Obama's "gun-control" will not lower crime

Executive orders regarding Background checks:" I was just making a point that a lot of people don't use legally means of obtaining a firearm, including the mentally ill."Of the 61 mass shootings in the US dating back to 1982, 49 of the shooters obtained their weapons legally... A large number of would-be criminals obtain their weapons through legal measures, which means that increased background checks will phase out at least some of these people which will in turn lower crime. http://www.washingtonpost.com..."And increasing the research, investigation, personnel.... all to somehow make the background heck system better, is a waste of money and a lost cause within itself."Opinion..... Again....."Seeing to as most criminals commit crimes with guns obtained in an illegal manner aka bypassing the background check system."Of the 10.8 million applications to buy a gun that were denied, convicted felons account for the largest share of those rejected; persons with a record of domestic violence, while growing in recent years, are a distant second.http://www.publicintegrity.org...Half of all people who fail background checks were felons who were trying to get a gun.... Which is enough evidence to show that background checks, in the bad state they are already in, have already prevented thousands of felons from getting guns, most likely to use for nefarious purposes. Therefore strengthening the background system will halt more problem people from getting guns to use for nefarious purposes, which in turn would lower crime. "But, the goal, it seems, Obama is trying to get to is make a universal and federally regulated background check system with no state lines or privacy acts hindering it. It will end up being a waste and it won't work. "Saying the same thing over and over and over without giving any evidence to support it doesnt make it true."It will only make it harder for law abiding citizens to buy a gun"If they arent a felon, have no criminal record, and are mentally sane, there is literally nothing that would prevent you from owning a gun...."And I am also very much against taking more rights away from the states and giving more power to the federal government."I was wondering what was really driving your opinions regarding this whole thing.... Ill keep this bias in mind. Executive Orders regarding upgrading safety standards of guns"They are simply put, NOT reliable. Guns are very dangerous in the wrong hands and locking them up should be taken seriously."You just did a complete flip flop where originally you said theres nothing wrong with them and they are proven to work, to they are not reliable and that cheap electronic gun locks suck..... Executive Order regarding hiring an ATF director"there is no proof that the push will work. And there is no proof that it will reduce crime."Hiring more ATF workers to coordinate with states to seize illegal caches of guns, shut down places that illegally sell or manufacture guns, better utilize the resources the ATF already has, and actually having leadership are all reforms that can help guns from falling into the wrong hands, which in turn will cut back the number of crimes committed. Like I said before, a classroom with no teacher of any kind will get nowhere fast, but when there is a teacher the whole system changes drastically to become more effective and efficient. Executive order to give training to security and officers to better handle a shooter situation"And the SWAT team has every skill required for dealing with shooters"I already explained how every movie theater and school in the country doesnt have a SWAT team 5 minutes away just waiting to deploy. When SWAT isnt around, the next line of defense of people are local police officers and security guards. It makes natural sense that funding a couple thousand officers to better handle a situation would be much better then spending a sh*tload more money to give all teachers guns and train them to handle shooters.... Its funny that pro is dead-set against the government intervening to do anything, unless it supports his alternative to a situation.....Executive Order to study successful forms of gun safety technology"EO15 does NOT say anything about "gun control". It talks about "gun safety technology" and to "develope innovative technologies""Wow I really misread that one, my bad. Wait a second... You were the one who two seconds ago was completely denouncing how ineffective electronic gun safeties are, which Im fairly certain qualifies as gun safety technology. This research could show how ineffective certain safeties are and help make guns safer for everyone. Doesnt really tie into gun crime I know but still it is something worth looking into. =========================================================================="And seeing to as NONE of these 23 Executive Orders are executed yet. It is inevitable that this argument was going to based of of logic and opinion. Seeing to the fact that they don't exist yet."But the problem is, youre only using opinion for your arguments and not logic at all.... For almost every argument youve given youve said at one point or another that it wont work or is a complete waste, yet never once did you go into any kind of detail explaining WHY it wont work or WHY its doomed to fail. You just make a statement and move on to the next argument, thats opinion based on your bias against a big government, not opinion with logic.... Example of one of pro's arguments: "Good luck on finding them. That's all I have to say. I'm sure our lost and stolen guns will be found as fast as the Fast and Furious guns."How is that an argument based off of any kind of logic at all? List of forfeited arguments: - 1 - Pro drops the argument that E.O.4 to review categories of people who shouldnt own a gun would prevent dangerous people from slipping past the system and getting their hands on a gun - 2 - Pro drops the argument that E.O.'s 9 and 10 will help track down lost guns and trace back guns used in crimes to their dealers, a process that would help lower crime - 3 - Pro forfeits that government agencies used to enforce gun control are terribly underfunded and understaffed, meaning more resources will help these agencies execute their job better and fight gun crime - 4 - Pro forfeits that the NICS is lacking in a lot of data and in need of updating, which Obama's executive orders would fix by setting standards for what is necessary information to be shared - 5 - Pro forfeits that police officers cannot carry out a full background check since the FBI only looks into criminal history, and not drug addiction or mental health, which will be fixed by an Executive Order that lets law enforcement have all the information they need. I would like to thank the pro though for a very speedy debate, im thrilled that I was able to finish this before the Superbowl even started. I would also like to thank all the voters for reading.Now excuse me, I need to go cheer for the Ravens.