- This topic is empty.
May 31, 2012 at 11:10 pm #759412
actually…because of numerous abdominal surgeries, my tummy is lined with kevlar mesh…wonder if that would stop a bullet..on second thought, I don’t want to know :DMay 31, 2012 at 11:39 pm #759413
That raises the question: Wouldn’t we be safer wearing Kevlar than carrying guns?
;)May 31, 2012 at 11:55 pm #759414
“Guns for ___________ (cash, food, gift card, etc) Program”
As far fetched as it sounds, I would support anyone on this forum, in conjunction with any of the police departments and / or retail vendors that want to get involved…
You get to bring your gun(s) to a drop off location. This also comes with a brief Amnesty period for that day – turn it in – no questions asked. A trained proffesional (gunsmith, police, etc.) will log it in and then destroy it right infront of you. You get something (?) in return…
Companies would have to pony up something good.
The pile of metal is send to the steel mill for recycle… proceeds donation to local charity.
What does this do? It would get some of the weapons off the street…do it often enough and perhaps you curb some of the risk…
Anyone in? I know some type of program has been done before somewhere…let me know…June 1, 2012 at 7:03 am #759415
I’ll be there.. offering to outbid them. Y’know all that will get turned in are old Sears and Roebuck single shot 22’s and there will be a rash of break ins while skeezers try a steal weapons for cash. I want lots of questions asked! That’s a set up for a crime spree! Chicago did it… and the gun murder rate is higher than ever. Guess the word of the turn in never reached the “hood”…..June 1, 2012 at 7:11 am #759416
Here’s how Chicago fared after it’s annual gun turn in for a 100 MC debit card. They turned in 6000 guns.
The city of Chicago has been home to a soaring number of homicides thus far this year when compared to the same period the previous year. The city’s homicide rate is up 60 percent in the first three months of 2012 compared to the last year. Last month, 10 people were killed and at least 40 others were wounded in shootings over the course of just one weekend.June 1, 2012 at 1:39 pm #759417
•Chicago-based gangs maintain connections to and influence over gangs in outlying suburban communities (See Appendix E, Map 6). An estimated 70 to 75 gangs with more than 100,000 members reportedly operate within Chicago and have consistently been a concern for law enforcement. In recent years the Chicago Police Department (PD), with assistance from federal and state agencies, has focused its efforts on reducing gang-related crime, which is estimated to account for 70 percent of all crime in the city. The Chicago PD has focused on disrupting 21 gangs it considers to be the greatest threat to the city because of the gangs’ large membership, highly organized structure, and violent propensities. The Chicago PD’s efforts have resulted in the arrest of many gang leaders and a reduction in violent crime. However, these law enforcement actions have caused gang members to become increasingly mobile, moving freely back and forth between Chicago and suburban communities. Gang movement has resulted in the creation of new gangs or the establishment of new chapters or subsets of the original gangs in suburban communities.June 1, 2012 at 7:09 pm #759418
Chicago is roughly 5 times the size of Seattle…so…I would take 1,200 guns off our streets as a win. Especially if you continue to offer a solid & secure program. Learn from their mistakes. Build a robust offer and lock down the back end.
Sure…go ahead and ask questions…create a profile database for every Tom, Dick, Harry, or Jane that drops off a weapon or ammo (can’t forget the ammo!)…
Ok..forget Amnesty…If you check the ID of a person that turns in a weapon and they have a warrant…arrest them.
You will never get them all…but reducing inventory by even a little will help.June 1, 2012 at 9:53 pm #759419
Simply as a point of clarification, the SMSA (Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area) of Chicago / Suburbs is 2.7 times larger than that of Seattle / Suburbs.
As stated previously, 70% of the Chicago area crime is gang led. Police efforts to disrupt 21 leading gangs has facilitated gang-crime migration out of traditional core city areas.
Given limited resources, & using the Chicago information as an example, wouldn’t we be better off spending allocated resources focused on gangs and lenient judicial systems rather then collecting guns one at a time?
