NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,286412,00.html

When are people going to learn that guns are not the problem? It's the people who are the problem and closing gun shops won't fix the problem.

Rev. Jesse Jackson Arrested at Gun Shop Protest

Sunday , June 24, 2007

AP
ADVERTISEMENT

CHICAGO —
The Rev. Jesse Jackson was arrested Saturday at a demonstration outside a south suburban gun shop and charged with one count of criminal trespass to property.

Jackson was arrested when he refused to move away from the entrance to Chuck's Gun Shop in Riverdale, police said. He has protested with other community activists outside the shop in recent weeks after a 16-year-old honor student was gunned down on a city bus.

Police said the shooting was gang-related but the teen was not the intended target.

Jackson, who says the gun shop's proximity to Chicago provides gang members and criminals easy access to firearms, has used the protests to call for stricter gun laws.

The Rev. Michael Pfleger, a Catholic priest who oversees a South Side congregation, also was arrested and charged with Jackson.

A message seeking comment from the gun shop was not immediately returned Saturday afternoon.

Two teens have been charged as adults with taking part in the May shooting of Blair Holt, an honor student at Julian High School.

He wants stricter gun laws, so he protested at a gun store.

Seems the good reverend is confused about who makes the laws in his state.

He wants stricter gun laws, so he protested at a gun store.

Seems the good reverend is confused about who makes the laws in his state.

I second that motion.

Maybe the protests should be focused on the gangs, instead of inanimate objects.

Maybe the protests should be focused on the gangs, instead of inanimate objects.

I wonder what would happen if the same logic was applied to Nuclear Proliferation...

Jackson, who says the gun shop's proximity to Chicago provides gang members and criminals easy access to firearms, has used the protests to call for stricter gun laws.

So is the gun shop owner knowingly selling to gang members? It wouldn't surprise me if he was but I'd like to know if that is what Jackson believes.

I wonder what would happen if the same logic was applied to Nuclear Proliferation...

:rolleyes:

Nuclear proliferation is good, if it's for power generation.

So is the gun shop owner knowingly selling to gang members? It wouldn't surprise me if he was but I'd like to know if that is what Jackson believes.

There have been numerous investigations by authorities. None have found any evidence of wrongdoing (at least not enough to warrant charges). The city of Chicago spent over 400 million in various civil lawsuits, all of which were thrown out of court.

Seems the "good" "reverend" is confused about the facts of gun law.

A gun store is legally barred from selling guns to criminals, and it is a serious felony to straw-purchase a gun for a criminal.

Typical Jesse Jackoff, I hope the charges stick.

He wants stricter gun laws, so he protested at a gun store.

Seems the good reverend is confused about who makes the laws in his state.
QFT.

Seems the "good" "reverend" is confused about the facts of gun law.

A gun store is legally barred from selling guns to criminals, and it is a serious felony to straw-purchase a gun for a criminal.

Typical Jesse Jackoff, I hope the charges stick.

Do you really thing that just because it's illegal the store wont sell guns to gangs? It's not hard to say that you had no idea they were criminals if you happen to be brought in front of a judge.

There have been numerous investigations by authorities. None have found any evidence of wrongdoing (at least not enough to warrant charges). The city of Chicago spent over 400 million in various civil lawsuits, all of which were thrown out of court.

Well, fine. I may not approve of guns but what Jackson is doing is rather pointless. Even if the owner was selling them to gangs someone else would just replace him. It is rather pointless. Perhaps Jackson should instead be demanding for more after school programs for kids to do something instead of hanging out on the street. For more turn in a gun and get a "whatever" program. To actually have criminals who use a gun in a felony to stay in jail so they don't come out and reoffend. Things like this would help more since expecting the kind of gun restrictions is never going to happen.

Guns aren't the problem, people are the problem. To get rid of the problem we have to get rid of people... guns are probably the most efficeint way of doing so!

Seems the "good" "reverend" is confused about the facts of gun law.

A gun store is legally barred from selling guns to criminals, and it is a serious felony to straw-purchase a gun for a criminal.

Typical Jesse Jackoff, I hope the charges stick.

At an earlier protest, the Friar endorsed criminal activity against the shop owner and legislators who didn't do what they demanded. He later claimed that he didn't know "snuff out" was a euphamism for killing someone.

:rolleyes:

Nuclear proliferation is good, if it's for power generation.

