Donald J Trump - Predsjednik USA All About

[kosava]

Nema to nikakvih statistika jer nema registacije oruzija to je sve na osnovu malog uzorka.

U Vermont i Maine procjena je da 70-80% domacinstava posjeduje oruzije i da ima 5 do 7 komada oruzija po glavi stanovnika.

Guns in churches are permissible, and guns in establishments with a liquor license are also allowed … and Vermont has never required a gun permit,” said Evan Hughes, vice president of the Vermont Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs.

Hughes told Vermont Watchdog the state’s Second Amendment-styled gun laws are the reason for the state’s remarkably low gun crime rate.

“We have one of the highest percentages of licensed hunters in the lower 48 states. Gun ownership is very prevalent in Vermont, and we don’t have a problem with guns being involved in crime or firearms accidents. So the laws serve us well,” he said.

Other indicators of Vermont’s leadership among pro-gun states include Article 16 of the state Constitution, which reads, “The people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and the state.” The law dates back to 1777 and was strengthened in 1903 by State v. Rosenthal.

Paul M. Barrett, senior writer for Bloomberg Businessweek, claims the new race to the top among gun-freedom states is a reaction to calls for gun control in the wake of the Sandy Hook school massacre in Connecticut. Gun control advocates find this trend disturbing.

Pia Carusone, executive director of Americans for Responsible Solutions, a gun-control group founded by former U.S. Gabby Giffords, called Georgia’s “guns everywhere” bill “the most extreme gun bill in America.”

Vermont gun owners such as Ed Cutler, president of Gun Owners of Vermont, take issue with such statements, saying the Green Mountain State is the nation’s reigning “guns everywhere” state — and it’s not a partisan issue.

“As funny as it sounds, being the most liberal state in the union, we also have the highest per capita gun ownership. Near as anybody can tell, 70 to 75 percent of all households in Vermont have firearms,” Cutler said. “Up here, even the liberals have guns.”

Another measure of Second Amendment freedom relates to how gun owners may carry in states. Just four states — Vermont, Arizona, Wyoming and Alaska — allow the concealed carry of handguns without a permit.

Moore said those rules have always been left up to the people of Vermont.

“The Supreme Court in the state of Vermont has said that the way you carry a weapon, weather concealed or not concealed, is irrelevant. What’s relevant is your intent to commit a violent or felony act,” he said.

One controversial issue, however, pertains to guns in schools. Vermont allows guns in schools only in limited situations.

“If there’s a sanctioned event for students or adults inside the school building, gun owners can carry,” Hughes said. “Say they have a hunter education course in the building, and they get approval from the school board, they can have firearms in the building.”

And while Vermont has no law prohibiting guns on college campuses, private and public universities are free to set administrative restrictions.

Hughes dismisses the oft-cited claim that increased gun freedom leads to Old West-style shootouts.

“You’re going to hear, ‘Oh my god, we’re going to have the OK Corral,’ and all these predictions of gloom and doom. It never comes to pass.”

Instead, Hughes insists that increased gun freedom leads to increased safety.

“Vermont continuously ranks among the lowest crime states in the country. In Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Connecticut, they have much more restrictive gun laws, yet they have higher crime rates. So you have multiple states right there adjacent to each other, and we disprove the idea that gun control works at preventing gun crime.”

[kosava]

The most complete state-by-state ownership data comes from the American Academy of Pediatrics i to jos iz 2002 pogledaj Maine i Vermont.

[jefferson]

Znaci upravo sto sam ja i govori dva doma, svi senatori su kongresmeni nisu svi kongresmeni senatori.

Sve si to fino u pravu.

No nisi u pravu jer su ove dvije tvoje izjave u koliziji:

Senator i congresman se ne izabiru na isti nacin

Svaki Senator je Kongresmen a nije svaki Kongresmen Senator.

Ako je svaki senator kongresmen, kako se onda senator i kongresmen ne izabiru na isti nacin?

Pises nonsens, vrlo jednostavno, i samo nije jasno jesi li skonto u medjuvremenu pa se pravis lud, ili jos nisi skonto, sto je u stvari jos gore.

Mislim da je oboje, ali kljuc je da ne shvata.

[jeza u ledja]

kongresme aka representaive

E vidis, to je tu gdje grijesis. Kongresmen nije isto sto i representative.

[kosava]

Jel Vermont i Maine ne granice sa Kanadom?

Maine i Vermont imaju nizu stop kriminala i od Kanade i od Skandinavskih zemalja.
Bice da tebi ne ide geografija najbolje.

Nije boja koze nego kultura nasilja i kriminala. Mozes ti otici i kupiti pistolj ili pusku u Indijani ali mora se poslati u prodavnicu oruzija u Cikagu i to je preuzmes ako kupis pistolj u Indijani ko stanovnik Ilinoisa i preneses ga u Cikago to je federalno krivicno djelo.

Al ako je to tako sto Indijana i ti djelovi sto granice sa Chickaom i Virdjinija koja granici sa DC nema istu ni slicnu stopu kriminala?

[kosava]

kongresme aka representaive

E vidis, to je tu gdje grijesis. Kongresmen nije isto sto i representative.

Svi su oni representaives, svi senatori su kongresmeni nisu svi kongresmeni senatori,

[jefferson]

kongresme aka representaive

E vidis, to je tu gdje grijesis. Kongresmen nije isto sto i representative.

Mislim da je vrijeme za ozbiljnu raspravu davno proslo.
Covjek ne konta (vjerovatno nije sposoban) da postoji jedan kongres sa dva doma ili tijela i da su representatives i senatori kongresmeni.
Ne konta da je Kongres jedna od grana americke politike koji cine Senat i House of Representatives.
Iduce godine pocinje 115-to zasjedanje kongresa. Nema 115-to zasjedanje Senata. Ima samo zasjedanje Kongresa sa dva tijela.
On u sustini zove predstavnike kongresmenima, sto je OK. Problem je sto su i Senatori isto kongresmeni jer je jedan Kongres, sa dva tijela, Senat i House of Representatives.
ALi mislim da on fakat nije sposoban da to skonta.

[kosava]

Uvijek jaro naucis nesto novo, sta ces.
Znaci da sumiram sta sam naucio juce i danas:
1. Senat nije dio Kongresa
2. Senat i House nisu zakonodavna tijela.

Jbg, covjek se uci dok je ziv.

Slabo si ti to savladao sjedi jedan.

[jeza u ledja]

The most complete state-by-state ownership data comes from the American Academy of Pediatrics i to jos iz 2002 pogledaj Maine i Vermont.

I sad otvori opet taj link odakle si uzeo tu mapu i nadji ispod listu drzava, pod "US states with the highest rates of gun ownership" i potrazi na listi Vermont i Maine. Je li ih ima i medju prvih deset?

[kosava]

kongresme aka representaive

E vidis, to je tu gdje grijesis. Kongresmen nije isto sto i representative.

Mislim da je vrijeme za ozbiljnu raspravu davno proslo.
Covjek ne konta (vjerovatno nije sposoban) da postoji jedan kongres sa dva doma ili tijela i da su representatives i senatori kongresmeni.
Ne konta da je Kongres jedna od grana americke politike koji cine Senat i House of Representatives.
Iduce godine pocinje 115-to zasjedanje kongresa. Nema 115-to zasjedanje Senata. Ima samo zasjedanje Kongresa sa dva tijela.

Dva doma si htjeo reci, jedna grana vlasti a ne politike.

daj malo poradi na semantici.

[kosava]

The most complete state-by-state ownership data comes from the American Academy of Pediatrics i to jos iz 2002 pogledaj Maine i Vermont.

I sad otvori opet taj link odakle si uzeo tu mapu i nadji ispod listu drzava, pod "US states with the highest rates of gun ownership" i potrazi na listi Vermont i Maine. Je li ih ima i medju prvih deset?

Vermont i Manie vode po broju komada oruzija per kapita jer nema ekzaktinh podataka nego se ide po broju background chekova a Vermont i Maine.

Maine is to become the seventh state in the union to nix its firearms-permitting requirements in toto. Johannes Paulsen with the story: Maine Governor Paul LePage has been getting into a bit of a tussle with the state legislature, vetoing 100 bills in this session, but on Wednesday, he signed a bill making the Pine Tree State the seventh state to adopt rules following Vermont-style permitless (or “Constitutional”) carry of firearms by law-abiding citizens . . . The bill, known as LD 652, is very simple, but will have far-reaching effects: anyone who is not otherwise prohibited by law from carrying a firearm will now be able to legally carry a firearm without the necessity of obtaining a government-issued license ahead of time. On the face of it, this development should be a rather surprising one. As we are often reminded, Governor LePage is a “severe” conservative in a state that does not typically elect such figures, and this is precisely the sort of “severely” conservative law that New Englanders are presumed to oppose. Certainly, the odds of passage looked slim. At present, Maine’s Senate has a slim 20-15 Republican majority, while its House is run by Democrats. A majority of local police groups were against the measure, as were the lion’s share of local newspapers, the state’s Criminal Justice Committee, and the usual suspects from outside. For their part, Everytown for Gun Safety and Moms Demand Action “blanketed” the state with negative ads. Despite all of this, the measure passed on a strong bipartisan vote — and in both legislative chambers. What gives? That the state is generally free of crime cannot have hurt. According to the Portland Press, FBI statistics reveal Maine to have been “the second-safest state in the nation in 2013,” with “only Vermont” having seen “fewer violent crimes per capita.” Nor can it be ignored that, in practice, this alteration is a minor one. Maine already allows its residents to carry a firearm openly without a permit, which meant that the debate over the new measure effectively centered around whether residents should be punished for putting on a coat — a difficult case to make in the affirmative.

