A response to: " Every possible reason for gun ownership addressed and countered"

reply to post by merkins


We fear government telling us how to live...but regular citizens with guns would never do such a thing, right?

We don't need the government to control and manipulate us through fear, we're apparently quite keen to do that to each other without them interfering...good job.

Originally posted by samerulesapply
reply to post by merkins

 

We fear government telling us how to live...but regular citizens with guns would never do such a thing, right?

We don't need the government to control and manipulate us through fear, we're apparently quite keen to do that to each other without them interfering...good job.

Nobody aid anything about control and intimidation. The fact is; predators only understand strength.

The old saying "Speak softly but carry a very big stick" applies here.

Originally posted by samerulesapply
Is the states the same now as it was when the constitution was created? If the answer is yes...what good is it? If the answer is no, why quote it as a source? Is it gospel?

Are the citizens of the states in the same predicament they were when that constitution was drawn up?

You seem to fail miserably at wrapping your head around one simple concept: It does not matter if it is the same or different now as to when the Constitution was drawn up.

The FACT is: The Constitution has no time limits, no restraints on how and when it is to be applied. NO MATTER WHEN WHY HOW OR WHAT has changed. GET IT?

reply to post by samerulesapply


yes it is gospel its what our country was founded on and there is a reason its in the bill of rights at the first 10 as they are generaly considered some of the more important ones,do you not like your magnacarta? or your own founding documents?

reply to post by samerulesapply


I'm sorry but I'm not sure I understand the point your making.

My view is that government shouldn't be involved in a whole host of topics regarding human life. It's just by coincidence that one of those matters happens to be guns. The government has no right to tell people they cant have a gun or own pretty much anything. It's morally wrong for them to even try. That's what freedom is.

Originally posted by RalagaNarHallas
reply to post by samerulesapply

 

yes it is gospel its what our country was founded on and there is a reason its in the bill of rights at the first 10 as they are generaly considered some of the more important ones,do you not like your magnacarta? or your own founding documents?

Amen! It IS Gospel.

The US constitution is the end all, be all. It is not left to "interpretation" as the language is quite clear. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!

reply to post by LightCraft


Good thread OP
I appreciate everyone of your responses to the comments. I agree with all of them and couldn't have responded better. Thank you for articulating what I would have liked to have said. S & F

Originally posted by samerulesapply
Is the states the same now as it was when the constitution was created? If the answer is yes...what good is it? If the answer is no, why quote it as a source? Is it gospel?

Are the citizens of the states in the same predicament they were when that constitution was drawn up?

This is always the opinion of the person who has never bothered to pick up a history book. You live in the now and have zero perspective. Just because something hasn't happened in a few years doesn't mean it cannot happen in the future. There have been many times throughout history where people have felt relative safety from their government and outside forces only to be knocked over the head with reality.

Lets also add that the author of the other thread is most likely a British subject.

Subject

They have never had any real conception of what it is to be free and therefore as they have always been subject to British rule. They are obviously content with what they are told they can have and are happy to live out their meager existence. This is why so many British subjects got kicked out of this country a few hundred years ago and haven't really ever done much sense. British empire me arse. They didn't have the will to fight. They had no wanton for the cause such as the cause for liberty so they lost.

Your thread is great btw. The other one is a load of nonsense. Unless comments by someone who knows not of which they speak makes sense. I might as well begin commenting on the finer points of the Labour Party platform or the significance of the monarchy since I know about that as little as the other poster knows about the US.

But then again. It is a free Internet (thanks US for creating it and keeping it free) so I guess I can make any thread about whatever I want. Facts be damned.

Originally posted by pale5218
reply to post by LightCraft

 

Good thread OP
I appreciate everyone of your responses to the comments. I agree with all of them and couldn't have responded better. Thank you for articulating what I would have liked to have said. S & F

No thanks necessary!

It is my hope that we all can come together and sift through the useless and troublesome issues and get to the real truth. I know the topic is an emotional one for many, trying to be rational in times like these can be difficult.

