Even if we count that as a left-wing, liberal killing you still need another 328 murders to pull even.
The point being, liberal violence of the sort you are considering is very small and far less than conservative violence.
Post an example of one of those right-wing murders.
As I understand it, what he’s saying is that the Democrats are proposing a new tax that would have be paid on each firearm that a person already owns, and one of his objections is that he made those purchases of those firearms when that tax did not exist. (I have no idea if this is an actual proposal that is on the table or not.)
I saw that yet there is no evidence provided of even one right wing murder.
Interesting. From the PDF I linked:
We relied heavily on START Global Terrorism Database (GTD) data for the early years of the data set, and due to data loss, a full record of incidents in 1993 is unavailable. Nonetheless, we concluded that 1994 served as a strong starting point, allowing us to examine both the build up to the 1995 peak in right-wing activity and, overall, over 25 years of terrorist activity in the United States.
In total, we drew from the following data sets: START GTD (1994-2017); Janes Terrorism and Insurgency Events (2009-2020); the RAND Database of Worldwide Terrorism Incidents (RDWTI) (1994-2009); and the Anti-Defamation League’s (ADL) Hate, Extremism, Anti-Semitism, and Terrorism (H.E.A.T.) Map (Anti-Semitic Incidents: 2016-2020, Extremist/Police Shootouts: 2008-2020, Extremist Murders: 2008-2020, Terrorist Plots & Attacks: 2002-2020, Islamist: 2002-2020, Left Wing: 2008-2020, Right Wing: 2002-2020). We also compiled events as recorded in ADL publications1 and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) annual reports and news releases (1994-2020). We cross-referenced events against local and national news sources, including the New York Times, Washington Post, and Los Angeles Times.
Data were compiled by four researchers, each covering a different quarter of the time period. Two researchers reviewed the full data set to ensure consistency across these sections.
What would you consider sufficient evidence?
Connor Betts was a left-wing extremist who killed 9 and wounded 27.
It’s almost like you didn’t read my links.
Not surprised. I’m done with you in this thread.
That’s methodology. Where is the list of murders? Give me one name. It’s not there.
You sound like my Dad in a story my uncle told. His parents told him to finish eating his dinner because people are starving in Africa. He said “Name One”.
Yes, it is.
Biden also wants to ban online sales of any gun parts. This would include things as harmless as a spring or rubber grips. About 20% of my business income is online sales.
That study is an overview, not a list of anecdotes.
But you want one name, here you go:
Tywanza Sanders
Thank you for the link, though I had to dig a bit to find the proposed “tax”, as it’s not actually mentioned in the page on the Biden site. One has to click on the link attached to the words “regulate possession of existing assault weapons” to find it, in a PDF from the Giffords Law Center.
As I understand it, based on reading Biden’s page, and the Giffords document, the proposal is that assault weapons would be added to the list of items required to be registered under the existing National Firearms Act (which currently covers machine guns, silencers, and sawed-off rifles), and that this would mean that current owners of assault weapons would have to make a one-time $200 tax payment for each weapon they register.
I’m not seeing on there where this proposed tax is coming from. Did you have a cite for that? ETA: I saw @kenobi_65’s post. So, the proposed tax is only on “assault weapons.” Do you have 150 of those?
As far as online gun sales, I certainly agree with that one. Hard to check someone’s ID if they are not physically present. Do you actually sell guns online? How do you verify the identity of the person who is ordering it? I assume only in state, right?
As far as gun parts go, I wouldn’t be adverse to that being modified a bit, to where some minor cosmetic or repair materials could be bought, but it would have to be very narrowly crafted so that nefarious actors wouldn’t abuse it to be able to build guns out of parts without having a background check.
Anyway, if people need springs for their guns, then they need springs for their guns. It may be less convenient for them to come into your shop to get their spring, but it seems it would be beneficial to you, as that way they are in your shop and you can try to up-sell them some other things while they are there.
