PDA

View Full Version : There are 60,000 handguns & 2,400 Assault Rifles in San Francisco


mecam
01-17-2008, 10:00 AM
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/01/17/BA2GUGI01.DTL

Proliferation of guns blamed for epidemic of violence in S.F.
C.W. Nevius

Thursday, January 17, 2008

A lot has changed since San Francisco police Lt. John Murphy started working the drug and homicide beats in the 1980s.

"In the '80s, we'd get one, two or three guns a week," Murphy said. "Now it's like - who doesn't have one?"

Just about everyone, it seems. Kevin Ryan, the former U.S. attorney who worked on federal law enforcement for the Bush administration, recently joined the staff of San Francisco Gavin Newsom as director of the Office of Criminal Justice. He says the sheer numbers are shocking.

"There are 60,000 handguns in San Francisco," Ryan said. "And 2,400 assault rifles. There are a lot of guns out there."

You're reading that right. SIXTY THOUSAND guns in a population of less than 745,000 in a geographical area of 49 square miles. That's a gun in every five households, or one for every 12th man, woman or child.

And Ryan says confrontations are going nuclear almost immediately. "Instead of a fistfight, a dispute is elevated to a shooting at the drop of a hat."

You can pick your example, but for a clear case of mindless, senseless gunplay, it is hard to beat the incident at the downtown Metreon shopping mall in November, when a 15-year-old boy shot an 18-year-old three times after an argument over moving too slowly on the escalator. The victim was pronounced dead at San Francisco General Hospital 30 minutes later.

"It's sad," says Murphy. "He's 15 years old. How could you be that mad at that age?"

And what was a 15-year-old boy doing with a gun? Where do these guns come from?

Most San Franciscans might initially conclude that the city needs stronger gun laws. But Dr. Garen Wintemute, director of UC Davis' Violence Prevention Research Program, says, "In San Francisco, it is actually very difficult to legally buy a handgun."

But it's a different story outside city limits. Guns are flooding into town from out-of-state gun shows, like the one next month in Reno, where background checks and waiting periods are not required. Another common tactic is a "straw purchase," where someone without a criminal record legally buys weapons and then resells them for cash. Murphy says one individual bought 62 guns in one year.

"We have numerous cases," said San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris, "where someone buys legally, then drives a truck or SUV into the Bayview neighborhood, opens up the trunk and has a fire sale."

One thing is certain: Gun violence has local residents calling for action. After posting the highest homicide total in 12 years in 2007 (89), 2008 got off to a gruesome start with six deaths in the first two weeks - including a 19-year-old who was shot in the heart while sitting on porch steps chatting with his girlfriend.

"It's tragic and a source of frustration to everybody," said Harris. "They're people, human beings, and they've got lives."

Guns are also political dynamite. Newsom hired heavy-hitter Ryan to address persistent questions about the climbing homicide rate, and Harris made gun violence a centerpiece of her inaugural speech Jan. 8. And some don't want to touch it. Newly confirmed Northern California U.S. Attorney Joe Russoniello, who started work Jan. 7, was "not available" for a comment on the topic. His spokesman Josh Eaton said, "We recognize that this is an important issue. Accordingly, we will continue to work closely with federal and local authorities to address the problem."

So are there any suggestions? Actually there are, although the solution begins by understanding the motivation of the shooters.

"Since the mid-'80s," says Wintemute, "the illicit drug trade has armed itself with progressively more lethal weapons. If you live in that environment, you'd be foolish not to carry a gun. It's essential business equipment these days."

You might have guessed that. But what you might not know is that a very small number of shooters are causing a large number of the incidents. SFPD's Murphy says at one point his group was able to identify and remove 12 bad actors from a neighborhood and "we didn't have a shooting for seven months."

Wintemute says that approach is a big part of the "Boston Miracle," a gun violence program that dramatically reduced homicides in that city in the '90s.

"They called in the gang leadership," Wintemute said, "and they told them, 'We know who you are, and we know most of you are on probation. If you don't knock it off, you're going to see probation enforcement like you've never seen before.' "

Wintemute says the Boston police concentrated on nailing the slow learners who ignored the warnings, even if it was for jaywalking, to get them out of the area. The results were dramatic. (Unfortunately, Boston's homicide rate has climbed again after funding cuts and staffing problems.)