Thus far it appears that the truth is: Guns save lives and the positives far outweigh the negatives when looking at the whole.

Originally posted by Sandcastler

Originally posted by samerulesapply
Is the states the same now as it was when the constitution was created? If the answer is yes...what good is it? If the answer is no, why quote it as a source? Is it gospel?

Are the citizens of the states in the same predicament they were when that constitution was drawn up?

This is always the opinion of the person who has never bothered to pick up a history book. You live in the now and have zero perspective. Just because something hasn't happened in a few years doesn't mean it cannot happen in the future. There have been many times throughout history where people have felt relative safety from their government and outside forces only to be knocked over the head with reality.

Sad but true, all too true. The Kurds of Northern Iraq are a perfect example of this.

Originally posted by Bakatono
Lets also add that the author of the other thread is most likely a British subject.

Subject

They have never had any real conception of what it is to be free and therefore as they have always been subject to British rule. They are obviously content with what they are told they can have and are happy to live out their meager existence. This is why so many British subjects got kicked out of this country a few hundred years ago and haven't really ever done much sense. British empire me arse. They didn't have the will to fight. They had no wanton for the cause such as the cause for liberty so they lost.

Your thread is great btw. The other one is a load of nonsense. Unless comments by someone who knows not of which they speak makes sense. I might as well begin commenting on the finer points of the Labour Party platform or the significance of the monarchy since I know about that as little as the other poster knows about the US.

But then again. It is a free Internet (thanks US for creating it and keeping it free) so I guess I can make any thread about whatever I want. Facts be damned.

Yeah facts be damned is right! It's too bad people ignore the facts over emotion. And we all know emotional responses are directly related to perception. I.e. "If all I have is a hammer, everything starts looking like a nail" It's too bad that many people can not see things from both sides as they are so skewed to one side, everyone suffers as a result.

OP, hats off to you, excellent post and replies. If I may, I would like to add a point or two for your list of items for having firearms.

Those that do not know and understand history, are doomed to repeat it.

Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone This is an excellent NY Times article that says the various police departments do NOT have an "obligation" to "protect" citizens, etc. They are mop-up / peace keepers.. Not crime prevention, or body guards.

He who sacrifices Liberty, for Security, deserves neither.

President Reagan, just a few weeks after the attempt on his life, cited the factoid of "over 20,000 Federal, state, and city gun laws are already on the books". The first instance of this was in 1961. during a congressional Hearing where a Demo from MI made the initial comment. Either way, 20,000 gun laws is still a hefty number, and should further provide proof that no matter what laws are written, and enforced, someone intent on committing a crime, will ignore the law.. You can legislate the world to hell, won't stop those who willfully ignore the law.

Here is also another excellent vid from Ben Stein:

Ben Stein: Stricter gun laws won't cut shootings

All it takes for evil to win, is for good men to do nothing..

(Yes I have made a couple quotes in this post, from famous people, but I am feeling a little lazy, and care not to cite sources, as I have not always made the quote proper for those people's historical commentaries).

-Cyg

Originally posted by Cygnis
OP, hats off to you, excellent post and replies. If I may, I would like to add a point or two for your list of items for having firearms.

Those that do not know and understand history, are doomed to repeat it.

Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone This is an excellent NY Times article that says the various police departments do NOT have an "obligation" to "protect" citizens, etc. They are mop-up / peace keepers.. Not crime prevention, or body guards.

He who sacrifices Liberty, for Security, deserves neither.

President Reagan, just a few weeks after the attempt on his life, cited the factoid of "over 20,000 Federal, state, and city gun laws are already on the books". The first instance of this was in 1961. during a congressional Hearing where a Demo from MI made the initial comment. Either way, 20,000 gun laws is still a hefty number, and should further provide proof that no matter what laws are written, and enforced, someone intent on committing a crime, will ignore the law.. You can legislate the world to hell, won't stop those who willfully ignore the law.

