Strike at the root of gun violence by shutting down the 'iron pipeline'
Obama also proposed a federal gun trafficking measure Wednesday, which Kelly called “a move in the right direction,” saying that 90% of the guns confiscated by police in New York come from out of state. “We need a federal plan. Otherwise, we’re still going to be plagued with guns coming from all over. They come up what we call the iron pipeline, 95, Highway 95, coming up from the southern states. These are guns that are landing on our doorstep and they’re killing New Yorkers,” Kelly said.
Kelly commended Obama’s efforts to reform gun control. “I think the power of the office is tremendous and the fact that the president is now speaking about it, actually getting behind this legislation, will mean an awful lot. As he said yesterday, that we need the public support. We need the citizens to get behind this. To me, this is just common sense. These are not new proposals. Certainly, [New York City] Mayor Bloomberg has put these proposals forward for quite a while. But now that they’re sort of coalescing, getting behind it, and the president is leading the charge, I think this is very, very important and it could very well be a turning point.”
more...
http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/01/17/ray-kelly-armed-guards-in-schools-is-not-the-answer/
In New York City alone, just last week, the NYPD suffered one of its bloodiest nights when three officers suffered gunshot wounds, in two separate crimes, just an hour apart. We are all thankful these heroes are on their way to recovery.
Almost one year ago, NYPD Officer Peter Figoski, the father of four beautiful daughters, was tragically killed in the line of duty.
One thing all of these shootings have in common: the guns used all came up "the Iron pipeline" from out-of-state. In fact, according to the Mayor's office, 85 percent of the guns used in gun crimes in New York City come from out-of-state, and at least 90 percent of these guns are illegal.
more...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-kirsten-gillibrand/end-the-flow-of-illegal-g_b_2440791.html
Proponents adhering strictly to the current NRA talking point about identifying the 'mentally ill' is just a panacea to placate the masses...until the next gun massacre occurs, that is. The root of the problem lies in the ready availability of firearms, and the NRA's polly-parrots continue to ignore the fact - once bandied about by their side with great regularity - that anyone, despite appearing on any generated list, is able to obtain a firearm because they're so readily available. All suggestions that run contrary to the NRA script are met with the equivalent of 'resistance is futile,' however, so it's up to us who believe a legislative solution is within our grasp to apply unrelenting pressure until the real problems are addressed first.
= new reply since forum marked as read
it brings their integrity into question. I do not expect an advocacy group to be even handed, MAIG any moreso than the NRA. It begs the question of what is their actual agenda.
Falsifying membership, failing to condemn their own who violate their raison d'etre, founded and backed by a billionaire with less than even views on civil rights... Is MAIG just another hypocritical 1% elitist promotion group? 
As for reducing gun trafficking- I support vigorous enforcement of existing Federal laws and expanding NCIS to all sales, whether done at Fededral or state level
How exactly does one go about shutting down the 'iron pipeline'?
you shut down all manufacture and commerce in the specific field? Remind me not to ask you to trim my toenails when you are riding a bush-hog. 
I do not doubt that you want to shut it down, I want to shut it down, the question is....... How do you shut down the 'iron pipeline'.
People who are already under the watchful eye of the BATF and the IRS in the way they conduct their business? How would that be implemented? If the small minority that is already responsible for the illegal purchases are known, why are they not already in trouble?
Improving traceability.. interesting. A more detailed track of serial numbers? RFID chips? Tattoo the serial number of the weapon on the buyers forehead, so the world can see that they have a gun?
ISO standards? Such as?
And of course, regulating production. Of course.
The problem seems to me, criminals, wanting guns in New York are willing to over look a law here and there to get them into their state. Am I right so far?
So, we can assume they are going to do just that. Now, my question is..... how is a safety inspection made of Sturm, Ruger & Company's office in Southport, Connecticut, going to stop the next Colin Ferguson from buying their weapon legally, and going to New York where it will be illegal to posses it?
Isn't the the gist of the who situation? How does one stop the flow of illegal guns, when the very act of importing is illegal in the first place?