Still, it's an idea. In the coming weeks, everyone from Harris and Ryan to the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms, Tobacco and Explosives is promising dramatic new initiatives. They've gotten the memo. This is a topic that has the city's attention.

"It is a perception of safety and violence," said Ryan. "Do the citizens of San Francisco feel safe? I think there is a lot of anxiety out there."

Who knows, in a week or so, maybe even U.S. Attorney Russoniello will chime in.

C.W. Nevius' column appears Tuesday, Thursday and Sunday. E-mail him at cwnevius@sfchronicle.com.

This article appeared on page B - 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle

Soldier415
01-17-2008, 10:02 AM
SF Board of Supervisors recommendation for defending your home...

http://halbot.haluze.sk/images/2006-06/2413_pastnazlodeje.jpg

Harbinger
01-17-2008, 10:03 AM
LOL, I'd LOVE to hear how they came up with those numbers.

Plus, I really want to know how you can just drive over to Reno and 'pick up a gun'.

Mike

USN CHIEF
01-17-2008, 10:06 AM
It sounds like the need more guns and AW's there...:43:

peepshowal
01-17-2008, 10:10 AM
Hey Soldier, what kind of bait does the Board of Supervisors recommend to use in that trap?

Socal858
01-17-2008, 10:11 AM
lets blame an inanimate object because they dont fight back !!! much easier than solving real problems! lets kick back now and enjoy our secure .gov jobs, phew

Soldier415
01-17-2008, 10:12 AM
Hey Soldier, what kind of bait does the Board of Supervisors recommend to use in that trap?

Considering it is SF, they recommend using Kool-Aid, fine cheeses (goes great with the whine), or any video made by Michael Moore.

The above are irresistable to (The majority of) SF residents ;)

tombinghamthegreat
01-17-2008, 10:18 AM
Only 60,000 guns and 2,400 rifles? Even if that is accurate that number is sadly low.

dfletcher
01-17-2008, 10:21 AM
Aside from the "OMIGOD lots of guns" (fewer than 10% is not very high and in any other state those AWs would be just plain old guns) not a bad article in that it states what the problem is (felons & bad guys with illegal guns) and (almost) how to solve it - throw them in jail. They've even admitted to knowing who many of the culprits are.

I think the most glaring inaccuracy is that it's hard to buy a gun in SF but it's not hard outside of SF - it's hard to buy a gun in CA, not just SF.

Hopi
01-17-2008, 10:47 AM
This gives me hope.....
So are there any suggestions? Actually there are, although the solution begins by understanding the motivation of the shooters.

"Since the mid-'80s," says Wintemute, "the illicit drug trade has armed itself with progressively more lethal weapons. If you live in that environment, you'd be foolish not to carry a gun. It's essential business equipment these days."

You might have guessed that. But what you might not know is that a very small number of shooters are causing a large number of the incidents. SFPD's Murphy says at one point his group was able to identify and remove 12 bad actors from a neighborhood and "we didn't have a shooting for seven months."


and then

it's an idea. In the coming weeks, everyone from Harris and Ryan to the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms, Tobacco and Explosives is promising dramatic new initiatives. They've gotten the memo. This is a topic that has the city's attention.



If you don't knock it off, you're going to see probation enforcement like you've never seen before.'
Perhaps Harris and the rest will start to explore realistic fact-based crime prevention measures. And maybe they will start punishing criminals?

DedEye
01-17-2008, 10:49 AM
SF Board of Supervisors recommendation for defending your home...

http://halbot.haluze.sk/images/2006-06/2413_pastnazlodeje.jpg

The best part of that is that it's actually more illegal than a gun :p.

It's always annoying when someone (the article's author) with no clue about gun laws tries to write about them.

Librarian
01-17-2008, 10:53 AM
CW answers polite email. He's checking to find out how Ryan 'knows' how many guns there are.

FreshTapCoke
01-17-2008, 11:15 AM
This gives me hope.....
And maybe they will start punishing criminals?