Here is also another excellent vid from Ben Stein:

Ben Stein: Stricter gun laws won't cut shootings

All it takes for evil to win, is for good men to do nothing..

(Yes I have made a couple quotes in this post, from famous people, but I am feeling a little lazy, and care not to cite sources, as I have not always made the quote proper for those people's historical commentaries).

-Cyg

Excellent additions to the thread! Thank you much S&F!

Don't even sweat it, he doesn't live in America or pay taxes here or is able to cast a vote here...what Iknowstuff thinks can stay where ever he is/down trodden by his government.

Originally posted by Hr2burn
Don't even sweat it, he doesn't live in America or pay taxes here or is able to cast a vote here...what Iknowstuff thinks can stay where ever he is/down trodden by his government.

Thankfully! The last thing we need in America is more people who are willing to be blindly lead by inexperience and emotion. It is a recipe for disaster. The sad thing is: many of the most outspoken against the second amendment have absolutely no concept of the sacrifices of our forefathers and the men and women who have vowed to protect our nation in the Military, Law Enforcement and even every day concerned citizens.

They also have lived such sheltered privileged lives and are so removed from living a tough life & having to work hard, they can not sympathize with people who have. It must be nice to walk through life completely numb, only having to worry about who is winning on American Idol, what brand of clothing mommy & daddy bought them and what their favorite bands are doing.

If we ever had a situation where we were forced to survive like our ancestors did, there would be a lot of suffering in those circles, they have absolutely no idea what hard work is or what is really important at the end of the day.

reply to post by LightCraft


Ill respond to all this here but I find it kind of rude you didnt post this in my thread or at least U2U me to let me know.
Ive been over most of this in the other thread but well try again

Your interpretation is absolutely incorrect "armed citizenry" is included. Specifically:

Yes but with a comma not full stop, you do understand how punctuation changes the meaning of a sentence I assume

Woman, without her, man is nothing
Or
Woman without her man, is nothing

It can easily be viewed that they were clarifying what a militia was, the fact its ambguous is evidenced by the fact the supreme court had to rule on its meaning

Is it really out of date? I think not. We have had multiple attacks on US soil in the past decade.

Yes you have, BY US CITIZENS USING GUNS THAT AT ONE STAGE WERE PURCHASED LEGALLY!!!!!
Attacks on US soil makes it sound like outside invaders

Not to mention international movements such as the islamo-fascist hate groups trying to impose Sharia law in the US populace.

You know thats never gonna happen and what you think this has to do with guns is beyond me

Not very many. See the great thing about the US Military is the fact that our Service members are protected by the US constitution. Any US service member can refuse to carry out an Unlawful Order or one that violates the Constitution of the US. There are also what are known as conscientious objectors which is: "an individual who has claimed the right to refuse to perform military service" on the grounds of freedom of thought, conscience, and/or religion.

Great, it sounds like we agree that the excuse "we need it to defend ourselves from our government" is complete crap.

There would be no possible way that the US Government could "pull out all the stops". They can't just carpet bomb their own cities and civilians. A National scale guerrilla war would quickly exhaust every military resource available and would be unsustainable militarily.

We both agree this is redundant as your military wouldnt attack you but for arguments sake Ill answer. They wouldnt need to carpet bomb, your first guerrilla strike would be the end of you, satellites would track you and drones would finish you off while you were slipping away.

Not always. Predators, tyrants and dictators only understand one thing: FORCE. Peace is great, and I am all for it! In an ideal world everyone could sit down and sing kumbaya and make everything better. This is not the world you or I live in.

You have a democracy, if you let a tyrant in either through voting or allowing the wool to be pulled over your eyes via rigged elections or a coup then guns wont help much.
Most of you seem to think it will come to war with your gov, if you think that remove your gov via civil disobedience. Even you have to acknowledge this has a higher chance of success than than armed conflict

Norway 77 people? Finland? Germany, Switzerland

1 shooting in recent memory is a tragedy, 1 every few months is a trend and a problem. name another industrialized nation that has massacres a few times a year?
here, Ill list them for you


Oh hang on there arent any.
Why you would even argue this point is beyond me

These guns that show up in these crimes are usually stolen. So how can you justify taking them from people who obtain them legally? You can't because good people follow the law, bad people do not.

