lennybird ,
@lennybird@lemmy.world avatar

Didn't we know this for years?

We're a net-exporter of firearms to south of the border.

In effect, we've created a key component of the problem that inevitably feeds mass migration north to flee said crime and poverty.

KevonLooney ,

You might be wondering why this information isn't public already. Republicans passed a law to keep this information private. Yes, they're protecting the identity of criminals selling guns to cartels.

Fucking vote

FreudianCafe ,

Yeah, its time for democrats to protect the identity of criminals selling guns to cartels.

Fucking vote

PunnyName ,

What

Snowpix ,
@Snowpix@lemmy.ca avatar

Troll. Downvote and ignore them.

FreudianCafe ,

Just pointing out that no matter who you vote, everything stays the same

PunnyName ,

Says someone who doesn't understand, or interact with, the political process.

Vote local. Canvas. Look at candidate histories and platforms. Work with candidates you support. And any time a ranked voting system is up for a vote, VOTE FOR IT.

Buelldozer ,
@Buelldozer@lemmy.today avatar

Republicans passed a law to keep this information private.

They passed a law requiring the Mexican Government to keep it private? Fascinating...tell me more!

MeaanBeaan ,

Per the linked article.

"Gun trace data is kept out of public view by a rider to a Congressional bill known as the “Tiahrt Amendment,” passed in 2003 to shield gun shops from scrutiny. Each year, the ATF provides a count of the guns recovered in Mexico that had been bought in the U.S., with no further details."

Nothing to do with the Mexican govt. The US govt passed a law in 2003 to prevent gun sale data from being public record. This includes sales of firearms eventually used in armed conflicts in Mexico.

Buelldozer ,
@Buelldozer@lemmy.today avatar

Nothing to do with the Mexican govt.

I'm interested to know how the Mexican Government, who also had / has the trace data, is bound by the Tiahart Amendment.

I know it's going to be an unpopular opinion but I really see no problem with the Tiahart Amendment shielding Firearms Manufacturers and Gun Stores. The Manufacturers are already regulated and monitored directly by the Federal Government and Gun Stores can only make sales in compliance with Federal Law. They should not be culpable in either Criminal or Civil court for that reason. The truth is that most of the organization who want that data aren't working in Good Faith and only want it so they can launch lawsuits meant to force Manufacturers and Sellers out of business.

It gets even worse at the individual level. There is absolutely zero cause for firearm transaction records to an individual to be publicly available. It's not only a gross violation of privacy but it's also a security concern.

What you SHOULD be mad about is why the BATFE, who clearly and provably does have this data, isn't doing something with it. They already know literally everything in this article and yet they don't seem to be doing much about it. Why?

MeaanBeaan ,

I can be both mad that this data isn't public record and that the BATFE aren't doing their jobs.

I would disagree that there's zero reason for this data to be public record. I'd agree with you if we were just shielding individuals who are purchasing like one handgun or something. That's something that I don't think is anyone else's business. But if a dude is buying 95 semi-automatic rifles in a short period of time you bet your ass I think that should be public knowledge. No one should be able to secretly purchase enough firearms to arm a small militia.

GiveMemes ,

That's a huge risk for robbery and basically just asking for trouble. Shit tier idea to make that public knowledge tbh. Criminal doesn't have a gun? Good thing they can just find someone that does. Already have one? Then they rob someone with 30 and put the guns onto the black market (still registered to the previous owner.)

PoliticalAgitator ,

Aren't you forgetting something? Every gun owner is a super cool action hero and if anyone tries to break into their house they'll be all "blam blam blam" and they'll be able to turn on their wives again.

GiveMemes ,

I forgot the answer to argument is a snarky remark.

PoliticalAgitator ,

The answer has been given over and over again but it doesn't meet the pro-gun communities deliberately impossible standards. Why bother answering it yet again?

ArcaneSlime ,

Frankly the answer is "make the cops do their fucking jobs" not "make a list of gun purchasers public." Public means that you or I could access the list, what the hell do you plan to do with this list? Tell the FBI "hey that list you maintain has a new entry, as you know, because you're the ones keeping the list?" Do you have jurisdiction anywhere on the entire planet? The literal only reason to make it public is to have a handy list of what houses it's safe to break into when occupied vs when unoccupied. It's basically a treasure map to arm criminals.

PoliticalAgitator ,

What made you think I cared? I've never advocated making gun owners public knowledge, I'm just laughing because gun owners insist their guns can keep them safe from criminals but shrivel up at the idea of those criminals knowing where they live and targeting them specifically.

As always with the pro-gun community, consequences are other people.

ArcaneSlime ,

Ya mama said you did.

Are you really dumb enough that you can't see how regardless of a gun owner's ability to defend themselves while they are home, they also don't want people targeting their house for theft while they aren't home based on a "has gun" list? Do you want stolen guns to end up in the hands of criminals? You think they have some magical ability to shoot people while they aren't at the location of the theft or something? This isn't fallout with grenade bouquets lmao.

As always with the pro-gun community, consequences are other people.

The consequences are the people's who commit the crime, not the gun owning populace as a whole who has not? Yes.

PoliticalAgitator ,

You really need to get your feelings out about this don't you? The world must no your opinion, even the people who aren't actually advocating it.

Anyway, your feelings are bullshit. The pro-gun community routinely opposes safe storage laws and are happy to leave guns in glove compartments and closets. Not that the black market is required to arm criminals, given how easy it is to pass a background check, straw purchase or buy privately but again, the pro-gun community opposes reforms to combat all of that.

So whatever the fuck "The consequences are the people's who commit the crime, not the gun owning populace as a whole who has not? Yes" is supposed to mean, it's clear that you're only upset that you would be in danger, since you put other people in danger all the time.

ArcaneSlime ,

Safe storage penalizes victims for being stolen from and is a tax to stop those dirty poors from having guns, glove compartments are necessary sometimes to follow the laws regarding where you can and can't carry which is the fault of the business and government that is forcing it, not the one forced to.

Not that the black market is required to arm criminals

Well it is if they've been charged with something.

given how easy it is to pass a background check,

Oh so "no criminal record," shocker.

straw purchase

Illegal.

or buy privately

Illegal if you're a prohibited possessor.

And even with all that, publishing a list is still stupid. I put nobody in danger, you're projecting, it's your stupid ideas on guns that endanger people, and not even gun owners but the people who will be harmed with their stolen guns. You don't give a shit though because if they die it "owns the republitards" so it's actually a win for you, I know.

PoliticalAgitator , (edited )

Safe storage penalizes victims for being stolen from

Good. If you didn't take reasonable steps to secure your firearms, your negligence armed criminals. Guns are already an exception to "dangerous things must be properly secured" thanks to crybaby gun owners.

Oh and don't waste your breath with a "B-B-B-But LockPickingLawyer opened this gun safe with his flaccid cock" because that's not even close to an insurmountable problem.

a tax to stop those dirty poors from having guns

You're using poor people as a human shield. You've never advocated giving people guns as a form of welfare and realistically a gun is one of the last things those "dirty poors" need.

You're a simp for a multi-billion industry that funds the very worst Republicans and puts profits before lives. You don't have a leg to stand on.

glove compartments are necessary

Sounds like we know where you leave your gun. It's grossly negligent and absolutely your fault. Either leave your gun at home (where I'm guessing it's just as poorly secured) or don't go to places that don't want you.

Well it is if they've been charged with something.
Oh so "no criminal record," shocker
Illegal

Laws that are a complete failure, which the pro-gun community opposes all changes to, including better enforcement.

Illegal if you're a prohibited possessor

Consequences for other people. The "responsible gun owner" making the private sale gets away with selling a gun to a dangerous person. If we only charged underage people for buying alcohol (and not the person who supplied them), there would be zero expectation of those laws working.

And even with all that, publishing a list is still stupid

Yet again, not actually a thing I advocated, just something I mocked your reaction to. Let's hope for your families sake you're not so easily confused when you hear a bump in the night.

I put nobody in danger

Another worthless promise from a gun owner. Whatever minimal vetting you've been through is demonstrably not enough to ensure gun owners aren't a danger. You cleared the same low bar as the people shooting at children who rang their doorbell or used their driveway to turn around.

If we reduce you to a statistic, it's even more bullshitty. Every person in your household is at a greater risk of domestic homicide and suicide.

it's your stupid ideas on guns

Are you still throwing a tantrum about an idea I didn't suggest or supoort, or are you just assuming all of my opinions based on what the gun lobby have told you I believe?

Your laws have failed America. It's 20 years past when "responsible gun owners" should have actually taken some responsibility.

ArcaneSlime , (edited )

Way to victim blame, if criminals didn't steal them they wouldn't be stolen, your logic is rapist logic, "she was asking for it out late at night in that slutty skirt, should've locked it up in a chastity belt."

I actually do advocate for a government program to pass out firearms to individuals in need, like a broke single mother with an abusive ex, for instance. Thing is I'm not the government so what I advocate for doesn't necessarily become policy. Funny how that works. Furthermore just because something that requires another's time, labor, and materials is sold by the company that makes it doesn't mean we should arbitrarily raise it more to make it harder for the poor (of which I am one, btw, "you don't care about the poor like yourself" is a dumb fucking take.)

Actually I view those laws as unsafe, therefore I just illegally carry past the sign. It's safer where someone would have to grab my dick to get it than unattended in a car. I'm not supposed to do that though, I'm supposed to leave it in the car. Oopsies. Still if someone does follow the law, the theft is the fault of the thief and the one who made it available for the thief: the law.

"Including" meaning "only" better enforcement, yes. Finish the laws you have at home before buying new ones little Timmy.

EHHH INCORRECT! If you sell a gun to a person who you should reasonably know is a prohibited possessor, like underage people, you get what is called "prison time." People have also been begging for years for access to NICs to help with this but you don't want to give it to us.

You're in a thread about advocating for a public list "mocking" gun owners who think a public list is a bad idea. Sure sounds like you're advocating for it while trying to pretend you aren't like a slimy little weasel.

If we reduce you to a statistic,

Hmm ok let's see, there are 600,000,000 guns in the US, and yearly about 60,000 are used in murders/accidents/suicide, that is a 0.01% chance that in any given year my gun will be involved in a death. "OH NOOOOOOOO." Btw it's actually less because this equation assumes each gun only kills one person, but as we know that isn't the case in every scenario.

We've talked before dingus I know you have stupid opinions on guns first hand because you incessantly repeat them lmao.

PoliticalAgitator , (edited )

Way to victim blame

"This woman scratched and bit me while I was raping her, so I'm the real victim"

I remember you now. You're not worth my time and it doesn't look like there's anyone left in the thread who is. I didn't read most of your comment but laughed when I saw you've lifted my insults to use as your own. Looks like you have made space for me in your head.

ArcaneSlime ,

Lol so to you having your house broken into and having things stolen from you is akin to raping someone and being injured while doing it? How do you figure that one? In my view it seems more like the one doing the breaking in is the rapist and you're arguing that it's the victims fault for only having one locked door instead of a matryoshka door.

No u lol if me remembering your name as a moron is "making space" you remembering me for always being right is the same. Cute insult attempts though, unfortunately I'd have to have a modicum of respect for you not to think you're laughably pathetic for it however.

PoliticalAgitator ,

Didn't read.

ArcaneSlime ,

'Course not lol.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • [email protected]
  • kbinchat
  • All magazines