For children yes. Wonder what the 4 above it are for people over 14.
Some places do take it seriously though and have tough penalties.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD
Strong Reason to Retain the Second Amendment
- Thread starter Sukerkin
- Start date
For children yes. Wonder what the 4 above it are for people over 14.
Some places do take it seriously though and have tough penalties.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD
Why are guns such a focus for you when so many things that are commonly accepted are far more dangerous? Why don't we regulate pools more? How about lakes and oceans? Why not have mandatory swimming tests and armed lifeguards checking cards that indicate registration into a national accepted swimming proficiency institution? Why is surfing allowed at all? How about water skiing?
The answer is cheeseburgers. You're going to die from a cheeseburger with more regularity than from a gun.
Ban cheeseburgers.
There are usually fence laws--and if not, insurance will likely compel it anyway.
If you drown in your own pool, that's sad. If your kids do, all the more so. But you're making a decision affecting only those who willingly choose to enter the pool. Hence there might be a comparison to gun accidental shootings, and with a stretch to gun suicides, but not to gun murders. Those affect other people who did not choose to take that risk. When someone uses a swimming pool to murder 20+ elementary schoolkids in their classrooms, let's have a discussion about this.
You have a lot of freedom in this country regarding what you can do in/at your own house, and what risks you can choose to take for yourself. If you're not in the military, you probably don't need to parachute. If parachuters were regularly landing on people on unaware the ground and killing them, we'd probably have a discussion about this.
The comparison only starts to make sense if I can "opt-out" of gun violence like I can opt-out of swimming in your swimming pool. But since a gun can be used against me without my permission, the comparison is meaningless.
Do you support the TSA's searching of every person who flies on an airplane because of terrorism? You mentioned opting out.
Speaking of opting out, do you opt out of cheeseburgers? How about alcohol? Do you opt out of driving? You can opt out of a lot of things in this life that can kill you quicker than firearms, but it would make your life a lot more inconvenient. I'd like you to write down your diet for the last week let us know how many things you are opting out on that are far more dangerous than firearms.
Any laws you make about guns will only affect the law abiding ordinary citizen. By implementing bans on all or certain types of guns, you disarm the law abiding and arm the criminal. You are making the choice to increase the number of victims, not decrease them because all of the people who use guns to defend themselves will now have to accept being raped, robbed, tortured or murdered by those who choose to break the law and use guns to enforce their will on others. Even if the attacker himself does not use a gun, you are telling the victim, you may only use your empty hands to prevent the attacker from beating you with a baseball bat or slash or stab you with a knife. If you are alone, and their are 2 or more attackers, you must simply do your best to defend yourself, at a disadvantage, especially if they are armed, or simply, quietly submit to them...and hope that they only hurt you a little, or let you live...by their choice, not yours. If you look at the crime stats from the F.B.I. on crimes with knives, and attacks by hands and feet, you are telling other victims, who in the past saved themselves with guns, that they are no longer allowed to stop those attacks with the most effective means of stopping them, and that they must now submit to those attacks, and rely on the police and medical professionals to come to their aid...most likely after their lives have been changed forever.
That is what you do with each gun law you pass...
The theater shootings and the Sandy Hook shootings are rare events...the murder of individuals by criminals with guns and knives and other weapons happen around the country, every day, in vast numbers, far more than the individual mass shootings. You are saying, deny guns to the innocent in order to really do nothing to stop the theater shootings or Sandy Hook and by doing that, you condemn thousands if not tens of thousands of innocent people every year to humiliation, injury and death...and you still won't save the children in the next "Gun Free" zone that we call schools.
That is what you do with each gun law you pass...
The theater shootings and the Sandy Hook shootings are rare events...the murder of individuals by criminals with guns and knives and other weapons happen around the country, every day, in vast numbers, far more than the individual mass shootings. You are saying, deny guns to the innocent in order to really do nothing to stop the theater shootings or Sandy Hook and by doing that, you condemn thousands if not tens of thousands of innocent people every year to humiliation, injury and death...and you still won't save the children in the next "Gun Free" zone that we call schools.
What are the FBI stats. on self-defense with guns?
They only count bodies on the ground, and I am not even sure they denote good dead bodies from bad dead bodies...and they don't record events like my freind who warned off two attackers by merely clearing his holstered weapon...but the gun grabbers don't care because seeing those incidents takes hard mental work...they only believe what they can see...even when that isn't even close to revealing the truth of the situation...and yet they are happy to let innocent people become victims...
It doesn't matter. You're mind is made up and you think you have the right to force everyone else to accept your level of risk.
here are some stats on victims murdered by criminals...using guns...
http://www.policyalmanac.org/crime/archive/firearms_and_crime.shtml
The gun grabbers support keeping those 533,470 victims...victims, by keeping them from owning the most effective means of self-defense against one or more attackers who will more than likely be armed with a gun...and if not a gun, a knife, club or simply their hands...as happened today in Chicago...again...because the people here cannot carry weapons to protect themselves...but the criminals use weapons to rape, brutalize, and murder them...
Soooo...how many people have to be victims each and every day to "not," do anything to stop the shootings in Colorado or Connecticut or stop the suicides of people who have chosen to give up their own life...it looks like at least 533,470 people...
Sooo...let's subtract 30,000 lives for those actually killed by criminals each year, although some of those are criminals killed instead of victims...that leaves 503,470 victims of criminals using guns...that is a lot of people who have to just quietly accept what happens to them because a bunch of gun grabbers want to feel good...