And who are they stolen from? the good legal gun owners of course, I seriously cant believe this, how can you not see this is the problem. These psychos are getting the guns because they are so accessible

Uhhh McVeigh, Kracynski? You're pulling these stats out of your back side. Sources please and thanks. Stop posting opinion as fact.

.

There were no stats in the quote you put, Mcveigh and Kracynski were both American citizens, neither of them were mass shooters so I fail to see how this is relevant

That is a pretty lame argument.

Care to elaborate on that statement? most of your fellow gun nuts agreed with it 100%

It is very easy to get a gun anywhere in the world. And criminals do have the resources to buy them, how else would they get them? If they don't, they just steal them. Your 'doubts' don't constitute FACTS.

You really are quite simple arent you,
I stated it was easy enough to get a weapon if you want one regardless of where you are in fact it almost seems like you cut and pasted what I said there. As for my doubts, its a FACT that in all the school shootings that have taken place the guns were either purchased legally or stolen from parents who purchased them legally.
Not a great argument for legal gun ownership in any logical persons mind

reply to post by LightCraft

You're absolutely positively wrong. By and large most gun deaths in America are Suicides followed by Homicides and then Accidents. The amount of people who die in any sort of firearms related incidents are dwarfed many times over by things like Doctors negligence, Motor vehicle accidents, influenza, cancer, stroke & alcoholism. Funny how we don't see a push to ban Doctors, booze and the like.

*sigh*

yes lets ban doctors

I cant believe people still use that ridiculous "this kills that kills lets ban them" argument, surely when its dribbling out your brain it sounds absurd.
Not sure how many times Ive said this but lets say it again just for kicks
A GUNS ONLY PURPOSE IS TO KILL!!!! when a car, Dr, knife, fork, piece of wood etc etc kills it has been misused.

Not a chance. Where there is a will there is a way. It is as easy as heading down to your crack corner with a wad of cash. We need to get tougher on criminals not good people.

As I stated many times, yes a crim anywhere will get a gun if they want one but as it stands most of them dont have to try very hard at all, taking guns out of circulation makes it harder for the crim and also the crack corner dealer to get access to them. All these guns commiting crimes in the US WERE ONCE SOLD LEGALLY!!!!!

The first stat says nothing about "gun crimes" it is obviously highlighting the fact that Gunshot victims who were most likely perpetrating a crime when they were shot had been arrested previously. Says nothing about gun crimes. The 64% had actual convictions and they averaged 11 arrests! See a common theme here, these bad guys are repeat offenders and have no regard for the law. The "system" obviously hasn't reformed them, maybe the 9mm did. Permanently.

Are you deliberately missing my points?
No one else has struggled with them like you and yet you felt the need to write a thread on it.
My point was and the data clearly shows that the vast majority of gun crime is committed by criminals against criminals.

The fact remains that there are many incidents where the bad guys come after good people. And guns save their lives. Criminals avoid armed citizens. After all, they don't want to be hurt on the job.

I wont argue that, I would love to see statistics on the amount of accidental deaths VS lives saved with guns.
I sincerely doubt the net gain would be significant

"Kennesaw, GA. In 1982, this suburb of Atlanta passed a law requiring heads of households to keep at least one firearm in the house. The residential burglary rate subsequently dropped 89% in Kennesaw, compared to the modest 10.4% drop in Georgia as a whole."

Its a small town, small towns always have lower crime rates, this was also addressed in the other thread but something I just learned is that since 92 crime rates are rising.
the rate of gun ownership did not increase in Kennesaw. Read the actual law or better yet read my actual thread where this is addressed

Rising crime in Kennesaw

"Guns are used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year—or about 6,850 times a day.(20) This means that each year, firearms are used more than 80 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives."

