8 shot, 4 killed in Englewood shooting, Chicago police say
By - WHOCaresAnymoretoday
5:45 AM on a work night? Who can be out partying that late when there's work in the morning?
Twas a 7 day weekend.
Gang members who don't have jobs
"We've been in a pandemic for 14 months," community activist Darryl Smith said. "Now that Chicago is open, people want to see their loved ones and friends, and they want to party. And sometimes when we have these large gatherings, things happen."
I don't know if that's it, Darryl. Of all the parties I've been to and all the large gatherings I've organized, I can't for the life of me remember a single mass shooting happening at even one of them.
I'm from rural PA so gatherings and shootings go hand in hand, it's just the targets were cans or pumpkins or some shit.
"Sometimes when we have these large gang gatherings things happen".
Fixed it for him.
what makes you think its gangs?
Are you familiar with the chicago drill scene?
What would ever make you think it wasn't?
It's interesting how 'Chicago violence' has gradually evolved into a kind of stable ecology which generates and regenerates itself over the course of decades. I've looked through some newspaper archives about violent crime in Chicago, and the 'modern' concerns over gangs and crime begin right around 1965/1966.
We're talking about 55 years of politicians and 'community leaders' 'expressing concerns,' 'demanding change,' implementing 'new initiatives to fight crime,' etc. And yet, every last one of them was ultimately a failure. At some point, you just have to admit defeat. Maybe Chicago is simply destined to have third-world levels of violence. Maybe that is its little piece of the eternal spiritus mundi, as pathetic as that would be. Maybe 'violent crime' is simply Chicago's unchangeable identity.
There is no simple solution to the endemic violence in some neighborhoods, and the current (justified) anti-police atmosphere in the country is *not* helping in this regard.
In other words, a summer night in Chicago.
Has anybody ever attempted to fix this?
Englewood always up to no good.
>During an unrelated press conference Tuesday, Mayor Lori Lightfoot blamed illegal guns for the mass shooting, and said the city needs federal help to help stem the flow of violence. Lightfoot said the White House reached out early Tuesday to offer assistance.
I watched the video...She said this with a straight face. No gun recovered, no suspect apprehended. Clearly it's criminals running guns across the border.
Problem is the criminals live in Chicago and are the source of the gun trafficking. Chicago's strict laws gave them the opportunity to make money along with drugs.
>But with a reported **50 active gangs Chicago today and 100,000 gang members**,
can the crackdown today make much of a dent in violence plaguing the city?
100K in one city? That’s around 1/26th of the entire population.
3.5% of Chicago is gangbanger.
The crazy thing is it’s probably more accurate to look at this by neighborhood or cluster of neighborhoods. Where I live I *highly* doubt it’s 3.5%. There are definitely some, but not that many. But if you go to another neighborhood it might be closer to 10-15%. Same with the violence. My neighborhood is no more dangerous than the national average. Englewood is a warzone statistically. It’s a sad, sad situation, especially for the ones who live there but aren’t involved. Hard to escape the violence when you’re formed by the violence.
Look at the 2021 map on [here](https://heyjackass.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/2021_city_map_061521.png). Insane the disparity by neighborhood. Imagine growing up in a neighborhood where 50+ people are gunned down yearly within walking distance of your house.
Its almost all Englewood and that other neighborhood infant recall right now. If you cut those out of Chicago, the homicide rate in Chicago falls by like, half. There homicide rate on the other hand...
I prefer 1/26th
I prefer 2/52nds
Illegal guns... sure, I doubt any handguns used were legal, however Lightfoot, our city has a persistent and infectious gang problem, that the CPD has not been able to get a handle on in the 20 years I have lived here. Guns, ok whatever, its the freaking gangs, every time, or most of the time, there is a gang connection. I am a criminal defense attorney here and am sick of those stupid lines, address the real issue, the real issue is the gangs.
Every child that joins a gang is a failure of our society. They don't form in vacuums.
Their parents failed them.
TBH, both society and their parents failed them. But the real question is what can we do to help them.
There was a story about a week ago where a dad took his 10 year old to practice drive-by shooting.
What the fuck can society possibly do to overcome that shit at home?
Remove men like that from society long before their children are 10, and replace the resources the family is missing once he’s gone.