[jeza u ledja]

Jel Vermont i Maine ne granice sa Kanadom?

Maine i Vermont imaju nizu stop kriminala i od Kanade i od Skandinavskih zemalja.
Bice da tebi ne ide geografija najbolje.

Nije boja koze nego kultura nasilja i kriminala. Mozes ti otici i kupiti pistolj ili pusku u Indijani ali mora se poslati u prodavnicu oruzija u Cikagu i to je preuzmes ako kupis pistolj u Indijani ko stanovnik Ilinoisa i preneses ga u Cikago to je federalno krivicno djelo.

Al ako je to tako sto Indijana i ti djelovi sto granice sa Chickaom i Virdjinija koja granici sa DC nema istu ni slicnu stopu kriminala?

Je li Kanada granici sa skandinavskim zemljama?

Da bi kupio oruzje na gun show privatno ne treba ti apsolutno nikakav dokaz ni za sta. Odes, das pare, kupis i cao. Kao da si krompir kupio. A prenosenje oruzja preko granice federalno krivicno djelo? Big deal. Ljudi se ubijaju s tim oruzjem, mislis da je njima bitno sto je oruzje prokijumcario?

[jeza u ledja]

Vermont i Manie vode po broju komada oruzija per kapita jer nema ekzaktinh podataka nego se ide po broju background chekova a Vermont i Maine.

Maine is to become the seventh state in the union to nix its firearms-permitting requirements in toto. Johannes Paulsen with the story: Maine Governor Paul LePage has been getting into a bit of a tussle with the state legislature, vetoing 100 bills in this session, but on Wednesday, he signed a bill making the Pine Tree State the seventh state to adopt rules following Vermont-style permitless (or “Constitutional”) carry of firearms by law-abiding citizens . . . The bill, known as LD 652, is very simple, but will have far-reaching effects: anyone who is not otherwise prohibited by law from carrying a firearm will now be able to legally carry a firearm without the necessity of obtaining a government-issued license ahead of time. On the face of it, this development should be a rather surprising one. As we are often reminded, Governor LePage is a “severe” conservative in a state that does not typically elect such figures, and this is precisely the sort of “severely” conservative law that New Englanders are presumed to oppose. Certainly, the odds of passage looked slim. At present, Maine’s Senate has a slim 20-15 Republican majority, while its House is run by Democrats. A majority of local police groups were against the measure, as were the lion’s share of local newspapers, the state’s Criminal Justice Committee, and the usual suspects from outside. For their part, Everytown for Gun Safety and Moms Demand Action “blanketed” the state with negative ads. Despite all of this, the measure passed on a strong bipartisan vote — and in both legislative chambers. What gives? That the state is generally free of crime cannot have hurt. According to the Portland Press, FBI statistics reveal Maine to have been “the second-safest state in the nation in 2013,” with “only Vermont” having seen “fewer violent crimes per capita.” Nor can it be ignored that, in practice, this alteration is a minor one. Maine already allows its residents to carry a firearm openly without a permit, which meant that the debate over the new measure effectively centered around whether residents should be punished for putting on a coat — a difficult case to make in the affirmative.

U ovom clanku ne pise nista o broju komada oruzja per kapita. Nadji clanak koji dokazuje tvoju tvrdnju da Vermont i Maine imaju oruzja vise nego bilo gdje drugo.

[jeza u ledja]

Dva doma si htjeo reci, jedna grana vlasti a ne politike.

daj malo poradi na semantici.

Grana ili tijelo?

[jefferson]

Dva doma si htjeo reci, jedna grana vlasti a ne politike.

daj malo poradi na semantici.

Ne htio sam reci dva tijela. Sto? Zato sto su i Senat i House of representatives zakonodavna tijela.
Grana politickog procesa da eto budem bas u bocu, iako ti vrlo dobro znas sta sam htio reci.

[kosava]

Despite Clinton’s insinuations, Vermont is the safest state in the nation according to FBI statistics. In 2013, Vermont had 115 violent crimes per 100,000 residents, well below the national average of 368 violent crimes for every 100,000 people. In 2010, the state’s gun murder rate per 100,000 people was 0.3 percent — the lowest in the nation.

[jefferson]

Dva doma si htjeo reci, jedna grana vlasti a ne politike.

daj malo poradi na semantici.

Grana ili tijelo?

