Shocked I tell you, I'm shocked. The universal background check law isn't working??? ... How can that be????

Oh wait, I know, because idiot progressives, who don't know their ass from a hole in the ground, THINK they can engineer society.

So the study performed in Colorado, Washington (State), and Delaware found that there was no increase in background check rate in Colorado and Washington. Note this was during the last term of the Obama Administration, where gun sales were at record highs throughout the country.

Article:
http://kdvr.com/2017/10/17/stu...-laws-arent-working/

Study the article is based on:
http://injuryprevention.bmj.co...juryprev-2017-042475


In addition, the 2016 FBI - Uniform Crime Report numbers recently released, show that the murder rate in Colorado is increasing. As of 2016 the murder rate is up to 3.7 murders/100,000 persons. Yea, that law is working like a charm.

---

Study: Colorado’s strict gun background check laws aren’t working

DENVER -- Colorado passed strict gun background check laws about three years ago, but new research shows they aren't working.

Researchers at Johns Hopkins and the University of California Davis teamed up to see if people are complying with Colorado's laws. Their conclusion is there is virtually no effect.

The data show background checks didn't significantly increase since Colorado passed stricter laws.

The study found a modest increase in background checks in private-party sales, but almost no change in gun show sales.

The study did not reach a definitive conclusion as to why background checks didn't jump.

Researchers suggested little enforcement and calls from pro-gun organizations to ignore the law may have contributed to the findings.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Storm,

The argument against background checks not working would be more persuasive if the data were the same for the case where more background checks were actually taking place.

quote:

Originally posted by Keystoner:
The argument against background checks not working would be more persuasive if the data were the same for the case where more background checks were actually taking place.

If what you're saying is that the argument that background checks aren't working would be bolstered, if Delaware has also shown no increase in the BGC rate, I agree.

However, to the point, this Bureau Of Justice Statistics study implemented before and after the 1994 Federal Background Check illuminates what's really going on. Which is when a source of firearms is denied to criminals, they shift their sources.



Source: https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fuo.pdf

The law must not be strict enough.

quote:

Originally posted by flesheatingvirus:
The law must not be strict enough.

We can roll our eyes at that, but never forget that that’s exactly what the antifre(edom) crowd says: The laws we have on the books now don’t prevent crimes because they don’t go far enough to prevent the proliferation of gun ownership. They—and any gun owner with half an ounce of sense—know that the ultimate goal of restrictions on gun rights is the total elimination of their private ownership.

Any gun owner who thinks for an instant that quoting these sorts of facts will suddenly result in the other side’s waking up and saying, “Why, look: these restrictions on the rights of law-abiding people do nothing to accomplish what we want, so we should repeal them all and start over with a different approach,” is suffering from the most extreme form of head-in-the-sand blindness. They’re not going to quit. Period.

If the study's conclusion - that the law is generally being ignored for private sales - is correct (and I think it is), then the Dems may have themselves partially to blame for this. In addition to this law, requiring background checks for private sales (which means that the FFL you get the background check through will charge you a fee for his time), they also passed a law charging a fee for every background check, whose funds went to the state. That's a service charge/tax of at least $25 (probably more) for every private sale. The Dumbocrats, in their zealous overreach to punish gun owners, may have provided sufficient financial incentive to ignore the law. LOL

We had private sale background checks go into law in NY as part of the "SAFE ACT" (FUAC).

The folks that were predisposed to follow the law, followed it. Those that didn't closely monitor the law or didn't care didn't follow it.

Imagine my surprise when I found out that my pro gun control friend and admitted SAFE act supporter did not comply with the law and did a person to person sale without a background check.

We also put LE in a bad situation by passing a hard to understand and enforce law.

quote:

Originally posted by Storm:
If the study's conclusion - that the law is generally being ignored for private sales

That is not the conclusion. The article actually says, "The study found a modest increase in background checks in private-party sales,..." The conclusion is Colorado's strict gun background check laws aren't working, and I'm saying you can't come to that conclusion if "background checks didn't significantly increase." Laws are definitely ineffective if they aren't enforced, and maybe they're ineffective where they are enforced but let's see somewhere they're actually enforced and ineffective so we can say they don't work. This article is useless.

quote:

Originally posted by Keystoner:

quote:

Originally posted by Storm:
If the study's conclusion - that the law is generally being ignored for private sales

That is not the conclusion. The article actually says, "The study found a modest increase in background checks in private-party sales,..." The conclusion is Colorado's strict gun background check laws aren't working, and I'm saying you can't come to that conclusion if "background checks didn't significantly increase." Laws are definitely ineffective if they aren't enforced, and maybe they're ineffective where they are enforced but let's see somewhere they're actually enforced and ineffective so we can say they don't work. This article is useless.

I was actually addressing the results of the study, not the article.

quote:

From the Study:

Results: Background check rates increased in Delaware, by 22%–34% depending on the type of firearm, following enactment of its CBC law. No overall changes were observed in Washington and Colorado. Our results were robust to changes in the comparison group and statistical methods.

Conclusions: The enactment of CBC policies was associated with an overall increase in firearm background checks only in Delaware. Data external to the study suggest that Washington experienced a modest, but consistent, increase in background checks for private party sales, and Colorado experienced a similar increase in checks for sales not at gun shows. Non-compliance may explain the lack of an overall increase in background checks in Washington and Colorado.

Note that in the Results section, the study finds that there was no change in CO or WA. In the Conclusion section it mentions that data outside the study suggested there was an increase in WA and CO. The study mentions non-compliance, but that doesn't mean, necessarily, that the law isn't being enforced. Perhaps in the full publication of the study it goes into more detail.

