On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:49:45 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"RM v2.0" wrote in message
news

And to add to what Ed has pointed out...

If there is one thing that Walmart is very good at, it is using
inventory tracking...they are considered to be the best in retail.

It will be a minor effort for them to modify their system to track
firearm sales as the story describes...darn near real time.

TMT
The police arent going to just handover crime info to them. How will they
use info they cant get? Sales are already recorded on 4473's anyway.

And then the ATF sits there with their thumbs up their butts when a gun is
confiscated in a crime -- unless local law enforcement requests a trace,
which they rarely do. And when they do, they rarely prosecute the original
purchaser, who lies that the gun was stolen. They get away with that because
only two states require that an owner inform the police when a gun is
stolen.

The whole network of laws is like a piece of mosquito netting that's been
shot through with 00 buckshot. And then people like Hawke and the
knuckle-draggers claim that this proves gun control doesn't stop illegal
purchases, building a case with tautologies and self-fulfilling prophesies.

Seems like you made their case pretty well, Ed! Perhaps you're arguing
that present laws are obviously not "gun control" regardless of what
they may be called. Perhaps they could be if enforced. I would
prefer the term "gun abuse control" as being more germane to the
issue.

"Don Foreman" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:49:45 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"RM v2.0" wrote in message
news

And to add to what Ed has pointed out...

If there is one thing that Walmart is very good at, it is using
inventory tracking...they are considered to be the best in retail.

It will be a minor effort for them to modify their system to track
firearm sales as the story describes...darn near real time.

TMT
The police arent going to just handover crime info to them. How will
they
use info they cant get? Sales are already recorded on 4473's anyway.

And then the ATF sits there with their thumbs up their butts when a gun is
confiscated in a crime -- unless local law enforcement requests a trace,
which they rarely do. And when they do, they rarely prosecute the original
purchaser, who lies that the gun was stolen. They get away with that
because
only two states require that an owner inform the police when a gun is
stolen.

The whole network of laws is like a piece of mosquito netting that's been
shot through with 00 buckshot. And then people like Hawke and the
knuckle-draggers claim that this proves gun control doesn't stop illegal
purchases, building a case with tautologies and self-fulfilling
prophesies.

Seems like you made their case pretty well, Ed! Perhaps you're arguing
that present laws are obviously not "gun control" regardless of what
they may be called. Perhaps they could be if enforced. I would
prefer the term "gun abuse control" as being more germane to the
issue.

Call it what you like, Don, but the fact is that the current laws aimed at
keeping guns out of the hands of criminals are a bunch of junk. All they
"prove" is that flaky laws, badly enforced, produce lousy results. Nobody
knows what would happen with some laws and enforcement that made sense.

--
Ed Huntress

On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 22:17:40 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Don Foreman" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:49:45 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"RM v2.0" wrote in message
news
And to add to what Ed has pointed out...

If there is one thing that Walmart is very good at, it is using
inventory tracking...they are considered to be the best in retail.

It will be a minor effort for them to modify their system to track
firearm sales as the story describes...darn near real time.

TMT
The police arent going to just handover crime info to them. How will
they
use info they cant get? Sales are already recorded on 4473's anyway.

And then the ATF sits there with their thumbs up their butts when a gun is
confiscated in a crime -- unless local law enforcement requests a trace,
which they rarely do. And when they do, they rarely prosecute the original
purchaser, who lies that the gun was stolen. They get away with that
because
only two states require that an owner inform the police when a gun is
stolen.

The whole network of laws is like a piece of mosquito netting that's been
shot through with 00 buckshot. And then people like Hawke and the
knuckle-draggers claim that this proves gun control doesn't stop illegal
purchases, building a case with tautologies and self-fulfilling
prophesies.

Seems like you made their case pretty well, Ed! Perhaps you're arguing
that present laws are obviously not "gun control" regardless of what
they may be called. Perhaps they could be if enforced. I would
prefer the term "gun abuse control" as being more germane to the
issue.

Call it what you like, Don, but the fact is that the current laws aimed at
keeping guns out of the hands of criminals are a bunch of junk. All they
"prove" is that flaky laws, badly enforced, produce lousy results. Nobody
knows what would happen with some laws and enforcement that made sense.

Quite so. Read me again, please. I'd say we're in violent agreement.

"Don Foreman" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 22:17:40 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Don Foreman" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:49:45 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"RM v2.0" wrote in message
news
And to add to what Ed has pointed out...

If there is one thing that Walmart is very good at, it is using
inventory tracking...they are considered to be the best in retail.

It will be a minor effort for them to modify their system to track
firearm sales as the story describes...darn near real time.

TMT
The police arent going to just handover crime info to them. How will
they
use info they cant get? Sales are already recorded on 4473's anyway.

And then the ATF sits there with their thumbs up their butts when a gun
is
confiscated in a crime -- unless local law enforcement requests a trace,
which they rarely do. And when they do, they rarely prosecute the
original
purchaser, who lies that the gun was stolen. They get away with that
because
only two states require that an owner inform the police when a gun is
stolen.

The whole network of laws is like a piece of mosquito netting that's
been
shot through with 00 buckshot. And then people like Hawke and the
knuckle-draggers claim that this proves gun control doesn't stop illegal
purchases, building a case with tautologies and self-fulfilling
prophesies.

Seems like you made their case pretty well, Ed! Perhaps you're arguing
that present laws are obviously not "gun control" regardless of what
they may be called. Perhaps they could be if enforced. I would
prefer the term "gun abuse control" as being more germane to the
issue.

Call it what you like, Don, but the fact is that the current laws aimed at
keeping guns out of the hands of criminals are a bunch of junk. All they
"prove" is that flaky laws, badly enforced, produce lousy results. Nobody
knows what would happen with some laws and enforcement that made sense.

Quite so. Read me again, please. I'd say we're in violent agreement.

Aha. OK, I must be misreading what you said.

--
Ed Huntress

On Apr 16, 8:17*pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
"Don Foreman" wrote in message

news




On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:49:45 -0400, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

"RM v2.0" wrote in message
news

And to add to what Ed has pointed out...

If there is one thing that Walmart is very good at, it is using
inventory tracking...they are considered to be the best in retail.

It will be a minor effort for them to modify their system to track
firearm sales as the story describes...darn near real time.

TMT
The police arent going to just handover crime info to them. How will
they
use info they cant get? Sales are already recorded on 4473's anyway.

And then the ATF sits there with their thumbs up their butts when a gun is
confiscated in a crime -- unless local law enforcement requests a trace,
which they rarely do. And when they do, they rarely prosecute the original
purchaser, who lies that the gun was stolen. They get away with that
because
only two states require that an owner inform the police when a gun is
stolen.

The whole network of laws is like a piece of mosquito netting that's been
shot through with 00 buckshot. And then people like Hawke and the
knuckle-draggers claim that this proves gun control doesn't stop illegal
purchases, building a case with tautologies and self-fulfilling
prophesies.

Seems like you made their case pretty well, Ed! Perhaps you're arguing
that present laws are obviously not "gun control" regardless of what
they may be called. *Perhaps they could be if enforced. *I would
prefer the term "gun abuse control" as being more germane to the
issue.

Call it what you like, Don, but the fact is that the current laws aimed at
keeping guns out of the hands of criminals are a bunch of junk. All they
"prove" is that flaky laws, badly enforced, produce lousy results. Nobody
knows what would happen with some laws and enforcement that made sense.

--
Ed Huntress- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

We could guess....irresponsible gun owners will lose their guns and
serve time, senseless deaths would drop, responsible gun owners would
have stronger rights, the parasites from the NRA would have to find
real jobs.....

TMT