Upravu je on ovdje, grana. Legislative branch.
Medjutim on ne konta da je Kongres jedan sa dva zakonodavna tijela, i da predstavlja taj "branch" a ne Kongres i Senat (sto bi bile dvije grane).

[kosava]

Dva doma si htjeo reci, jedna grana vlasti a ne politike.

daj malo poradi na semantici.

Ne htio sam reci dva tijela. Sto? Zato sto su i Senat i House of representatives zakonodavna tijela.
Grana politickog procesa da eto budem bas u bocu, iako ti vrlo dobro znas sta sam htio reci.

Nezam ja sta is ti htjeo reci, necitam ja misli nego sto si napisao, mislim velike su to greske za semanticara kao sto si ti.

Ja sam svo vrijeme u pravu i nije dva tijela nego dva doma, zato zakon da bi isao pred Predsjednika mora proci oba doma.

[jeza u ledja]

Despite Clinton’s insinuations, Vermont is the safest state in the nation according to FBI statistics. In 2013, Vermont had 115 violent crimes per 100,000 residents, well below the national average of 368 violent crimes for every 100,000 people. In 2010, the state’s gun murder rate per 100,000 people was 0.3 percent — the lowest in the nation.

Nisam pitao za gun murder rate, vec za procenat ljudi koji posjeduju oruzje. Slika koju si postavio doduse spominje ovo drugo, ali samo u usporedbi sa okolnim drzavama, ne cijelom Amerikom.

Ti si rekao :

da budemo precizni u Vermontu i Maine oruzija nego igdje na planeti Zemlji

Imas li negdje podatak da u VT i ME ima oruzja vise nego igdje na planeti zemlji? Eto ne mora cijela planeta, moze samo Amerika.

[kosava]

Jel Vermont i Maine ne granice sa Kanadom?

Maine i Vermont imaju nizu stop kriminala i od Kanade i od Skandinavskih zemalja.
Bice da tebi ne ide geografija najbolje.

Nije boja koze nego kultura nasilja i kriminala. Mozes ti otici i kupiti pistolj ili pusku u Indijani ali mora se poslati u prodavnicu oruzija u Cikagu i to je preuzmes ako kupis pistolj u Indijani ko stanovnik Ilinoisa i preneses ga u Cikago to je federalno krivicno djelo.

Al ako je to tako sto Indijana i ti djelovi sto granice sa Chickaom i Virdjinija koja granici sa DC nema istu ni slicnu stopu kriminala?

Je li Kanada granici sa skandinavskim zemljama?

Da bi kupio oruzje na gun show privatno ne treba ti apsolutno nikakav dokaz ni za sta. Odes, das pare, kupis i cao. Kao da si krompir kupio. A prenosenje oruzja preko granice federalno krivicno djelo? Big deal. Ljudi se ubijaju s tim oruzjem, mislis da je njima bitno sto je oruzje prokijumcario?

Ne nego Maine i Vermont granice sa Kanadom a imaju nizu stop kriminala od Kanade i Skandinavskih zemalja koje su uzor kvaliteta zivota.

Ocito ti nisi nikada bio na gun show, mozes al u kurcu na gun show prvo slabo ima privatnih prodavaca a na sve strane ATF agenti i lokalni zandari u civili i uniformama, jos se nikada nije desilo da je dosao covjek koji nema FFL znaci ovlasteni prodavac oruzija i stavio 30-40 pistolja da proda onako privatno na gun show jer ima mali fol ako prodas vise od 4 komada oruzija godisnje onda si se bavis prodajom oruzija bez regitstrovane firme prvo ti se naklati ATF na kosti a onda IRS jer nisi registrovan kao privatna firma i neplacas porez a znasli koliko je da iznajmis sto na gun show? 500 do 1000 dollar dan.

E tu si upravu jebe se kriminalcima za zakon, to ti je onaj famozni kombi sto dovozi oruzije u Cikago ,urbana legenda svi pricaju a nikad ni jedan takav registrovan slucaj.

[kosava]

Na osnovu podataka u Maine i Vermontu ti je 5 do 7 komada po glavi stanovnika toliko nema ni u Jemenu ni u Srbiji.

Znaci po statistickim podatcima u Vermontu koji ima 600 hilljada stanovinka ima oko 4 miliona komada oruzija koje se prodalo od 1993 godine kada je Brady Bill stupio na snagu, Maine ima na 1,2 miliona stanovinka oko 6 milion komada oruzija.

Niko nije bolje opisao situaciju u Maine i Vermontu od Erika Garlanda

THE CONTRADICTORY GUN CULTURE OF THE UNITED STATES
ERIC GARLAND JULY 22, 2012 GREATEST HITS 20 COMMENTS
Like all Americans, my thoughts have been with the victims of the senseless, grisly tragedy in Aurora, Colorado. For the last few days, I have not felt like writing anything on the Internet until the initial wave of predictable nonsense gave way to some mental space. I simply haven’t been in the mood to add to the reflexive cacophony of long-held opinions and election year blather. This moment is too sad for that, too predictable, too much of a goddamn waste. I have little to add to help appreciate the tragedy. Perhaps I can provide an atypical perspective from a little-known part of America.