I think we know what needs to be done, but we have to wrap our heads around the fact that all of our existing agencies have too much baggage to do it.
Thoughts and prayers
Well paying, low skilled jobs for men that grant them capital to escape the slums and make them valuable enough for their women to keep around.
Problem is, other folks need those too so we will need a crap ton of them.
Blame the guns not the gangs of course.
Without the guns yeah this wouldn't happen. When people died in car accidents we made seatbelts a necessity. Guns kill plenty and it's fine I guess.
My guns haven’t killed anyone. The majority of gun owners are completely responsible. Guns are necessary for safety. Being armed prevents you from being a victim.
We know more about a particular strain of Marijuana than we do about guns. I don't disagree with much, except being armed does not prevent you, or other victims from unintentional consequences.
We require a license to drive as a privilege out in public, and insurance mandated as a means to the privilege. It's not unreasonable to require a license to bear arms in public. When innocent people are victims, laws need to be changed. Insurance required to license firearms is a minimum standard liability to compensate innocent victims of gun violence.
To pretend like you are the victim of something potentially happening in the future is short sighted.
We have a right to protect our privacy. That right does not extend into the public realm, just because it is convenient
My vehicle insurance and my drivers license can't stop a criminal from stealing my truck and crashing it into innocent people if they want to.
I'd vote for the GOP before I went for any of this horseshit.
Yeah I’m sure the gangsters who shot up this party would be stopped by not having a public firearms license. Why didn’t anybody think of this before ?
You’re only hurting responsible gun owners with bullshit like this. The real way to solve this problem is to find a way to tackle poverty, single parent homes, lack of education/opportunities, lack of positive role models, etc. It’s not slapping extra fees and licenses on everything. Those are just feel good laws.
Yet unlicensed and uninsured drivers are out there all the time. You don’t need firearm insurance. If your shoot someone you’re already legally on the hook for it unless it was self defense
Or an accident.
[A nine-year-old boy is in critical condition after being accidentally shot by his father (...) He is expected to survive. Houston police say the father is not expected to face any criminal charges since they believe this was purely an accident.](https://news.yahoo.com/9-old-boy-accidentally-shot-133427968.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cucmVkZGl0LmNvbS9yL25ld3MvY29tbWVudHMvbnl1cGMwLzl5ZWFyb2xkX2JveV9hY2NpZGVudGFsbHlfc2hvdF9pbl9jaGVzdF9ieV9mYXRoZXIvaDFtOW56ZC8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAFGHebwvsi4g6GF4FJpzJNeTbXjVA4DgwUolnatyjvAW_JcTLiq3TZVCBSEbhksXu6er8n98cZwD1tBe-aMi8aIncjzi7woUOLJiBVrK_RMahri6b27DK9z1-6qqsrhAt7l-M30QUWRcx2CIx8bOpw33oBWlTh-Cr_EAUXr-9gcV)
Not that long ago an American told me here on reddit that in contrary to other countries, children aren't the property of their parents.
I honestly doubt that.
The dad could absolutely get charged for that. He’s lucky.
But looks like they won't charge him, and you said "unless it was self defence".
Who's lying - the police or you?
E: What happened to the responsible gun owners that only aim their weapon at a target that they intent to kill/destroy - are they also downvoting? LOL - hypocrites they are. If most of them would be, that comment would be at least controversial. But I guess, if you get cut your dick as a child (childrens aren't property in the US), you need something to compensate.
Every downvote - a paddling - :). Bring em on, you free and brave people.
The police can charge him but just said they aren’t expected to. He still broke the law.
He hurt his son with a gun. How is this not a crime? How can the police let him go away with that? Are they really the ones that decide whether he gets charged?
If so, then that's a sure sign for a police state, but I guess the prosecuters are others, like a district attorney? But even then how can that be? On accident - that's beyond silly.
How do you leave the house with such fear?
With one in the chamber. But for real being prepared isn’t the same as living in fear
If your landlord refused to fix the collapsing roof of your apartment but offered to sell you a hard hat what would you do?
Fix the system. Not saying ban guns but you shouldn't require PPE to walk down the street in every day life.
By that rationale you shouldn't ever wear a life jacket, you should just never ride a jet ski or go boating. You should never wear a seatbelt, you should just never get in a car. You shouldn't have a smoke detector in your house, you should just not have anything that could possibly catch fire. Life has risks, we seek to mitigate those risks. Those that we can't, we accept as part of life. Being prepared with a firearm is no different than having a fire extinguisher, wearing a seatbelt or wearing a hard hat where things can fall on you. neither in and of themselves are guaranteed to help, but they might. And you can't always control life, but you can't avoid it either
No, but if you live at a construction site, not having PPE is just begging for an accident. And to many, living in an area that has criminal activity is akin to living at a construction site. Being prepared just makes sense.
Absolutely, but when construction has halted you pressure the site manager to get things moving again. No one should have to accept living in a construction site forever.
Trying to compare constitutional rights to fixing a roof is....what?
Prepared for what? It's more likely you'll shot yourself than use a gun. Saying that as a woman who has lived in a city her whole life with nothing more than a knife.
I’ve lived in the hood and in some meth towns. People are crazy these days. People get jumped and robbed or car jacked frequently. It’ll probably never happen to me but I’d rather not take the chance when I don’t have to
The answer is to fix those problems. Not just throw guns at it and have people shoot each other.
Well in leu of achieving utopia, enabling self defense and ownership of one’s protection is not a bad thing.
"lol like just rix the drug and crime problem real quick, that's all"
And this is why we get nowhere. Cool
I have a solution.
Commit a violent crime with a firearm immediate 25 years no eligibility for parole.
Any age applicable.
Repeat offenders: life no eligibility for parole.
....this is so dumb. There's so many unsolved shootings and you solution isn't to actually fix anything, it's just make criminals go to jail if caught. Like that doesn't already exist.
Just look how the prision system worked so well for you guys already. Increasing it is surely the answer
One person can't fix those problems. Until they're fixed what someone can do is take measures to keep themselves safe.
You're much more likely to be injured defending yourself with a knife than with a firearm.
So why does the us have so many murder victims
Socioeconomic factors. Including income inequality, racism, and class warfare in healthcare.
So it's allll those things but even the idea of it maybe also being guns is insane?
I'm pro gun ownership and all, but it is not a necessity by any means. Very few people I know have one.
The equivalent would be banning cars completely. Nobody NEEDS a car.
Separate argument but why the fuck is everyone transporting a ton of metal to work everyday anyway? Why do we even need cars like the ones everyone drives? Considering every person in the US needs one, they should be designed to not kill people and to get good mileage.
Maybe we can compromise on scooters. After a government buy back. You'll get 500 for a normal car and 1000 for a luxury car.
Actually they do. And I didn't say ban guns. We need regulation and better tracking though.
What regulation do you support?
Mandatory gun classes before you can apply for a permit. An actual database of guns. A registration that has to be redone every few years to prove you didn't sell it illegally. Ban on no background checks to sell weapons. And mental health screenings for every purchase.
So, just to be clear, the abolition of the second amendment. Just wanting to clarify.
If you got that from trying to regulate guns then sure. I totes want all guns banned and not regulated.
The abolition of 2A doesn’t mean banning guns instantly. Guns can still be present and not considered a right if 2A is gone, and that is what you’re presenting. No right can be treated like you’re suggesting.
It’s your right to have that viewpoint, but don’t try and avoid the implication.
>No right can be treated like you’re suggesting.
Philando castile says hi.
Where does he say that not everyone can go through the process?
By making it not a default. Rights are pre-existing and applicable to all citizens under the sovereign power of the state. You can be disqualified by certain actions, but making someone take a test and prove you’re worthy of that privilege indicates it is not applicable by default, and is therefore only a privilege and not a right.
As a litmus test, put any other right under the parameters presented and see if it still sounds like a right. Would you be OK with being forced to take a test and qualify for freedom of speech or from self-incrimination?
I'd be cool with that 👍
Like I replied to the other guy, it’s your right to support that, even if I find that to be egregious, but I just want people to understand the ramifications of what they’re proposing.
That kind of constitutional change would damn near if not outright start a war.
Better regulation and better enforcement of existing legislation would be a great start. Half of all illegal guns in Chicago come from neighboring states. That is over 5,000 guns, with 1000 coming from Indiana alone. I'm not saying we should repeal the 2A but obviously we can be doing better.
Where have they banned cars completely?
Reading is hard.
Ah, I see now. You are incorrect. Nobody NEEDS a car. You could take public transit, dude a bike or walk. If it saves only one life isn't it worth it to take these murder machines of the road? If you wanted to get where you were going badly enough, you'd pay the extra fee.
Why not both?
Because there's a lot of guns in the rest of the country, but nowhere near this amount of gang violence. It should be noted, Illinois has some of the strictest gun laws in the country. And Chicago has one of the highest rates of gun violence in the nation. Obviously, gun laws didn't address the gun violence. Maybe they should address the gang violence instead.
Address the socioeconomic factors in Chicago that lead to gangs. But that's a hard problem to solve. So they try duct tape instead.
There's a thing lost in correlation/causation debates in that sometimes causation is obvious. The effect of gun control laws on violent crime is very hard to determine. But it's totally obvious that high rates of violent crime cause gun control laws to exist.
This is a really good point. Almost all of the major federal gun control legislation passed came as a response to a presidential assassination attempt, successful or not. Starting with the NFA in 1934.
> Illinois has some of the strictest gun laws in the country. And Chicago has one of the highest rates of gun violence in the nation. Obviously, gun laws didn't address the gun violence.
Because you can easily cross the border into East Chicago, Indiana and buy a gun. The law doesn't work if you can violate it by going out of state a mile or two.
Is it legal to buy cocaine or heroin in Chicago? No.
Is it legal to buy a gun in Indiana if you live in Illinois? No.
Criminals are capitalists and will use any economic opportunity they can. Guns are just another revenue source for them because it's so difficult to buy a gun legally in Illinois.
It's not legal to buy cocaine or heroin anywhere, so that's not really an equivalent to making something illegal when you can just go down the road and buy it. It's the same reason why making weed illegal in Indiana is silly when you can just go to Illinois or Michigan, buy it legally, and return.
That's kinda my point. It's illegal everywhere, yet easy to get when you have a large criminal element willing to break the law. They are filling a need.
It's not easy to get compared to going to a store where you can buy it legally.
I can find coke faster than a left handed pair of scissors in any city in America.
People can’t buy handguns from gun stores in states they don’t reside in.
They can, it just has to be transferred to an FFL in their home state for a legal transfer and background check. Good luck with that in Illinois where you need the state's permission to exercise a right.
Right, I was replying to the guy who suggested that Chicagoans can simply waltz into a gun store just over the state line, buy a gun, and waltz back over with it.
In 2018, 10,000 illegal guns were recovered in Chicago. 5,000 were traced back to others states, with 1,050 coming from Indiana. So half of all illegal guns were from other states and 1/10 of all illegal guns recovered were from Indiana. So it sounds like people can't just walk into Indiana and buy a gun. They atleast have to hop, skip, and jump to get one
I’ve bought 21 guns over the last 12 months. Am I a gunrunner, or just a collector with a credit card? And what do you want the gun store to do about it? What law do you want to enact?
The reason Westforth is involved in this lawsuit is because of convenience. It’s no surprise that the criminal element on Chicago’s South Side has some connections with people in Gary. You just need a friend with flexible morals and no felony convictions and voila, you’ve got yourself a straw purchaser, and the closest gun shop for said knucklehead happens to be Westforth. But I guarantee there’s been even more straw purchases originating out of Cabela’s since it’s literally blocks from the state line. But is Groot Lightfoot suing them too?
Fuck no, you don’t bring a merit less lawsuit against a corporation that has the resources to make you look like a fool, you sue a family run business that hasn’t done a damn thing wrong.
>Fuck no, you don’t bring a merit less lawsuit against a corporation that has the resources to make you look like a fool, you sue a family run business that hasn’t done a damn thing wrong.
Corporate owned gun stores usually follow warnings from the atf and do not continue selling fire arms to people the atf explicitly told them not to.
They sold 180 guns to 40 people who were later charged with crimes. Guns would be brought from this shop and used in crimes literally hours later.
These are the people that give smart gun owners a bad name and if you care about your right you would not be defending the people who are flaunting it.
