Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: ATF joins NYPD

  1. #1
    Regular Member Eeyore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    on the move

    ATF joins NYPD

    At first I thought this might be good news--that NYC might have learned from Richmond's success with "Project Exile," where federal charges were added to state charges to make sure violent criminals were put away for a long time. And it appears that that might be one of the objectives, but the Obama administration's attitude about gun control and its Justice Department's pathetic record on enforcement of existing gun laws made me suspicious.

    About halfway down, I found what I believe to be the real motivation: “Of course, when the ATF gets involved with our resources and our tracing expertise, we’ll be able to figure out if weapon is part of an interstate trafficking operation,” Mulham said. So this is probably a Bloomberg-inspired effort to prove that New York's gun control regime actually works and that all crime guns in NY come from Virginia or somewhere else. Then the logical conclusion would be that other states need to tighten up their gun control laws.

    This might even be part of a coordinated media campaign, since it comes right on the heels of recent reports about a study (by the Johns-Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health) which claims Connecticut's handgun registration requirements have reduced "gun violence" by 40% (but only if you compare CT to the "right" states and only if you pick the "right" years to analyze).
    Guns don't kill people. Drivers on cell phones do.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Superlite27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    God's Country, Missouri
    I've found that the 'ol "Strict gun control laws would work if it weren't for people bringing guns from places with lax gun laws" argument to be absurd.

    Gun control proponents always try this kind of crap when you point out murder rates in places with strict gun laws. Chicago is my favorite example. I always ask, "If gun control works, why is the firearm homicide rate higher in places that have sticter gun laws?".....and I invariably receive the reply, "Well, that's because of places with loose gun laws. People bring the guns in from places where it's easier to get them.".

    HA! That's completely absurd!

    If this were true, why doesn't this explain why the crime isn't greater in places where the gun laws are looser? Why would a criminal have to bring a gun from such a dangerous place with those evil lax gun laws (with a low crime rate) a place (with a high crime rate) where the gun laws prevent the very thing he's supposedly leaving?

    This is like claiming M&M's candy causes cancer.

    Well, if this is true, explain why the incidence of cancer is greater on Three Mile Island, where you can't buy M&M's, than in the Mars factory where they make M&M's in the first place.

    "Well, it's because people bring them in to Three Mile Island from places where M&M's are easily obtained."

    This answer does not explain why, if M&M's cause cancer, it doesn't do so in places where M&M's are prolific.

    Just as absurd as the claim that guns are responsible for crime: If they did, why are the crime rates so low in places where guns are more prolific? Criminals bringing them into places where gun laws are strict from places where they are not fails the logical "smell test".

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Quote Originally Posted by Superlite27 View Post
    I've found that the 'ol "Strict gun control laws would work if it weren't for people bringing guns from places with lax gun laws" argument to be absurd.
    What Superlite said.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Did you spot the clinchers and dead give-aways in the article?

    Those agencies are mounting a first-ever anti-gun initiative in high-crime areas. “There’s going to be an increase in federal arrests – no doubt,” said ATF agent Charles Mulham.

    Mulham’s words were intended to be a stiff warning to city residents who would carry weapons, and seem all to ready to use them. They will not only have to deal with the NYPD, but they will have the feds on their tail too.

    The message is clear: "Don't you DARE exercise your Second Amendment rights."

    It doesn't get any clearer than that.
    Last edited by since9; 06-20-2015 at 07:59 PM.
    The 1st protects the 2nd, and the 2nd protects the 1st. GET THIS OR LOSE IT ALLl: 27-2=0. Our 2A is THE bellwether, and ain't none finer: Islamic Reality. Our Founding Fathers on Church and State. PC=ZERO.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts