The "90% myth" comes from Obama, now

[USAFNoDak]

Juan Carlos posted:

Same goes for a theoretical AWB in an attempt to restrict guns to cartels. Take the weapons off the shelves in the U.S., and out of citizens' houses, and you are effectively drying up one supply of weapons to Mexico (whether through straw purchases or theft). Yes, there are other supply routes; however it's pretty obvious that this route is utilized because it is either cheaper or safer (or both) than the alternatives. Force them to utilize alternate supply lines, and obviously you've either increased their costs or increased their risk of interdiction.

Again, the effect may be marginal...but it's non-zero.

When the UK virtually banned all firearms, what happened to the number of "illegal" guns in the UK? Did the numbers go up or down? I've read that they went up dramatically and now number over 3 million. You would have a very hard time taking all of the assault weapons in America out of the homes. More would get smuggled in to replace many of the ones which were taken away. This is what happened in the UK. The smugglers all of a sudden had a gun free market and there was still a demand for guns. Gun control seldom affects the "demand" side of the equation, only the supply side. The smugglers in the UK were very happy to fill the need. Plus, the black market typically sells much cheaper than the "legal" market because they have no taxes to pay, no upkeep on the buildings, no employees to pay, no heating and electric bills for their business locations, etc. And, they don't even pay wholesale prices in many cases because the guns were obtained at a virtual cost of zero through theft or other corruption in the government.

I agree that gun laws seldom have "zero" effect. However, sometimes the effect is not something the authorities were hoping to accomplish when they passed certain gun control laws.

Here's an example. Lets say you ban handguns and are almost totally successful in removing all of them from society. What happens? The criminals turn to shotguns which can be sawed off and have the stocks shortened so that they relatively concealable. A sawed off shotgun with 00 buck is much more deadly than most handguns at close range. Thus, instead of injuring his intended target if he decides to shoot, the perp will typically kill them.

[JohnKSa]

If their guns weren't coming (however indirectly) from a sporting goods store or gun show in the U.S., they'd be coming from a freighter straight from China.

You will cut into their profits,

I was with you right up to that last statement.

Before Clinton stopped the import of Chinese firearms to the U.S. it was possible to buy a brand new Chinese SKS rifle for $50 dollars on the retail market.

We may make it less convenient for them to purchase arms, but if we force them to start buying guns & ammunition directly and in quantity from the Chinese they'll actually save money. LOTS of money.

[Hunley]

I blame the overly corrupt MexiCAN'T government and military. I'm sure the weapons were made in the US... And then sold to the Mexican government! The latest American Rifleman had a picture of cartel members handcuffed in front of a bunch of Class 3 stuff (fully auto m16s with 40mm grenade launchers, 40mm shells, and hand grenades) and plenty of body armor... ALL with Mexican government/military/police logos on it.