From: ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy)
Subject: Re: Guns and  Boston Crack Dealers (Was: Dressed for Rape)
Organization: NMSU Computer Science
	<9301021305.12@rmkhome.UUCP> <ATAYLOR.93Jan5134603@gauss.nmsu.edu>
	<9301061155.03@rmkhome.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 20:54:21 GMT

<In article <9301061155.03@rmkhome.UUCP> rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) writes:
<   In article <ATAYLOR.93Jan5134603@gauss.nmsu.edu> ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy) writes:

<   ><   I believe there is some benefit in determining if a person is
<   >,   psychologically able to take on the responsibility of owning
,   ><   a handgun.
<   >
,   >	Then why isn't Kelly also demanding licensing for cars;
<   >	automobiles are used to cause more deaths than firearms
<   >	every year.<

<   I don't know about the laws where you live but cars and drivers here are
<   licensed/registered, and cars get a title search before the registration
<   is granted.

	And do they also determine if a person is "psychologically
	able to take on the responsibility of owning a car"? 

	If not, why not?

<   ><   >>I maintain that I wouldn't want to live in a state like that, as it
<   ><   >>would rapidly turn into a scenario like Beirut.
<   ><   >
<   ><   >Yet, the states where one can just walk in and buy a gun don't have
<   ><   >much crime - they're less like Beirut* than Boston is.  If guns are
<   ><   >the problem, how come the problems are where the guns aren't?
<   >
<   ><   Most of the gunshots that are fired in Boston are crack dealers
<   ><   shooting at other crack dealers.
<   >
<   >	Said crack dealers do not obtain their firearms through
<   >	legal channels, now do they?

<   The point is, for the city of Boston, if you ignore the crack dealers
<   shooting at other crack dealers, then the number of actual violent crimes
<   involving guns drops considerably.
	<
<   If you take the town of Framingham, population 65000, where I live, and
<   where crack and heroin dealers also trade, then you might conclude that
<   there is basically no violent crime involving guns.

	Then what problem is Kelly trying to solve with his desire
	for more gun laws? Since the crack dealers don't buy their
	guns at gun stores, running gun stores out of business won't
	affect the gunfighter crack dealers, right?

<   ><   >We happen to know that criminals don't acquire guns at gun stores.
<   ><   >(It's easy enough to do the relevant research.)  Therefore, controls
<   ><   >on stores are, at best, like looking for your keys under a street
<   ><   >light when you know that you lost them somewhere else.  Sure the light
<   ><   >is good there, but you're wasting your time.
 
	Oh, look, that's already been pointed out to Kelly before,
	by Freeman.

<   ><   >We can't win a gun war any more than we can win a drug war.  How many
<   ><   >people should we jail to satisfy Kelly's bigotry?  (BTW - He's also
<   ><   >misstated the way MA's gun laws work for honest law-abiding people.)
<   >
<   ><   Apparently, the appeal process has changed over the last decade.  It's
<   ><   been a long time since anyone I know had to go through it.
<   >
<   ><   You seem to imply that if EVERYONE had a gun, there would be no crime
<   ><   and no shots fired.
<   >
<   >	Hardly. On the other hand, those states with so-called "lax"
<   >	gun laws *DO* have less violent crime than such garden spots
<   >	as Washington, DC, New York, Chicago and so forth.

<   Compare population density.

	Ok, let's do so. Texas has "lax" laws by the standards of
	the abovementioned cities, yet has a lower murder rate.
	Houston is the 4th largest city in the country, yet it
	has a lower murder rate than DC. DC's population is 600,000
	or less; El Paso, Texas is almost that big and El Paso's 
	murder rate is less than the national average.

	In fact, Los Angeles has a lower murder rate than Chicago,
	yet is a larger city.

	Try again, Kelly.

<   ><   And, of course, untrained idiots who bought a gun at K-Mart would never
<   ><   hurt themselves or anyone else by mistake.
<   >
<   >	Can Kelly show where anyone asserted this?

<   Huh?  Are you saying that people are born with the genetic talent to use
<   guns in a safe manner?

	Kelly's reading skills are a bit low. Can Kelly show where
	*anyone* on this newsgroup has asserted that no firearms
	accidents happen? 

	I doubt it.

	But I note the elitism and implied racism in Kelly's
	remarks about "untrained idiots who bought a gun at K-Mart";
	sorry, Kelly, even poor folks with the "wrong" skin color
	have the right to self defence.

	
<   ><   And your belief that no one legally buys a gun and then does something
<   ><   illegal with it is ridiculous.
<   >
<   >	The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, Department of
<   >	the Treasury, surveyed about 900 convicted felons.
<   >	Over 90% of them stated they obtained their firearms from
<   >	a source OTHER than a licensed dealer.

<   Of that 90%, how many of them already had a record when they bought
<   illegal firearms?

	Who cares? The point is, criminals don't get their guns
	from licensed dealers, so making it more difficult for
	non-criminals to get guns from those dealers won't affect
	the criminals.

	That's because criminals are people that don't obey the
	law, not even Bartley Fox-type laws.

	Surprise, surprise.

<   ><  Read a newspaper.
<   >
<   >	One of those publications that use such terms as
<   >	"automatic revolver", "Semi-automatic assault rifle",
<   >	"saturday night special"? One of *those* paragons
<   >	of factual accuracy?
<   ><
<   >
<   >	If Kelly can point to a newspaper that doesn't sensationalize
<   >	any story having to do with firearms, I'll try reading it.

<   If reported cases of gun violence are all sensationalized nonsense, then
<   I guess no one needs guns.

	Yawn. Kelly doesn't know much about this subject, but he's
	not willing to learn, either. 

	What's his point?
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns