The headline kinda explains it all – in this county, you pretty much get a free-pass if you smoke meth.
Try being a assault-gun-toting white-supremacist who smokes marijuana, and see where that’ll get ya!
The NRA’s poster child, this as much as anything makes me proud to be a citizen.
Recently, when trying to explain the silliness of only selling liquor in special stores in Oregon to someone from a more sensible place, I realized that there are about as many stores selling guns in Oregon as there are selling liquor.
Kind of buried the fact that the felon didn’t buy his firearms from a licensed dealer, who would have denied the sale based on his background check, but rather committed multiple additional felonies buying them secondhand from private individuals.
“Felon commits felonies, NRA to be blamed for felon’s actions in first 3 comments. Details at 11.”
Attempting to buy firearms from a licensed dealer after a felony conviction is also a felony crime, but the DoJ prosecutes about 44 of those cases a year out of 15,000 felonious attempts. Why should he worry? Clearly prosecuting felons who try to buy guns isn’t a priority for the administration.
This is why anyone who is serious about keeping assault weapons away from violent felons (or people who may aspire to commit violent felonies) recognizes that the only way to do so is to place limits on how easy it is for “ordinary, law-abiding” folks to acquire those weapons.
Whether that cost is worth it depends on where you fall on the political spectrum.
In Austin, TX, around the corner from the house there used to be a liquor store, a gun store, and a bank branch lined up in a row. The bank closed, but drunken gun buys are still possible.
“Meth-smoking white supremacist was able to buy tons of assault rifles illegally on the black market despite felony record”
I can’t even buy an over/under shotgun without a ten day waiting period and taking a test to get “firearms safety certificate” and getting a background check and giving a thumb print and showing proof of my address and answering a bunch of questions about my background.
Of course, all that goes out the window if I start buying black market guns, which in itself is a felony.
If I had my druthers, anyone with the inclination could go down to their local shopping center and stock up on laudanum, hashish, whiskey, and guns all in the same place. I just thought that particular fact cast a very strange light on our priorities as a culture, because, for me personally, guns would definitely be last on that shopping list.
Obviously that’d be the “Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms” store…
Actually, articles about the rabid right-winger out-in-Montana/Idaho white-supremacists crazies say that they like marijuana just as much as hippies do, and they generally don’t respect the government’s right to ban it. They may also use meth, or at least sell it, but they’re cool with marijuana.
Yup. The ones who hate the weed are the "decent church-goin’ women,
with their mean, pinched, bitter, evil faces. "
Interesting - I didn’t think the average reader of BB was in favor of banning 3D printing and machine shops - or blueprint bans.
Seeing as how simple, functional firearms can be constructed en masse by anyone with access to a high school machine shop, I think the cost of banning maker tools & supplies, and knowledge is pretty high to keep felons from rolling their own.
Half of Brazil’s illegal machineguns are home made - the laws don’t seem to be stopping anyone. You really think that making it a felony here for me to loan my co-worker a shotgun, to keep guns out of criminal hands, is going to stop career criminals with financial incentive to continue committing felonies, such as building a machinegun in their garage?
The “making things illegal doesn’t stop anything” argument… Do you favor removing the ban on drunk driving (and the equipment cops use to check for it) since that doesn’t stop people from doing it?
I do think that they should use simple field sobriety tests to detect intoxication with any drugs. Defining a limit based on BAC doesn’t take into account people’s different physiologies. For example, the point I would consider myself at the limit where I could drive safely is about half the legal limit.
Who said anything about making it impossible for bad/crazy/violent guys to get their hands on assault weapons? It will always be possible, but that doesn’t mean it necessarily needs to be trivial.
What the blue fuck is a “semi-automatic assault rifle”? That makes as much sense as “4x4 18-wheeler.”
No, not at all. Drunk driving is inherently dangerous to others, and should be illegal. Doesn’t have anything to do with my scotch and soda at home.
Violent felons with firearms is inherently dangerous, and should be illegal. Doesn’t have anything to do with my hypothetical guns at home.
In short, punish crime as an action. It’s already illegal to drive drunk, and for a felon to buy, own, steal, or make a gun. It’s got nothing to do with my stuff, until I commit a crime.
Well the Seattle PI obviously needs to do a bit of research. By definition, a semi-automatic can NOT be an “assault rifle”. An assault rifle always is select fire (has an auto or burst firing mode). Distinction may seem irrelevant to the layman, but it’s actually key to legislation and most people who know a thing or two about guns…
It’s a self-contradictory catchphrase, thrown around by the uninformed, to scare the uninformed into fearing their neighbors.