actual problem the proposals would address, I must assume one of the following:

A) It's "something", from the pattern "Something must be done; this is something; this must be done", or "We must be seen to be doing something"; it's signalling behavior, not a remedy.

B) They have no idea what the actual problems or facts are.

C) They just want to get rid of guns and it's a first step.

I think it's mostly A, sometimes some B, and rarely but not never C.)

Also, contra Shapiro's "military-grade weapons like fully automatic "machine guns" have no place in civilian life.":

I wonder if Mr. Shapiro is aware that civilians can and do own machineguns, and that it's perfectly legal?

And that cops have lots of them, and cops are civilians: "The police are the public and the public are the police".

It's expensive for non-cops, and requires (defensible) extra background checks and a tax stamp, but it's perfectly legal.

It turns out that machineguns (legal or not) are almost never used in crimes in the US - and legally owned ones even more close to never [IIRC, once in living memory, by a cop].

Machineguns are a scary, scary chimera in the gun control debate. In practice they're not a problem; even the black market criminals don't seem to use them.

(At some level we might be better off if they did; they're already bad at shooting, and a machinegun will run them out of ammunition faster and will less chance of hitting the target, and throw more lead into the air [hopefully hitting the upper stories of a building rather than down the street at chest level; less target-dense].

They already throw lead around at bystanders, so that part is at worst a wash.)

So Sigvald... seems like for a LOT of laymen, I'd like to slice and dice and say:

There are a small group of people who have fully automatic "machine guns" [firing as long as you hold the trigger down] in the US, and they have jumped through many hoops with the ATF and paid the $2000 tax to have them... and they are often gun store owners and the like.

Almost everyone else owns a semi-automatic weapon [handguns and rifles], where it fires one bullet per trigger pull, and then cycles to the next bullet for the next pull. These include revolvers.

And then there are some long rifle owners that often own bolt, pump, or lever action weapons where the ammunition must be advanced after every fire manually.

I have had to patiently explain to many people in this debate that making it LOOK like a "machine gun" doesen't make it one... but there are many out there that have never held or seen any weapon like that up close, so they don't really know.

What especially gets people is to tell 'em that less than 400 people are shot by rifles in a year in the whole US, vs. 9000 by handguns, which are all semi-auto...

That's not to say that we shouldn't have any gun regulations. Cracking down on "straw purchasers" is a good idea and indeed military-grade weapons like fully automatic "machine guns" have no place in civilian life.

How can he say they have no place in civilian life? "The people" need arms not only to defend themselves against criminals, but also to defend themselves against fascist government thugs who are eventually going to come for them.

Not allowing civilians to own fully automatic weapons -- and hand grenades, RPGS, tanks and nuclear weapons -- is an infringment on "the right of the people." So what if someone who owns an RPG ends up taking down a 747, or someone with a nuclear weapon ends up obliterating Little Rock? That's a small price to pay for keeping true to the 2nd Amendment.

Not allowing civilians to own fully automatic weapons -- and hand grenades, RPGS, tanks and nuclear weapons -- is an infringment on "the right of the people." So what if someone who owns an RPG ends up taking down a 747, or someone with a nuclear weapon ends up obliterating Little Rock? That's a small price to pay for keeping true to the 2nd Amendment. -- JD at January 11, 2013 5:35 PM

What about someone that owns fertilizer and fuel oil that takes down the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building?

Did the perpetrator have a nuclear weapon? How about an RPG?

But you are all about a reasonable standard?

Thanks, but you are not my choice.

How about requiring licenses and insurance??
Works with cars, and maybe that would shut Jesse Ventura up.

Seriously.

How about requiring licenses and insurance?? -- DrCos at January 12, 2013 3:57 AM

Sure. Sounds good. Any Concealed Handgun Licensees can sign up for insurance any time they want, or even a non-CHL holder.

How would that have stopped the Sandy Hook shootings? What about the Aurora Theater shooting? How about the Gabbie Giffords shooting?

These mass shootings are not being done 99.9% of legal gun owners. Even most of day-to-day gun crimes are not being done by the people that would get a license and insurance.

For example there were over 500 gun deaths in Chicago, Illinois in 2012. There are essentially no Concealed Handgun Licensees in the state of Illinois. So that means that either all the deaths were done by cops, U.S. Marshals and the few others that can legally carry concealed in the Chicago area -- or they were done by criminals that walked out the front door of their home carrying concealed illegally already.

Making one more law to break is not going to fix this. The problem is not the firearms. The problem is not the person willing to observe the law 99.999% of the time.

As I write this, the Today Show is talking about mortgage fraudsters making it harder for the rest of us to get a mortgage. So do I blame the other 99% of the people getting mortgage or make them get a license to buy a house?

And here is a thought that the anti-gunners and the gun owners are really on the same wave-length.

"How about requiring licenses and insurance??
Works with cars, and maybe that would shut Jesse Ventura up."

Gee, I like this: another quick solution that does nothing. Has anyone at all been to a good school?

That would lead to the most massive decontrol in world history.

Do you want to tell others what to do?

Congratulations - they feel the same way, and you're going to shackle yourself again because you have no idea how a gun is possessed, a fundamental property of any control argument.

What part of blowback don't you understand, Biden you busillanious blowhard bitch?

The other day, I saw someone nominate that evil beast Feinenstein for doing the most to get Americans to buy more guns and ammo. Biden may eclipse her.

Hell, there's a 4-month minimum wait on the gun I'm trying to buy because they are out of stock everywhere and I'm having a really hard time finding any ammo for the guns I already have. There is about a 3-week wait on that. Everyone has panicked and started stocking up, that and the government has started buying up and stockpiling ammo now, probably to keep it out of the hands of civilians (per multiple gun shops I've been to). Something foul is afoot.

Everyone has panicked and started stocking up, that and the government has started buying up and stockpiling ammo now, probably to keep it out of the hands of civilians (per multiple gun shops I've been to). Something foul is afoot. -- BunnyGirl at January 12, 2013 12:52 PM

BunnyGirl,

Are you talking about the InfoWars.com -- Alex Jones conspiracy theory?

There are several facts in this and other stories that are ignored.

The way governmental budgeting works is that on October 1, >year< your agency has $## millions to spend. Each department and sub-department has portions of that money to spend. It is originally compartmentd into training, operations, travel, maintenance, etc.

If you hit September 30, <year> and have money left in your budget, that amount is deducted from your October 1, <year+1> budget.

The financial controllers track this money as well as the agency and department heads. So if they see that they have $## million left at the beginning of the fourth quarter -- they find a way to spend it. This time a bunch of agencies realized that long term, multi-year contracts for bullets could work. (They actually have government run workshops on how to spend your money in tourist cities and tourist hotels.) The contracts had to be set before October 1.

Anecdotally, in the late 80's I was the in the Air Force. I was sub-departments supply NCO. I spent a full day on a September 29th running around the base re-programming the money out of travel to assets, then putting in the purchase orders in for $27K worth of shielded computers that could handle classified information.

Some additional information that they don't make readily available, but is there if you dig down far enough.

When you, me and about 95% of the shooting public goes to the range, we'll buy the cheapest ball ammo that we can get to practice with. We'll run a box of the good Hornady JHP through our pistols just to make sure they work and don't stovepipe or otherwise jam. But the practice rounds are generally ball.

When they give rounds to the DHS, FBI, or other alphabet soup agents to train with, they are giving them HTS, Hornady or other good JHP rounds. So the 450K rounds are both training and carry rounds. There is no differentiation.

Another thing, and this is my opinion, is that Alex Jones (InfoWars) is so full of shit that if you gave him an enema, he would weigh about 25 pounds. He still believes that 9/11 was a conspiracy. He has declared that Popular Mechanics and Glenn Beck are in on the conspiracies as well.

Jerry, thank you for the link to the Sam Harris article. Well researched & well written. A great companion piece to the Megan McArdle column Crid linked to in a prior post.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/12/17/there-s-little-we-can-do-to-prevent-another-massacre.html

Gee, I like this: another quick solution that does nothing. Has anyone at all been to a good school?

So let's continue to do nothing as that's working out really well.

Do you want to tell others what to do?

No. Let everybody do whatever the hell they want. Again, that's working out really well.

Do you have any actual ideas, or shall we continue to disparage my supposed lack of education?

So let's continue to do nothing as that's working out really well.

