LOL…..Chicago has the strictest gun laws in the U.S. but yet has more gun violence on any given weekend than any other major city. Somehow, Mayor Lightfoot is under the impression that one can simply cross the state border and legally buy all the military grade weapons they want. That’s a total lie of course but according to her, it’s her neighboring state’s fault for all the crime in Chicago. Gee, I wonder if Biden could order Harris to go to Chicago on a discovery mission to find the “root cause” for all the violence? Naw, even if he did she wouldn’t go because she hasn’t been to Europe yet.
Just out of curiosity, where do you think the Chicago guns come from? Have you ever been to a "Gun Show?
Some states have provisions in which felons can own a firearm, usually having to do with the amount of time since they had been released from prison. In others, they can request a pardon. But yes, in most cases, they cannot. I disagree with this strongly, particularly when the crime did not involve violence or a firearm.
Yup, sure have. Have you? And if you have, did you buy a gun? How recently and what did you have to go through to buy it? Here’s a good read on the subject: https://www.durysguns.com/news/gun-transfer-laws-buying-out-of-state Edit: Notice in my first post that I wrote that Lightfoot said a person could LEGALLY buy military grade weapons. Now, do tell me where a crook (or any regular John Doe) can legally buy military weapons.
The last time the military ‘LOST” a lot of weapons is when Obama sold them to who? The cartels in Mexico. Fast and Furious?
@Al Amoling The government has kept record of every single firearm purchased since the assassination of Robert Kennedy via the 1968 Gun Control Act, that's 50+ years now! Has it done any good? Attempting to keep a record pertaining to each and every firearm is flat-ass out absurd. Frank
@James Hintze Why in the world are "Chicago" guns so damned-fired more important or significant than any other guns? Handguns have been prohibited in Chicago BY LAWS enacted both long ago, as well as re-enacted with more stringent requirements. Regarding gun shows, and having attended them myself for well over 40 years, I have seen a number of changes instituted in their operation over the years. Long ago, a great many more private sellers were present than today. Now, a uniformed law enforcement officer is present at the entry, to personally inspect, disable, and tag every firearm brought in. The shows I attended in Phoenix boasted full rental of the state fairgrounds, claiming guns displayed numbering in the hundreds of thousands. No difference exists between private transactions at the shows vs those out in the parking lot. The advent of cellphones has allowed licensed sellers to easily and quickly obtain the required FBI background checks completed. I cannot see any way in which gun shows contribute to the crime rate. Frank
Prosecutor: 3 soldiers charged with sending guns to Chicago May 11, 2021 article I have worked dozens of gun shows for a organization I belong to. All sales get background checks. These things are not fixed by design. As long as they capture headlines, the violence is allowed to continue (and is lied about) so the public can get stoked up to negate our rights. Having those rights has nothing to do with the violence.
I don't understand why this is even being discussed after Ken made his post. Maybe you thought Ken was just being cute, but think about it and study history and you will know he said it all. The biggest rise in violence where guns are involved always happens under Democratic rule. Democrat-controlled cities always have high gun violence.
In other words, stop disarming honest citizens. This won't lead to gunfights, it will just make cowardly predators think twice before attacking people. Evidence of this exists in DC. In 2008 when the Supreme Court ruled that the government could not require that a citizen keep his gun disassembled and locked up in his own home, crime immediately took a nosedive. Word got out on the street that the government could no longer make things safe for criminals. Of course, the Democrats (a) immediately took credit, claiming that their decades-old failed "programs" suddenly bored fruit, and (b) went on the offensive to find other ways to screw the law-abiding in DC. The vast majority of these high-profile crimes are in "Gun-Free" Zones (or more to the point, where criminals know the government protects them from harm). They are in cities where it is difficult-to-impossible for citizens to defend themselves, and they are in schools, shopping malls and other such designated "You May Attack Here In Complete Safety" locations.
When we decided to sell our Winchester Lever-Action 30-30 and our Remington Express Shotgun, was going to sell the Winchester to an employee at Sportsman's Warehouse (locally). But, after doing some online research about selling firearms, we ended up selling both to a local gun/rifle store. My wife was stunned at how much we got for the Winchester. They done 100% of the paperwork and gave us a check for the amount that our bank completely accepted. IOW, we decided NOT to sell to a private party and every bit of research I done on this, highly recommended selling only to a store. So, we had no worries about where the rifles were going.
J. Smart decision if your guns were registered when you bought them. It gets your name cleared but be sure to keep the paperwork. You may need it if the Gestapo comes calling in the future. If older unregistered guns I would sell to a private party. I should have held on to all my Winchesters and Colts as they are bringing 10 times what I got for them 20 years ago.
Your research must have uncovered facts I'm unaware of. Where has the transfer of a firearm under a private transaction turned out bad? (I'm not referring to a transfer that was engaged in with illegal intent, like a Straw Purchase.) Regarding that rifle: If I had a Model 94, I'd also sell it and run out and buy a Marlin 336.