So you agree that proliferation of nuclear weapons is bad? But why should we care about proliferation of nukes? Wouldn't it be better to concentrate on the rogue states or terrorist groups which would be willing to use them?

Could you find a better news source then fox?

Do you really thing that just because it's illegal the store wont sell guns to gangs? It's not hard to say that you had no idea they were criminals if you happen to be brought in front of a judge.

Actually, it's very hard for a gun store operator to claim that, since every firearm that the gun store sells, MUST have a NICS check performed. If the person is a criminal (or adjudicated mentally incompetent), it'll show up on the NICS check.

I wonder why this never happens in contries where laws about selling weapons to everyone really do exist..
Gettin money from weapon sells is a lot better than stoping this free killing on streets.

Maybe the protests should be focused on the gangs, instead of inanimate objects.

I couldn't agree with you more.

Could you find a better news source then fox?

Is this better?

http://www.kwqc.com/Global/story.asp?S=6701120&nav=menu83_9

Actually, it's very hard for a gun store operator to claim that, since every firearm that the gun store sells, MUST have a NICS check performed. If the person is a criminal (or adjudicated mentally incompetent), it'll show up on the NICS check.

Along w/ those annual inventory/paperwork checks by the BATFE. And since he's been investigated , there's been more than just the annual ones.

The way to get rid of guns and gun crime for the most part is remove the silly constitutional right to bear arms.

I live in Britain, guns are scarce and few have them (Farmers and the Gentry), we have a few dozen gun related deaths a year. (as some people do mangage to obtain them)

COICIDENCE? I THINK NOT!

Actually, it's very hard for a gun store operator to claim that, since every firearm that the gun store sells, MUST have a NICS check performed. If the person is a criminal (or adjudicated mentally incompetent), it'll show up on the NICS check.

And I suppose all gang members have criminal records? Use common sense; if I want to buy some guns for the gang and have a criminal record, I'll just send someone who is clean.

Guns dont kill people, rappers do.

But more to the point - guns don't fire by themselves.

Well unless its accidental discharge or whatever but that doesn't count.

The way to get rid of guns and gun crime for the most part is remove the silly constitutional right to bear arms.

I live in Britain, guns are scarce and few have them (Farmers and the Gentry), we have a few dozen gun related deaths a year. (as some people do mangage to obtain them)

COICIDENCE? I THINK NOT!

Actually it is.

We still had a low rate of gun death in the UK pre gun law.

Its more to do with society and peoples behaviors. And quite frankly, America is messed up and blames crap like computer games. I blame parenting.

And I suppose all gang members have criminal records? Use common sense; if I want to buy some guns for the gang and have a criminal record, I'll just send someone who is clean.

I'd hope there would be a limit to the number of guns you can buy at one time...

So you agree that proliferation of nuclear weapons is bad? But why should we care about proliferation of nukes? Wouldn't it be better to concentrate on the rogue states or terrorist groups which would be willing to use them?

Of course the proliferation of nuclear weapons is bad. But (IMO) nuclear weapons aren't inanimate objects. And inanimate object can be safely left sitting on a desk, in a case, in a vehicle, in a room, etc all without doing anything to it. A nuclear weapon requires regular maintainance and safety checks, to ensure that it is still safe.

Along w/ those annual inventory/paperwork checks by the BATFE. And since he's been investigated , there's been more than just the annual ones.

Annual? When I was the Sporting Goods department manager at Wal-Mart (back when most Wal-Marts sold firearms), I had to do monthly inventory checks.

The way to get rid of guns and gun crime for the most part is remove the silly constitutional right to bear arms.

I live in Britain, guns are scarce and few have them (Farmers and the Gentry), we have a few dozen gun related deaths a year. (as some people do mangage to obtain them)

COICIDENCE? I THINK NOT!

Of course the fact that UK gun crime was lower than the US even before the restrictions doesn't matter right? Or the fact that numerous countries w/ effectively zero legal ownership have very high "gun crime" while some w/ high ownership have very little, etc. Is it "coincidence" that UK violent crime went up after the recent ban?

Why is it that any thread with the word "gun" in the title has to boil down to a gun control thread? :rolleyes:

The way to get rid of guns and gun crime for the most part is remove the silly constitutional right to bear arms.

I live in Britain, guns are scarce and few have them (Farmers and the Gentry), we have a few dozen gun related deaths a year. (as some people do mangage to obtain them)

COICIDENCE? I THINK NOT!