No. Let everybody do whatever the hell they want. Again, that's working out really well.

Do you have any actual ideas, or shall we continue to disparage my supposed lack of education? -- DrCos at January 13, 2013 3:26 PM

I'm not going to disparage any one's education. I just want an answer that is honest and works without total prohibition of firearms. We all know that Prohibition works so well, otherwise there would be no need for the 21st Amendment.

Here is a list of mass murders since Columbine. Let's see what laws could have made a difference:

Not listed: A man convicted of killing his grandmother decades ago ambushed firefighters on Monday, fatally shooting two of them as they arrived to battle a blaze in upstate New York, police said.

Authorities do not know how Spengler -- who was found dead of a self-inflicted gunshot wound hours after the four firefighters were shot -- obtained the weapon or weapons he used or why he opened fire, Pickering told reporters. As a convicted felon, Spengler was not allowed to legally possess weapons, but he had "several different types of weapons" Monday, the police chief said.

Let's see, if he had been doing life without parole, that probably would have stopped him.

December 11, 2012: On Tuesday, 22-year-old Jacob Tyler Roberts killed 2 people and himself with a stolen rifle in Clackamas Town Center, Oregon. His motive is unknown.

He killed himself after seeing a CCW licensee draw, but not firing on him.

September 27, 2012: Five were shot to death by 36-year-old Andrew Engeldinger at Accent Signage Systems in Minneapolis, MN. Three others were wounded. Engeldinger went on a rampage after losing his job, ultimately killing himself.

"Our hearts go out to the families of the people killed and those who were wounded in this tragedy. Nothing we can say can make up for their loss," the Engeldinger family said in a statement. "Our son struggled for years with mental illness. In the last few years, he no longer had contact with us. This is not an excuse for his actions, but sadly, may be a partial explanation."

August 5, 2012: Six Sikh temple members were killed when 40-year-old US Army veteran Wade Michael Page opened fire in a gurdwara in Oak Creek, Wisconsin. Four others were injured, and Page killed himself.

Teresa Carlson, special-agent-in-charge of the FBI's Milwaukee office, issued a four-paragraph statement saying the agency had concluded its investigation into the Aug. 5 incident and found no evidence to suggest shooter Wade Michael Page had any help or was carrying out any directive from any white-supremacist group. Investigators also found nothing to suggest the attack was part of any ongoing threat to the Sikh community.

I could go on for the other 13 or so mass shootings, but I still don't see any law that could be written that would have effectively stopped any of these shootings. For that matter the AWB was five years in when Columbine happened.

Sometimes there is "nothing" that can be done.

"I'm not going to disparage any one's education."

I will. DrCos, you simply didn't know what you were talking about, but that didn't stop you.

You didn't look anything up before you made your suggestion. If you feel bad now, well, don't do that again.

And yes, you DO want to tell others what to do - provided it doesn't recognize the truth: that the operative syllable in the term, "law enforcement" is FORCE, and the operative syllable in the term, "self-defense" is SELF.

The thing to do here is to fight the tide of surrendering personal responsibility - a sickness that has gripped all of America as too many of its people are desperate to blame anyone and anything else for failure.

That's the only way to maintain a nation which charter insists that the public is the ruler of the country.

Oddly enough, that's what the "Eddie Eagle" program of the NRA did, as it taught kids gun safety.

"So let's continue to do nothing as that's working out really well."

Actually, we're do something effective - we're seeing more states enact right-to-carry laws, and their crime rates are plummeting.

So we've got that going for us.

Which is nice.

I actually hadn't heard the Alex Jones conspiracy on ammo buying. I just know I could easily go in and buy a few hundred rounds of .22LR for my Mosquito whenever I wanted (I shoot 500-1000 rounds through it a month) and now it's next to impossible to find and I have to keep getting on wait lists and this wasn't an issue until Christmas. I always use CCI as that's recommended. I had also been planning to buy a P238 as a Christmas present to myself and I'm being told don't count on seeing one until April, which sucks. Just my opinion, but if the government buying up of ammo is related to trying to unload leftover money for the last quarter, wouldn't we have seen the shortage sooner than the end of December?