To be honest, if I owned a gun store, I would be praying for Biden to win. You know he won’t actually restrict guns in the slightest, but you also know that many of your customers are paranoid enough to think that he will. You know you sell more guns when a Democrat is in office than a Republican, don’t you?
Of course, I bet your bushiness is booming right now. Maybe what is even better for gun sales than a threat to enact gun control is the threat of the fall of society.
[quote=“k9bfriender, post:154, topic:918506, full:true”]
As far as online gun sales, I certainly agree with that one. Hard to check someone’s ID if they are not physically present. Do you actually sell guns online? How do you verify the identity of the person who is ordering it? I assume only in state, right?[/quote]
See, this is what gets me. People like you are extremely ignorant about these things yet want to have a say in what the laws are on it.
When a firearm is purchased online it has to be shipped to a federally licensed dealer where the buyer picks it up and goes through the background check. This idea that people are buying guns and having them shipped directly to their home is a lie perpetrated by the likes of Biden and other Democrats.
And you better research what is going to be considered an “assault weapon”. The list is going to be far more inclusive than the 1994 ban and may include almost any semi-auto which can accept a detachable magazine that holds more than 10 rounds of ammunition. That would include grandpas old Ruger 22 in the attic.
And this thought that I should hope for massive gun control laws is sick. The idea that I would wish for diminished rights of my fellow citizen so I could make a buck is repugnant.
See, this is what gets me, people like you who stand to gain monetarily think I who might be harmed by unrestricted gun sales shouldn’t want an equal say in what the laws are on it.
I have no problem with paying a fee/tax to keep my heirloom guns in the attic. So, no, I’m not worried. Last time I tried to put game food on the table I didn’t need more than ten shots before reloading either.
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
― Upton Sinclair
Except they’re not unrestricted. I would like it explained as to why all the other gun control laws that were supposed to thwart crime didn’t, but another one will?
Clearly, well meaning people need to keep trying until we get it right.
OTOH, I’m not opposed to legislating dropping gun laws that have shown to not work. As long as …see above.
See, what gets me is people like you who think that being smug is the same as being superior.
It is not a lie perpetuated by anyone, it was a question that I asked you, as my impression was that you, as an FFL, could not ship guns directly to their home. What you said is what made me question that. What you said conflicted with what I understood, so I asked you for clarification.
Your complaint about springs made me think that you were somehow shipping things to customers, as otherwise, that complaint made no sense.
To which you of course, responded with the dismissive smugness that I’ve come to expect from gun advocates in these sorts of debates. Your assumption as to my ignorance only makes your argument much more pathetic, as it is transparently false, and is only a feckless accusation that only convinces yourself of your self righteousness.
So, you don’t sell guns online then, right? People buy them online and have them shipped to you?
That is a different type of “online sales” than what I would call it, and what any meaningful legislation would either. There is no difference between that, and coming into your store and ordering something from your catalog of vendors.
The online sales that I would like to see shut down would be sites like armslist.com, where right now I could buy a NEW CUSTOM GLOCK 19 GEN 4 for $350 as a private sale. Or a dozen other guns, all as private sales, not going through an FFL. (To be fair, it would be illegal of them to them ship them, most likely we’d have to meet up, but it’s not like people never do anything illegal.)
Do you object to those sorts of online sales being banned?
If people can still buy their gun from a gun manufacturer, have it shipped to your store, where you do your FFL thing, while places like armslist are shut down or at least regulated, is that the type of gun control that you are in fear of?
Fear mongering that guns that are designed with killing lots of people in mind may find themselves restricted doesn’t actually work on me. Try it on your customers, maybe put it out with a flyer and a coupon. I seriously doubt that anything would happen on gun control at all, and if it did, it wouldn’t be nearly as devastating as your paranoid fantasies.
I said nothing about that you should hope for gun control. I said exactly the opposite, in fact. But, your attempt at twisting my words here is also very transparent for anyone to see the straws you are clutching at in order to maintain your false sense of superiority.