Gun Expert Lott: Let Teachers Carry Arms, Ban Gun-Free Zones to Halt Mass Shootings

be wary of 'experts' they hide behind the namesakes, as a way of hiding the other half of stuff they dont know shit about..

to balance it, you'd find experts in 'no licence, no gun' stance or even no guns at all...trouble with USA, theres MORE fucking gun shops than there are as gas stations !!!!

here's that something to really think about, WHY THE FUCK so many gun shops, what for?
theres a fine line between guns for hunting, and guns for sports and guns for protection, and at end of the day all guns are for killing.

getting more people to have access to guns isnt going to help
 
Jiro said:
no. back then - the cops didn't have assault weapons because there were no budget plus there was no need for it. the thought of "militarizing" peace officers was unfathomable until LA Bank Robbery. and now.... our "peace officers" - notice the irony - are armed to the teeth and are dressed like GI Joe. that is very sad for America.

These bank robbers modified their guns to be fully-auto. at that time - it was very easy to modify semi-automatic AK-47 into full-auto AK-47. You just have to drill a hole in it to install an autosear pin.

since then, police departments were allowed to purchase military weapons leftovers from National Guards. I'm against this and I believe our police officers should not be equipped with assault weapons. It should be left to S.W.A.T. and National Guards to carry assault weapons on American soil. If our own police officers have to pack a heat and more, then so should we! It goes both way.
Click to expand...

interesting, im not in usa, and not familiar but interesting to read this about buying decommissioned miltiary weapons, i agree it shouldnt be allowed....down right dangerous, and the bits about AK47...
 
Grummer said:
be wary of 'experts' they hide behind the namesakes, as a way of hiding the other half of stuff they dont know shit about..

to balance it, you'd find experts in 'no licence, no gun' stance or even no guns at all...trouble with USA, theres MORE fucking gun shops than there are as gas stations !!!!

here's that something to really think about, WHY THE FUCK so many gun shops, what for?
theres a fine line between guns for hunting, and guns for sports and guns for protection, and at end of the day all guns are for killing.

getting more people to have access to guns isnt going to help
Click to expand...
funny thing is.... it's easier to buy a gas than to buy a gun :lol:
 
You don't seem to understand that assault rifle ban was IN EFFECT at that time, you see since we have had ban these weapons, YET these events occurs ANYWAY. My point is the idea of reinstate ban is not going to help, like you said it is easy to convert to automatics. Guns are easy to obtain in black markets, even machine guns still available even if the ban is in effect. So my point is ban these gun is NOT going to solve the problem.

You see, ban the assault weapons leads to perspective that police do not need assault weapon and got backfired.

Jiro said:
no. back then - the cops didn't have assault weapons because there were no budget plus there was no need for it. the thought of "militarizing" peace officers was unfathomable until LA Bank Robbery. and now.... our "peace officers" - notice the irony - are armed to the teeth and are dressed like GI Joe. that is very sad for America.

These bank robbers modified their guns to be fully-auto. at that time - it was very easy to modify semi-automatic AK-47 into full-auto AK-47. You just have to drill a hole in it to install an autosear pin.

since then, police departments were allowed to purchase military weapons leftovers from National Guards. I'm against this and I believe our police officers should not be equipped with assault weapons. It should be left to S.W.A.T. and National Guards to carry assault weapons on American soil. If our own police officers have to pack a heat and more, then so should we! I do not believe there should be many laws that police officers are exempted from. It goes both way.
Click to expand...
 
Most of crimes are just based on opportunity, and desperate when there is opportunity, and desperate crime WILL commit. We can ban guns, but we can't stop the black market. Which is more dangerous because black market don't do background check, they don't care who they sell guns to.

Gotta to think outside of box, if one is so desperate they will do anything no matter what.
 
Also, the drugs have been banned for 40 years, how come drugs is everywhere and is much easier to get than to buy booze from liquor stores. Especially that now Meth is out of control and we can't get it in control, thanks to stupid Nixon idea of war on drugs.

The idea of ban really creates lucrative black market that is why it is still bad idea to ban anything
 
diehardbiker said:
You don't seem to understand that assault rifle ban was IN EFFECT at that time, you see since we have had ban these weapons, YET these events occurs ANYWAY. My point is the idea of reinstate ban is not going to help, like you said it is easy to convert to automatics.
Click to expand...
there are 2 kinds of ban.

1. enacting a ban that assault weapon cannot be purchased or sold. flaw? the assault weapons already purchased before the ban was enacted are allowed for people to keep.

2. enacting a ban that ALL assault weapons are to be destroyed. this would be very effective in removing all assault weapons off the street.

