Quote :

"I've left more substance dripping out of your mother than you have in this thread"

so we're supposed to take you seriously?

12/18/2012 12:18:43 PM

Quote :

"In GA, an officer was being beaten by the person he was trying to arrest. Most people drove by. One person stopped, and shot the BG. The officer credits that person for being alive today. "

Good story, here's another one: Once upon a time Adam Lanza took a legally acquired semiautomatic rifle from his mother and shot 27 people dead in Connecticut. Good guys: 1, Bad Guys: 27.

Quote :

"Now you are on to personal attacks again? Against my taste no less, and you don't even know me. I guess you don't like beer commercials either that have those pretty women in them? And you don't like sports cars either?"

Beer, pretty women, and sports cars are not killing machines. Killing machines should be treated with sober respect and not conflated with juvenile machismo or a valid compensation for insecurities.

Folks like Ted Nugent:



For whom guns are a toy and a means to piss off their stereotype of liberals, do not demonstrate sober respect, they demonstrate childishness and gun ownership pride for all the wrong reasons.

Quote :

"I do think it is difficult for ANYONE to try and train for a shooting spree situation, which is why the police have units specifically for that, and do active shooters training."

Is it just difficult, or also dangerous, to handle a shooting spree without training?

Quote :

"VA is one of those, where you might get expelled, but you would be alive if it was needed. "

In the best case scenario. Other scenarios might end up with you shooting an innocent or being shot yourself.

Quote :

"Though it does bring up the point again: What makes a person on campus different than the person at the grocery store, Target, movie theater, soccer field, etc? They are legally allowed to carry and have the gov't issued permit that says so."

Because a campus is generally kept as a semi-closed space for the express purpose of cultivating a safe and productive learning environment. That and there's a shitload of alcohol, drug use, and adolescents of questionable emotional stability and maturity.

Quote :

"Now, on to what you said that I can't possibly do.... My ideas and stuff...."

You could have just said "add more guns" instead of typing all of that up.

[Edited on December 18, 2012 at 12:22 PM. Reason : .]

12/18/2012 12:20:45 PM

Quote :

"I absolutely, 100% disagree with all of this. Mandatory sentences removes the possibility of any extenuating circumstances. And the death penalty with no appeals and the method of death chosen by the victim's family? I don't have time right now to point out everything I see wrong with that. "

That is fine to disagree. Those are my ideas.
Mandatory sentences does not remove extenuating circumstance. Just like now, it is on the DA to assign charge, and jury to convict. Yes, that is putting faith in the gov't again.

I know people will see a lot wrong with it, and "not the wild west" etc, but I am positive there would be a drop in crimes committed.

12/18/2012 12:23:02 PM

(^^^I'm the only person not jerking off to dumb corollary arguments right now)

[Edited on December 18, 2012 at 12:24 PM. Reason : .^^^]

12/18/2012 12:23:42 PM

Quote :

"Other scenarios might end up with you shooting an innocent or being shot yourself"

if you're unarmed, pretty much all scenarios end up with innocent people and/or yourself being shot

12/18/2012 12:24:14 PM

Quote :

"Mandatory sentences does not remove extenuating circumstance."

seems like your understanding of "mandatory" is on par with the anti's understanding of "infringe"

12/18/2012 12:25:40 PM

neuseriverrat- the next sentence is important. If convicted of a crime, there is a mandatory sentence. The DA would be responsible for bringing the charges as needed. The jury would still have to convict as well.

Quote :

"Good story, here's another one: Once upon a time Adam Lanza took a legally acquired semiautomatic rifle from his mother and shot 27 people dead in Connecticut. Good guys: 1, Bad Guys: 27."

So a guy with a stolen gun kills people. This happens quite a bit.
Guys with guns stop crimes somewhere between 300,000 and 2 million times a year in the US.

Quote :

"Beer, pretty women, and sports cars are not killing machines. Killing machines should be treated with sober respect and not conflated with juvenile machismo or a valid compensation for insecurities."

I would say that beer, pretty women, and sports cars are responsible for a lot of deaths. I would even say that they cause more deaths than guns. Further, they are directly tied to "conflated with juvenile machismo or a valid compensation for insecurities"

Quote :

"For whom guns are a toy and a means to piss off their stereotype of liberals"

This is a perfectly legitimate reason for ownership

Quote :

"Is it just difficult, or also dangerous, to handle a shooting spree without training?"

If you are there, it is already dangerous, but not by your choice.