The circumstances are different here. The population's higher, there's a lot more hunters, target shooters, and collectors here, not to mention the people that carry for self defense, and IIRC, the US has always had a higher murder rate than the UK.

And I suppose all gang members have criminal records? Use common sense; if I want to buy some guns for the gang and have a criminal record, I'll just send someone who is clean.

Once again, Straw Purchasing is a federal felony. If the courts would stop letting people plea bargain, there'ld be less "clean" records for "should be" felons.

Annual? When I was the Sporting Goods department manager at Wal-Mart (back when most Wal-Marts sold firearms), I had to do monthly inventory checks.

Sorry, I meant annual minimum by the BATFE, not the owners/managers.

Of course the proliferation of nuclear weapons is bad. But (IMO) nuclear weapons aren't inanimate objects. And inanimate object can be safely left sitting on a desk, in a case, in a vehicle, in a room, etc all without doing anything to it. A nuclear weapon requires regular maintainance and safety checks, to ensure that it is still safe.

You're missing the point, deliberately I suspect. Suppose the rogue states and terrorist groups all had the equipment and expertise needed to keep the bombs safe until they chose to use them. Would their possession of nuclear weapons worry you if you knew that the weapons could be regarded as 'inanimate objects'?

Why is it that any thread with the word "gun" in the title has to boil down to a gun control thread? :rolleyes:

Because Jackson being arrested isn't really news?

Could you find a better news source then fox?

Could you browse for one you like better?

Actually it is.

We still had a low rate of gun death in the UK pre gun law.

Its more to do with society and peoples behaviors. And quite frankly, America is messed up and blames crap like computer games. I blame parenting.
Quite simply: Thank you.
Although in SOME cases, games ARE a problem. A group of men went crazy over in california, robbing a few banks and killing a few people with chainsaws. They admitted that they'd been playing GTA: Vice City for quite some time.
I say you should have to pass some sort of mental evaluation before being able to play games that are 'over-violent'.
But then again if you can't pass a simple mental evaluation, perhaps you should be seeking some kind of help.

Why is it that any thread with the word "gun" in the title has to boil down to a gun control thread? :rolleyes:

Possibly because the protest was about gun control? :rolleyes:

And I suppose all gang members have criminal records? Use common sense; if I want to buy some guns for the gang and have a criminal record, I'll just send someone who is clean.

My post was in response to the part of your post where you said this:

It's not hard to say that you had no idea they were criminals if you happen to be brought in front of a judge

As far as you sending in someone that has a clean record to buy you a firearm, that's called a straw purchase, and that person is commiting a felony. If they're caught (say, when you use the firearm in a crime, and if the police recover it), they will be going to jail (but maybe not before they sell you out for a reduced sentence).

Why is it that any thread with the word "gun" in the title has to boil down to a gun control thread? :rolleyes:

A lot of people are intent on destroying and abridging the natural and fundamental right to keep and bear arms, and this is repugnant to liberty.

Why is it that any thread with the word "gun" in the title has to boil down to a gun control thread? :rolleyes:

Because it's fun?



:D

As far as you sending in someone that has a clean record to buy you a firearm, that's called a straw purchase, and that person is commiting a felony. If they're caught (say, when you use the firearm in a crime, and if the police recover it), they will be going to jail (but maybe not before they sell you out for a reduced sentence).

Don't be so naive. Do you really think gangsters who shoot people in broad daylight are worried about committing such puny felonies?

Sorry, I meant annual minimum by the BATFE, not the owners/managers.

DOH! I suspected as much, but wasn't sure.

As far as you sending in someone that has a clean record to buy you a firearm, that's called a straw purchase, and that person is commiting a felony. If they're caught (say, when you use the firearm in a crime, and if the police recover it), they will be going to jail (but maybe not before they sell you out for a reduced sentence).

Lawl.

That's a fairly big if, and if you're in a shootout, I think a felony is going to be the least of your worries. And that's only if you get caught.

A lot of people are intent on destroying and abridging the natural and fundamental right to keep and bear arms, and this is repugnant to liberty.

Yeah... you have a fundamental right to life and liberty. No doubt there. But placing gun ownership at this same level just seems foolish.

So is the gun shop owner knowingly selling to gang members? It wouldn't surprise me if he was but I'd like to know if that is what Jackson believes.
Did the gun(s) from said shooting even come from that gun shop? Were the guns legal?



