[kyp275]

Sigh, your red herrings are starting to get pretty old.

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

No, they don't have an "8 ball", but if a particular gang is illegally practicing some kind of racket, it doesn't take them long to find out and bust them.

If you decided to get some friends together and hold your neighbour's property to ransom, would you get away with it? Or would you get busted by the police? You might manage it once, or maybe even twice, but it wouldn't take long for you to be reported and for the police to come down on you. The same doesn't occur in the less controlled parts of Mexico.

Red Herring 1. How does a couple guy stupidly deciding to hold their neighbor's property hostage (lol?) have anything to do with the nature of police work in general? since when did gang racketeering becomes the only crime you have to worry about? Home invasions, robbery, rape and other regular violent crimes are what most people would ever have the misfortune of having to defend themselves from.

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

Global prices have nothing to do with it. It's local prices. It doesn't matter if you can buy an AK for 100$ in Colombia, if the process to transport it to the US is 500$.

Yea, that's why the Mexican cartels are totally not sourcing the majority of their weapons from south america! oh wait...

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

Also, local circulation of weapons is very important in determining weapon prices. If everyone and his mother owns a gun, you don't need to go to Colombia to get a gun. The black market price for a gun will approach the real market value of a gun, as they'll be extremely easy to obtain.

I suggest you read this:

http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20110...0-percent-myth

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

Government corruption is a metric of government control. A corrupt government is a weak government. Corruption reduces the ability of the government to project it's power. Corruption is rife in Mexico or China, making it easy for organised crime to do business. In the US, corruption exists on a much smaller scale, and is not systemic.

Red herring 2. This is fine and dandy, but has little to do with the discussion at hand, which is supposed to be gun control.

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

If you remove all gun controls, the logical end point is that everyone and their mother will own a gun, logically that means every rioter will also have a gun.

False logic, you're assuming that everyone will want a gun, and that they will all have the money to purchase the gun, and that all the rioters will also want to use their gun in said riot.

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

What riots have occured on American soil that were on the scale of the London riots?

A few seconds on google would've given you the answers:

http://www.forensiccolleges.net/blog...rican-history/

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

Of course rioters won't be a private army, but they can still kill a lot of policemen (and each other) before getting subdued.

Neither of which requires firearms. As a matter of fact, they tend not to be caused by firearms, but rather melee weapons or other items such as molotov cocktails, or just your plain 'ol fists.

Originally Posted by DonQuigleone

If everyone has a gun, and there's no law and order, what would logically happen?

Red herring 3, irrelevant scenario. Unless you're trying to imply that civilian gun ownership leads to a loss of societal order, in which case reality would like to slap some sense into you.

Let's try to keep these discussion at least somewhat close to the realm of the plausible. At this point you're pretty much saying that the availability of civilian firearms will lead to the downfall of societies and governments.