As my friends and regular readers know, I hail originally from the state of Vermont, just like seven previous generations of my family. The Green Mountain State has come to be known for a great many things that are quaint and tourist friendly – Ben & Jerry’s ice cream, skiing, the Vermont Teddy Bear Factory, Green Mountain Coffee, and “Larry, Darryl and Darryl,” so long as you were watching television in the 1980s. One facet of Vermont life is neither famous nor quaint: Vermonters are armed to the teeth. Guns are absolutely everywhere. Rifles. Pistols. Shotguns. Muzzle-loaders. Semi-automatics. 50 caliber tripod-mount “semi” automatics that could take out aircraft. Every firearm you can possibly imagine. Vermont could be the most armed part of the world per capita, as rife with firearms as Afghanistan, but with trees and cheddar cheese.

Why have you never heard of this crazy, paranoid armed madhouse? Because Vermont routinely has the lowest violent crime in the United States, with only Maine competing for the title of safest place – and it’s armed to the teeth as well. Are you thinking, “well, maybe Vermont has a lot of guns, but surely they have safe and sane gun control laws.” Sorry – we have basically no limitations. Behold the most lax group of regulations you can imagine. There are no concealed carry laws – you can walk around with a trench coat loaded with shotguns, if that floats your boat. There are no open carry laws – feel free to shop for groceries looking like Dirty Harry with a .45 hand cannon strapped to your belt. There are no limits to the number of weapons you can own – if you have the cash, feel free to arm a militia with 3,000 handguns and hunting rifles. The list of gun rules are comically loose, even by American standards: it’s a $200 fine for wearing a gun on the way to kill someone (?), a $50 fine for pointing a loaded weapon at someone other than for self-defense, and the only thing we’re really straightforward on is not arming school children or bringing guns to court with you. The rules allow all kinds of guns, everywhere, and Vermonters thus purchase and own and bear all kinds of guns, everywhere.

And you never hear of massacres in Vermont. The state feels about as safe and wholesome as any place in the world, with thousands of tourists streaming in during winter skiing, summer camping and fall leaf-peeping with nary an idea that they are surrounded by the most armed populus in the United States. This is for two reasons, one obvious, and one a bit more complex and contradictory.

GUNS DON’T KILL PEOPLE; ECONOMIC INEQUALITY AND SUBURBS DO
The main reason that Vermont gets away with tons of firearms and no violence is that there is low population density and a low Gini coefficient. There aren’t many people per square mile, and there’s no huge rich poor gap. It’s more like a poor-kinda poor-not-that-poor-gap, and it creates relatively little social tension. There is enough open space and secluded land for most Vermonters to live on their own private property with little friction with neighbors – excepting, of course, Town Meeting Day in March, which may result in hot debate of snow plow budgets, but which is rarely enough to cause much animosity. Compare this with parts of America where the rich, middle-class and terribly poor are constantly glaring at each other, part of the same tax base but not the same culture. I’m thinking specifically of my last two residences, Washington DC and Saint Louis – places where people are shooting each other in the hind end all of the time. Vermont has none of that tension, even though it has far more firearms.

The next reason that I give as to the relative lack of violent crime in Vermont will sound shockingly similar to NRA talking points, and will likely discomfit people thinking about the need for new gun laws in the wake of yet one more massacre abetted by easy access to firearms.In Vermont, you assume that everybody is armed and will shoot you if you mess with them.I don’t mean that people shoot each other over Red Sox games or over simple neighborly disputes. But if you plan on approaching anybody at night or on their property with anything other than friendly intent, you risk being shot. The ubiquity of firearms – and people who damn well know how to use them – means that culturally, you have a lot of respect for property and privacy.

I learned my first lesson about this in high school. One of my high school classmates, James Ashcroft, was with several members of our basketball team as they went to steal liquor from the garage of Robert Bizon, a local bar owner at around 2:30 am. They did not know that he had been robbed so many times that he had placed an alarm inside his garage and announced to the community – including a variety of passers-by at my father’s farm store – that he was going to kill the next person to rip him off. When he came upon a gang of people on his property late at night, he shot Ashcroft and refused to call the paramedics for several minutes. He died at Rutland Hospital up the road a couple hours later.