Either way... LOL @ Jackson being arrested. :D

You're missing the point, deliberately I suspect. Suppose the rogue states and terrorist groups all had the equipment and expertise needed to keep the bombs safe until they chose to use them. Would their possession of nuclear weapons worry you if you knew that the weapons could be regarded as 'inanimate objects'?

It doesn't matter if they have the equipment and expertise to keep them safe. The fact that they have to do ANYTHING to them in order to keep them safe, means they're not inanimate objects. Therefore, your example of inanimate objects (from your first post on this thread) isn't valid.

And yes, the possession of nuclear weapons by terrorists/rogue states does concern me, no matter what they can be regarded as.

ETA: I think we should stay on topic. If you want to keep this conversation up, either telegram me, or a new thread should be started.

Don't be so naive. Do you really think gangsters who shoot people in broad daylight are worried about committing such puny felonies?

So straw purchasers = gangsters who shoot people in broad daylight?

So straw purchasers = gangsters who shoot people in broad daylight?

Don't twist my words. My point is that it is incredibly easy for such criminals to purchase guns, and incredibly easy for the gun salesman to avoid punishment.

Yeah... you have a fundamental right to life and liberty. No doubt there. But placing gun ownership at this same level just seems foolish.

Weapons ownership, the ability to defend yourself and your things. In a prior age, that was realized with swords or axes or whatever, nowadays guns are de rigeur.

Don't twist my words. My point is that it is incredibly easy for such criminals to purchase guns, and incredibly easy for the gun salesman to avoid punishment.

I'm not twisting your words. Criminals can't purchase firearms legally. Firearms salespeople can't easily avoid punishment for selling firearms to criminals. Straw purchasers (ones with previously clean records) are commiting felonies for purchasing firearms for criminals that can't buy one legally on their own. Straw purchasers aren't the ones shooting people in broad daylight.

I'm not twisting your words. Criminals can't purchase firearms legally. Firearms salespeople can't easily avoid punishment for selling firearms to criminals. Straw purchasers (ones with previously clean records) are commiting felonies for purchasing firearms for criminals that can't buy one legally on their own. Straw purchasers aren't the ones shooting people in broad daylight.

Wrong. CONVICTED criminals cannot purchase firearms legally. Straw purchasers are committing felonies...big deal. I suppose the salesman has to ask purchasers if they are buying guns for criminals or criminal purposes? And no, the straw purchasers may not be shooting people, but in this case, they could well have been buying them for people who do.

You need to wake up and realize that just because something is a felony does not frighten criminals. Who cares about being convicted for straw purchasing when you're committing murder and probably other crimes?

I suppose the salesman has to ask purchasers if they are buying guns for criminals ...?
Actually, the 4473 does ask if you are the person buying the gun, so it does pretty much ask if you are buying it for criminals.

Who cares about being convicted for straw purchasing when you're committing murder and probably other crimes?

If you're doing a straw purchase, then you're not commiting murder and probably other crimes. The biggest advantage of a straw purchaser is, (other than commiting a felony for purchasing a firearm for a prohibited person) the person doesn't commit crimes. If they did, then they wouldn't be useful as a straw purchaser anymore.

Wrong. CONVICTED criminals cannot purchase firearms legally. Straw purchasers are committing felonies...big deal. I suppose the salesman has to ask purchasers if they are buying guns for criminals or criminal purposes? And no, the straw purchasers may not be shooting people, but in this case, they could well have been buying them for people who do.

You need to wake up and realize that just because something is a felony does not frighten criminals. Who cares about being convicted for straw purchasing when you're committing murder and probably other crimes?

5-10 years in a federal prison (per offense) is a big deal to most people.

Line 12A on the form 4473 asks if the person giving their information is the purchaser of the firearm.

Hence one of the reasons why straw purchasing is illegal.

If you're doing a straw purchase, then you're not commiting murder and probably other crimes. The biggest advantage of a straw purchaser is, (other than commiting a felony for purchasing a firearm for a prohibited person) the person doesn't commit crimes. If they did, then they wouldn't be useful as a straw purchaser anymore.

Naturally, but what's your point? These people would be buying guns for people who do commit the crimes.

EDIT: 5-10 years in a federal prison (per offense) is a big deal to most people.

I suppose that's why so many people commit crimes.

Line 12A on the form 4473 asks if the person giving their information is the purchaser of the firearm.

And I suppose the purchaser will inform the salesman that he is buying guns for a criminal gang?