Those figures were extrapolated from a phone survey of 2000 people, I wont go into it here but its been addressed in the other thread, these figures are nonsense, the same or similar survey said guns stopped 5500 rapes and 11,000 murders a day I think my rebuttal to this is on about page 12

I have yet to see conclusive evidence by any credible source as to what these numbers actually are. The ATF let guns 'walk' into the hands of cartels, can you really "trust" their stats?

LMFAO

Aphone survey of 2000 people who were most likely lying is credible but the ATF isnt

Did anyone who starred or flagged you actually read what you wrote

These numbers are so low they are almost non existent.

Is that your opinion or do you have facts to back it up?

LOL, you read one article from a biased news outlet and you're an expert? Laughable at best.

So what exactly is a credible source? apparently not the ATF, hang on Ill get another phone survey done for you, you seem to like those

[

reply to post by LightCraft


quote]
Tools like Guns and swords have many useful purposes other than killing. See: Competitive shooting like USPSA, IDPA, Skeet, Trap, High Power, Bullseye, Hunting, Fencing, Martial arts


Hardly many but ill give you this one as its the first intelligent thing youve written.
How many of the 100 million gun owners in the US do you realistically believe are into this sort of thing?

You're right, the criminally insane will always find a way to do harm no matter what the means. The China incident was a stroke of sheer luck. If the man had been any more competent there would have been a different story to report.

Or if he had access too guns

You can easily ring up a high body count with a car or a bomb or by arson. There are a number of ways to get it done, it's not the car, the bomb or the matches fault, it's the sicko using it. Same with guns.

Yet it doesnt happen, if these school and mall killers wanted to take out maximum people then logically they would use bombs or ... ahem... cars psychos seem to like guns

"Washington, D.C. has, perhaps, the most restrictive gun control laws in the country, and yet it is frequently the Murder Capital of the nation. In the 25 years following the DC gun ban, its murder rate INCREASED 51 percent, even while the national rate DECREASED 36 percent"

Your facts are wrong:
he says quoting an article 10 years old, the increase in murders were a result of a crack epidemic and now it is lower than it was prior to the gun ban, its still high but this is acknowledged (except by gun nuts looking to twist data to suit their agenda) to be a socio economic issue and has nothing to do with a lack of legal firearms.

Yes criminals do have guns and therefore I do need them. I refuse to be a victim, I refuse to let my family fall prey to ruthless criminals. Your claim that more guns makes it easier for criminals to get them is a moot point. The number of legally obtained guns falling into criminal hands is minuscule compared to the number of guns in circulation in the US.

You fail to acknowledge that the number of illegal firearms that werent once legal isnt minuscule, its practically non existant.
Once again are you deliberately missing every point Im making?

You seem to be hung up on this ONE anomaly where someone slashed 20 people and they miraculously survived. Take a look at the grim figures of machete gangs in Africa & Jamaica. That will really open your eyes as to the lethality of knives.

I never said or even implied knives werent lethal and have said many times anything can be lethal if MISUSED, are you suggested knives are more lethal than guns?

The fact is these mentally challenged people are slipping through the cracks. There is a lack of guidance and a lack of parenting and a huge lack of responsibility. If people actually spent time with their children they could identify and treat these issues. Nowadays it's easier to plop them in front of a TV , game console or iPod than to actually act like a parent. pop culture and media isn't a substitute for parenting.

2nd intelligent thing youve said, unfortunately for your argument it doesnt rebut anything I said

Knives more deadly: According to the FBI, people have a much greater chance of being killed by a knife or a blunt object than by any kind of rifle, including an "assault rifle."(109) In Chicago, the chance is 67 times greater. That is, a person is 67 times more likely to be stabbed or beaten to death in Chicago than to be murdered by an "assault rifle."

