comment: >
  
  Yes, and then need more resources to manage the additional license volume, so more resources, hiring, and promotions all around without having to go after a single baddie.
context: It's not 85%, it's 36%.
  Page 3 is the page that shows where the guns used for the crime came from. 83,781 of the crime guns came from California out of 231,784 traced guns.
  You're referring to page 4, which shows where the guns were recovered. 85% of the crime guns traced were recovered in California, not necessarily originally from California. >
  
  Edit:  using page 3 has the total trace requests.
  
  You're referring to page 4, which shows where the guns were recovered. 85% of the crime guns traced were recovered in California
  
  Page 4 is the crime gun recovery in state from that state. 
  Even lists the top recovery states for in California on the same page.
  CA 83,781
  NV 1,581
  BJ 1,292
  AZ 963
  TX 834
  Which seems fairly consistent with the previous years of ATF trace data on the state with Arizona, Texas and Nevada being the largest out of state sources.
  Like the entire point of the individual state reports is to determine what is accounting for their crime guns. >
  
  
  Page 4 is the crime gun recovery in state from that state.
  
  Yes, that's what I said. That's very different from:
  
  California appears to be the source for its own crime guns 85% of the traces
  
  Looking back at it though it appears that it's actually 58.3%, not 36%. The denominator is 143,466, not 231,784 - they based their stats on the "traced to a known purchaser" for the state-by-state data. >
  
  Waiting for this place to be swarmed with pro gun talking points as usual… >
  
  “Guns aren’t the problem! It’s everything else!”
  “Ok, let’s fix everything else…”
  “Nah…” >
  
  I always hear it's a mental health issue from conservatives. Then let's create a robust mental health system in the US. Crickets.... >
  
  As a gun-loving liberal, let's have all the healthcare.  For free.  And tax the fucking rich for it.  If they don't pay their fair share of taxes, we eat them.  Every tax-paying citizen will get a protein bar made partially with the reconstituted bits of last year's tax cheats. >
  
  Gun owner and liberal here too.  I can list a dozen social and economic changes that would reduce crime in general and gun crime specifically, but most conservatives would tank them as they are all progressive and are things like free healthcare, economic programs to rebuild the middle class and reduce economic disparity, legal changes so we aren't locking people up for little shit that causes them to loose jobs and basically upend their entire lives.
  On the other hand I can see things like longer wait times, better background checks, requirements on safe storage, investment in preventive policies as ways to reduce some of what this report outlines.  The problem is all of the requires investment to be effective and people don't want to pay for that, plus it requires active enforcement and a lot of police/sheriffs not willing to do that (oh and make it so police don't get special rules... If you wouldn't be safe as a private citizen with a gun, having a badge should not make you immune).
  From the legal gun owner side, a lot of people feel like they keep giving things up with new rules and not getting anything back and ending up villainized in the process.  It would be just awesome if gun policy was informed by educated professionals including gun owners.  A hell of a lot of what gets talked about for reducing gun violence doesn't actually make a hell of a lot of sense or is too wildly impractical to be enforceable or is just window dressing. A lot of the laws are written around adjectives describing aspects of guns that are ambiguous and sometime contradictory. >
  
  …and legal changes to that women aren’t knocked up which causes them to have financial upheaval and lose their jobs as well! Like, affordable contraceptives and abortion availability. >
  
  Has nothing to do with gun control or gun violence that I can see, but you are correct, those things should be guaranteed in a non-medieval society. >
  
  Easier access to guns and more guns on the street due to constitutional carry leads to more gun crime, as it turns out.
  Who could have imagined this?
  
  Previously, because of the carry permit requirement, any handgun owner who wanted to bring their weapon into a public space had to go through an eligibility screening, register fingerprints and undergo four to six hours of training, in addition to passing a written exam and shooting proficiency test, the Texas Department of Public Safety website states. After HB1927 goes into effect on Sep. 1, those Texans will no longer need that permit or the training that went with it. >
  
  Absolutely no one. It is a total mystery. >
  
  So in other words: the thing that the ATF NEEDS be going after, straw purchasers and gun traffickers, are being strategically neglected through regulation on benign things like short-barelled weapons and suppressors, whose processing/licensing/management takes up the bulk of the agency's resources. >
  
  That takes work, it’s much easier for the ATF to make millions of legal firearm owners criminals overnight with the stroke of a pen, with out involvement from a single elected official or any kind of vote whatsoever.