1/10 of all illegal guns found in Illinois in 2018 came from Indiana. That is over 1000 illegal guns from just one state. And those were the ones they recovered
>Because there's a lot of guns in the rest of the country, but nowhere near this amount of gang violence.
St Louis would like a word with you
>It should be noted, Illinois has some of the strictest gun laws in the country.
Indiana and Missouri, states which are 3 hour drives at most for any Illinois resident, do not have strict gun laws.
Why can't the massive amount of guns in America be in anyway partly responsible?
We'd want to do math like (violent crimes by gang bangers/number of gang bangers) and compare it to (violent crimes by gun owners/number of gun owners). If the first is very large compared to the second, we've identified gang bangers as the problem.
That's a shame, but if their local leaders and police don't care, why should the rest of us.
I have an idea. Let's take away gun rights of law abiding citizens to stop gang violence.
Anyone know anything about entry protocol or body armor? I only ask cause my family and I need groceries and I need to be able to cover corners while the wife selects the best sale prices
The trick is to have your kids establish a hard point with a crew-served weapon. They'll provide overwatch while you and your wife use a leapfrog technique to maneuver down the aisles. You may need to enlist relatives to provide CASEVAC or indirect fire support if things get hairy, though.
> crew-served weapon.
Kids as a indirect mortar team really can build teamwork, math skills, and communication skills with the spotter, as well as providing one of the the most wide-reaching support weapons aside from artillery, something that might be too large/advanced for some children. It also keeps them out of range/view of the enemy, so rarely are you directly risking them while they still provide you with some support.
I know what I'm getting my kids for Christmas!
You laugh, but you really could get that stuff through the mail once upon a time.
For only $10 more I could get the 60mm as opposed to the 50mm?! Hell I can skip the shake-n-bakes for a week!
This ad is old. 10 bucks is more like 50 bucks.
Funny story I know an antiques appraiser that's one of the top guys for antique guns/military collectables in my region and one of his customers actually bought a Lahti through this catalogue in part because he knew where to get 20 MM BMG surplus pretty cheap, only when he gets this thing it uses a much more powerful hard to get 20 mm cartridge and the only place in the country at that time to get them was the same catalogue. 25 rounds was roughly the same cost as the gun. He was still kinda mad about it decades later when I heard the story.
See, I told the wife. "Go with the armored dodge caravan" but does she listen
Hm. That is most unusual. I'll talk to her
Good looking out
I know a guy who ordered a Hummer, sight-unseen, from a guy who resells vehicles that he buys from police auctions. The thing gets delivered and the seller neglected to mention that it was seized from a cartel member by the cops and it was fully coated in matte-black Kevlar on the outside. It's not quite up-armored like am Army Humvee, but it's definitely more bullet resistant than your average civilian car.
The guy was too embarrassed to drive it to his job at the bank, so he gave it to his wife and she just mobs in this cartel Hummer to play golf at the country club.
Hahahahaha, that's awesome
Goddamn, the shootings are so constant. Makes the weekend shootings obsolete in news coverage
We are coming up on 2 mass shootings per day in America.
edit: yeah I get that reality ([1.96 mass shootings per day this yea](https://massshootingtracker.site/data/?year=2021)r, and rising) makes you uncomfortable but downvoting it won't make it go away
The inability of criminals to stop shooting each other in the ghetto doesn’t affect myself or most other Americans.
Yeah never mind the innocent bystanders and get caught in the crossfire I guess you don't care about them
>continued use of this term perpetuates suffering since it avoids addressing the systemic racism, poverty and collective trauma
No, it brings attention to a problem. We can't fix a problem if we aren't aware of it. I have no idea how you think it "perpetuates" anything. That would be like someone saying that we have a heart disease crisis is "perpetuating" obesity.
If you try and start a conversation about "gang shootings" as that's what almost all "mass shootings are" you get shouted down as a racist.
>what almost all "mass shootings are"
The problem is the actual evidence doesn't show this.
You fell for the initial media lie where they "seperated" "mass shooting" from gang shootings where a bunch of people got shot.
This helped perpetrate the idea of racist whites are the only "mass shooters"
Only in the last 6 months or so have I noticed the media is now calling gang shootings "mass shootings" because they hope that will help disarm the law abiding populace (which the govt would love).
