XPost: aus.politics.guns, can.talk.guns, uk.politics.guns   
   From: 10x@teluös.net   
      
   On Mon, 23 Mar 2009 08:42:23 +1100, "Trevor Wilson"   
    wrote:   
      
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >"10x" <10x@teluös.net> wrote in message   
   >news:b6i9s4lsaf6so7lq3ks9ctb9crg16drjiq@4ax.com...   
   >> On Sun, 15 Mar 2009 23:02:15 +1100, "Blinky Bill"    
   >> wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> The exisiting laws are entirely adequate.   
   >>>   
   >>>What is your evidence for that? The US gun homicide rate certainly   
   >>>suggests   
   >>>otherwise.   
   >>   
   >> Murder is against the law in the U.S.A.   
   >   
   >**Well that law doesn't work. Perhaps it should be removed from the law   
   >books. Is that your inference? Or are you trying to say something else?   
   >Perhaps you could elaborate.   
      
   My point is that folks willing to break the law and taboo against   
   murder are not going to care about a gun law or method of murdering   
   others.  Firearms do not cause the intent to murder.   
      
   >> Folks who have the intent to commit murder don't really care what   
   >> method they use.   
   >   
   >**Perhaps. In the US, however, they prefer to use a gun.   
   >   
   You are quite correct they do perfer to use a gun in the U.S.   
   However they also use other methods when firearms are not available.   
   Canada has strict controls on firearms.   
   Jamaica has a complete ban on firearms.   
   Folks still get murdered in both countries.   
      
   >> The U.S.A. has over 20,000 laws restricting the use of firearms   
   >   
   >**Really? That many? Got a cite for that? However, just to humour you for   
   >the moment, you should understand that 20,000 weak, haphazard, poorly   
   >regulated and just plain nonsensical gun control laws are not a replacement   
   >for a dozen well thought out, tough, sane and properly policed gun control   
   >laws. Perhaps the US could learn from places like Australia, where the gun   
   >control laws are tough, sane, well policed and homogeneously applied accros   
   >the entire nation.   
      
   Where they don't work, same as Canada.   
   In Canada the firearms laws are the same across the nation, yet crime   
   rates with firearms vary from region to region - totally unrealted to   
   the number of firearms in each region.  If the gun laws worked, the   
   crime rate would be the same in all regions.   
      
   >> including a federal law that prohibits possession of a firearm by a   
   >> convicted felon.  Many of the murders commited by all means in the   
   >> U.S.A. are by felons with histories of violence.   
   >   
   >**Of course. Thanks to the weak, haphazard and poorly regulated gun control   
   >laws in the US, it is a trivial exercise for a felon to buy a gun from a   
   >secondary source. Here's sort of how it might go:   
   >   
   >Felon: "I'd like to buy your second hand gun please."   
   >Gun seller: " Are you a convicted felon?"   
   >Felon: "Nope."   
   >Gun seller: "Good. Here's your gun. Have fun."   
      
   Do you have any numbers on the rate at which convicted felons do this   
   in the U.S.A.?   
   Or are you speculating?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)