Good lord I almost wet my pants when I read that part of the article. "When we started prosecuting criminals for the crimes they commit, we saw crime go down."

chris
01-17-2008, 11:25 AM
Hey Soldier, what kind of bait does the Board of Supervisors recommend to use in that trap?

may i answer. i think money and valuable objects and an unlocked door maybe good bait. results may vary as the game you are after may react to different types of bait. it is always a good idea to camoflauge your trap.:)

cartman
01-17-2008, 11:32 AM
I think those numbers are just a count of one of our members collections:D

chris
01-17-2008, 11:38 AM
I think those numbers are just a count of one of our members collections:D

good one, or it covers a few of the members here.:D

QuarterBoreGunner
01-17-2008, 11:47 AM
This story is taking a beating in the comments section (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article/comments/view?f=/c/a/2008/01/17/BA2GUGI01.DTL) on SFGate.
As well it should.

1911su16b870
01-17-2008, 12:12 PM
"That's a gun in every five households, or one for every 12th man, woman or child."

How do we arm the other 11 people? :D (Lord of War Intro)

QuarterBoreGunner
01-17-2008, 12:14 PM
^ I thought the same thing.

scrat
01-17-2008, 12:14 PM
i am very dissapointed in San Francisco. Very Very dissapointed. With all these people out there. They should have a lot more firearms. Everyone in San Francisco needs to go out and legally purchase a firearm after taking a class on handguns and safety. Those numbers are way too low.

WolfMansDad
01-17-2008, 12:18 PM
I call BS on these numbers. One firearm for every 12 people? The national average is more like 9 firearms for every 10 people, or so a recent study reported. Moreover, firearm ownership tends to go up along with incomes, and incomes are pretty high in the bay area.

60,000 handguns among three-quarters of a million people seems like a gross underestimate to me.

Bishop
01-17-2008, 12:23 PM
I like how they noted the amount of legal guns in the city, then started talking about violence of illegal guns. Classic anti-gunner strawman.

"Bob bought a gun legally, and just two weeks later a gang member with an illegal gun killed 4 people in Bob's neighborhood! BLOOD IN THE STREETS WILD WEST THINK OF THE CHILDREN (tm) Just because it hasn't happened doesn't mean it won't happen sometime in the future somewhere!"

:mad:

PonchoTA
01-17-2008, 12:25 PM
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/01/17/BA2GUGI01.DTL

"We have numerous cases," said San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris, "where someone buys legally, then drives a truck or SUV into the Bayview neighborhood, opens up the trunk and has a fire sale."

So, that whole "gun control" thing is working eh? All those law-abiding people getting guns and committing crimes with them?? No?? Oh yeah, it's the criminals that are arming themselves, and the helpless (state-mandated unarmed) people of the city are being gunned down!!

How's that working for ya?

Isn't this the exact same thing that the Pro Gun folks have been trying to fight against this whole time??? :(

When will they learn? :(:(:(

tteng
01-17-2008, 12:31 PM
I thought it's a fair-minded(coming from SF) piece, though I don't know the 60000/2500 numbers.

1. It didn't push for more gun control.
2. It placed source of gun-violence on criminals, and illegal access to but not the firearm itself.

bulgron
01-17-2008, 12:42 PM
Articles like that one are the reason why I hang up on the Chronicle guys when they call to beg me to take their newspaper.

Smokeybehr
01-17-2008, 12:45 PM
"That's a gun in every five households, or one for every 12th man, woman or child."

How do we arm the other 11 people? :D (Lord of War Intro)

Wow, That's what I thought when I read that line...

OK, Lord of War is now officially on the list of Man Movies... :D

Smokeybehr
01-17-2008, 12:46 PM
I thought it's a fair-minded(coming from SF) piece, though I don't know the 60000/2500 numbers.

1. It didn't push for more gun control.
2. It placed source of gun-violence on criminals, and illegal access to but not the firearm itself.

Yeah, but it was full of nothing but one-sided BS. They didn't have anyone that wasn't anti-gun quoted.

SemiAutoSam
01-17-2008, 12:51 PM
Looks like they need more Assault Rifles in San Fransisco.

Sorry to see their numbers diminishing like that.

Maybe someone needs to let the reporter know that an assault rifle is a NFA Weapon and not the same as a Assault Weapon.

