Nothing to do with the fact that Chicago is a city full of criminals and run by criminals.
Let’s be frank: There is no “gun problem”.
What there is is a “black violence problem”.
And the solution to black violence is not to disarm law abiding white people, or any law abiding people.
My lib cousin claims folks are simply going to nearby Gary Indiana to buy guns, that Chicago gun laws actually work. Right.
“Often there’s a misimpression about the importance of assault guns and assault weapons, and it’s important to point out how rare that is,” says Phillip Cook, an economist at Duke University who studies underground gun markets.
Cool. Since Democrats aren’t anti-science. We can forget about “assault weapon bans”. That’s a load off my mind.
If neighboring areas have lax gun laws, why aren’t their crime rates as high as Chicago?
If an assault weapon is typically black, then would spray painting a super-soaker black make it an assault weapon?
“As President Obama has pointed out, that isn’t a failing of the city’s gun laws. The problem is that most of the guns used in crimes in Chicago come from neighboring states with lax gun laws.”
You’d be surprise how many people I gun down in the street due to lax gun laws in my neighboring states. One of my neighboring states is Wyoming so let’s see, how many people have I gunned down out in the street? Oh yeah, ZERO. I guess maybe there is something else, something other than gun laws that determines whether I commit crimes.
Not one Springfield Armoury?
This statement is quite misleading. Regardless, of where the guns were purchased the overwhelming majority were stolen by either the shooter or someone else who illegally sold it to the shooter. I also note that the places with these supposedly "lax gun laws" don't have near the shooting that Chicago has, so it's not the laws of these states that is the problem.
What are Chicago criminals’ favorite Italian beef joints? Want to avoid those!
That will always be the excuse. Someplace will have more lax gun laws than the jurisdiction you are in. The socialist will not be happy until all guns are banned and eliminated except the ones that they and their protectors have.
FTA: “From that hierarchy, a few patterns emerge. The city’s criminals, for instance, prefer semiautomatic pistols to revolvers and generally seek out cheap junk guns.”
Actually the visual chart shows the opposite as far as cheap junk guns*, Bersas, Lorcins, Ravens are not preferred, but S&W, Colt, Ruger are.
*I remember the days of “Saturday night specials”, this is a reprise
When I first read the headline, I thought maybe it was going to be a list of reccomended firearms for my wish-list. I think I’m already good to go.
Smith and Wesson .38... works for me.
The article contradicts itself by saying that the preference is for “cheap junk” guns but that drug money allows criminals to buy quality guns.
The list of guns shows 50 Lorcins & 40 Ravens. From what little I know about guns, esp the Lorcins, those are the “junk”. The rest are Glocks, SWs, Colts, Rugers, Charter, Bersas and very decent brands. Of course, every manufacturer has some junk models in their line.
But for the most part, I would posit that these are not any better nor worse guns than any other sampling one might find out there, indeed, they might well be better than average.
Plus....these are guns “seized”. They may or may not have been used in crimes.
“almost 60 percent of firearms recovered at Chicago crime scenes were first bought in states that do not require background checks”
Rather silly statement, considering that 64% of states do not require a background check for private sales. The vast majority of sales, do require background checks because of federal law.
But background checks do nothing to stop stolen firearms or “strawman” purchasers from obtaining guns for criminals. Those are the main sources for guns used in crime.