Bizon was charged with involuntary manslaughter – and acquitted. I remember the community response. It’s not that people weren’t outraged and disgusted at the senseless death, the overreaction of somebody who seemed relish the opportunity to shoot whoever violated his property next – that was clearly ugly. But as a matter of culture many Vermonters in the area said, “Well, don’t go on people’s land at 2:30 in the morning, up to no good.” There was no push for a “James’ Law,” no attempt to blame guns. It was too bad. Then again, Vermont culture dictates that in the middle of the night, when five unidentified guys are lurking, you may not have the benefit of time to decide.

AMERICA NEEDS MORE THAN ONE SET OF GUN LAWS
I compare this culture with recent events. Let me just say that having lived in major cities, I do not believe that America should just have one set of gun laws. What works for Vermont – producing the lowest crime in the country – would be insane in Washington DC, which has the highest crime, around 1,400 rapes, murders or robberies per year per 100,000 residents – ten times the Vermont average. Do I want the residents of Northeast DC to have 50 caliber tripod rifles and armor piercing bullets? Does Saint Louis require yet more handguns, restricting firearms only at courthouses and schools? No, that’s insanity.

The violence in America does not spring up around places of high firearm ownership, or Maine would look like Chechenya. Violence, and the most disturbing cases of deranged mass murder in recent years, having been springing up in locales with the poor and rich living side by side. The most perverse plans to murder people tend toward the suburbs, a state of living which lacks the realness and interdependence of either dense urban centers or diffuse agrarian regions. You are living too close to people about whom you couldn’t care less. That, or in the case of places like West Baltimore and East St Louis, you are living in a place that is packed with people, but people do not work together toward a common goal, to stricken by the diseased lifestyle of poverty. This afflicted lifestyle occurs in a country where guns are easy to acquire, by legal or illegal means. Sick minds meet available ammunition. The mix is lethal.

Does America need new gun laws in the aftermath of the Aurora tragedy? I would say the answer is complex and contradictory. In one sense, no – because Vermont does not require new gun restriction, nor Maine, nor Wyoming. But do the suburbs and cities require a dramatic restriction of firearms to reduce the number of people living in pathogenic suburban automobile slums or decayed urban wastelands from going crazy and taking out their fever dream on a crowded theater? My sense is yes. As a lifelong Vermont separatist, I think it is up to the local cities and states to make that decision.

Then again, maybe the problem isn’t guns, but of a culture of consumerism, suburbanism, myth, delusion, disappointment, isolation and resentment. That is a much more difficult issue to legislate.

[jeza u ledja]

Na osnovu podataka u Maine i Vermontu ti je 5 do 7 komada po glavi stanovnika toliko nema ni u Jemenu ni u Srbiji.

Znaci po statistickim podatcima u Vermontu koji ima 600 hilljada stanovinka ima oko 4 miliona komada oruzija koje se prodalo od 1993 godine kada je Brady Bill stupio na snagu, Maine ima na 1,2 miliona stanovinka oko 6 milion komada oruzija.

Imas li negdje link koji pokazuje da u Vermontu i Maineu ima vise oruzja po glavi stanovnika nego u ostatku Amerike?
Imas li ili nemas?

[jeza u ledja]

Ne nego Maine i Vermont granice sa Kanadom a imaju nizu stop kriminala od Kanade i Skandinavskih zemalja koje su uzor kvaliteta zivota.

Ti si napisao da Kanada granici sa Skandinavijom.

Evo citiram te:

Kanada sa kojom granice i Skandinavske zemlje

Ocito ti nisi nikada bio na gun show, mozes al u kurcu na gun show prvo slabo ima privatnih prodavaca a na sve strane ATF agenti i lokalni zandari u civili i uniformama, jos se nikada nije desilo da je dosao covjek koji nema FFL znaci ovlasteni prodavac oruzija i stavio 30-40 pistolja da proda onako privatno na gun show jer ima mali fol ako prodas vise od 4 komada oruzija godisnje onda si se bavis prodajom oruzija bez regitstrovane firme prvo ti se naklati ATF na kosti a onda IRS jer nisi registrovan kao privatna firma i neplacas porez a znasli koliko je da iznajmis sto na gun show? 500 do 1000 dollar dan.

E tu si upravu jebe se kriminalcima za zakon, to ti je onaj famozni kombi sto dovozi oruzije u Cikago ,urbana legenda svi pricaju a nikad ni jedan takav registrovan slucaj.

Nisam nikada bio na gun show niti u radnji za prodaju oruzja. Meni takvi debilizmi u zivotu ne trebaju. Pogotovo mi ne treba cirkus gun showa gdje vrvi od budala svakakvih vrsta.

A da to sto ti govoris, naprosto nije tacno, evo samo jedan clanak lokalne tv kuce iz Chicaga:

http://wgntv.com/2014/09/03/indiana-gun ... ngbangers/

Indiana guns: Favorite of Chicago gangbangers

In six years, 3,824 guns taken off Chicago gang bangers that were used in crimes came from our next door neighbor: Indiana. It’s why WGN Investigates took undercover cameras over the border to see why.