365Stairs, I applaud your initiative. I just can’t see it being as effective as potentially other alternatives given limited resources.June 2, 2012 at 1:31 am #759420
The gun used was purchased in Tacoma at Bullseye. So it was registered… and purchased new, so I don’t think the whack job would have been at the head of the turn-in line. what IS disturbing is … his family said it was predictable….June 2, 2012 at 2:26 am #759421
yep…he was never committed, never treated, so it was legal for him to get a weapon, just like the rest of us. For some reason, his family saying that he was “mentally ill”, and that this was predictable, doesn’t make it any easier for the families of the 5 persons killed and the one guy injured.June 2, 2012 at 2:30 am #759422
yep…he was never committed, never treated, so it was legal for him to get a weapon, just like the rest of us. For some reason, his family saying that he was “mentally ill”, and that this was predictable, doesn’t make it any easier for the families of the 5 persons killed and the one guy injured.June 2, 2012 at 7:45 am #759423
No, I don’t imagine so. Nice to have such a great family support unit. And he had a record of violence too. 4th degree is usually a domestic assault…they take cops weapons away if they are convicted of same.
“Stawicki was arrested in February 2008 on a misdemeanor domestic-violence charge in Seattle, but the charge was later dismissed. In 2010, he was charged with fourth-degree assault in Kittitas County, but that case was also dismissed.” Two arrests for domestic violence….. and no record? Maybe I wil modify my stand …. a bit. I wonder when he bought the gun? when he was arrested in 2010…for 4th degree domestic assault… did he have a carry permit and was it checked?June 2, 2012 at 7:52 am #759424June 2, 2012 at 7:55 am #759425
dismissed usually family member doesn’t prosecute or cooperate… but.. at tiem of arrest they take DNA swab, cross match nationaal fingerprint database.. run warrant checks… even if the cases is dismissed. He was living at home too… family members must have known he had a pistol. The national firearms registry also keeps a record of every backround application submitted… so why no cross reference at the time of arrest. They arrest you for damn parking tickets they will run all kinds of checks…June 2, 2012 at 4:27 pm #759426
Ian Stawicki isn’t a good case for classic gun-control methods. As noted, he would’ve passed the most stringent requirements to get a gun. Apparently, he had acquired several of them over the years, and he even had a “concealed carry” permit.
It’s unfortunate that “lone nut” shooters like Stawicki get all the headlines, because they’re not the ones who cause most of the bloodshed. In fact, most gun deaths are caused by people who are not legally able to have a gun.
Which makes me think of that old pro-gun slogan: “Guns don’t kill people. People do.”
You know, that is actually the best argument FOR gun control I can think of. (Not gun elimination, mind you. Gun control.)
A gun in the hands of a felon is much likelier to kill someone than a gun in the hands of a gun collector. So obviously we need to take strong steps to keep guns out of the hands of the felon, while not imposing an undue burden on the gun collector. And the best way to do that is by having a national gun registry that would allow us to trace ownership and penalize people who sell/give guns to felons — or other people who are not legally entitled to have them.
A registry would not fall afoul of the Second Amendment because it is not a significant restriction on the rights of legal owners. It is even less of one than many laws currently on the books.June 2, 2012 at 4:28 pm #759427
sad thing is he had a clear permit that let him buy these guns back in January at the same place were the dc sniper bought his and they ran the checks it came back clean ……with out anything to stop him like a simple note of sort that said he was charged and at risk might of save life’s….the question is do we want to change the laws that would of aloud the gun store to say no…..June 3, 2012 at 4:25 am #759428
I think some of the posters are forgetting a critical principal of our legal system. Innocent until proven guilty. You can’t deny an individual his lawful right to own a firearm on the mere accusation of criminal activity (being charged). Only upon conviction. Also, if you are convicted of a domestic assault you do lose your right to firearm ownership. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_Violence_Offender_Gun_BanJune 3, 2012 at 5:01 am #759429
Kootch: I haven’t followed the news reports on Stawicki — I’m just going on what’s been mentioned here. Assault in the fourth degree is simple assault, a gross misdemeanor. If the conviction does not involve domestic violence, there would be no restriction on possessing firearms. If the assault did involve domestic violence, then the person loses the right to possess firearms upon conviction, even in misdemeanor assault cases.