Keep in mind, only 15,517 people were murdered in the statistics above with guns...how many other victims left defensless does that make? You do the math...
http://www.policyalmanac.org/crime/archive/firearms_and_crime.shtml
The gun grabbers support keeping those 533,470 victims...victims, by keeping them from owning the most effective means of self-defense against one or more attackers who will more than likely be armed with a gun...and if not a gun, a knife, club or simply their hands...as happened today in Chicago...again...because the people here cannot carry weapons to protect themselves...but the criminals use weapons to rape, brutalize, and murder them...
Soooo...how many people have to be victims each and every day to "not," do anything to stop the shootings in Colorado or Connecticut or stop the suicides of people who have chosen to give up their own life...it looks like at least 533,470 people...
Sooo...let's subtract 30,000 lives for those actually killed by criminals each year, although some of those are criminals killed instead of victims...that leaves 503,470 victims of criminals using guns...that is a lot of people who have to just quietly accept what happens to them because a bunch of gun grabbers want to feel good...
Keep in mind, only 15,517 people were murdered in the statistics above with guns...how many other victims left defensless does that make? You do the math...
One thing for all sides to realize is that once the appeal to law is made, no amount of reasoning matters anymore. One side has convinced itself to a point where they feel that they can force everyone else to do what they want with the guns of government. At that point, no amount of reason matters because the amount of commitment on the issue is so great. One side is literally saying that they would throw the other side into cages for disagreeing with them. That is the real state of discourse in our society. People that engage in that kind of discourse have a serious handicap regarding their rationality because they feel that they can pull the ejection lever on their reason at the ballot box.
You can throw down all of the stats you want, but if another man has decided that they can simply vote your position away, no amount of rational debate matters.
You can throw down all of the stats you want, but if another man has decided that they can simply vote your position away, no amount of rational debate matters.
Tgace
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2003
- Messages
- 7,766
- Reaction score
- 409
Which our founding fathers wrote the 2nd Amendment specifically for in the first place. The whole "only the gvt should..." argument would have the FF's kicking your ***.
Sent from my SCH-I405 using Tapatalk 2
Tgace
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2003
- Messages
- 7,766
- Reaction score
- 409
So its your fear you want to let run your decision making process vs actual risk?
I suppose its similar to peoples fear of flying even though driving a car is a risk orders of magnitude higher...because plane crashes are so scarry as seen on TV and the movies....
Sent from my SCH-I405 using Tapatalk 2
Is that so bad--believeing what you see, or what there is statistical evidence for, rather than what may or may not have happened? Public policy should be based on facts as much as possible, no?
The thing with your friend is we have no way of knowing what would have happened had he not had a gun. Yes, he might've been hurt--or, he may have been mistaken about their intentions and nothing would have happened. (Maybe it was clear in his case, but in general this is certainly true.) Was a police report filed in his case? Did they ever catch his attackers?
Concealed carry is here to stay. I support it, in particular. Of course, in many robberies the robber has the drop on you and you won't have time to access it, and in any event if they only want your money that's your best self-defense option anyway. Where are the verified statistics on gun-wielders stopping robbers? By your account it seems like we should be flooded with such data. But it seems like these anecdotes so rarely result in a gunshot (or even pistol-whipping!) injury to the criminal that results in a hospital report, or a dead or captured criminal for a police report, or even a filed police report on fleeing thugs, to allow for any sort of analysis. It may be that what you see movies doesn't happen so often in real life.
Last edited by a moderator:
I really don't think Thomas Jefferson et al would look at Aurora, Newtown, etc. and say "Well that sucks, but what can you do?" I just don't believe it. That's not the country they envisioned. And they believed problems like that could be solved--Ben Franklin sure would've tried.
I can manage my risk of death by swimming pool by avoiding them--by not owning one. But it's much more difficult to manage my risk of death by a gun. Going into a pool is my choice. Getting shot isn't. Same thing with drunk drivers. If they only killed themselves there'd be less outcry--of course people would want to address it, but it wouldn't be the same.
I choose my risk with pools. Others create risk for me with guns. Big difference.
Drasken
Brown Belt
I agree. However disarming the populace would not be an option for them. The guns are as much to protect us from criminals and foreign invaders as they are to protect us and this countries ideals from a possibility of a corrupt government.
They damn sure would have asked why no one else was armed. If you believe different, you haven't read their writings on firearms.
Here are my stat on people who didn't have the option...but the criminals had the guns...
Now, imagine if there were no guns at all...would these crimes have not happened...of course not...they would still happen. The criminals would simply change tools or attack in larger numbers and pick weaker, more defensless targets...BUT THE ATTACKS WOULD STILL HAPPEN there would just be more dead or injured victims. Now imagine if those 533,470 victims had the ability to use firearms to protect themselves...of course, many of them may have, the stats here don't record the outcome...
What the gun grabbers are saying is that those 533,470 people, which we know of through these stats...should not defend themselves with the most effective tool, but should submit to their attackers and endure whatever those attackers decide to inflict on them...be it robbery, rape, torture, or murder. That is what the gun grabbers support with their stand on guns.
This is a set of stats for one year...
Now, imagine if there were no guns at all...would these crimes have not happened...of course not...they would still happen. The criminals would simply change tools or attack in larger numbers and pick weaker, more defensless targets...BUT THE ATTACKS WOULD STILL HAPPEN there would just be more dead or injured victims. Now imagine if those 533,470 victims had the ability to use firearms to protect themselves...of course, many of them may have, the stats here don't record the outcome...
What the gun grabbers are saying is that those 533,470 people, which we know of through these stats...should not defend themselves with the most effective tool, but should submit to their attackers and endure whatever those attackers decide to inflict on them...be it robbery, rape, torture, or murder. That is what the gun grabbers support with their stand on guns.
This is a set of stats for one year...
Similar threads
Latest Discussions
-
-
-
Aging, health issues and Martial Arts. - Martial Journal- Latest: Kung Fu Wang
-
-