Knowledge is useless on those kind of people however so it would just be a waste of time.

Omega13device
01-17-2008, 12:57 PM
I like how they noted the amount of legal guns in the city, then started talking about violence of illegal guns. Classic anti-gunner strawman.

"Bob bought a gun legally, and just two weeks later a gang member with an illegal gun killed 4 people in Bob's neighborhood! BLOOD IN THE STREETS WILD WEST THINK OF THE CHILDREN (tm) Just because it hasn't happened doesn't mean it won't happen sometime in the future somewhere!"

:mad:
What is really ironic is that this kind of fear mongering is exactly what causes a lot of people to think, "Gee, maybe I should buy a gun to defend myself!" So their tactics are just creating more gun owners. :D

Fjold
01-17-2008, 2:05 PM
"There are 60,000 handguns in San Francisco," Ryan said. "And 2,400 assault rifles. There are a lot of guns out there."

If guns are so evil, why aren't there 60,000 murders and 2,400 mass-murders?

QuarterBoreGunner
01-17-2008, 2:07 PM
Well I recently moved from SF to Pacifica...

...so they'll need to revise those numbers appreciably.

dfletcher
01-17-2008, 2:20 PM
Originally Posted by mecam
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl.../BA2GUGI01.DTL

"We have numerous cases," said San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris, "where someone buys legally, then drives a truck or SUV into the Bayview neighborhood, opens up the trunk and has a fire sale."

Here's a novel idea - if you know this is happening why not deal with the criminal offense as it occurs? Isn't that what the police & DA are supposed to do?

It seems to me that the DA & SFPD seem to know alot about what the criminals are doing, who they are and when & where they do it - the only thing lacking is actually doing something about it ....

Bad Voodoo
01-17-2008, 2:26 PM
I normally enjoy reading Nevius' columns but this one exposed him a bit, didn't it? Here's my letter to him:


Chuck,

C'mon now. I expected better from you. This article amounts to pure, unadulterated, anti-gun propaganda. I guess "the occupied" Bay Area has gotten used to the lies regularly spewed from the mouths of our fearless, local and state politicians. I shouldn't be surprised any longer.

The numbers, oh the numbers. 60,000 handguns and 2,400 "assault rifles" in San Francisco. I need some clarification here - Are these the number of firearms LEGALLY DROSd (Dealer Record of Sale) by the law abiding citizenry of SF from a local federally licensed armory/dealer (FFL), or do these numbers indicate firearms ILLEGALLY acquired by *criminals* on the safest of San Francisco streets through other, not-so-legal car trunk methods? If those numbers don't reflect "registered" LEGAL firearms, then where did they come from? Is it an extrapolation based on the number of illegal firearms confiscated from the mean streets of SF over a certain period of time? Is it a number pulled out of thin air? I really need to know, and I think you do your readers a great disservice by NOT fact checking the sewage you've been picking up from these socialist political appointees before incorporating it into what amounts to an obvious anti-gun editorial. You certainly are at their service aren't you, Chuck?

Did Mr. Ryan provide you with statistics outlining how many LEGALLY owned firearms were confiscated after the commission of a crime by the citizens who LEGALLY owned them? I didn't think so, otherwise you would have printed those statistics, right? I can tell you Chuck, that if those "suspect" numbers you allowed through your fact-based net reflect "registered" LEGAL firearms, that the VAST majority of owners are certainly NOT "going nuclear almost immediately" and "elevating to shootings at the drop of a hat." That's an absurdly wide net you cast that hauls in law abiding citizens right along with the dirt bag catch of the day. It's too bad that city leaders and the media who are at their beck and call can't distinguish your biased arguments clearly between ILLEGAL activity and LEGAL civil rights. Would you treat the 1st Amendment in the same fashion?

And what of the term "assault rifle"? Did Mr. Ryan provide you with a definition for that term, or was the BATFE out of the office on the day he tried to retrieve it from them? Not that the BATFE would be particularly interested in providing clear, meaningful distinctions between off-list "assault rifle" and perfectly legal fixed mag/10-round capacity semi-automatic rifles either, but at least I could have credited Mr. Ryan with the effort.