No, people have actually looked into this. [1/3rd of mass shootings are gang violence (NYT).](https://www.reddit.com/r/guncontrol/comments/nzq3dk/this_is_an_excellent_nyt_analysis_of_mass/) Do you have a source that agrees with your assertion that "almost all mass shootings are 'gang shootings'" (paraphrased)? I doubt you do. I suspect you're about to say that a mass shooting involving black people is obviously gang violence or something similar -- and that's why you were called a racist last time you said that.
This is how the lie that most "mass shootings" are not gang related is spread.
Studies intentionally exclude them so skew the data.
Keep spreading the lie so you can make everything about racism and never address the issue.
“Because mass shootings that stem from domestic and gang violence are contextually distinct from high-fatality indiscriminate killings in public venues, some have argued that they should be treated separately,” RAND reported.
A study done in 2002 on mass public shootings excluded incidents of gang activity and drug dealing. That is the motive behind most of Chicago’s gun violence.
You're moving the goalposts from "most mass shootings" to "most mass shootings *in Chicago".*
>Keep spreading the lie so you can make everything about racism and never address the issue.
Yeah, the NYT is known for fabricating things, sure, sure.
Don't care anymore, muted. You're obviously not interested in reality if it conflicts with your narrative, which, as far as I can see is "black people are the cause of most mass shootings". That's why people say you're a racist, if you say things like that.
Oh the fucking irony.
Beautiful American gun culture strikes again
That's criminal culture, not gun culture.
Way past time for Congress to do their job and address the massive gun problem.
Strangely enough, in my city with much more lax gun laws this didn’t happen.
Wonder what the difference is
I don’t know. Maybe if there were some kind of a pattern?
That guns are a federal issue due to open borders between states?
Purchasing a handgun in another state without going through an FFL would already be a felony sooooo
The background check system isn't universal and has too many loopholes. Background checks need to apply to every single gun transaction and the system needs to include a mental health screening.
I agree with you on expanding background checks (well except mental health screening) and allowing citizens to leverage NICS but that’s another law that the would-be criminals will ignore.
I can open carry without a permit in my state but a few minutes away in dc or Baltimore , they have some of the most restrictive gun laws (hello ammo registration) in the country with a much higher rate of violent crime
I wonder if it’s not about the guns and maybe we should address the crime part of gun crime
Open carry should be outlawed and replaced with concealed carry with a permit. Open carry is literally legalized intimidation and unnecessarily escalates petty disputes to violence.
Like criminals who get ahold of guns bought them legally.
Hence, make it more difficult to get guns. This isn't rocket science.
I suppose unarmed minorities are easier to oppress
Lmao! Wtf are you smoking?
Making guns harder to get affects poor people. Typically poor people are minorities due long time systemic racism. So gun grabbing is racists and anybody who supports that is racists.
Remember, reagen did gun control because black people were arming themselves. Freed slaves weren't allowed gun because white people feared they would seek revenge. its history is rooted is racism.
You don't have to hide that want minorities to be oppressed as long as its your boot on their neck and not the other way around.
Yes, make it more difficult for non-record holders who do not engage in violent criminal activity to get guns. That will definitely fix the problem.
As much as reddit wants to claim most gun violence is the lone wolf white guy who snapped, it's not. Its organized gang activity who's weapons are all obtained illegally and wouldn't be caught up in any of your fantasy's about gun control.
Start executing gang members (or anyone) who uses a firearm in commission of a violent crime and after a year or two of "culling the herd" you will see gun crime fall to historic lows.
But, that would take some actual societal courage. We lack that.
> Start executing gang members (or anyone)
What the actual fuck? Talk about going full off the deep end authoritarian.
> That would take actual societal courage
That would take the opposite. Killing people to "solve" problems is the cowards way out. A lot easier to just kill people than address societal ills.
The fucking irony that you oppose proper gun regulations yet want the government to just execute people is stunning. Talk about cognitive dissonance.
Here's the issue. 350 million people. Even if 10th of a percent are irredeemable psycho's who very existence is a permeant danger to society that's 350 thousand people. I bet the number is actually higher.
Why does the rest of society have to suffer these individuals once they identify themselves (say, by murdering people, most often with illegal guns)?
