Where Chicago gets all its guns

[bgcatty]

Perhaps if they were to enforce all the gun laws on the books, they could make some serious progress. Straw man purchases are an overlooked problem. Furthermore the authorities must stop plea bargaining away firearms violations when they do catch the bad guys!

 

[Floivanus]

Straw man purchases are a big problem (family members/ friends in Indiana or other lax areas would be an issue too)

You also do have 'private sellers' at gunshows who have a booth packed with 100+ guns, many that are new, making a tax free, liscense free living at gunshows, I've seen quite a few people selling hoards of guns at nearby shows claiming they were private sellers. A few years back I was going to buy a handgun at a local show until the guy behind the table said he didn't need to see proof that I was in state 'he didn't care' I passed on principal.

 

[gregr]

Need to qualify that. Most criminals do not buy guns from dealers.

Criminals DO buy guns from dealers and gun shows. Ignoring this fact does us no good.

Indiana gun show customer sold to Chicago gangs

Not sure what the point really is here. This goon was a felon in the making, and KNEW it. It`s fair enough if we have to qualify everything with "law-abiding", or not, but, the usual argument about gun shows is the mythical "loophole", which we know to be just one more insidious liberal lie.

 

[gregr]

Straw man purchases are a big problem (family members/ friends in Indiana or other lax areas would be an issue too)

You also do have 'private sellers' at gunshows who have a booth packed with 100+ guns, many that are new, making a tax free, liscense free living at gunshows, I've seen quite a few people selling hoards of guns at nearby shows claiming they were private sellers. A few years back I was going to buy a handgun at a local show until the guy behind the table said he didn't need to see proof that I was in state 'he didn't care' I passed on principal.

Lots of ways to skirt the system, but I feel that when we err, we ought to err on the side of freedom, and NOT grant even more power to an overbearing government to trample and usurp individual liberties from the people. And I strongly disagree, there is NO issue with family members buying a firearm for a gift to a loved one.

And hey, just as an aside, I get weary of hearing about our "lax gun laws" in Indiana. Certainly, freedom MUST look "lax" to those who trample it.

 

[Floivanus]

There IS a problem with a 'family member' buying a firearm for a relative outside their state (FFL transfer required on out of state transfers) and a problem with purchasing for other people in an area where certain weapons are forbid. If I have a relative who really wants a firearm that is prohibited in their area and I buy for them I am taking advantage of iur lax laws and putting US law abiding citizens in jeopardy of interference (and yes Indiana is lax, we can own class3 items, SBS, and SBR with no magazine restrictions etc, freedom is lax compared to other people's five round capacity)

That being said I have been given guns as a gift and have given guns as well, I am not against that. I am against somebody buying a gun for someone who doesn't have that ability to own (tons of felons out there getting their firearms bought for them thru a third party to skirt a 4473, and buying OR giving to someine you KNOW couldn't legally own said weapon is a felony)

 

[TopDog]

There IS a problem with a 'family member' buying a firearm for a relative outside their state (FFL transfer required on out of state transfers) and a problem with purchasing for other people in an area where certain weapons are forbid. If I have a relative who really wants a firearm that is prohibited in their area and I buy for them I am taking advantage of iur lax laws and putting US law abiding citizens in jeopardy of interference (and yes Indiana is lax, we can own class3 items, SBS, and SBR with no magazine restrictions etc, freedom is lax compared to other people's five round capacity)

That being said I have been given guns as a gift and have given guns as well, I am not against that. I am against somebody buying a gun for someone who doesn't have that ability to own (tons of felons out there getting their firearms bought for them thru a third party to skirt a 4473, and buying OR giving to someine you KNOW couldn't legally own said weapon is a felony)

Firearm laws in Indiana are NOT lax. Your statements are contradictory. If by you using the term "area" you mean state, then there are Federal laws already in place to forbid that. Your other statement "and yes Indiana is lax, we can own class3 items, SBS, and SBR with no magazine restrictions etc, freedom is lax compared to other people's five round capacity" is equally absurd. We live in a common sense state that does not infringe on our rights anymore than the federal government demands. Indiana is not lax, it also is not ridiculous in infringing on our rights. You seem to be very confused as to what is "lax" and what is stomping all over and kicking the crap out of rights.

Edit: I didn't grow up with a keyboard under my hands and so frequently make typing errors, especially when I am riled up. I have corrected some errors. Sorry if this was hard to read.

 

[Floivanus]

The only thing stepping all over and kicking the crap out of our rights would be the NFA, hughes amendment and brady bills, but to insinuate trafficking arms across state lines (as a gift, straw purchase etc) is the proper way to do things is equally as absurd as accusing me of thinking we are so lax that I can buy and do whatever I want. If you think a law is absurd, breaking it is the wrong way to go about things.