Let's be honest, Chuck. The only "assault" happening in the City of SF is the assault against the 2nd Amendment of the Bill of Rights. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Want to know why homicides and ILLEGAL gun play are so prevalent in our local society? It's because a freedom loving, law abiding citizen's natural born right to protect him/herself from thuggery is being infringed everyday by SF's socialist policy developers and major media propagandists. I know, I know. You're only here to help.

-Chris

QuarterBoreGunner
01-17-2008, 2:31 PM
if you know this is happening why not deal with the criminal offense as it occurs?
That's some fine police work Lou.

Seriously, if this is such a problem that she can tell anecdotal stories about it, it would seem easy enough to put an end to.

DIG
01-17-2008, 2:36 PM
Originally Posted by mecam
...It seems to me that the DA & SFPD seem to know alot about what the criminals are doing, who they are and when & where they do it - the only thing lacking is actually doing something about it ....

Makes too much sense for some people to actually grasp that concept.
"...does not compute, does not compute..."
;)

It would be entertaining to know the number of OLL receivers in CA since the announcement in Nov2004. At one point some people were buying 8-10 stripped receivers just to sit in the safe (in case they couldn't get them in "two weeks", next month, next year, etc...) Not sure how they would generate an accurate number though.

rue
01-17-2008, 2:43 PM
That's not nearly enough

ARRRR-15
01-17-2008, 2:57 PM
Hey Soldier, what kind of bait does the Board of Supervisors recommend to use in that trap?

Yourself.:eek:

Matt C
01-17-2008, 3:00 PM
Interesting, 2400 AWs is a DECREASE...

http://calgunlaws.com/Docs/ASSAULT%20WEAPONS/Agency%20Corr/AW%20Registration%206-06.PDF

acolytes
01-17-2008, 3:00 PM
Hey Soldier, what kind of bait does the Board of Supervisors recommend to use in that trap?

The bait will be a sign out front that says "Unarmed residents live here"

acolytes
01-17-2008, 3:03 PM
The best part of that is that it's actually more illegal than a gun :p.

It's always annoying when someone (the article's author) with no clue about gun laws tries to write about them.

Yeah, the perp will come back and sue you and own your home for him getting hurt in your house.

QuarterBoreGunner
01-17-2008, 3:05 PM
Interesting, 2400 AWs is a DECREASE...
Ok, now that is very interesting.

I have to post that over on the SFGate comments page. Thanks BWO!

tgriffin
01-17-2008, 3:08 PM
Hey Soldier, what kind of bait does the Board of Supervisors recommend to use in that trap?

Welfare check

1911_sfca
01-17-2008, 3:53 PM
After thinking about this article for a couple of minutes, I actually like it. I know the usual complaints will come up from gun-savvy readers here, but you have to ask yourself who the target audience of the article is. And I think it speaks to them well.

By starting the article with "omigod, there are so many guns and so much crime", it strikes a chord with libs who have no clue about guns. Then he goes on to explain that gun control is actually NOT the answer, and that programs targeting the trouble makers are what works.

I personally don't see anything wrong with the article at all. It's not what you or I would have written, but I think it serves it's purpose as well as can be asked.

Now if we examine what's going to come out of all these pow-wows between Newsom, Harris and the BATFE... well that is another story (i.e., a recipe for disaster).

Smokeybehr
01-17-2008, 3:54 PM
Welfare check

EBT card with the PIN written on it.

tyrist
01-17-2008, 6:52 PM
Why don't they come out and tell you the 15 year old who shot the 18 year old was a gang member. It has gang crime written all over it. I am pretty sure he did'nt purchase that gun legally.

If we had the room to put these guys then we might start further reducing crime. As it is now it seems like we give them a life sentence a few months at a time and waiting for them to finally go over the edge.

jdberger
01-17-2008, 7:00 PM
After thinking about this article for a couple of minutes, I actually like it. I know the usual complaints will come up from gun-savvy readers here, but you have to ask yourself who the target audience of the article is. And I think it speaks to them well.

By starting the article with "omigod, there are so many guns and so much crime", it strikes a chord with libs who have no clue about guns. Then he goes on to explain that gun control is actually NOT the answer, and that programs targeting the trouble makers are what works.