Quote :

"Because a campus is generally kept as a semi-closed space for the express purpose of cultivating a safe and productive learning environment. That and there's a shitload of alcohol, drug use, and adolescents of questionable emotional stability and maturity."

In what reality is campus semi-closed? Where is is stated that it is a safe environment? The no gun signs? And if we remember to look at laws and not emotion, the alcohol, drugs, and adolescents argument goes away. Now look, emotional stability again as a problem. How about we work on that instead of taking guns away from law abiding people.

Quote :

"You could have just said "add more guns" instead of typing all of that up."

I could have said follow the constitution, but that would have confused you based on your previous posts.


[Edited on December 18, 2012 at 12:34 PM. Reason : .]

12/18/2012 12:31:22 PM

Quote :

"if you're unarmed, pretty much all scenarios end up with innocent people and/or yourself being shot"

None of them end with you personally adding to the body count.

12/18/2012 12:31:52 PM

^So you are of the do nothing mentality?
Better to get shot than do anything?

[Edited on December 18, 2012 at 12:36 PM. Reason : .]

12/18/2012 12:36:22 PM

Quote :

"Guys with guns stop crimes somewhere between 300,000 and 2 million times a year in the US."

You mean police officers?

Quote :

"Further, they are directly tied to "conflated with juvenile machismo or a valid compensation for insecurities""

That's why I brought them up. Those are bad things for guns to be tied to (juvenile machismo and insecurity). That's why it's bad that you tie guns to things that are directly tied to those things.

Quote :

"This is a perfectly legitimate reason for ownership"

I assume you're talking legalistically because I must have missed the part in the NRA's manifesto when they said "being a spiteful, childish dickwad" is one of the vital reasons why we have the right to wave guns around flamboyantly.

Quote :

"If you are there, it is already dangerous, but not by your choice."

Way to avoid the point.

Quote :

"Now look, emotional stability again as a problem. How about we work on that instead of taking guns away from law abiding people."

Great. How about instituting universal, free healthcare, so there are exactly zero barriers to getting help when you need it?

Quote :

"I could have said follow the constitution, but that would have confused you based on your previous posts."

Woah ho look out guys we got us a badass here!

12/18/2012 12:39:18 PM

mandatory sentencing for any crime is a terrible terrible idea

12/18/2012 12:39:53 PM

Quote :

"So you are of the do nothing mentality? Better to get shot than do anything?"

I'm of the "don't further endanger innocent people" mentality.

12/18/2012 12:40:01 PM

I can see how this might not make sense to people with a "I can do no wrong" mentality.

12/18/2012 12:41:46 PM

i can see how this might not make sense to people with a victim mentality

12/18/2012 12:52:12 PM

^^way to avoid the question....

Quote :

"You mean police officers?"

So I do need to spell everything out for you. I should have figured that out based on your responses to this point. Private citizens use firearms between 300,000 and 2 million times a year to prevent or stop crimes. The exact number can not be determined exactly, as many uses go unreported.

Quote :

"That's why I brought them up. Those are bad things for guns to be tied to (juvenile machismo and insecurity). That's why it's bad that you tie guns to things that are directly tied to those things."

This makes no sense. You said beer, girls and cars don't kill people. I replied that they lead to many deaths and do relate to your points. Now you say that I tie guns to them? Something is wrong with the logic there.

Quote :

"Great. How about instituting universal, free healthcare, so there are exactly zero barriers to getting help when you need it?"

Who pays for that? I already pay over 30% of my income in taxes.

Quote :

"Woah ho look out guys we got us a badass here!"

Not constructive to the discussion in any way, regardless of how true it is.

[Edited on December 18, 2012 at 12:55 PM. Reason : .]

12/18/2012 12:54:57 PM

Quote :

"Private citizens use firearms between 300,000 and 2 million times a year to prevent or stop crimes."

Ok, I'm curious. Where is this number coming from?

12/18/2012 12:56:33 PM

One source:

According to the National Self Defense Survey conducted by Florida State University criminologists in 1994, the rate of Defensive Gun Uses can be projected nationwide to approximately 2.5 million per year -- one Defensive Gun Use every 13 seconds.

Among 15.7% of gun defenders interviewed nationwide during The National Self Defense Survey, the defender believed that someone "almost certainly" would have died had the gun not been used for protection -- a life saved by a privately held gun about once every 1.3 minutes. (In another 14.2% cases, the defender believed someone "probably" would have died if the gun hadn't been used in defense.)

