How can we regulate guns ... ?

No. Evidence? I'm not sure. I suspect its because the gun regulations don't do much of anything, but instead it was the huge crack-down on crime in general in New York that lead to the results. No, I think its a waste of time and money that could be better spent addressing the social issues that I believe are at the root of the problem. The research doesn't distinguish between the homicides that were cause by the prevalence of guns or the guns possessions that were caused by the prevalence of homicides. Its of little to no use.

Are NY's gun laws dissimiliar to Chicago's?

Pushback on Obama's plan to stem gun violence | CNN Politics

quote:

---

President Barack Obama on Wednesday proposed background checks on all gun sales and bans on military style assault weapons and high-capacity magazines as part of a package of steps to reduce gun violence in the wake of the Newtown school massacre last month.

​

With relatives of some of the 20 children killed in the Connecticut rampage looking on, Obama signed 23 executive actions -- which don't require congressional approval -- to strengthen background checks and expand safety programs in schools.

​

He also called on Congress to reinstate an assault weapons ban that expired in 2004, to restrict ammunition magazines to no more than 10 rounds, and to require a background check on anyone buying a gun, whether at a store or in a private sale at an auction or convention.

​

While some of the steps he proposed are given little chance of winning congressional approval in the face of the nation's powerful gun lobby, Obama said all efforts must be made to reduce chronic gun violence in the country.

​

Read the full plan (.PDF)

​

"This is our first task as a society -- keeping our children safe," the president said, adding that saving even one life would make the changes he seeks worth the effort.

​

"We can respect the Second Amendment while keeping an irresponsible law-breaking few from inflicting harm on a massive scale," he said.

​

Obama proposed legislative steps he previously has backed, such as reinstating the Clinton-era ban on assault weapons, and also requested that funds be made available to help treat mental illness and provide schools with support to enhance their safety.

​

However, new polls show increased public support for stronger gun control measures,and Obama called for citizens to let their elected representatives know what they think.

​

"The only way we can change is if the American people demand it," Obama said.

​

A main focus of Obama's steps was closing loopholes in background checks. While requiring universal background checks would require congressional approval, some of the executive actions signed by Obama were intended to bolster the existing system.

​

Across the country, more than a million people failed background checks to buy guns during the past 14 years because of criminal records, drug use or mental health issues, according to FBI figures.

​

That figure, however, is a small fraction of overall gun sales.

​

In New York, Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo on Tuesday signed into law a series of new gun regulations -- the nation's first since the Newtown shootings.

​

Both New York's GOP-controlled Senate and Democrat-controlled Assembly approved the measure by overwhelming margins.

​

It includes a statewide gun registry and adds a uniform licensing standard across the state, altering the current system, in which each county or municipality sets a standard.

​

Residents are also restricted to purchasing ammunition magazines that carry seven bullets, rather than 10.

​

"The changes in New York are largely cosmetic," said CNN legal analyst Paul Callan, who described state's existing regulations as "the toughest gun laws in the United States."

​

Lawmakers in at least 10 other states are reviewing some form of new gun regulations in the new year.

---

We can do better: just ban ammo clips and magazines altogether.Enjoy.

From the PDF link above:

quote:

---

Our nation has suffered too much at the hands of dangerous people who use
guns to commit horrific acts of violence. As President Obama said following the
Sandy Hook Elementary School tragedy, We won’t be able to stop every violent
act, but if there is even one thing that we can do to prevent any of these events, we
have a deep obligation, all of us, to try.

​

Most gun owners are responsible and law-abiding, and they use their guns
safely. The President strongly believes that the Second Amendment guarantees
an individual right to bear arms. But to better protect our children and our
communities from tragic mass shootings like those in Newtown, Aurora, Oak
Creek, and Tucson, there are four common-sense steps we can take right now.
The President’s plan includes:

​

1. Closing background check loopholes to keep guns out
   of dangerous hands;
2. Banning military-style assault weapons and high-capacity
   magazines, and taking other common-sense steps to reduce
   gun violence;
3. Making schools safer; and
4. Increasing access to mental health services.

​

While no law or set of laws will end gun violence, it is clear that the American
people want action. If even one child’s life can be saved, then we need to act.
Now is the time to do the right thing for our children, our communities, and
the country we love.

---

Details found in the full plan here. (.PDF)Sounds a lot like the issues being discussed here.Enjoy

First: you make no good argument in this post as to why the "thug" ought to change his view on guns and not the other person. Are you saying (and I say this based solely on the pics you provided) that guns are not meant to be in the home, as the first young man has it, but should be at the range?Second: people like you are seen as glorifying guns just as much as the thug, if not more. It's just that you don't make rap songs about it (country songs, maybe). If it's the "glorifying" of guns you are worried about, look no further than your very own Ted Nugent: 2nd amendment champion.Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.

I made no mention of restriction. I was saying nothing about where guns were meant to be.I was answering a question about whether the desire to have guns should be addressed by showing that the reason for the desire mattered to if it should be addressed. The desire to have a gun so you can be a cooler thug should be addressed while the desire to have a gun to participate in matched competition should not. You don't know much about me... I listen to heavy metal. But thanks for prejudicing me, jerk.

You're right. I was thinking of restriction and used that word erroneously. I've edited my post. Who decided that his sole purpose for gun ownership was to "be a cooler thug"? Simply because he took a picture with it? Or because he has his hat to the side? Maybe we make this distinction based on clothing, class and social perception?Only rich white people who dress professionally should be under the impression they can like guns. Kinda like you did to the kid in that picture you posted????

Since you are the one discussing it like you know, why don't you tell me.

They're not.

http://www.nyc.gov/...nloads/pdf/crime_statistics/cscity.pdf

Hi CS,I have to admit I share Theodoric's confusion about what point you're trying to make with the music piracy analogy. It seems like there's only one point that could be made with that analogy, namely that both music piracy and gun control laws have difficult enforcement issues, but you seem to be objecting to that interpretation, so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, and I don't think Theodoric is, either.Also, I never thought Theodoric was trying to say that failing to support one regulation means one must support no regulations. Maybe I'm wrong, but you might want to verify that interpretation.Anyway, I'm not a participant, so if you *are* interested in clarifying your point concerning the music piracy analogy then it should be to Theodoric, not me.

Statistics are not evidence of your point of view unless you can show how. Statistics can be misleading and a totally different understanding can result when the method of how the statistics were derived is uncovered.

Yes, they can. However, .. well.. the poitn of the matter is.. these AREN'T misleading. The gun laws, and their enforcement in New York City has drastically reduced crime.The numbers of murders in specifically have dropped drastically since 1990.I gave the raw numbers. You can deny the data, or you can accept it. If you want to deny it, no one can make you accept the data, but if you can't accept the facts,that seems to be like shoving your fingers in your ears and yelling 'I can't HEAR YOU'.Edited by ramoss, : No reason given.

How do you know it is gun laws and their enforcement that has dropped crime since the 90's and not some other factor?

quote:

---

These young thugs have glorified guns and I do think they should be disabused of that.

---

You are right but how is that different from cheery people standing in front of a xmas tree with their gift Bushmaster? Why is it that a gun is even considered a lovely gift?'Merica has a love affair with guns and violence that stems from its past - other nations have been able to leave less desirable parts of their history behind, why cannot the US?