I personally don't see anything wrong with the article at all. It's not what you or I would have written, but I think it serves it's purpose as well as can be asked.

Now if we examine what's going to come out of all these pow-wows between Newsom, Harris and the BATFE... well that is another story (i.e., a recipe for disaster).


I was pretty pleasantly suprised, too.

I read the lead paragraphs in the morning during my commute, and couldn't get myself to read the rest 'cause I just didn't need the agita during work...then read the rest and had to keep re-reading it cause it wasn't a Kamala Harris style diatribe against gun owners....

Gshock
01-17-2008, 7:36 PM
Maybe San Francisco should follow Kennesaw, Georgia and make guns mandatory. After the law went into effect in 1982, crime against persons plummeted 74 percent compared to 1981, and fell another 45 percent in 1983 compared to 1982.

PIRATE14
01-17-2008, 7:39 PM
It sounds like the need more guns and AW's there...:43:

I'm on my way..........:chris:

UBFRAGD
01-17-2008, 8:14 PM
I can't get over the straw purchasers. Those guys are the real profiteering bastards. I'm all for freedom and capitalism but selling kids guns is right up there with pedophiles.

Gun play is way, way down in the city. Sure there's killings that get the media play but driving around shooting stuff up seems like a thing of the past. It seems like the culture shifted a little bit, guns bring too much heat and attention, so now the thugs send enforcers for beat-downs and vehicle destruction. And there's not that many places where thuggery can get away with it left in SF anyway--I think the city is a much safer place than a decade ago, but I still wouldn't want to ride MUNI or go to a public library or anything like that because at the street level, civilization, politeness, and cleanliness are completely absent, perhaps extinct.

Drive down Valencia street and look at them all with their Che shirts. Any one of them would be knocked over by the recoil of a 10/22. Che used guns, they have never touched one. The Chron is rabid anti-gun for the past fifteen years, but at least they call to sell you a subscription to their rag and you can tell them that their radical leftist slant sucks especially when it comes to the 2nd amend. I always feel better after that and they never stop calling. All USA news sucks anyway and when some American TV executive dipshiat figures out why Primer Impacto is watched by Americans because even without understanding the language we can still see that it's not totally biased and propaganda-driven, and when that executive comes up with a non-aligned, non-agenda, fact-driven news channel just the facts ma'am he will capture the American market because guess what? Americans have evolved for generations under sneaky marketing and news bias conditions--our natural intuition will beat their agenda/bias every time. Woops, started ranting off topic. Just watch out for SF--it's a massive population of emasculated weenies/empowered biatches governed by the biggest socialists in the USA hoping to shove the nanny state deep and hard. Must. Have. More laws. Especially anti-gun laws now that they have conquered a lot of the other frontiers like property rights (eminent domain), family rights, freedom of speech and assembly, and have gotten the green light to whittle our freedoms down to nothing while making sure income taxes continue to rise.



Back to Sf and guns. We have never read a statistic like this: "In 2007 legally owned/registered guns killed X people while illegally owned guns killed Y" in solved documented murders or shootings. SFPD, I dare you to step in and accuse legal gun owners in SF of contributing to violence in any statistically meaningful way. Don't even tell me about felony gun statistics when you caught someone from Arizona with a CCW visiting Fishermans Wharf and found a firearm in his SUV after it was wrecked in an unsolved hit-and-run. Clowns. SF gun owners have a lot to lose if they mess around and they damn well know that and the laws as well if not better than the average gun-toting LE.

The anti-gunners are fully garbed in the Emperor's Clothes and most everyone who has taken an unabashed look at American culture knows it.

Whew I'm done ranting for ten minutes.

Later!

metalhead357
01-17-2008, 9:03 PM
LOL, I'd LOVE to hear how they came up with those numbers.

Plus, I really want to know how you can just drive over to Reno and 'pick up a gun'.

Mike


+infinity and 1 more to boot

oaklander
01-17-2008, 9:20 PM
The number on assault weapons is about right:

http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/AWregstats.pdf

Linh
01-17-2008, 9:22 PM
What, did they have all these criminals come down and have their guns counted for some kind of census?

My favorite comment on that website LMAO. Too funny

Just imagine a line filled with gangmembers carrying all the weapons they own and a single cop taking inventory.

