This isn’t hypothetical. It is happening now. Last year’s “sit-in” in Congress to oppose due process rights in the matter of No Fly lists, the growing movement to limit free speech, and the ongoing efforts to end religious free exercise.
Jon, your frantic desire here to widen the goalposts to include gender is tragic.Vonsalza:
Because, as you said, you favor keeping guns and gun rights out of the hands of people for gender and economic reasons.Lets just expand something like it to auto-loaders and I’m happy!
And, as we’ve also covered earlier, poor folks amass in cities. Indiana is simply far, FAR more rural than Chicago.Vonsalza:
As we’ve covered earlier, if “lax” gun laws in Indiana are the cause of more crime in Chicago, but not the cause of a similar crime rate it Indiana, then it probably isn’t the cause in Chicago.
As we’ve repeated ad nauseam, race isn’t the factor. Income is.Vonsalza:
Most gun crime in Chicago is committed by blacks. Should we target blacks for special taxes?
Good lord man! Because in the example you provided that I was responding to, you cited a woman!Vonsalza:
No. Because you assumed in your comment "She’s EVERY BIT as great a danger to herself and innocents near her as she is to the “bad guy” she’d try to shoot. "
I’m not the one who made the comment, Von. You are.JonNC:
Jon, your frantic desire here to widen the goalposts to include gender is tragic.Vonsalza:
Because, as you said, you favor keeping guns and gun rights out of the hands of people for gender and economic reasons.Lets just expand something like it to auto-loaders and I’m happy!
But if that’s the tarp you want to throw over a good argument against your errant views, I cannot stop you.
I quoted your comment. Don’t blame me. But if you want to disavow that comment, okay.JonNC:
Good lord man! Because in the example you provided that I was responding to, you cited a woman!Vonsalza:
No. Because you assumed in your comment "She’s EVERY BIT as great a danger to herself and innocents near her as she is to the “bad guy” she’d try to shoot. "
Do you need to be reminded of your own points?
Jon, your rhetoric appears to be degrading substantially… You’re not even keeping up with what YOU post…
So, your desire is to limit the rights of the poor in this matter. I disagree. Guilt by association is not a valid reason to limit rights.JonNC:
As we’ve repeated ad nauseam, race isn’t the factor. Income is.Vonsalza:
Most gun crime in Chicago is committed by blacks. Should we target blacks for special taxes?
Then why don’t those poor folks who can remarkably afford a trip to Indiana and back and purchase a firearm, waiting for the background check, etc, not stay in Indiana to commit crime?JonNC:
And, as we’ve also covered earlier, poor folks amass in cities. Indiana is simply far, FAR more rural than Chicago.Vonsalza:
As we’ve covered earlier, if “lax” gun laws in Indiana are the cause of more crime in Chicago, but not the cause of a similar crime rate it Indiana, then it probably isn’t the cause in Chicago.
Your counters here are getting nonsensical, Jon.
Jon…Vonsalza:
I quoted your comment. Don’t blame me. But if you want to disavow that comment, okay.JonNC:
Good lord man! Because in the example you provided that I was responding to, you cited a woman!Vonsalza:
No. Because you assumed in your comment "She’s EVERY BIT as great a danger to herself and innocents near her as she is to the “bad guy” she’d try to shoot. "
Do you need to be reminded of your own points?
Jon, your rhetoric appears to be degrading substantially… You’re not even keeping up with what YOU post…
If you want to further disavow your comment about the poor, that’s fine, too.
Because they live in Chicago (remember: poor folks amass in cities). The person they want to commit crime against is in Chicago. Everything is in Chicago except the gun-lax gunstore.Vonsalza:
Then why don’t those poor folks who can remarkably afford a trip to Indiana and back and purchase a firearm, waiting for the background check, etc, not stay in Indiana to commit crime?JonNC:
And, as we’ve also covered earlier, poor folks amass in cities. Indiana is simply far, FAR more rural than Chicago.Vonsalza:
As we’ve covered earlier, if “lax” gun laws in Indiana are the cause of more crime in Chicago, but not the cause of a similar crime rate it Indiana, then it probably isn’t the cause in Chicago.
Your counters here are getting nonsensical, Jon.
That wasn’t the quote I cited. You said she was a danger to others if she had a gun.
Then the problem is with Chicago, not Indiana. Don’t blame Chicago’s problems on the people of Indiana
The Chicagoans can purchase easily-obtained firearms from Indiana Jon. You’re just ignoring the problem here. Which is unsurprising.Vonsalza:
Then the problem is with Chicago, not Indiana. Don’t blame Chicago’s problems on the people of Indiana
She would be a danger. Like any man would. If you can’t swing a $100 permit, you’re not financially capable of putting rounds down-range on any real basis (thus learning how to actually use your firearm). In a critical moment, you’d be as much a danger to yourself and by-standers as you would be your intended target.Vonsalza:
That wasn’t the quote I cited. You said she was a danger to others if she had a gun.
Like I said, if you want to disavow it, fine
The problem is Chicago, not Indiana. If the problem was Indiana, the crime rate would be higher there.
Why would Chicagoans committing crime in Chicago with firearms purchased in Indiana raise the crime rate in Indiana?Vonsalza:
The problem is Chicago, not Indiana. If the problem was Indiana, the crime rate would be higher there.
I’m not ignoring the problem. I’m ignoring a "solution " that doesn’t solve the problem.
Am Illinois resident cannot legally purchase a firearm in Indiana. That requires an dealer to dealer transfer, whereupon the Chicago resident must pick it from a dealer in IL