Every gun manufactured or imported in the United States (exept curos and relics) has a serial number etched onto the metal. When you buy a firearm (assuming you pass the NCIS), that serial number is recorded, along with your personal information, onto documents. The gunshop keeps these documents for quite a while, and must turn them over to authorities on request. This connects you to the firearm. There are substantial penalties ifa firearm owned by you is used in a crime, even if you were not the one using it.

Every gun manufactured or imported in the United States (exept curos and relics) has a serial number etched onto the metal. When you buy a firearm (assuming you pass the NCIS), that serial number is recorded, along with your personal information, onto documents. The gunshop keeps these documents for quite a while, and must turn them over to authorities on request. This connects you to the firearm. There are substantial penalties ifa firearm owned by you is used in a crime, even if you were not the one using it.

Can you file off the serial number?

Can you file off the serial number?

Potentially, you could. But, for handguns, the Serial number is located on the inside of the barrel. This makes significantly distorting the serial number quite a task. That, and it also messes up the rifling, which effects performance.

It's much more difficult then you see in the movies or Law and Order.

Potentially, you could. But, for handguns, the Serial number is located on the inside of the barrel. This makes significantly distorting the serial number quite a task. That, and it also messes up the rifling, which effects performance.

It's much more difficult then you see in the movies or Law and Order.

Who told you that load of crap?

The serial number is on the frame or receiver of the firearm, the component which is itself considered, for the purposes of the NFA, GCA, &c, the firearm.

There is a reason that a barrel can be mailed without using an FFL, or that a barrel can be changed out but a gun still retain its SN.

Take an ar-15 of any stripe- the upper receiver, which houses the barrel and other components is *not* considered a firearm, and can be mailed ordinarily and sold to anyone.

The lower receiver, which contains the trigger assembly among other parts, but no barrel, is serial numbered and is treated as a firearm.

The same is true of handguns. A barrel (or just about any other part, aside from the SN'd frame) can be mailed through the ordinary mail or sold to anyone.

I heard it from someplace. I can't exactly remember where...

I stand corrected.

Could you find a better news source then fox?

Which one is a "better new source?" Or by "better" do you mean "biased in the opposite direction" of FOX?

Is this better?

http://www.kwqc.com/Global/story.asp?S=6701120&nav=menu83_9

Funny, but both stories look the same to me. I wonder what the FOX haters problem is. :rolleyes:

And I suppose all gang members have criminal records? Use common sense; if I want to buy some guns for the gang and have a criminal record, I'll just send someone who is clean.

Or buy them on the black market, or steal them, or make them, or....

Naturally, but what's your point? These people would be buying guns for people who do commit the crimes.

Do you have a problem following what I'm responding to? In one post, you claim that the straw purchasers don't care about a felony charge for straw purchase, when they have bigger crimes to worry about (like murder). Then when I respond to that, you claim otherwise.

EDIT:

I suppose that's why so many people commit crimes.?

Some people don't care about the consequences. Still, a significant portion of the population is dissuaded from committing a crime due to the punishment that they'd get.

And I suppose the purchaser will inform the salesman that he is buying guns for a criminal gang?

No, the purchaser probably won't.

Potentially, you could. But, for handguns, the Serial number is located on the inside of the barrel. This makes significantly distorting the serial number quite a task. That, and it also messes up the rifling, which effects performance.

It's much more difficult then you see in the movies or Law and Order.

A file would mess up rifling but a serial number wouldn't?

Do you have a problem following what I'm responding to? In one post, you claim that the straw purchasers don't care about a felony charge for straw purchase, when they have bigger crimes to worry about (like murder). Then when I respond to that, you claim otherwise.

If a straw purchaser bought guns for the people in the example here, I believe that is known as aiding and abetting murder. He certainly would be charged in some way. Now stop arguing over semantics.

Some people don't care about the consequences. Still, a significant portion of the population is dissuaded from committing a crime due to the punishment that they'd get.

....

[QUOTE=Gun Manufacturers;12807602]No, the purchaser probably won't.

Exactly.

Or buy them on the black market, or steal them, or make them, or....

I don't know about making them, but the other two are quite true.

If a straw purchaser bought guns for the people in the example here, I believe that is known as aiding and abetting murder. He certainly would be charged in some way. Now stop arguing over semantics.

One of the biggest complaints from law enforcement is that criminals are being allowed to plea bargain down to lesser charges (if they're charged at all) and being released back onto the streets.


No wonder they have no fear of prosecution.

Man, at least Jesse can rhyme. Why couldn't they have nailed Al Sharpton instead?