President Clinton only enacted #1 - very ineffective. a very failed policy.

We've actually did enact #2 in New Orleans - Hurricane Katrina. This led to President Bush to sign a new federal law prohibiting all law enforcement agencies from confiscating weapons from law-abiding citizens in the time of crisis - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disaster_Recovery_Personal_Protection_Act_of_2006

diehardbiker said:
Guns are easy to obtain in black markets, even machine guns still available even if the ban is in effect. So my point is ban these gun is NOT going to solve the problem.

You see, ban the assault weapons leads to perspective that police do not need assault weapon and got backfired.
Click to expand...
I disagree. guns are easy to obtain in black markets??? laughable. it's much easier to buy drugs illegally than guns.

FYI - the guns from LA Bank Robbery shootout were purchased legally... not from black market.
 
The truth is most criminals (Outlaws) actually want the gun banned. It makes it easier for them to do criminal jobs when the ban would be in effective.

Does not matter what kind of ban, like you said Clinton made mistake with the ban, one way or other criminals WANTS the ban.
 
diehardbiker said:
Also, the drugs have been banned for 40 years, how come drugs is everywhere and is much easier to get than to buy booze from liquor stores. Especially that now Meth is out of control and we can't get it in control, thanks to stupid Nixon idea of war on drugs.

The idea of ban really creates lucrative black market that is why it is still bad idea to ban anything
Click to expand...

you cannot really compare between drug ban and gun ban. it's apple-orange. drug is very easy to move around and to "disappear" - either by flushing it down the toilet or consuming it.

guns? extremely difficult to move around and extremely difficult to sell it. and it's traceable. not a very profitable business. and a very risky business because if a gun was used in crime and somebody died, you'll have at least dozens of 3-letters agencies involved. people will get caught. drugs? eh not so much.
 
diehardbiker said:
The truth is most criminals (Outlaws) actually want the gun banned. It makes it easier for them to do criminal jobs when the ban would be in effective.

Does not matter what kind of ban, like you said Clinton made mistake with the ban, one way or other criminals WANTS the ban.
Click to expand...

ok that's a :crazy: talk. might want to put down that doobie for a moment :lol:
 
Jiro said:
guns? extremely difficult to move around and extremely difficult to sell it. and it's traceable. not a very profitable business. and a very risky business because if a gun was used in crime and somebody died, you'll have at least dozens of 3-letters agencies involved. people will get caught. drugs? eh not so much.
Click to expand...

If my career is criminal, I can show you how easy to get guns illegally. It is not that hard as you might think. It is as easy as getting dope, really no difference.

I have witness one guy who was my ex-friend. Not really a friend, he was so so so mad that other guy raped his girlfriend, he decided stop by on one of street and actually saw .357 and was about to buy it, that's right no background check and this gun may be hot. He decided not to buy it because he wasn't sure if that gun was used in other murder and don't want to get involved mistakenly, thank god! How long did it take for him to find gun dealer on street? Same night that rape had occurred, and murder could have happened at that same night. Anyway, that rapist got busted and now is in jail until 2022.

Don't you know, not all guns are traceable. There are millions of untraceable guns out there.

If you don't believe me, go ahead watch tv series called "I [almost] got away with it" you won't believe how criminals have done in attempt to escape justice. They avoid gun shop that does the background guns and go to black markets.
 
diehardbiker said:
If my career is criminal, I can show you how easy to get guns illegally. It is not that hard as you might think. It is as easy as getting dope, really no difference.
Click to expand...
oh? sounds like you know who to contact if you're gonna commit a crime. then why haven't you given this information to police? *smh*

diehardbiker said:
I have witness one guy went to street and almost bought .357, dealer was there, he sells dope and guns and dealer don't give damn about it. That happened about 10 years ago.
Click to expand...
almost? what do you mean almost?

diehardbiker said:
Don't you know, not all guns are traceable. There are millions of untraceable guns out there.
Click to expand...
let me guess... just file off the serial number, right? :roll:

everything is traceable. your fingerprint on shell casing... ballistic fingerprinting... etc. all new guns have ballistic fingerprinted stored in database.

diehardbiker said:
If you don't believe me, go ahead watch tv series called "I [almost] got away with it" you won't believe how criminals have done in attempt to escape justice. They avoid gun shop that does the background guns and go to black markets.
Click to expand...
oh.... I figured.... you got all these "fact" from tv..... a tv.....

and did you see the keyword "almost"? they got caught! they failed! you just basically proved my point! lol!!!
 
Not necessarily file off, if one has machine shop, they can make guns,

fingerprints not always comes up on guns, some criminals are smart enough to wipe clean. That is why there are many unsolved murder cases.