BigDogatPlay
01-17-2008, 9:44 PM
I'd like to see the District Attorney back her claim of car trunk transactions made by gun owners trying to make a buck with some actual cases I can go to the court's archive and read. But that's the problem with hyperbole, isn't it?

The solution to San Francisco's gang and gang violence problem is simple. Launch a mirror of Operation Exile. Take the esteemed Ms. Harris and her office out of the loop by making referral on every qualifying arrest direct to the United States Attorney for federal prosecution. Brighter line on evidence and hard core mandatory minimums.

metalhead357
01-17-2008, 11:06 PM
The number on assault weapons is about right:

http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/forms/pdf/AWregstats.pdf


For those that REGISTERED thier weapons. To this day we get peeps here thinking that because they DROS'd a weapon that it was registered:rolleyes: and then there is the crowd that never registered them and took them out of state, then the crowd that just never bothered..... That's just the AW's. As far as pistols go......there are a lot of peeps old enough to have lived prior to the DROS requirement for PPT's on handguns.

In short...those stats are about as valuable and viable as used toilet paper

Pvt. Cowboy
01-18-2008, 11:41 AM
But it's a different story outside city limits. Guns are flooding into town from out-of-state gun shows, like the one next month in Reno, where background checks and waiting periods are not required.

You bet your life it's a different story outside of city limits.

Now, if background checks and waiting periods are not required in Reno NV and they haven't got anywhere even remotely near the violence problem that the SF Bay Area does, what could explain the discrepancy?!

HMNNN... Let me think... Gosh, this is a toughie! Hmnnn...

SemiAutoSam
01-18-2008, 12:27 PM
Background checks are required nationwide thanks to the Brady law that went into effect in 1994.

That would include Reno Nevada.

Not all states outside of California require a waiting period.

Nevada has a instant check that is facilitated through the Nevada Highway patrol based in Carson City Nevada.





You bet your life it's a different story outside of city limits.

Now, if background checks and waiting periods are not required in Reno NV and they haven't got anywhere even remotely near the violence problem that the SF Bay Area does, what could explain the discrepancy?!

HMNNN... Let me think... Gosh, this is a toughie! Hmnnn...

Solidmch
01-18-2008, 12:36 PM
I'm on my way..........:chris:

The city will tax you sooooo much, and hold protests in front of you store. In their minds, you would be the cause for all of there crack smoking ways. Let them have that Island, come to the East Bay!:43:

XOne
01-18-2008, 2:24 PM
What I wrote:

Hello there,

My name is Mario Casillas, and my older brother was murdered in the 2007 epidemic of violence; In a senseless act, he was shot to death, after getting into a brief argument with two people he had never met before that moment. I was also a victim, having been almost murdered myself at the hands of a group of people I have never met before.

I read your article today after my mother had pointed it out, and I have to say I was surprised at how you blamed guns for the actions of evil people; Even though the phrase "Guns do not kill people, people kill people" is in fact very cliche, it is at the same time very true. I do not blame guns for what an evil person did to my brother. You are a person in the position to expose the true causes of violence in San Francisco, yet instead, you use your voice to blame and demonize an inanimate object, such as firearms.

First of all, no where do you mention in your article whether the firearms currently owned are legal, or illegal, nor where those statistics originate. It would help to know where you acquired such information, since it is part of the basis of your article.

In 2007, in San Francisco there were 98 homicides, and only 19 of them were solved by the SFPD. Aren't the police supposed to protect us, and at the very least, catch these criminals, and bring them to justice? I cant understand that in an article about illegal guns and murder, that this subject wasn't brought up. My brother was murdered in a random act of violence, and to this day, his murder remains unsolved by the SFPD. Do you know what will give my family some peace? If the SFPD actually does their job, catches these individuals, and makes sure these murderers never see the light of day again.

The murderers, and evil doers, do not live in fear anymore, as they should. They know they have more then a 50% chance of getting away with murder, and with a predominantly unarmed populace, it is like target practice for them. The city of San Francisco has taken our right to defend our own lives a long time ago, and with the police showing absolutely no competence to deal with them, this city has become their playground.