In 83.5% of these successful gun defenses, the attacker either threatened or used force first -- disproving the myth that having a gun available for defense wouldn't make any difference.

In 91.7% of these incidents the defensive use of a gun did not wound or kill the criminal attacker (and the gun defense wouldn't be called "newsworthy" by newspaper or TV news editors). In 64.2% of these gun-defense cases, the police learned of the defense, which means that the media could also find out and report on them if they chose to.

In 73.4% of these gun-defense incidents, the attacker was a stranger to the intended victim. (Defenses against a family member or intimate were rare -- well under 10%.) This disproves the myth that a gun kept for defense will most likely be used against a family member or someone you love.

In over half of these gun defense incidents, the defender was facing two or more attackers -- and three or more attackers in over a quarter of these cases. (No means of defense other than a firearm -- martial arts, pepper spray, or stun guns -- gives a potential victim a decent chance of getting away uninjured when facing multiple attackers.)

In 79.7% of these gun defenses, the defender used a concealable handgun. A quarter of the gun defenses occured in places away from the defender's home.

"Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun," by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, in The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, Northwestern University School of Law, Volume 86, Number 1, Fall, 1995


Another:

Roughly 16,272 murders were committed in the United States during 2008. Of these, about 10,886 or 67% were committed with firearms.[11]
* A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 0.5% of households had members who had used a gun for defense during a situation in which they thought someone "almost certainly would have been killed" if they "had not used a gun for protection." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 162,000 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard."[12]
* Based on survey data from the U.S. Department of Justice, roughly 5,340,000 violent crimes were committed in the United States during 2008. These include simple/aggravated assaults, robberies, sexual assaults, rapes, and murders.[13] [14] [15] Of these, about 436,000 or 8% were committed by offenders visibly armed with a gun.[16
* Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18]
* A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 3.5% of households had members who had used a gun "for self-protection or for the protection of property at home, work, or elsewhere." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 1,029,615 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard."[19]
* A 1994 survey conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that Americans use guns to frighten away intruders who are breaking into their homes about 498,000 times per year.[20]
* A 1982 survey of male felons in 11 state prisons dispersed across the U.S. found:[21]
• 34% had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"
• 40% had decided not to commit a crime because they "knew or believed that the victim was carrying a gun"
• 69% personally knew other criminals who had been "scared off, shot at, wounded, or captured by an armed victim"[22]

Another:
One effort to quantify the benefit of firearm ownership estimates that guns are used for self-defense in the United States as many as 2.5 million times each year. (1)
The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) yields a more conservative estimate, approximately 100,000 defensive gun uses (DGU) each year. (2)
Estimating the number of times guns are used for protection is a difficult task with inconclusive validity. The former estimate, for example, extrapolates low prevalence events - that is, few survey respondents report having used a gun to defend themselves - and can yield gross overestimates of the population that actually used a gun in defense. (3)
Conversely, the NCVS does not ask about all crimes nor does it specifically ask respondents if they had used a gun in self-defense. (4)


Kleck G, Bates D. Chapter 7. In: Armed: New Perspectives on Gun Control. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2001.
Cook P, Ludwig J, Hemenway D. The gun debate's new mythical number: how many defensive uses per year?Journal of policy analysis and management, 1997;16(3):463-9.
Hemenway D. Survey research and self-defense gun use: an explanation of extreme overestimates. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 2002;87(2).
Kleck G, Gertz M. Armed resistance to crime: the prevention and nature of self-defense with a gun. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology.1995;86:150-87]


More:

Approximate number of firearms in the USA = 400,000,000
Latest stats from the CDC...
(2009) Homicide deaths by Firearms = 11,493
So...
0.0000287325% of firearms are used to murder a person in the USA.


"Firearm Use By Offenders", NCJ 189369, https://www.ncjrs.gov/app/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=189369; 1997 survey data published 2001 •

According to the 1997 Survey of State Prison Inmates, among those possessing a gun, the source of the gun was from -
a flea market or gun show for fewer than 2%
a retail store or pawnshop for about 12%
family, friends, a street buy, or an illegal source for 80%

During the offense that brought them to prison, 15% of State inmates and 13% of Federal inmates carried a handgun, and about 2%, a military-style semiautomatic gun.
On average, State inmates possessing a firearm received sentences of 18 years, while those without a weapon had an average sentence of 12 years.
Among prisoners carrying a firearm during their crime, 40% of State inmates and 56% of Federal inmates received a sentence enhancement because of the firearm.