Granted, things may have changed..
http://www.fop.net/servlet/display/news_article?id=411&XSL=xsl_pages%2fpublic_news_individual.xsl
I am writing on behalf of the membership of the Fraternal Order of Police to express our strong support for the inclusion of language in the FY 2008 Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies appropriations bill to prohibit disclosure of firearms trace data by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) firearms to non-law enforcement entities.
The FOP has supported this language since the original version was first enacted several years ago because of our concern for the safety of law enforcement officers and the integrity of law enforcement investigations. For example, the disclosure of trace requests can inadvertently reveal the names of undercover officers or informants, endangering their safety. It may also tip off the target of an investigation, as appears to be the case in New York City. According to media reports last year, law enforcement sources cited that as many as "four cases were compromised and an additional 14 were put at risk" by private investigators employed by the city who acted on the basis of trace data. In this case, the investigators conducted "sting" operations for the city's civil suit against several gun stores that had been identified through firearms trace data. As a result, several gun trafficking suspects under investigation by law enforcement changed their behavior to avoid scrutiny. This is exactly the type of interference that caused the FOP to originally support language restricting the use of the data to law enforcement.
(me again), Haven't read the actual amendment wording, and googling supplies links to both for and against. With out reading the actual text, it is too iffy to make a call. Will look after the raid, see if I can form an opinion for you.
it would be specific. Which I applaud. If someone is breaking the law, then the police should stop them and arrest them. I just am asking how, after making a law to make transportation of a firearm into NY illegal ( was under the impression it was already, but I've never been there), how does one go about finding the people doing it? Is it an after charge, to be tacked on and plea bargained down? Is it a charge that after a local jury acquits, the Feds can step in and retry?
Last I heard, there was a whole lotta stuff moving up and down I-95 that wasn't exactly legal. 
I just don't see how so many other people, who rage against government control, don't.
Were you, in fact, trying to open up serious debate for this issue?
In which case, I salute you!
That is what we need - more SERIOUS debate rather than a bunch of rhetoric.
PS, I still stand by my points!
It was pointed out that we have very loose border restrictions between states, and a certain amount of travel freedom. So, again, how does one stop any, banned item from moving from one state to another, in light of the fact that the mover already knows they are breaking the law?
Some may think the best way is to set check points, (which I suggested), on avenues into the restricted areas. Others, seem (to me at least), want to expand the most restrictive policies from the most restrictive location out to the other states. Then what? Instead of people trafficking guns into NY, they are trafficking into the USSA?
Why not just come down on the people breaking the law, with the fury of a fiery mountain landing on them, instead of dreaming of ways to lock this country down more. On a board that a good size group (knowing the members change, some overlap, ya pick up a few, ya loose a few) wants no boarders, are firmly convinced the police are not just incompetent, but deliberately evil, wants unrestricted access to.. the internet, higher education, housing, health care, food, water, utilities, transportation.. am I missing anything? Anyway, on that board, we have people clamoring to become a police state.
We (collectively) don't trust the federal government to oversee our food, our courts, very little of our 'national defense', it's all a racket. We don't (see preceding sentence) trust the government when it comes to wire taps, surveillance, interrogations, prosecutions or incarcerations. We (above) don't trust elections, legislation, court proceedings, yet some how, if we all just gave up, agreed, if we put our trust in these benevolent law makers, it will be sunshine, and puppies, and people will die at the ripe old age of 250, in their sleep. (Bonus for anyone thinking of how Tyrion Lannister said he wanted to die).
It's not about fighting the gubmit. It's not about 'my precious', or delicate flowers, or any other insult dreamed up. It's not even about deer hunting, or why do you need, or even compensating for a small pecker. It's about consistency.
There was a picture posted earlier, in another thread, showing the 11 Steps to Fascism. Every one of those steps have been covered on this board since I joined many years ago. Each one brings emotions, strong opinions, and core beliefs into play during the discussions. The only problem I see, is that the first 10 generate outrage against, and the last generates desire for.
I know it is an emotional issue. I understand that people are scared and concerned. (well, I'm not, then again, I am a delicate flower, not a scared rabbit 
) But, when I hear something must be done, I just think of the Patriot act.
