0
10

[–] JesTheRed 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Nobody really cares about the gun permits (they call it a FOID) in Illinois. Nowhere in the state is very far from a state border, across which ammo and firearms can easily be purchased without the card. I knew plenty of people with safes full of guns who just drove to Missouri to load up on bullets or spend a day at the range. Illinois sits in the middle of prime hunting and ranching territories too, so in college towns across the state it's ridiculously common to see college kids from Kentucky or Tennessee shooting skeet in their f'ing backyards. Most of them don't even bother getting IL licenses, without which they can't even apply for a FOID. Your chances of getting prosecuted as an everyday joe for not having a FOID is about the same as getting paid in the IL lottery, so at the end of the day it's just another tax on the stupid and a way to trump up charges against undesirables.

The crime problems in Illinois aren't really the result of stupid gun laws, it's just a silly coincidence that they have such idiotic laws and the murder rate. The problem is, and always has been, the massive criminal population needed to sustain one of the single largest addict population in the history of the world. The drug trade in Chicago is so lucrative that it runs murder rates similar to those found in Mexican cartel cities, and for precisely the same reason. Without a radical new policy toward poverty and addiction in Chicago, the whole state of Illinois is swirling in the bowl.

1
1

[–] Kurplow 1 point 1 point (+2|-1) ago 

Addiction is symptom of poverty among other things. People who want to be present in their lives don't abuse drugs or alcohol. Conversely, if you give an addict a reason to want to be present in their lives, they often find the will to walk away from their addiction.

http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/a-war-well-lost

The above is a great discussion between Sam Harris, a public intellectual I enjoy and Johann Hari, a journalist and writer who spent a long time looking at addiction and drug enforcement policies worldwide.

4
-4

0
0

[–] mastersw999 ago 

I agree with that to an extent but you don't just "walk away" from an addiction. But you are right though that there is some correlation between poverty and crime/addiction. But correlation don't equal causation but it might be a big part of the issue.

2
4

[–] brother_tempus 2 points 4 points (+6|-2) ago 

Regulations and taxation are just alternate forms of prohibition which can create a black market depending of the severity of such, the size of legitate demand , and lastly tie size ( in dollars ) of the market

Prohibition does not work and so logically neither does regulation and taxation

10
-10

0
0

[–] cli-che-guevara ago 

Your first statement is right. Severity of taxation is very important on whether a parallel marketplace develops.

But your conclusion is logically fallacious due to it's over simplification. Your first statement shows there is a gradient of severity, but your conclusion is a rule that ignores your own assertion of a vector.

Prohibition does not work if there is a market place willing to risk the punishment for operation. Someone will be willing to make money off of unlawfully supplying a restricted good or supplying a highly taxed item below the taxed value and keeping the difference. Alcohol prohibition through Constitutional regulation is a great example.

Moderate taxation, where the risks of operating a black market don't outweigh the rewards, is still a partial prohibitional taxation. These cases go against your simplified rule. Regulation and taxation can be used to change trends in usage of a good or service as long as they are implemented in a way to not incentivize the creation of a second, parallel market. A good example is tobacco use. Regulation of advertisement and slowly increasing costs due to taxation have effectively shrunk the legal marketplace domestically.

That being said, I think forcing gun owners to license their firearms is just as unconstitutional as voter ID laws. In both cases the government is adding a cost restriction on a Constitutionally given right.

0
5

[–] Antichamp 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

We should look into the English and Australian gun bans - Hillary Clinton

When are they going to learn that shit helps no one.

0
3

[–] jeegte12 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago  (edited ago)

She's not stupid. She knows the truth as well as you or I. You know who doesn't? The people she wants to like her.

0
3

[–] PopeBiscuit 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

I need a liberal to explain this to me. It's almost like people are getting guns regardless of the law. I don't get it.

1
-1

[–] Tecktonik 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

But I thought Chicago's problems were due to all the, you know, those people, those black people.

Voat makes it so hard to keep track of all the different ideologies. If we could just combine all of the pro-gun narratives with all of the pro-racism narratives that would be more helpful.

0
0

[–] arrggg [S] ago 

FTFY -> Paying attention to facts Voat makes it so hard to keep track of Self-Righteously-Assume all the different ideologies.

Your comment is the most racist comment here. All your assumptions have made you look like an ass.

0
0

[–] Tecktonik ago 

LOL I trolled you.

0
1

[–] QuestionEverything 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

$15 EVERY year? Forever?

Under that setup, you're really just renting your gun..

Completely Unconstitutional.

0
1

[–] youareivan 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

after seeing this post i remembered a graphic i'd seen online showing where the chicago police department had traced where a bunch of guns they seized came from. it's pretty interesting and shows the problem as much more complicated than most people think it is.

where 50,000 guns recovered in chicago came from

0
1

[–] arrggg [S] 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Interesting map. Its crazy that there were 50 thousand guns taken by police, and the linked article says there are only 7500 legal registered owners. In a city of 2.7million. No wonder its a warzone.

0
1

[–] Pawn 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

We need less gun regulation. Often these shooters go out and kill the unarmed since they can't retaliate. Arm more people, and the risk to the shooter increases once they're found to be hostile. Manhunt.

0
1

[–] Cacciaguida 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

and if they go on a spree they can be stopped in their tracks before too many get shot.

load more comments ▼ (1 remaining)