[Edited on December 18, 2012 at 1:09 PM. Reason : .]

12/18/2012 1:05:07 PM

Quote :

"Who pays for that? I already pay over 30% of my income in taxes."

How about a 500% tax on guns and ammunition!

12/18/2012 1:08:16 PM

So tax it to non-existence is your answer?

12/18/2012 1:11:05 PM

Yeah, that self defense survey is probably full of shit.
http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/Hemenway1.htm

I sure see the "13 seconds" malarkey repeated ad nauseum on every gun proponent site though. You'd think they'd have something better than a debunked 20 year old survey.

Quote :

"In 1992, Kleck and Gertz conducted a national random-digit-dial survey of five thousand dwelling units, asking detailed questions about self-defense gun use. [13] Their estimates of civilian self-defense gun use range from 1 million to 2.5 million times per year. [14] The 2.5 million figure is the one they believe to be most accurate and the one Kleck has publicized, so that figure will be discussed in this paper. K-G derive their 2.5 million estimate from the fact that 1.33% of the individuals surveyed reported that they themselves used a gun in self-defense during the past year; [15] in other words, about 66 people out of 5000 reported such a use. Extrapolating the 1.33% figure to the entire population of almost 200 million adults gives 2.5 million uses. Many problems exist with the survey conducted by Kleck and Gertz. A deficiency in their article is that they do not provide detailed information about their survey methodology or discuss its many limitations. For example, the survey was conducted by a small firm run by Professor Gertz. The interviewers presumably knew both the purpose of the survey and the staked-out position of the principal investigator regarding the expected results. The article states that when a person answered, the interview was completed 61% of the time. [16] But what happened when there was a busy signal, an answering machine or no answer? If no one was interviewed at a high percentage of the initially selected homes, the survey cannot be relied on to yield results representative of the population. Interviewers do not appear to have questioned a random individual at a given telephone number, but rather asked to speak to the male head of the household. [17] If that man was not at home, the caller [Page 1434] interviewed the adult who answered the phone. [18] Although this approach is sometimes used in telephone surveys to reduce expense, it does not yield a representative sample of the population. The 2.5 million estimate is based on individuals rather than households. [19] But the survey is randomized by dwelling unit rather than by individual, so the findings cannot simply be extrapolated to the national population. Respondents who are the only adults in a household will receive too much weight. K-G oversampled males and individuals from the South and West. [20] The reader is presented with weighted rather than actual data, yet the authors do not explain their weighting technique. K-G claim their weighted data provide representative information for the entire country, [21] but they appear to have obtained various anomalous results. For example, they find that only 38% of households in the nation possess a gun, which is low, outside the range of all other national surveys. [22] They find that only 8.9% of the adult population is black, [23] when 1992 Census data indicate that 12.5% of individuals were black. [24] The above limitations are serious. However, it is two other aspects of the survey that, when combined together, lead to an enormous overestimation of self-defense gun use: the fact that K-G are trying (1) to measure a very low probability event which (2) has positive social desirability response bias. The problem is one of misclassification. "

Also this:

Quote :

"Approximate number of firearms in the USA = 400,000,000 Latest stats from the CDC... (2009) Homicide deaths by Firearms = 11,493 So... 0.0000287325% of firearms are used to murder a person in the USA."

C'mon, really? You think you'll get away with that?
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10tbl01.xls

There were only 15,399 "murder and non-negligent manslaughter" instances in 2009. 11,493 were homicide by firearms. That means of all the people that killed someone else non-negligently 3/4 were from a gun.

It would be just as meaningless for me to divide the number of knives that have killed people by the total number of knives (which I'm sure would give a much smaller ratio than you've given).

[Edited on December 18, 2012 at 1:50 PM. Reason : addendum]

12/18/2012 1:34:56 PM

I did post more than one thing.

So 2.5million is overboard. That is the high end of the estimation based on everything I've seen.
I even posted a very conservative estimation of 100k in one study, that even said their numbers are low based on methodology.

Also, it is relevant as the argument currently is "guns are bad"

[Edited on December 18, 2012 at 2:02 PM. Reason : .]

12/18/2012 1:45:15 PM

Found a good petition on whitehouse.gov

http://wh.gov/n2iI

12/18/2012 4:00:46 PM

Schools should teach acceptance, and bullying should be thwarted with a heavy hand.

What do gun nuts think about that as policy?