You do realise those stats are from 20 years ago dont you?
Curious if those stats included handguns or just rifles but anyway in 2010 guns accounted for over 80% of homicides, check the link

Chicago crime stats

Acceptable? What's acceptable here you're saying the variation and upswing of gun crime in the UK is 'acceptable' yet you touted the "DC Gun bans as saving an ESTIMATED 47 people over a 20 year period"? WTF?

Acceptable sadistically variation!!!! do you understand what is meant by that? it means the sats didnt show a significant increase or decrease, the way crime was reported changed figures and the recent increase in violence has nothing to do with a lack of guns, as any Pom will tell you (or even official statistics) the upswing in violent crime is gang on gang related and also perpetrated by immigrants for the most part. Most of whom were not around prior to the gun ban.

Guns are used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year—or about 6,850 times a day.(20) This means that each year, firearms are used more than 80 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives. * Of the 2.5 million times citizens use their guns to defend themselves every year, the overwhelming majority merely brandish their gun or fire a warning shot to scare off their attackers. Less than 8% of the time, a citizen will kill or wound his/her attacker.

As stated earlier this is from a phone survey and is nonsense

You can't argue with the numbers. You're grasping for straws here.

Grasping at straws

Coming from a guy who uses 20 year old data and passes it off like it was recent

Well thank you for your permission to hunt Mr. end-all-be-all. And you're wrong about your "bugger all" theory in 2 states alone there are more than 2,3000,000 hunters. Hardly bugger all.

Maybe listed as hunters but that many active hunters and you would have no animals left to hunt pretty quickly

And as for your "only acceptable reason to own a gun" comment: The fact of the matter is: You are able to have your opinions here in the USA because there are good people standing by with guns ready to do bad things to bad people in order to insure that the USA citizens are able to enjoy their lives.

Good for you guys
While the good guys have guns there are bad and psycho people waiting to "borrow" them to do those bad things that you good guys need to watch out for

If there were not vigilant people standing ready, people would not have the same freedoms they do today. And because ether are so many armed citizens, that keeps our Government in check and renders them ineffective of forcibly taking our rights away. Period. Thankfully, you are not American.

Oh my god, this one always makes me laugh, so how well are those guns protecting your freedoms right now?
having travel restricted and get molested at airports, illegally having your communications monitored, being able to be detained indefinately without charge, yeah its lucky you all have guns or it could be bad

You have no clue as to what you're talking about and no concept of freedom. I want the best tools for any job that may arise and each one of these guns are tools and serve a purpose. You can't try and limit my effectiveness when criminals have no regard for my life.

I was talking about hunting you silly person!!!!

You seriously didnt even worry about the content of this thread did you?
You knew if it was pro gun no one would read it and just star and flag away.
And for the last time not trying to limit or restrict anyone, just sharing my opinion and trying to cleear up misconceptions, unfortunately most gun nuts seem to share you lack of logic and shoe size IQ

Once again, your "doubts" do not constitute FACTS. These people who commit these crimes are ruthless predators and are very calculating. They choose their targets based on a likelihood of little to no opposition. They wouldn't be very effective otherwise. Hello, common sense? You'll notice that Adam Lanza stopped shooting kids and took his own life when he knew armed people were closing in on him. Otherwise the carnage would have continued.

Ok so how is wrote you wrote more FACTUAL than what I wrote, how exactly do you know thats why he took his life? did he tell someone "Oh the police are here, better kill myself before they do". I dont think so.
These people arent predators, they are sick individuals. I spose youll say the Columbine kids shot up the school coz it was an easy target and had nothing to do with wanting to get even for the bullying

When you take into consideration the number of guns in the US these statistics shrink exponentially. Compared to the number of guns in circulation per capita vs. violent crimes, the USA would be much farther down the list. Your perception is incredibly skewed. Again grasping for straws.

SERIOUSLY!!!!!!!!!
WTF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
My perception is skewed???????

Please tell me your trolling, please tell me if your being serious your one of the people who arent allowed to own firearms?

So the fact the USA has so many guns it makes it OK or acceptable that the death rate is as high as it is???

Who the feck flagged this drivel