Living in Colorado, I haven't heard of a case where this law has been used. Although, it seems like a difficult law to enforce, short of conducting sting operations. And I don't think LEAs here are going to waste resources on that. I'm pretty sure the first offense under this law is a misdemeanor.

quote:

Originally posted by CD228:
Imagine my surprise when I found out that my pro gun control friend and admitted SAFE act supporter did not comply with the law and did a person to person sale without a background check.

Turn 'em in. What's good for the goose...

quote:

Turn 'em in

Get outta here with that nonsense.

The law is the problem in these cases, and nothing more.

quote:

Originally posted by 46and2:

quote:

Turn 'em in

Get outta here with that nonsense.

The law is the problem in these cases, and nothing more.

Not nonsense at all.

How does bad law become bad law?

Those that enacted it deserve to be bound by it.

If the consequences of bad legislation are not visited upon those who supported its passage then what is to keep them from continuously passing more and more bad legislation?

I stand by my original statement.

They made their beds, now they get to sleep in them.

Maybe private party background checks haven't increased because the new law has discouraged people from entering into private party sales. I know if such a law was passed in my state, that's the effect it would have on me.

I think that's quite likely.

Why bother with the hassle if you don't need too?

On second thought, you're right.

This whole background check debate by the Left is utter and complete foolishness, and as usual, completely ignores reality. There are currently, and have always been, plenty of people who will ignore the law and buy guns for others (i.e straw purchases). And once those guns pass into the hands of criminals they can be sold over and over again because, as anyone with a functioning brain stem knows, criminals don't care about the law, which is why they're criminals! Add to that stolen guns and the whole background check debate is just beyond stupid.

People might be ignoring the law? How could that be? What if we just made it illegal to exceed the speed limit or sell drugs or shoot someone. No one would break the law would they?

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:
This whole background check debate by the Left is utter and complete foolishness, and as usual, completely ignores reality. There are currently, and have always been, plenty of people who will ignore the law and buy guns for others (i.e straw purchases). And once those guns pass into the hands of criminals they can be sold over and over again because, as anyone with a functioning brain stem knows, criminals don't care about the law, which is why they're criminals! Add to that stolen guns and the whole background check debate is just beyond stupid.

I think you're wrong.

The smoke screen is working on you.

Yes, it's smoke. It has always been just smoke.

What they REALLY want is a law with teeth in it that requires every firearm to be registered with the federal government.

What makes them love the background check requirement is that no universal background check requirement can be enforced without first getting every firearm registered -- without the registration how in the world can you prove that the firearm changed hands? These "failures" aren't an accident, they're planned. They're proving the point that they need registration to make it really work.

Background check requirements are just another example of leftist incrementalism. They're the first step toward universal registration. And, of course, universal registration is the first step toward confiscation.

Don't let the smoke blind you.

They're playing chess.

quote:

Originally posted by SapperSteel:

quote:

Originally posted by bigdeal:
This whole background check debate by the Left is utter and complete foolishness, and as usual, completely ignores reality. There are currently, and have always been, plenty of people who will ignore the law and buy guns for others (i.e straw purchases). And once those guns pass into the hands of criminals they can be sold over and over again because, as anyone with a functioning brain stem knows, criminals don't care about the law, which is why they're criminals! Add to that stolen guns and the whole background check debate is just beyond stupid.

I think you're wrong.

The smoke screen is working on you.

Yes, it's smoke. It has always been just smoke.

What they REALLY want is a law with teeth in it that requires every firearm to be registered with the federal government.

What makes them love the background check requirement is that no universal background check requirement can be enforced without first getting every firearm registered -- without the registration how in the world can you prove that the firearm changed hands? These "failures" aren't an accident, they're planned. They're proving the point that they need registration to make it really work.

Background check requirements are just another example of leftist incrementalism. They're the first step toward universal registration. And, of course, universal registration is the first step toward confiscation.

Don't let the smoke blind you.

They're playing chess.

Trust me, my eyesight is 20/20 and I'm not missing anything. First off, I agree with many of your comments. However, criminals skirt the background check system all the time through one means or another, and not a single law on the books now or yet to be proposed is going to change that reality with over 300 million (and growing) privately owned guns in circulation. Second, a serious attempt at gun registration would whip up a hornet's nest the likes the left has never seen. And let's go waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyy out on that limb for a moment and hallucinate that a gun registration bill somehow made it through the House and Senate and was signed into law. How many people do you think would comply? I can state without reservation I wouldn't willingly comply on any of my guns, mags, or ammo regardless the penalties, and I doubt I'm alone in that position. Over the past several years mag bans were passed into law in a few states and to date virtually no one has handed over their high caps. So I guess the government will have to declare martial law and send the military door to door to take our guns. Yeah, that's going to happen.

Returning to reality, background check laws are feel good, delusional nonsense, proposed and passed by non-serious nitwits who needed to 'do something' to win votes for re-election. Would the Left love to take all of our guns? Sure they would. I'd actually like to be 20 years old and single again and chasing dozens of beautiful girls. What those two 'wants' have in common is that neither are going to happen. Background check laws do little to nothing to protect you and me, and adding to them is 1) not going to change anything for criminals and crime, and 2) not going to happen unless the current paradigm with gun ownership and gun rights completely changes which is highly unlikely.

Oh, and your comment about the Left playing chess. I disagree. They're actually playing with fire. And you know what eventually happens to those who continually play with fire....they get burnt.

Well don’t you know why all this isn’t working? It’s not enough, they need to do more make more strick laws banning all guns, knives, forks, chainsaws, bats, badminton rackets, golf clubs, tire irons, alcohol, big trucks...not limited to just these items.

They are clueless