The thing here, though, is that the cases against Stawicki were both dismissed. Since there was no conviction, the state could not restrict his right to possess firearms.
Stawicki likely would have been under a court order saying he could not possess firearms while the cases were pending. What usually happens during the course of a domestic violence case — after charging but before the case is resolved — is that the court issues an order requiring that the person remove any firearms from the home. However, the defendant is not required to turn the firearms over to law enforcement or to sell them; it’s enough to get a friend to keep them while the case is pending. Then if the case is dismissed or the defendant is acquitted at trial, he can take his firearms back home. But these court orders are very likely not recorded in any law enforcement database, so I bet a defendant could purchase firearms even while a DV case was pending against him.
I don’t know why the cases against Stawicki were dismissed, nor whether the alleged victims were romantic partners. “Domestic” in this context applies to ordinary roommates, as well as family members and boyfriends & girlfriends. For what it’s worth, prosecutors in King County are tougher on domestic violence cases than a lot of other places. Even if the victim says she (usually it’s she, not always) doesn’t want to go forward, which is common, the prosecutor will move forward with the case based on the testimony of the officers or other witnesses. In some cases, they will even subpoena the unwilling victim to the trial or threaten to hold her in jail as a material witness. Obviously it depends on the seriousness of the case.June 3, 2012 at 8:47 am #759430
waynster.. seems to be when he was arrested for two counts of domestic assault… those dismissed cases might have been harder to come by as a registered conceal and catty guy… ?? I’d say at a minimum, status as a concealed weapons carrier should be automatic for further consideration. Or have it revoked and have to go through the reinstatement process..June 3, 2012 at 3:46 pm #759431
in this regard, those who choose not to treat their mental conditions have more rights than the citizens who become the casualty of their presumed innocence.June 3, 2012 at 8:29 pm #759432
I gotta say, the pro-gun folks don’t have a very good answer to the Stawicki rampage. The weakness of the registration requirements seems to me a result of the insitance of gun owners to accept only the bare minimum of investigation into who is purchasing guns. Not criminals buying them illegally, people who buy them legally under a law that is too lax.
I think the commenter who asked why Stawicki managed to shoot all those people when there was probably one or two gun carryers who might have stopped him is one that needs to be expolored. The hero in this case is the guy who faced down Stawicki with bar stools and lived to tell about it.June 3, 2012 at 10:52 pm #759433
“The hero in this case is the guy who faced down Stawicki with bar stools and lived to tell about it.”
where is that dang like button?June 3, 2012 at 11:25 pm #759434
Maybe I should post it on facebook?
I would, but the interface stumps me everytime I go there.
Thanks for the like :)June 4, 2012 at 3:08 am #759435
I don’t follow your logic. We live in a free society. That has an inherent risk. You can’t control the actions of another individual. Only hold them accountable after the fact.
In this state. If you have not been convicted of a felony or domestic assault you can be issued a concealed pistol license. The man in this case met those requirements. Again allow me to re-iterate, you can’t apply punishment (taking away your lawful right) based on the accusation of criminal conduct.
Besides all this noise about his CPL. He still would have had a lawful right to purchase a firearm (for home protection) in all 50 states. What further restrictions do you want that don’t unduly restrict his rights?June 4, 2012 at 3:32 am #759436
i would prefer any restriction that would prevent people gunning as many people down as possible..
wholesale slaughter of one another isn’t one of our rights
and regardless of how gun right’s activists would like to portray them … there are certain guns whose only purpose is to kill as many people as possible as quickly as possible..
now tell me again just what we as individuals need those guns for..
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.