Our producer and photographer walked in to an Indianapolis gun show one recent Saturday afternoon wearing undercover camera gear. They listened as one gun dealer showed them a semi-automatic with a 30 round magazine.

Asked why anyone would need that, the dealer said, “Everybody needs something.”

For a $5 dollar entry fee, you can buy all sorts of stuff at the gun show – bullets, handbags with hidden pockets, and of course, guns. The law for buying a gun is different for those who live in Indiana than those who live in Illinois.

It’s so easy here, the dealers joked with our producer and photographer about it. One bragging, “We deal with Illinois residents all the time and we invite them to come to Indiana.”

Another dealer said, “As long as you’re an Indiana resident and you don’t have any trouble, I just write down your name and address so if they come knocking on my door, and say this gun was used in a robbery, well this is who I sold it to and then you got to explain what you did.”

But it’s easy to scam. Like one now infamous guy who simply used a fake Indiana drivers license. David “Big Man” Lewisbey filled a duffle bag with 9 millimeter and 40-caliber handguns. He bought them at various gun shows then sold them to gang bangers in Chicago for big bucks.

Tom Ahern, a special agent with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives says, not only it is easier to buy in Indiana than Illinois, it’s cheaper too. He says the combination has meant a steady flow of guns to Chicago that are involved in crime.

What Lewisbey didn’t know at the time was the feds were watching him. Said Ahern of the ATF, “There’s a large number of individuals at gun show that are selling their personal collections and they’re not holding the buyers to any kind of criminal background check or any paperwork of those transactions.”

That’s the missing link - as Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy put it, the gun show loophole. He says a big reason why more than 3,000 confiscated guns from crimes have come from Indiana. McCarthy says of the loophole, you have a federal firearms licensee, a dealer, who does a quick background check at one table. Right next to him at another table is a private collector who is not, by law, forced to check a buyer’s background.

That makes it awfully tough to trace when a gun is used in a crime. And that’s why this case against Lewisbey and his partners is so important.

Back in 2007, Lewisbey was a Thornton Township High School football lineman who made his way to college. Like many students, he kept a “to do” list that included, the first day of school.

But the rest of the list is like none other. Mid-way through on his things “to do” list is “Get guns back up.” Think about that for a moment – a college student who keeps a summer “to do” list that includes buying guns for gang bangers.

Ahern says it’s clear the word is on the street that if you want a gun, cash and carry, go to Indiana, bring it to Illinois and use it or sell it for a good profit.

In one 48 hour period, Lewisbey delivered 43 guns to a guy with ties to the Gangster Disciples - many purchased at gun shows.

WGN’s Mark Suppelsa asked the Indianapolis gun show owner if he ever sees a buyer fill up a duffle bag, even though it’s perfectly legal. The man said, most of the criminals know not to come to his gun show because he allows law enforcement to come inside for free to deter crime.

Whether this promoter is just naive or in denial, it is happening. Perhaps, he’s been more fortunate than most.

But that still doesn’t impress Chicago’s top cop. Since guns continue to flow across the border he’s had to switch tactics. He’s now working harder to partner with the feds to catch guns moving state to state. When we asked if it’s working, McCarthy said we’re up against it like a screen door on a submarine.

In May, Lewsiby was sentenced to 16 years and 6 months in prison for a gun running smuggling operation. His partner got nearly 11 ½ years.

[kosava]

Imas li ti koja nepokazuje da nema vise komada oruzija po glavi stanovnika nego u Vermontu i Maine,

jedini podatci su broj background checkova od 1993 po tim podatcima najvise oruzija ima u Vermontu i Maine.

[jeza u ledja]

Evo ti drugi clanak, Al Jazeere, o porijeklu oruzja u Chicagu:

Lax gun laws in Indiana fuel gun violence in Chicago

Nearly 60 percent of Chicago crime guns were first purchased outside Illinois; 20 percent came from Indiana

January 11, 2016 5:00AM ET
by Ryan Schuessler @RyanSchuessler1
CROWN POINT, Indiana — At a gun show on Indiana’s fairgrounds, hundreds of people filed past tables of firearms — World War Two relics, handguns, hunting rifles, and combat-grade automatic weapons — sprinkled with a selection of knives, Nazi artifacts, Confederate flags, dozens of anti-Obama and anti-Islam bumper stickers, and t-shirts with slogans including “Infidel” and “I want YOU to learn English.”

“You got something to sell in that bag, buddy?,” one vendor asked a passerby at the December show. Guns aren’t just for sale — you can trade yours in, and vendors are buying.