...you simply didn't know what you were talking about, but that didn't stop you.
Nor does it ever stop you or others here.
You didn't look anything up before you made your suggestion.
You base this comment on what? That you don't agree with me? I'm apparently too undereducated to understand you, oh Oracle.

So your suggestion would seem to be that we all need to defend ourselves. If everyone has a gun, that will somehow curb gun violence?

Where did you "look that up" and why should that demonstrate that you know what you're talking about?

Also, I don't know whether it's cute or frightening that you think you only have to obey laws because you are FORCEd to do so. Apparently you can decide for yourSELF what your rules are.

I just want an answer that is honest and works without total prohibition of firearms.
I agree with this. My suggestion of licensing and insurance would put the responsibility for what someone does with the gun where it belongs, with the owner.
Please tell me how this is not a decent suggestion or at least offer a workable alternative.

Very simple, Doc: how would your idea have mitigated any of the 513 murders committed in Chicago in 2012?

I agree with this. My suggestion of licensing and insurance would put the responsibility for what someone does with the gun where it belongs, with the owner. Please tell me how this is not a decent suggestion or at least offer a workable alternative. -- DrCos at January 14, 2013 3:59 AM

The firefighter shooter, Spengler, was provided the weapons by his neighbor. That purchase occurred in 2010. Yes, she's guilty of a straw purchase on June 6, 2010.

The mother of the Newtown shooter bought the weapons. Did he shoulder surf her for the combo to the safe? Did he threaten her then kill her? Were they never locked up? We'll never know what occurred that day. But for all intents and purposes the son acquired the weapons by theft.

The Aurora Theater shooter purchased the guns, legally. So he would need to show proof of insurance? The nut job had his apartment rigged to blow up his building and probably the adjoining building. Do you think he wouldn't have lied about insurance? Or put the payment down on the insurance policy, knowing he wouldn't be paying the premiums.

I have my firearms secured, but I don't have a safe. I live alone and am out of the house for many hours of the day. If someone were to break in after I left and steal my firearms and an hour later go on shooting spree, am I irresponsible?

And as noted by Akatsukami, the 513 shootings done in Chicago in 2012 were done by criminals.

How does licensing and insurance stop any of this criminal behavior?

This is the same thought behind a restraining order. A person can hold up ten restraining orders up. That will stop zero bullets.

BG,

I'm going to be lazy and just italicize. Sorry.

I actually hadn't heard the Alex Jones conspiracy on ammo buying. I just know I could easily go in and buy a few hundred rounds of .22LR for my Mosquito whenever I wanted (I shoot 500-1000 rounds through it a month) and now it's next to impossible to find and I have to keep getting on wait lists and this wasn't an issue until Christmas.

There are a convergence of issues going on. The O'bama re-election and suspicion of gun grabbing. The effects of Newtown and the Westbury shootings. And the belief that a .22 is a really effective weapon by neophytes.

I always use CCI as that's recommended. I had also been planning to buy a P238 as a Christmas present to myself and I'm being told don't count on seeing one until April, which sucks.

You should see the waiting list for AR-15's and civilian AK's, especially left-handed. Feinstein is running a close second as gun salesperson of the year. The price is going through the roof as well. You may want to look at a Diamond Back or a Walther, depending on your budget.

Just my opinion, but if the government buying up of ammo is related to trying to unload leftover money for the last quarter, wouldn't we have seen the shortage sooner than the end of December?

The problem is that you have preppers, who buy on a regular basis. Then you have your <Katrina> refugees that are like locusts; and eat everything to the ground. Because many now think that the new AWB is going to happen; they are buying anything and everything. Cheaper Than Dirt has standard green AR-15 mags going for a $100 a piece. I wish I had a few hundred AR mags. I could buy several AR's off the profits.

My personal preference is for Sig Sauer. They are the nicest guns I've used/owned in my experience, although generally pricey compared to similar models of other brands. I also own a Kimber Solo at the moment that I concealed carry. Nice gun, but kind of stiff. Perhaps it's because it's still relatively new and not well broke in (owned since November and I've only taken it shooting three times), but other than that, a very nice gun.

I think part of the problem getting guns in my area is because I live, literally, across the street from Clackamas Town Center and know one of the victims (casual professional acquaintance). Within days of that shooting several gun shops were completely out of stock and are having a hard time replacing inventory.