It is my considered opinion that the moment our government disarms us your government will have nothing to fear in descending on you. This is why you see people of other nations (including your own), begging america not to give up our guns! Once we free ourselves from tyranny, we will then be able to free the rest of the world. The whole world watches this with great interest for a reason!
Originally posted by ajay59
I pose a question to all you anti-gun people. If and when confronted by an armed criminal, (and they will always have the ability to be armed as they do not follow the law) whom has the better chance at survival, me with my weapon, or you with your Lamborfeeties?
But in my never ending quest to end stupidity throughout the world,
Originally posted by ajay59
reply to post by 1littlewolf
But in my never ending quest to end stupidity throughout the world,
So those who believe that force is better deterred by force are stupid?
What about the person confronted by an armed man with no moral value and totally devoid of remorse, who pleads for their life and is brutally murdered for their car or for money to buy drugs? I say to you thinking you can plea to a monster and change him with a tear is stupidity at it;s utmost!
Originally posted by ajay59
reply to post by 1littlewolf
For the purpose of clarity, the idea is for the good people to have the bad people hopelessly out-gunned. If a criminal knows his chances of coming out alive, let alone his chance of coming out on top are slim to none should be a pretty good deterrent. There will always be the "out of their head" bad guys but I think the numbers would dwindle quite rapidly. The best scenario of coarse would be to have no weapons or even animosity towards our fellow man. However, getting the controllers to lay down their weapons , IMHO, is a pipe dream.
It noted that for every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four accidental shootings,
54% of firearm-related deaths occurred in the home where the gun was kept
70.5% of these (firearm-related deaths in the home where the gun was kept) involved handguns
0.5% of these (firearm-related deaths in the home where the gun was kept) involved an intruder shot while attempting entry
1.8% of these (firearm-related deaths in the home where the gun was kept) were judged by police as self-defense
there were 1.3 times as many accidental firearm-related deaths in the home where the gun was kept as self-protection shootings
there were 4.6 times as many criminal firearm-related homicides in the home where the gun was kept as self-protection shootings
there were 37 times as many suicides in the home where the gun was kept as self-protection shootings.
Kellermann published a study comparing robberies, burglaries, assaults, and homicides in Seattle, Washington and Vancouver, British Columbia, a city "similar to Seattle in many ways" that had "adopted a more restrictive approach to the regulation of handguns." The study found that
both cities had similar rates of burglary and robbery
in Seattle, the total rate of assaults with any weapon was modestly higher than that in Vancouver
rates of homicide by means other than guns were not substantially different in the two study communities
the rate of assaults involving firearms was seven times higher in Seattle than in Vancouver
the rate of being murdered by a handgun was 4.8 times higher in Seattle than in Vancouver.
The study concluded that restricting access to handguns may reduce the rate of homicide in a community by reducing the lethality of assaults.
