The guns he purchased were unregistered with the State of Mass. He was by the State’s definition a felon, albeit an unconvicted felon. He broke an estimated 4-7 gun laws in order to complete his crime. He turned from law-abiding citizen to criminal long before he walked into that office.
but for the sake of this argument, only CONVICTED felons cannot legally possess an untraceable gun now. a registration law would allow the confiscation of guns bought illegally and unregistered by anyone.
Thanks, I’m glad I’m now eligible to join my local militia based on your highly informed opinion. :wally
I think they’re protecting my right to own a gun. I haven’t exercised that right yet, but I’m glad that the government still recognizes it. They cover every position in favor of the right to keep and bear arms, but why shouldn’t they? AFAIK, they are the only game in town, and NO lobbying group takes a middle of the road stance; everyone is for or against something. The opposing side can be taken care of by …well, the opposing side.
Besides this, I appreciate their being a clearinghouse for knowledge about guns and gun safety.
UncleBeer: I take it you are unfamiliar with the concept of time. At any one instant, you are correct, one cannot be a law-abiding citizen and a criminal. But one can go from being a law-abiding citizen to a criminal in the time it takes to fire a gun, or, if you don’t like that example, in the time it takes to walk out of a store with shoplifted merchandise. I didn’t think I had to be quite this explicit to make my point, but apparently I do.
You said you have “no intent upon breaking the law.” Right now you don’t, and you probably never will. But some people who are currently law-abiding citizens with no intent to break the law may shift from that position over the course of time. Maybe they’ll develop paranoid schizophrenia, and act out violently. Maybe they’ll have a lovers quarrel and lose their heads. And if one of those situations arises, it’s probably not good for them to have a gun—even one that was purchased legally-around.
Now: do I think people without criminal records should be allowed to purchase and own guns? Yes. But do I think that people without criminal records should be allowed to purchase and own guns BECAUSE they have no criminal records? No. If you can’t make the distinction, post again, and I’ll help.
PS. Merriam-Webster’s lists a “felon” as “one who has committed a felony.” It does not list “felon” as a synonym for “criminal.” What’s next, the OED?
JJohn: If your point is that Mike McDermott was a criminal before he started shooting people, fine. If you want an example of someone who used a legally purchased handgun to commit a crime—that is, someone who transitioned from law-abiding citizen to criminal with one crime involving a legally purchased gun—I’m sure if I had the time I could find hundreds, if not thousands. As for further illustrating my point that one can go from being a law-abiding citizen to a criminal, I thank you.
BF: I don’t know what the hell your response had to do with my post. Nevertheless I think it speaks to my “ignorant wacko” remark.
Sandrala,
You’re arguements are absolutely incredible. In one fell swoop you have been able to humble some of the more respected debaters on the pro-gun side, and able to identify this humble poster so accurately, all in two posts!! I cannot believe we have been debating gun control, et al., for months without a resolution until your arrival. Where have you been?!?
((must start filling empty head, mmm, maybe I should read Mao, nah, maybe Lenin, something with true meaning))
All criminals are law-abiding at one time. They CHOOSE to cross the line and should be punished accordingly. As of December 31, 1999 there were 1,366,721 people in prisons or awaiting trial. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/prisons.htm This works out to be .005% of the US population using 270 million as a figure for total population. Note that this total does not separate types of crimes, just those convicted and under Fed or State custody. The number of criminals incarcerated that used or carried a gun is about 16% http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/press/sospi91.pr
My point, and one that most on the other side of this argument overlook, is that most people are not, and never will be criminals. The overwhelming majority of people are decent, hard-working folks who won’t ever commit a crime, let alone use a gun to commit a crime.
I’m not preaching, I’m just stating the facts. I refuse to be treated like a criminal because of a hobby that I have chosen. No argument on your side will ever change my mind.
“The bottom line, IMHO, as a gun owner is: If I have to register my firearms with a government organization that is not looking out for my best interest is, sooner or later, they will look up my registration, cruise by my house and say, this is a warrant to check out your house to see if you have illegal weapons here”
Dear mr./mrs(?) BF, you seem to be a dyed in the wool republican against any commie bastard trying to take away your right to own a gun. Now while i believe in our rights as american citizens to own a nice little piece of metal intended to rip holes in fleshy animals (hell boys i’m from the south), the scenario you describe would only be undertaken under the guidance (social direction) of your right wing god-fearing republican politician/law maker anyway. i am young, white, and american so i obviously don’t want the government telling me what i can and can’t own - however i still don’t understand what the problem is in having people register?
i am new at this boys so be gentle
On that note, if I may direct you to the Great Debates forum, peruse the thread entitled Handgun Registration. The discussion there is being treated in a more civil tone. As for the rest of your post, dreck.