Again, of course there is database, and NOT even single of that data shed light on murder investigation. I will find link that shows that the database had failed solve single crime.

Jiro said:
oh? sounds like you know who to contact if you're gonna commit a crime. then why haven't you given this information to police? *smh*


almost? what do you mean almost?


let me guess... just file off the serial number, right? :roll:

everything is traceable. your fingerprint on shell casing... ballistic fingerprinting... etc. all new guns have ballistic fingerprinted stored in database.


oh.... I figured.... you got all these "fact" from tv..... a tv.....

and did you see the keyword "almost"? they got caught! they failed! you just basically proved my point! lol!!!
Click to expand...
 
Some localities, particularly Maryland, have attempted to build up a large database of "fingerprints"; in the case of the Maryland law, all new firearms sales must provide a fired case from the firearm in question to the Maryland State Police, who photograph it and log the information in a database. The Maryland State Police wrote a report critical of the program and asking the Maryland General Assembly to disband it, since it was expensive and had not contributed to solving a single crime.[3] Subsequently however, the database did provide evidence used to obtain one murder conviction at an estimated cost of 2.6 million dollars per conviction.[4]

Found in
Ballistic fingerprinting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
I ain't get involved since my face gets burned and if I report, these person may have somebody else shoot and kill me, no thanks! I kept my mouth shut.

Jiro said:
oh? sounds like you know who to contact if you're gonna commit a crime. then why haven't you given this information to police? *smh*


almost? what do you mean almost?


let me guess... just file off the serial number, right? :roll:

everything is traceable. your fingerprint on shell casing... ballistic fingerprinting... etc. all new guns have ballistic fingerprinted stored in database.


oh.... I figured.... you got all these "fact" from tv..... a tv.....

and did you see the keyword "almost"? they got caught! they failed! you just basically proved my point! lol!!!
Click to expand...
 
diehardbiker said:
I ain't get involved since my face gets burned and if I report, these person may have somebody else shoot and kill me, no thanks! I kept my mouth shut.
Click to expand...

anonymous tips.........
 
Anonymous tips not necessarily anonymous. And at that time, I do not have gun to protect myself so I decided not to take risk. Finally, I don't have the name and address of that dealer so tip to cop is meaningless.

Give you example, if I saw you and doing crime activity at same time then you decided to call using Anonymous tip, I will KNOW it is you that rat on me. Why? Your the only one that saw me doing this so who else? That is why Anonymous tip is not necessarily means 100% anonymous.

Jiro said:
anonymous tips.........
Click to expand...
 
diehardbiker said:
Not necessarily file off, if one has machine shop, they can make guns,

fingerprints not always comes up on guns, some criminals are smart enough to wipe clean. That is why there are many unsolved murder cases.

Again, of course there is database, and NOT even single of that data shed light on murder investigation. I will find link that shows that the database had failed solve single crime.
Click to expand...

diehardbiker said:
Some localities, particularly Maryland, have attempted to build up a large database of "fingerprints"; in the case of the Maryland law, all new firearms sales must provide a fired case from the firearm in question to the Maryland State Police, who photograph it and log the information in a database. The Maryland State Police wrote a report critical of the program and asking the Maryland General Assembly to disband it, since it was expensive and had not contributed to solving a single crime.[3] Subsequently however, the database did provide evidence used to obtain one murder conviction at an estimated cost of 2.6 million dollars per conviction.[4]

Found in
Ballistic fingerprinting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

here's extra information you probably didn't know - many murder cases are hard to prove because you need to prove an intent and a direct correlation. that's why some hitman or murderer leaves a gun at the scene of crime. you actually need to prove that this is the person who shot him with this gun.

there's a difference between solving and conviction. lot of murder crimes were solved but not convicted. why? pricey defense attorney. just because your fingerprint on the gun doesn't mean you actually murdered him. keyword - circumstantial evidence. Did you forget OJ Simpson?

for example - I killed this man and left my gun at the scene of crime. I didn't even bother wiping my fingerprint or filed the serial number off. Police then traced my serial number and fingerprint to me and took me in for questioning (but not under arrest). Whether or not if I will be arrested and charged depends on interview. If there is not a single association or any connection between me and the person... then I get off free and the case may be unsolvable.

If there is a tiny shred of association (assuming that they can prove that I know him)... then I would be arrested and they don't really need to prove with hard evidence that I shot him. The jury will simply find me guilty based on circumstantial evidence - the gun belongs to me and my fingerprint is on it and I know him and some witness heard "argument".

hence.... the phrase - "presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and the burden of proof for all elements of the offense is upon the prosecution." but there's much more to it so it's not that simple.
 
Back
Top