Demonizing law-abiding good people for owning guns, and passing more laws prohibiting firearm ownership is not helping. I do not think there is anything we can do to completely quell the violence, but at least lets hold those evil killers responsible, and make them examples for tomorrows killer; Maybe tomorrows killer will think twice before they murder the innocent, knowing that they will be caught, and pay for what they did.

Take care and God bless,

Mario

He replied:

Huh. It seems to me you went a long way to be offended. My point is that when a 15-year-old kid has a semi-automatic handgun, guns are too easy to get. Sorry to hear about your brother, and you too of course, but am surprised that you wouldn't think that the ease with which people can get guns doesn't contribute. Thanks for the note. CWN


I replied:

Hello there again,

You still fail to mention whether you are talking about legal, or illegal firearms.

A 15-year-old buying or possessing firearms is already illegal. You know what also is illegal? The act of murder, but that doesn't seem to stop criminals from doing it. What does passing more laws against legal gun owners do? Nothing. Instead, why don't the police actually enforce the current laws, and at the very least, catch these criminals?

I do not think you read my letter correctly, 19 out of the 98 murders were solved by the SFPD. If a murderer knows he can committ a murder using a gun, knife, spoon, keyboard, or whatever, and have more than a 50% chance he will get away with it, the violence will continue.

I am really ashamed that people like yourself are the ones talking for families like mine, who had to face this violence. For you, this is a newspaper article that you hope will make you famous; For me and my family, this is reality.

So go on, and believe what you believe; Continue to blame guns, and not place any responsibility on the incompetence of the SFPD to catch these criminals, and the criminals themselves for committing these crimes. You had the chance to really do something good for San Francisco, and you have failed us.


Take care and God bless,

Mario

Sarkoon
01-18-2008, 2:28 PM
Mario, thanks for taking the time to write that excellent letter and follow-up.

PonchoTA
01-18-2008, 5:19 PM
Mario, thanks for taking the time to write that excellent letter and follow-up.
+1. Mario, I'm very sorry to hear of your loss of your brother. I really hate to think that the city that you live in will do nothing to resolve the case, nor do anything to ease your pain. However, you and I both know that "they" never will. The society that they have created will in fact continue to blame an inanimate object for their pain, and ignore all the real reasons that are so apparent to you and I (and the rest of this type of forum)

Please, continue your fight for justice and the right thing to do. There are a lot of us behind you and will stick with you in your fight, count me as one of them!

Again, I'm sorry for your loss, but if it is any consolation, you can use this to aid the right thing to do and the cause!

Thanks brother!

Paul
P.S. Please feel free to PM me anytime to rant, or sound off, or compare notes anytime!

metalhead357
01-18-2008, 6:01 PM
Mario. +10000000000000000 on that letter. And a mighty big condolences for your loss that would allow the circumstances to write such a letter:(

oaklander
01-18-2008, 6:15 PM
I know about the various types of bonehead peeps.

I was pointing out where the statistic might have come from.

:D

For those that REGISTERED thier weapons. To this day we get peeps here thinking that because they DROS'd a weapon that it was registered:rolleyes: and then there is the crowd that never registered them and took them out of state, then the crowd that just never bothered..... That's just the AW's. As far as pistols go......there are a lot of peeps old enough to have lived prior to the DROS requirement for PPT's on handguns.

In short...those stats are about as valuable and viable as used toilet paper

metalhead357
01-18-2008, 6:31 PM
I know about the various types of bonehead peeps.

I was pointing out where the statistic might have come from.

:D

LOL! I gotcha...I understand. But I think you and me preaching to each other's choir aint gonna let the *everyday joe* and the snot nosed filled minivan soccer mom's heads be that enlightentedededed. Stats like these just drive me nucking futts;)

oaklander
01-18-2008, 7:40 PM
No problem!

Mark Twain said it best about statistics. . .

:)

LOL! I gotcha...I understand. But I think you and me preaching to each other's choir aint gonna let the *everyday joe* and the snot nosed filled minivan soccer mom's heads be that enlightentedededed. Stats like these just drive me nucking futts;)

QuarterBoreGunner
01-18-2008, 7:47 PM
Heh.

Lies. Dammed lies... and statistics.