She is again quoting a study that investigated other studies to lay the groundwork for continuing studies. Even her link states that:
Researchers compiled data from previous studies in order to guide future research on gun violence, noting that “almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year.”The first part of that is correct, the second part while correct, also misses a big point of the study. It was an investigative study that looked at many of the studies done. The Washington Post did a writup on this, and the CDC also said in their study that, "all of those statistics are in dispute -- creating, in the study authors' eyes, a research imperative."
Pools, cars, and bikes are also highly regulated. Most of those regulations are in place to reduce those unintentional injuries and death. All of these things are used more commonly among children, as well. Not a great argument, if you ask me.
Notice Obama said sensible steps, and Dana points to a poll that says Obama policies? But if you believe Pew research, one of the more revered polling institutions in America, there is overwhelming support for closing the gun show loophole, something that hasn't changed since their 2013 poll that also show overwhelming support for restricting those with mental illness from owning a gun, having a database of gun sales, and a ban on semi-automatic weapons. And yes, that poll also states the majority of gun owners want most of these measures as well.
What reforms? Oh, people, I'm so clueless, help me out here. I'm going to spit out the four states where there was a mass shooting, and then say because they had mass shootings, they reduced nothing. I love mixing stats!
Let's forget real stats in this case. Stats that show states that have "expanded background checks" have fewer gun deaths. Do this, because it's a losing argument on your side.
Ah, but the federal regulation does have a loophole. While it isn't significant, it is there. Patching it up should be no problem, right? Ah, a defacto registry. I'll go get my tin foil hat.
Awww, how cute! John Lott has a Blogspot website. He has to be reputable (and no, I never said I was reputable). Not that what Dana quotes from Mr. Lott here has anything to do with overhauling (not expanding) the background check system,
Furthermore, how do you "improve notifications?" We're talking about improving the consistency with which people do their jobs. It wasn't a lack of manpower that enabled thug Dylann Roof to purchase a firearm and mow down black church-goers. It was a simple FBI error:It wasn't an FBI error, it was an error in the criminal history. From Dana's link:
The examiner did her job correctly. She actually contacted two incorrect arresting agencies, then labelled the the case as delayed/pending. Since they did not find the needle in the haystack in 3 days, the case proceeded. Now, if she had gotten to the case earlier, maybe she would have had enough time to find that needle, but it was so backed up, the first two days of the 3 day process saw the case waiting for an agent to take the case. More people and people working 24/7 would have helped in this case.According to Comey, on April 13, two days after Roof tried to purchase a gun, a background check examiner ran his criminal history, which brought up a felony drug charge and wrongly listed the arresting agency as Lexington County Sheriff’s Office.Had the examiner known that the actual arresting agency was the Columbia Police Department, which detained Roof in February for behaving erratically at a local mall, she would have known that Roof had admitted to drug possession and barred the sale.
Whether or not Roof could even purchase a firearm is moot as he was charged with felony drug possession and in South Carolina, a charge, not even a conviction, is enough to render one a prohibited possessor. Roof couldn't carry much less purchase. But then again, criminals don't follow laws.I'm confused, because in Dana's link states, "A drug charge does not stop an individual from buying a gun, but Roof's admission, contained in the Columbia Police Department's arrest report, would have." I mean, who's right? The Washington post also says, "Roof had been arrested for possession of narcotics in February, a charge that alone did not disqualify him from buying a gun." Without delving into the law, I'll side with the journalists on this one.
The administration sold guns? There's nothing farther from the truth. They told gus stores to allow straw purchases which they were supposed to track to the illegal dealers and make big arrests, That's far from them selling guns themselves. Not that it has anything to do with this point.
All I hear from the right is, "Enforce the gun laws you have." Heck, Wayne La Pierre put out a video doing just that. Doing more to enforce gun crimes is #1 on your list of things the administration should be doing. Until the administration says they will do it. Then of course you are not. Thanks, Obama.
There's something missing, let me add that in now:
And there is further clarification further down the proclamation:
Although States generally report criminal history information to NICS, many continue to report little information about individuals who are prohibited by Federal law from possessing or receiving a gun for specific mental health reasons. Some State officials raised concerns about whether such reporting would be precluded by the Privacy Rule issued under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA). Today, the Department of Health and Human Services issued a final rule expressly permitting certain HIPAA covered entities to provide to the NICS limited demographic and other necessary information about these individuals.Yeah, dancing around HIPAA is to me dicey as well. But why leave out the increase to mental health care?
Again, for laws to work, people must follow them and those implementing them must do it properly. It's not a money issue.Agreed, but you didn't include the part about money, and the part about money had nothing to do with enforcing the law. So what are you trying to say here?
Man, I remember having a Commodore Vic 20. That thing was garbage. It was expensive and didn't do much, and didn't do that well (enter run command, start tape, get error, rewind tape, lather rinse repeat. But I sure am glad they didn't stop trying. Look at what we can do now. I carry a very small device in my pocket that does thousands of times more things than the Vic 20 did.
Gun safety tech doesn't do much now, but I can't wait for the tech that reads your DNA when you touch it and only fires for you. Dream it, and it will happen.
There is nothing in the President's executive orders that would have prevented the tragedies we saw this year anor is there anything included in these proposals that isn't already federally regulated.What the heck is an "anor"? Probably mean "nor", but you can't criticize a typo and then make one yourself, unless you are doing it ironically.
Dana stated in her radio show that she loves conflict and debating issues. Then why has she banned me on Facebook and Twitter? Whenever someone who is level and rational states facts instead of namecalling, she suddenly can't handle conflict or debating the issues. Kinda sad, really.
Well, that's all for now. I'll be looking out for more Fisking in the future, and now that Fantasy Football season is over, expect more from these pages in the coming months.