JJohn: You are absolutely right. I take no issue with anything you have said.
My point all along has simply been that “because I am a law-abiding citizen” is not, in and of itself, a good reason for why people should be allowed to have guns. As you yourself said, “All criminals are law-abiding at one time.” Precisely. People’s “law-abiding citizen” status is not fixed. Yet the gun lobby, when it uses this argument, seems unable to understand this. And that makes people like me nervous.
People should be allowed to have guns because of the Second Amendment, or for self-defense, or for any number of good reasons. The “because I’m a law-abiding citizen” argument is not one of them.
Incidentally, I am not on a “side.” I could just as easily be pro-gun as anti-gun. I only meant to point out the flawed reasoning of the “law-abiding citizen” argument, why it concerns me and others like me, and why the smart people in the pro-gun movement should try to keep the dumb people from using it.
Are you suggesting that we punish people before they commit any wrongdoings?
Very well. I hereby declare you a mass murderer, rapist, child molester, and traitor. I sentence you to death by squicking. Have a nice day.
Uh…Randy is my name. I couldn’t come up with a real clever “handle” like yours, good buddy.
Let me tell you this though, you’re gonna need that HK 308 if I come over there. See, I can be a tough guy 3,000 miles away too.
I’m really, really trying to stay out of this because i started this thread hoping to hear peoples opinions rather then to see my own -very poor- writing.
But i had to jump in and say how great i think this is. This is exactly what i was looking for; people aren’t beating each other over the head as i had worried they might. And i’m getting exactly the kind of information i was looking for.
Thank you all very much and please keep it up if you can, the more the better.
Upham
Ok, so i hadn’t noticed the post directly before mine, nor a couple others.
I posted this in the pit because i wanted hard core, non suger cookie opinions. As fun as pissing contests are, i’m sure you can find some other place to do it.
Thank you.
Just to make that perfectly clear (because i really wnat to go to bed, but i dont want people to start argueing about what i’m talking about)
I am more then fine with argueing back and forth and discussing the opinions. However, it would be great if people would not threaten to kill each other.
i’m just basically asking that the OP be kept in mind when offering to shoot someone a thousand miles away. This is how wars get started…
**
What I attempted to illustrate however is just how small a percentage of people turn bad. My analogy/cliche is that we are making a mountain out of a mole hill on this registration issue. I feel that it gives the authorities too much knowledge concerning my privacy. Sex offenders are registered because they commited a crime. Cars are registered to be on the public right of way because fees need to be paid to fix the public right of way. I am still looking for a reason to register my guns. I am not trying to be an a-hole but I really haven’t seen one posted yet. The references to cars pulled over with unregistered guns is nonsense. If a person is pulled over with guns under their front seat, registered or not, they will/should be charged with posession and arrested according to state law. Exceptions would be if they held a CCW permit. **
**
I think again, that I have not stated my opinion correctly or you are missing it. We (NRA, Gon owners in general) state the “law abiding” argument simply because we choose NOT to side with the non-law abiding element. Therefore our logic is sound. The other side (not necessarily yours) groups gunowners together with criminals. For a lack of a better term, this is not fair. We state that anyone who is “law abiding” should not have their Second Amendment rights infringed upon. Once that person has committed a crime, they are no longer a member of the good guy club and at that point deserve what they have coming to them.**
**I’m sorry to have paintd you with too large of a brush. The problem is that any threat (perceived or otherwise) to my rights promotes a knee-jerk reaction and I am put on defense mode. As a gun owner, I have no more time for compromise, until someone can come up with a VERY good argument for it. **
As I said in the other thread, over in Great Debates, well hell. I’ll just quote it:
THAT is why we should not have handgun registration. If confiscation is not the goal, then registration should be dismissed outright.
That is a bit of a hoot but that is not what I feel it is about on the self incrimination issue. Never the less, as others have said, where is the good that out weighs the bad of gun registration?
My ability to Intellectualize allowed me to Rationalize which got me Institutionalized!
Guess what ! The person around here that gives the classes for Concealed Carry is the ** Chief of Police.**
The gun that you bring to the class to use is ** not ** written down, nor checked to see if it is registered. Just must be a pistol, i.e.: under 16 inches and not be a smooth bore.
I guess the local police are not too worried that the criminal element around here are going to flip out and start shooting.
I just want to know why, when one of their guns are mising or especially stolen, doesn’t these gun lovers round up a posse to try to get it back? If that happens more often, crime will go down in a hurry.