Societal cowardice, that's why. Your inability to accept your personal responsibility to society at large by admitting that some people, once identified by the actions, have to go!
Gun regulations are a joke, there are millions of them. They'll last a 100years on average with basic maintenance.
Tell the population where the line is drawn, execute those who cross it. Murdering people regardless of a lame ass excuse is certainly a line that can be drawn.
Exactly. We need to repeal the NFA.
Uh, that would do the opposite of addressing the gun problem. We need LESS guns, not more.
The NFA allows you to buy a fully automatic machine gun for a 200 tax. How is that not a problem? Call your senator today and tell them we need to repeal the NFA!
So repeal the NFA and replace it with a straight up ban on machine guns? I'm not really seeing your point here, when is the last time a machine gun has been used in a shooting? The NFA seems to be working well, it is hand guns and rifles that we need to focus on.
Repeal it and replace it with a law that makes it a federal crime to attempt to pass legislation that violates the constitution. Sort of like a national preemption.
Wtf? NFA doesn't violate the constitution. You are very obviously arguing in bad faith. I am arguing for less guns and you come in with random bullshit about the NFA despite the fact that it is working well. Again, when was the last time a shooting with a machine gun occured?
I'm not arguing in bad faith. The 2A states that the right shall not be infringed and the NFA is an infringement. None of us trust people like you with the whole "no one wants to take your guns" schtick anymore. Beto ruined that for you when he said the quiet part out loud. Every infringement is a step toward confiscation, which is your eventual goal.
In short, no more compromises.
> I'm not arguing in bad faith. The 2A states that the right shall not be infringed and the NFA is an infringement.
The 2nd amendment also states "well regulated". The NFA is part of said regulations and has been law for many decades. You are arguing in bad faith as you replied to my original comment with unrelated, bad faith bullshit about the NFA.
> Beto ruined that for you when he said the quiet part out loud.
Dude, fuck Beto. That guy is a neo-liberal hack who tried to larp as a progressive. The left hate him just as much as the right do.
> Every infringement is a step toward confiscation, which is your eventual goal.
Lmao. That is laughable. The goal is getting the US on par with every other developed country instead of moving further into being the shit hole of the world.
> In short, no more compromises.
Yeah, no more compromises: we NEED proper regulations on guns. Mass shootings and gun violence have gotten way out of hand. This should not be considered normal. And now far right astroturfers like you want people armed with even more dangerous weapons like machine guns? Are you fucking kidding me? Get the fuck out of here.
I'm not a far right astro turfer. I'm a pro choice liberal that supports single payer healthcare. I just refuse to support the "woke" crowd that want to disarm law abiding Americans in the face of the mobs you unleashed to burn the country over the last year.
Well regulated at the time meant well armed, not "having tons of restrictive, ineffective laws".
Whether or not you like Beto, people like you own his comments now.
As for getting the us on par with the rest of the world, America isn't Europe and I also don't believe you(see above about Beto). That continent has been the Nexus of genocide over the last several centuries. Why would you want to be like them?
As for the last point, you're welcome to try and I'm welcome to oppose everything unconditional your side thinks up.
Gang warfare and the fallout from the war on drugs should absolutely be kept in the public eye if the necessary support to end it is ever to appear.
Whats sad is that incidents like what happened here in austin arent even gang related. When it comes to minors, middleschoolers just have to ask the right person at school if they want a gun. People being wannabe “gangstas” aren’t in actual gangs… im assuming that these idiot minors shooting at eachother in a crowd like that are just idiots. Many of our shootings here are based off personal problems, drama, ego, narcissism, alcohol/other drugs like xanax. I know this because im familiar with the hood and underbelly, one of my own friends was trafficking weapons and drugs and he wasn’t in a gang. With shootings that are drug-dealing/purchasing related situations, robbery or retaliation (or self defense) is generally the MO. No gang warfare involved. 3 kids from the most wealthy school in austin robbed and shot their 21 year old pot dealer dead. Its honestly racist for people to have assumed the recent incident here in austin was gang related even though the cops never even said that—- these folks are labeling these children as gang members because they are black.
So this issue with shootings is far more complex than many people assume.
It's sad that this is even a question, but it is a valid question.