So the anti-gun background check bill in Oregon is heading to the governor, and I found this rather balanced report:
Karl Durkheimer is warily eyeing the new background check bill nearing final passage in the Oregon Legislature.
Durkheimer, co-owner with his wife of two gun stores in the Portland area, said he doubts requiring private sellers to pass background checks will stop criminals. And he’s not sure he’ll even agree to run the checks, saying it doesn’t look like a good fit for his business, Northwest Armory.
“I believe there will be very little benefit to this law,” said Durkheimer, adding that he suspects a lot of gun enthusiasts who buy and trade firearms will simply ignore the new requirement.
We don’t need to speculate, he’s right!
Officer Brian Moore followed his father into the New York Police Department, rose to the ranks of an elite plainclothes unit tasked with confronting the city’s most dangerous street crime and died on Monday, two days after a gunman opened fire on him in Queens.
…It was about 6:15 p.m. on Saturday when Officer Moore steered his unmarked police sedan toward a man whom he and his partner observed walking on a quiet street in Queens Village and adjusting his waistband in what the police said was a suspicious manner.
They pulled up behind him and as they began talking to him, the police said, the man turned and fired at the car. Officer Moore was struck in the cheek and had trauma to his brain, officials said. Officer Moore’s partner, Officer Erik Jansen, was not hit.
Ninety minutes after the shooting, officers arrested Mr. Blackwell at a house within view of the scene of the gunfire, near the corner of 212th Street and 104th Road. He had discarded the weapon, the police said, and tried to mix into a crowd of curious neighbors as heavily armed officers went house to house.
…The police said three .38-caliber rounds were fired at the officers, two striking their car and one hitting Officer Moore.
The gun was among 23 reported stolen in 2011 from a Georgia gun shop, the chief of detectives, Robert K. Boyce, said. Nine of those weapons, including the revolver, have been recovered in New York City by the police, he said.
Not only does New York have laws against transferring guns without background checks, but it’s also illegal to transport the guns across state lines in this manner, and it’s also illegal to steal guns.
This all isn’t mentioning how illegal it is to shoot a police officer in the face. Background check laws don’t prevent crime, getting criminals off the street prevents crime!
Supporters say it makes sense to close a loophole that allows easy access to guns by felons or other people who are legally prohibited from owning firearms.
“It’s like saying you shouldn’t have everybody go through security at the airport,” said Ted Alcorn, research director for Everytown for Gun Safety.
The group, with financial backing from billionaire Michael Bloomberg, the former New York mayor, has helped pass similar laws in recent years in Washington and Colorado and is now focused on Oregon.
Polls show strong public support for background checks, making them the focus for many advocates trying to reduce gun violence in the wake of the mass shootings in Newtown, Connecticut, and other cities around the country.
First up, if there was such strong support for this bill, why did it pass on such narrow margins, and why was is strictly across party lines? Also if the people of Oregon want this law so bad, why does it need to be brought into the state by a Tyrant from New York?
Also given how useless the TSA is for security, the Airport analogy is quite accurate.
Hopefully this won’t become law, but as we’ve seen in Washington, even if it does, the people as well as the police are completely ignoring it.
More guns equal more lethal crime. The evidence is convincing. Studies consistently show how increases in firearms ownership are positively associated with increases in homicide and suicide. Whether on the street or in the home, where handguns and rifles are easily available they are more likely to be used in a criminal act. This applies across most wealthy societies and middle-income ones too.
Except crime is down, and gun ownership, as well as carry permit issuance is up. Why do anti-gunners want to ignore the drop in crime so much?
Either way, they have their myths set up, and they superimpose them on reality because the truth is not as important as their agenda!
“…where handguns and rifles are easily available they are more likely to be used in a criminal act.”
Actually, that’s True. Because CRIMINALS USE HANDGUNS AND RIFLES IN CRIMINAL ACTS! THAT’S WHY THEY ARE CALLED CRIMINALS, NOT NUNS!
Sheesh! Is Simple Logic too hard for these Chuckleheads to use?
“More guns equal more lethal crime.” Except where they don’t. In my area, we have political subdivisions adjacent to one another where the murder rates per 100,000 differ by a factor of 100 or more, and where I’m pretty confident the gun ownership rates are pretty similar. Maybe it’s not about guns at all.
That last article is a very slick, very manipulative example of cherry-picking data to fit a pre-conceived conclusion.
The evidence is convincing. Studies consistently show how increases in firearms ownership are positively associated with increases in homicide and suicide.
And of course they give us a bait and switch. Though this author said “homicide and suicide”, the study linked to is for “gun deaths”. There is no correlation between gun ownership and murder rates.
Oregon’s bill passed, but not along strict party lines. Three House Democrats joined the Republicans and voted AGAINST the bill.
But now it’s on the governor’s desk. If any readers are in Oregon, please take my advice and spam Gov. Brown’s contact form. She’s endorsed by pro-woman and pro-gay-rights groups. Hit her in the heartstrings with stories of battered women who accept loaned firearms for self-protection against abusive spouses, and will become criminals if S.B. 941 becomes law. I doubt it will affect her decision, but we won’t know unless we try.
“More guns equal more lethal crime.” That HuffPo piece is from Brazil’s Igarape Institute, a think tank.
You may want to look at Wikipedia’s “Gun Politics in Brazil”. I did a quick scan. I don’t know anything about Brazil or its gun politics. But, it looks like an anti-rights referendum there was defeated a few years back. Among the arguments was the observation that ” . . . regions [in Brazil] where gun ownership is widespread were the ones with the smallest number of gun-related deaths.”
IOW-more guns, fewer gun-related deaths.