The Brady Campaign is running out of money, but they saw this a a valid thing to blow their last few dimes.
So let’s just skip past the lies, because we all know Felons can’t OWN guns let alone carry them FEDERALLY, so just because Arizona doesn’t require carry permits doesn’t mean their imaginary thugs can legally pack, or that interstate trafficking in handguns is illegal on a federal level.
Remember they honestly believe that the law making it a crime to privately sell a handgun in Pennsylvania will make a Philly drug dealer switch to selling Avon, save for the Iron Pipeline supplying PA criminals with guns from Virgina, despite that being a serious federal crime.
Oh yeah, and no data showing that actually happens.
Still I was most amused when the criminal says “I want to shoot California SO BAD!” Have a look at the numbers! Boy that must be a safe state with all those gun traces! Yeah I know not all gun traces are for crimes committed…but all guns recovered at crime scenes are traced! And hey, look the vast majority of them come from INSIDE California, and for ALL traced guns the AVERAGE time-to-crime interval was 13.68 years! Yep that means for every dude that does the whole “Iron Pipeline” thing and smuggles a gun into LA from Vegas, there needs to be a gun used in a crime traced back to a legal sale during the Carter administration!
So really the criminals aren’t looking at states for how strictly they control their guns….but from violent crime data you see that they ARE looking for states that strictly control their GUN OWNERS!
Because nobody wants to get shot….and the Brady Campaign wants MORE people to get shot!
Felons can’t legally own or carry guns in AZ due to federal law, but I’d bet my bottom dollar that they can’t legally own or carry guns in AZ due to AZ state law, too.
In Oregon, “felon in possession” is a state-level crime as well as a federal crime. Which makes sense, as it allows state-level prosecutors to go after felons who illegally own/carry guns without involving federal agencies. I’d be truly surprised if it wasn’t a similar setup in other states, including Arizona.
I still don’t get the logic that concludes that a law declaring that carrying a handgun by law-abiding citizens is legal — and that carrying cannot in and of itself be grounds for “reasonable suspicion” — somehow makes it legal for felons to carry. It doesn’t. It just means that the cops have to have another reason to stop/detain/question someone.
“Another reason”, as in, “evidence a crime has been committed by the person stopped/detained/questioned”. Fourth Amendment, FTW! 🙂
IF there are still contributors to the Brady Bunch out there, by this point they should be demanding their money back!
“Remember they honestly believe that the law making it a crime to privately sell a handgun in Pennsylvania will make a Philly drug dealer switch to selling Avon, save for the Iron Pipeline supplying PA criminals with guns from Virgina, despite that being a serious federal crime. ”
Your tense is ambiguous here so I’m not sure if you’re saying that PA already has a ban on private transfers with handguns. They already do and thus we can see that the thugs didn’t go to selling Avon.
Again, your tense is a big vague so I’m not sure if that’s what you’re saying.
There was a reason why I picked PA for the reference.
I guess I’m going to die, because that was not funny.
Do they ever even stop to listen to themselves? First they talk about how easy it is to smuggle guns into California and how strong the street market is there, and then 15 seconds later lament what a bummer it is that California’s tough gun laws means they can’t have their guns.