And yes Indiana's own laws on firearms are lax, the state doesn't regulate SBR SBS or class 3 items, ask states with bullet buttons, permanent magazines, assault rifle registration, bullet buttons and evil features what state regulation is like.

 

[TLHelmer]

Another bad weekend! 48 Shot, 11 Fatally, In Christmas Weekend Shootings In Chicago « CBS Chicago

 

[KLB]

The only thing stepping all over and kicking the crap out of our rights would be the NFA, hughes amendment and brady bills, but to insinuate trafficking arms across state lines (as a gift, straw purchase etc) is the proper way to do things is equally as absurd as accusing me of thinking we are so lax that I can buy and do whatever I want. If you think a law is absurd, breaking it is the wrong way to go about things.

And yes Indiana's own laws on firearms are lax, the state doesn't regulate SBR SBS or class 3 items, ask states with bullet buttons, permanent magazines, assault rifle registration, bullet buttons and evil features what state regulation is like.

Lax? Because we do not have ridiculous laws like other states, you think this state has lax laws? I think you do not understand freedom.

 

[Floivanus]

Lax yes, we have lax laws, we have the ability to carry an EASY to get carry at that, other than a 4473 at your LGS, and the aforementioned NFA/hughes/brady bill federal screwing we get, the state basically stays out of things.

The state even stepped in and told employers (like mine) that they couldn't keep me from carrying to work and having a firearm in the car. Not to mention castle laws and other right restorations the state has come up with. And Indiana is one of few states that honor other people's right to carry. If we aren't 'lax' we are on a better footing that most other areas are.

And I do understand freedom, you do not get the simple fact our STATE laws are not stepping on anything here, the majority of any acts against the 2nd for Us hoosiers are at a national level

 

[Lex Concord]

Lax yes, we have lax laws, we have the ability to carry an EASY to get carry at that, other than a 4473 at your LGS, and the aforementioned NFA/hughes/brady bill federal screwing we get, the state basically stays out of things.

The state even stepped in and told employers (like mine) that they couldn't keep me from carrying to work and having a firearm in the car. Not to mention castle laws and other right restorations the state has come up with. And Indiana is one of few states that honor other people's right to carry. If we aren't 'lax' we are on a better footing that most other areas are.

And I do understand freedom, you do not get the simple fact our STATE laws are not stepping on anything here, the majority of any acts against the 2nd for Us hoosiers are at a national level

So, rather than assume... by "lax", do you mean "not sufficiently strict, severe, or careful", or did you have another meaning in mind?

While I certainly don't speak for INGO, I imagine that, in these parts, you'll have a difficult time finding agreement with that rather common definition of the word.

 

[Woobie]

I'm thinking David890 is back.

 

[Floivanus]

By lax I mean relaxed, as in no registration easy to get ccw, no magazine restriction, no duty to inform, the ability to have all NFA regulated weapons, not this 'insufficiently strict' definition of the word.

The point again was we have no state restrictions on scary looking weapons and are fortunate in that regard. And by this I assume so and so is back remark, I'll take a guess that is some type of troll account that used to be here and to that I say you are mistaken.

 

[Dentoro]

I'm sure we get a fair amount of drugs from them!

 

[gmcttr]

Hmmm...you sure sound like a troll since your only objections seem to be along the lines that indiana laws are lax because a person can break them if they want in order to supply a gun to someone not eligible. No one else is making a case that that is to right thing to do.

 

[printcraft]

I'm thinking David890 is back.

QFT

Welcome back rocketsurgeon!

 

[actaeon277]

Maybe the choice of the word "lax" was in error.

 

[OakRiver]

By lax I mean relaxed, as in no registration easy to get ccw, no magazine restriction, no duty to inform, the ability to have all NFA regulated weapons, not this 'insufficiently strict' definition of the word.

The point again was we have no state restrictions on scary looking weapons and are fortunate in that regard. And by this I assume so and so is back remark, I'll take a guess that is some type of troll account that used to be here and to that I say you are mistaken.

So Indiana is "lax" because they respect the rights of the citizens as guaranteed by their State Constitution and US Constitution, gotcha.

 

[OakRiver]

Hmmm...you sure sound like a troll since your only objections seem to be along the lines that indiana laws are lax because a person can break them if they want in order to supply a gun to someone not eligible. No one else is making a case that that is to right thing to do.

If we are setting the bar low then every law ever conceived is lax

 

[Woobie]

Before the dogpile gets any bigger....

Lax implies negligence in modern vernacular. So "lax" would mean Indiana is lazy and too permissive with its gun laws.

Or are you saying Indiana has more freedom than other states? Perhaps you mean our laws are less intrusive or restrictive.