Indiana’s gun laws are relatively simple. Federally licensed “brick and mortar” gun dealers are required to perform standard background checks, while vendors selling their “private collections” at gun shows are not. An Indiana resident could walk out of the Crown Point gun show with a legally purchased assault rifle that same day — without a background check — less than an hour from Chicago, where assault rifles are banned. Handguns are subject to different regulations in Indiana.

Indiana’s Republican-controlled government has rolled back firearm regulations in recent years. In July 2015, a new law went into effect that made it legal for residents to own sawed-off shotguns. People typically saw off part of the gun barrel to make a gun more concealable and maneuverable.

When asked to comment for this report, a spokesperson for Indiana Governor Mike Pence directed Al Jazeera to a tweet written by the governor in early January that said: “Second Amendment unambiguously affirms the right to keep and bear arms. I will continue to support the Constitutional rights of Hoosiers.”

Chicago Police point to Indiana as a major source of guns recovered at crime scenes, indicating that the state’s lax gun purchasing laws, through gun trafficking, are fueling the city’s violence. Gun violence in Chicago remains high, with more than 2,300 shootings in 2015 alone and a homicide count of 484, including the November murder of a 9-year-old boy targeted in gang violence.

“You can be in the city of Chicago and be closer to a gun show in Indiana than you are to downtown,” said Sarah Emmons, a researcher at the University of Chicago’s Chicago Crime Lab. “Having such dramatically different regulations in such close proximity makes it really, really easy for folks [to bring illegal guns into Chicago].”

Emmons and Julia Quinn, another researcher at the crime lab, said research has shown very few crime guns in Chicago come from federally licensed dealers. A 2015 study by the institute estimated that only 11 percent of crime guns recovered in Chicago were purchased from federally licensed vendors, which require background checks, and that many were passed or sold through social networks. They cited straw purchases — where one person buys a gun for a person who cannot legally purchase one — as a major contributor to the city’s underground gun market.

“I think that speaks to the regulations in Indiana, and why it’s quite obvious why a gang member might go into Indiana where they can buy guns quite easily at a show or private sale,” Quinn said.

According to a 2014 report from the Chicago Police Department, 60 percent of the guns recovered at crime scenes in the city between 2009 and 2012 Between 2009 and 2013, almost 60 percent of guns used to commit crimes in Chicago were first purchased outside of Illinois. Each state in the country contributed at least one gun used in a Chicago crime. — nearly 20 percent came from Indiana, the second-highest state after Illinois. The City of Chicago’s regulations are stricter than the rest of the state.

“The carnage in Chicago is still being driven by guns that are coming from elsewhere,” Quinn said.

In May 2014, a federal judge sentenced a man to 17 years in prison for illegally selling guns on the street in Chicago, which he had legally purchased in Indiana.

“I try to bring out the point on the illegal trafficking and the number of guns going to Chicago,” said Edmund Smith, president of Hoosiers Concerned About Gun Violence, a group that advocates for gun control in Indiana, referencing the gun control discussion there. “I think there is some awareness, certainly, but I couldn’t say otherwise.”

Smith’s organization is pushing for universal background checks — including at gun shows and private sales — an assault rife and armor-piercing ammunition ban, and a limit on the number of handguns that can be purchased within a 30-day period.

Back in Crown Point — and in Shipshewana, Indiana, which hosted a gun show on the same day in mid December — all those who were asked to comment declined to speak with Al Jazeera for this report. Central Indiana Gun Shows, which facilitated the Crown Point show, did not respond to requests for comment.

National Rife Association spokesperson Lars Dalseide said in a statement emailed to Al Jazeera that other factors are fueling Chicago’s epidemic of violence.

“The violent crime problem in Chicago has nothing to do with the gun laws in Indiana,” he said. “There are countless reports in the Chicago media about low prosecution rates and the short sentences handed down to repeat offenders. Instead of treating the law-abiding gun owners of Indiana like criminals they should start treating the criminals in Chicago like criminals.”

Emmons and Quinn maintain that guns are a major contributor to the lethality of crime in the United States.

“Evidence and data from other countries who have similar rates of some violent crimes, but very different rates of homicide, suggest that guns probably are a big part of the problem,” Quinn said. “Designing more effective enforcement strategies, or reasonable gun safety regulations, would make a big difference in the short term. So why not give it a shot?”

Numerous studies in recent years have found that a higher number of guns does not lead to a decrease in crime, and actually is associated with higher rates of violent crimes. A 2014 study from Stanford found that eight states saw their homicide rates increase after passing right-to-carry laws in the early 2000s.

Some estimates place the number of guns in the United States at more than 350 million — or, one for every person in the United States.

“I think that guns don’t help,” Emmons said. “And the prevalence of guns is really causing a lot of the lethality.”


Fucking freaks.