General Discussion

Duckhunter935

(16,974 posts)

40. Not telling the truth again I see

Sun Oct 19, 2014, 03:26 PM

Oct 2014

85,000 X 365 = 31,025,000 way off, where did you get this number, may I ask? Do you have a link to the source data?

The NICS Section processed 98,688 explosives transactions. Denials issued by the NICS Section totaled 2,403.

The NICS Section processed 2,596,745 of the total 7,360,400 firearms and explosives transactions conducted via the Internet-based NICS E-Check. The amount of transactions processed in 2013 is a 66.25 percent increase over those processed in 2012.

2013 FBI data
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/reports/2013-operations-report

Remember, 98,688 of the total 7,360,400 were for explosives and should not be counted as a firearm transaction. That leaves 7,261,712 total NICS transactions that are required for new firearm purchase. 88,203 were denied via the NICS check. that leaves 7,173,509 total passed transactions but even then it does not mean a firearm was purchased, just the check was made. So your numbers are just plain wrong and you should admit the fact that you are putting out bad information.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

57 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Meanwhile in England: 0 fatalities by cop in the last 2 years. 4 total shootings. [View all] pa28 Oct 2014 OP

K&R for more visibility. nt Mnemosyne Oct 2014 #1

K&R DeadLetterOffice Oct 2014 #2

Why do cops even need guns? They murder far more innocent ppl than they save. ncjustice80 Oct 2014 #3

Because civilians have guns BrotherIvan Oct 2014 #4

That if everybody is armed to the teeth, we'll all live in a utopian society? Chakab Oct 2014 #5

Is that not America today, armed to the teeth Utopia? Fred Sanders Oct 2014 #7

Of course! BrotherIvan Oct 2014 #13

An armed to the teeth citizenry naturally means a similar police force...duh. And neither are safer. Fred Sanders Oct 2014 #6

+ infinity!!!! etherealtruth Oct 2014 #9

Agreed. Only solution imo is to get the guns back to cstanleytech Oct 2014 #10

It needs a better Supreme Court that has members not indebted to the NRA. Fred Sanders Oct 2014 #17

The problem is though with relying on scotus is that their opinions can change where as cstanleytech Oct 2014 #19

Cart before the horse, my daddy always said, never is a good idea. Fred Sanders Oct 2014 #20

Just like how you would "reinterpret" the First Amendment? NutmegYankee Oct 2014 #25

Well.. that was disturbing.... Oktober Oct 2014 #45

As long as we are going to just say fuck it sarisataka Oct 2014 #48

How would we afford to do that? NutmegYankee Oct 2014 #24

Buy back? Confiscate and destroy, refund all registration fees and taxes only. Same with the police Fred Sanders Oct 2014 #26

You can't just take people's property without due process and recompensation. NutmegYankee Oct 2014 #28

and nobody calls for confiscation Duckhunter935 Oct 2014 #30

I am calling for confiscation, Australia did it. Fred Sanders Oct 2014 #34

They also paid for the weapons Duckhunter935 Oct 2014 #36

85,000 in a year? That is the gun sales in one day in America...try again.... Fred Sanders Oct 2014 #38

Not telling the truth again I see Duckhunter935 Oct 2014 #40

Austrailia paid full market value for every gun. NutmegYankee Oct 2014 #39

Guns will no longer be considered legal property, duh. Only restricted to certain trained folks and Fred Sanders Oct 2014 #47

care to answer my question in post #40 Duckhunter935 Oct 2014 #49

You still cannot take private property from people without just compensation. NutmegYankee Oct 2014 #50

in his world you can Duckhunter935 Oct 2014 #52

Land of the free, yo!!! Initech Oct 2014 #12

So you don't think the problem runs any deeper than that? pa28 Oct 2014 #14

Britain proves that the answer is NO, it does not. Fred Sanders Oct 2014 #16

Well, since there are no guns in Britain that proves it. pa28 Oct 2014 #42

And before the ghost of Charleton Heston can say "we have a more mixed ethnicity" TrollBuster9090 Oct 2014 #8

Much smaller country Duckhunter935 Oct 2014 #31

Too many of our cops are untrained, undisciplined children who like flashing lights and dressing up. EEO Oct 2014 #11

I'm not sure what you'd name it but there's also this . . . pa28 Oct 2014 #15

Masochism... EEO Oct 2014 #18

The main difference is, of course, RKBA. Donald Ian Rankin Oct 2014 #21

Because were fucking violent country who loves guns! nt Logical Oct 2014 #22

what is their homicide rate compared to ours? hfojvt Oct 2014 #23

Or, (c). They all are not armed to the teeth with military grade weaponry? Fred Sanders Oct 2014 #27

what is military grade? Duckhunter935 Oct 2014 #32

Your mindset. Fred Sanders Oct 2014 #33

You made the statement Duckhunter935 Oct 2014 #35

you think that is an alternative? hfojvt Oct 2014 #44

Well, unilaterally disarming is what they did in the UK and they are handling the punks fine, and Fred Sanders Oct 2014 #46

no, it is neither factual nor complete hfojvt Oct 2014 #53

5 incidents of use of firearms by a cop, what more proof do folks need that guns are dangerous in Fred Sanders Oct 2014 #54

It's common knowledge Duckhunter935 Oct 2014 #55

Weak. So, you surrender to the logic? Fred Sanders Oct 2014 #56

Nope Duckhunter935 Oct 2014 #57

K&R Grey Oct 2014 #29

In addition to a different police culture, GB doesn't have an armed to the tblue37 Oct 2014 #37

If interacting with the public causes trigger-pulling pants-pissing fear pa28 Oct 2014 #41

Absolutely. A partial explanation is NOT a justification. There is NO excuse for US cops' behavior. tblue37 Oct 2014 #43

No neurosis like Antebellum yearning for a backward time . orpupilofnature57 Oct 2014 #51