Jim0001 Loc: originally from Tennessee, now Virginia, USA

You poor abysmal creature, you really are out in left field. I doubt you have ever shot an AR-15. I doubt you would be capable. I will attach pictures of some kinder AR's maybe some gay colors would motivate you and not be so scary,

Jim0001 Loc: originally from Tennessee, now Virginia, USA

Very few. Fists are a bigger killer.

steve66613

Enforcing the law in this country, apparently, isn’t “simple”.

Why do you suppose that is? Could it be that there are certain factions who believe that criminals have more rights than law-abiding citizens? And, in order to appease the criminals, we need less policing(?)

liberalhunter Loc: Your mom's house

Democrat halfwits...... just to be clear.

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

I have always been puzzled when laws are not enforced. have never heard of one answer that covers all the situations.. I do not subscribe to the criminals have more rights idea, nor do I think that is the case with our current law enforcement.. as this is not a one answer fits all, we could make a very long list of reasons why..

Carelessness would have to be on it.. in some cases if procedure is not followed to the letter the case does not exist... As in, the chain of custody is not kept, the evidence will not be usable.. the prosecution fails to provide access to evidence during "discovery" case may be useless... all sorts of technicalities.. Even have heard claims that the LEO himself just does not give a rats ass about making justice work..

I would like to think of one reason that covers the majority of cases.. one upon a time I was with the side that the law was purposely to easy on the perp and not doing the job.. Now I think this can happen but it is a rarity..

One thing I have read lately is that with the struggle for funding.. Our jails/prisons are so crowded, we have no place to put the reprobates who need to be locked up..

this may be true in a few places... Maybe we should get rid of laws for minor cases and put the prisons to use only for the more serious crimes.. who should make that decision? anyway we do need to get something done..

But to be clear... I d o not think it is an entire law system that thinks rights for the perp are more important than for the victim.. in a country as large as our, we could probably find someone to say that.. but I do not think they would be speaking for the whole law enforcement group...

liberalhunter Loc: Your mom's house

Sell em' pink........ home depot sells black in a can I can use.... ya know, that stuff you huff before posting stupid opinions.

BIRDMAN

🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪

BIRDMAN

coelacanth Loc: Michigan swamp

Permafrost got a vasectomy because his neighbor has too many children.

BIRDMAN

Kids are being shot by stray bullets because blacks don’t know how to aim

BIRDMAN

A AR is not an assault weapon

WEBCO

Just stay away from my F..ing guns. I don't care that you don't like SR-15s, you don't have the right to infringe on my constitutional rights

Puds Loc: So Centrl MN

You elect the wrong people .

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

Bullshit!

The "scary black military look" is precisely why leftist gun grabbers have politically designated the AR15 as an "assault rifle". They are full of shit. And if you think the "scary black military look" is a selling point, you're full of shit.

Over the years, I've bought a number of AR15s - A Colt Sporter, a Bushmaster, a DPMS carbine, a Rock River Arms carbine - and I sure as hell didn't buy them for their looks, I bought them for their versatility, their semi-auto function, their accuracy, their reliability, ease of maintenance, availability of ammo, and a host of other reasons that have nothing to do with what they look like.

Truth is, the AR15 and similar platforms and variants have been used far more often in defense of life and property than they have been used in committing a crime.

Even women and children have no problem shooting an AR15.

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

What is the difference between a "deadly weapon" and one that isn't?
Any weapon in the hands of a halfwit is a deadly combination.

A weapon in the hands of a rational person trained to use it has proven to be a life saver.

From the American Institute for Economic Research:
More guns, less crime
Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, experts argued that more guns in the hands of citizens would lead to blood on the streets, Wild West shootouts, and all sorts of mayhem.

Despite the fearmongering, numerous states went ahead and passed right-to-carry laws. These laws oblige state officials to issue concealed-carry permits to individuals who have met numerous prerequisites­, such as having a nearly spotless criminal record, no history of mental illness, and passing a firearms proficiency test (depending on the state).

Were policymakers in these states onto something?

More Guns, Less CrimeEnter John Lott’s More Guns, Less Crime (first published in 1998, revised in 2010). An economist by trade, Lott sought to study the effects of gun policy on crime rates.

At the time Lott delved into his research, right-to-carry laws were starting to become the norm across the country. This new trend spurred Lott to analyze the impact of concealed-carry laws had on crime rates.

The result was nothing short of astonishing.

Contrary to popular belief, John Lott’s More Guns, Less Crime demonstrated how states with “shall-issue” concealed-carry laws did not see increases in crime rates. In fact, his findings even showed that these very policies played a pivotal role in reducing crime.

But what makes More Guns, Less Crime special is Lott’s uncanny ability to weave economic concepts with gun policy. The power of this text lies in its ability to make any economist or casual observer of economics feel at home, given his use of simple economic concepts to illustrate the viability of liberalized gun policies.

Lott, for example, observes the deterrent effects of right-to-carry laws:

To an economist … the notion of deterrence — which causes criminals to avoid cab drivers, “dope boys,” or homes where the residents are in — is not too surprising. We see the same basic relationships in all other areas of life: when the price of apples rises relative to that of oranges, people buy fewer apples and more oranges. To the non-economist, it may appear cold to make this comparison, but just as grocery shoppers switch to cheaper types of produce, criminals switch to attacking more vulnerable prey. Economists call this … “the substitution effect.”

The substitution effect illustrates how changes in the relative prices of goods and services affect consumption patterns. Normally, consumers substitute cheaper alternatives for luxury items when prices rise. In the context of gun ownership, when people can arm themselves, the presence of law-abiding gun owners constrains criminal activity. Criminals think twice before attacking a civilian, due to the possibility of the victim being armed. Instead, criminals opt for property crimes or other crimes that do not involve direct contact with the victim.

Similarly, Lott draws on another economic concept, externalities, to demonstrate the positive effects of gun ownership:

Deterrence matters not only to those who actively take defensive actions. People who defend themselves may indirectly benefit other citizens.… cab drivers and drug dealers who carry guns produce a benefit for cab drivers and drug dealers without guns.… [Similarly,] homeowners who defend themselves make burglars generally wary of breaking into homes. These spillover effects are frequently referred to as “third-party effects” or “external benefits.”

Externalities generally occur when the production or consumption of a good affects a third party that is not directly connected to its production or consumption. Lott connects this concept to gun ownership, where the presence of a few concealed-carry holders creates a spillover effect that makes the rest of the unarmed population safer.

These observations, among many others, have completely changed the way gun policy is looked at.

At a time when gun-rights activists relied on raw emotion and appeals to the US Constitution, John Lott took an unprecedented step forward with his rigorous and lucid investigation into statistics regarding gun laws and crime.

For anyone who wants a thorough understanding of the effect of concealed-carry laws on crime, More Guns Less Crime is a mandatory read.

Criminals for Gun Control