[Edited on December 18, 2012 at 4:08 PM. Reason : ]

12/18/2012 4:03:26 PM

fine by me

12/18/2012 4:05:54 PM

works for me as well.



People say spankings damage children, yet the last 20 years of 'friend' parenting has only led to shitty kids.

12/18/2012 4:07:44 PM

^ lol you can't spank an autistic kid. It doesn't work.

Spanking teenagers doesn't work either.

[Edited on December 18, 2012 at 4:09 PM. Reason : ]

12/18/2012 4:08:58 PM

Quote :

"People say spankings damage children, yet the last 20 years of 'friend' parenting has only led to shitty kids."

Because beating your children is the only way to discipline them that works.

12/18/2012 4:22:51 PM

If kids carried guns, no one would beat them.

12/18/2012 4:50:49 PM

spanking is not beating. There is a very big difference.

Taking away their PS3/xbox/phone/car doesn't work either.

12/18/2012 4:53:04 PM

enough said.

[Edited on December 18, 2012 at 5:09 PM. Reason : .]

12/18/2012 4:54:24 PM

victim mentality

12/18/2012 4:59:14 PM

Quote :

"None of them end with you personally adding to the body count."

Looks like we have one of them "new generation" people; don't step up, don't take initiative, ignore the problem and everything will be OK!

12/18/2012 5:20:59 PM

Quote :

"i can see how this might not make sense to people with a victim mentality"

Yeah like those dumb ass kids who got shot with their victim mentality, if they would have grown a pair and taken some initiative and not allowed themselves to be a victim, they would have brought a gun and defended themselves.

Quote :

"Looks like we have one of them "new generation" people; don't step up, don't take initiative, ignore the problem and everything will be OK!"

So I'm part of the problem because I don't own a gun? Owning a gun is more dangerous to me and my family than not owning one.

12/18/2012 6:10:00 PM

Quote :

"Yeah like those dumb ass kids who got shot with their victim mentality, if they would have grown a pair and taken some initiative and not allowed themselves to be a victim, they would have brought a gun and defended themselves."

this has nothing to do with the discussion in which i made that statement. you're so far off in left field that i honestly don't even know why i'm replying to this.

Quote :

"So I'm part of the problem because I don't own a gun? Owning a gun is more dangerous to me and my family than not owning one."

you're part of the problem because you don't respect my right to defend myself.

[Edited on December 18, 2012 at 6:16 PM. Reason : adsf]

12/18/2012 6:15:20 PM

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-guns-newtown-liberals-20121218,0,4287461.story

Quote :

" Let gun lovers lead the charge on gun control"

^ no one wants to terk yer gurns.

12/18/2012 6:17:59 PM

most don't, but some folks most certainly do

12/18/2012 6:19:16 PM

There's no one with any political credibility that does.

There are more politicians that want the US to become a Christian theocracy, than want guns to be banned.

12/18/2012 6:21:51 PM

there are people who don't want me to carry a handgun for self defense. i, along with millions of others and the supreme court, think that is a right.

12/18/2012 6:29:07 PM

Quote :

"Yeah like those dumb ass kids who got shot with their victim mentality, if they would have grown a pair and taken some initiative and not allowed themselves to be a victim, they would have brought a gun and defended themselves."

First of all, children are under 18 and wouldn't be allowed (legally) to carry a firearm on their person, concealed or otherwise. However, a teachers or other staff may legally have conceal carry permits. They should be allowed the opportunity to defend themselves as necessary. I don't particularly endorse open carry and I would oppose it in most environments (ie: school zones). It doesn't need to be announced that you have a firearm, IMO. By having a "gun free" zone, criminals know that they have they upper hand for 2 reasons;
1) Element of surprise
2) Law abiding citizens won't be carrying, so it's safe to assume the population is going to be disarmed and quite weak in any attempt to counter a threat.

By removing the "Gun Free" laws and signs, it makes criminals think. Most crimes are committed because of opportunity and temptation. When a target looks like an easy hit, it'll likely get hit. By removing/reducing gun controled zones, criminals don't see Schools, Hospitals, Malls, and Theaters as "unprotected zones" anymore. They have to question it because now, there MIGHT be someone conceal carrying. In that case, the criminal reveals himself before the conceal carry holder does, so the element of surprise can be turned against the criminal. Most criminals don't want to get shot or die, so at the first sign of opposition, they'll flee/retreat/surrender. The criminals that don't care about getting shot or dying, nothing is going to stop them from their rampage until you FORCEABLY stop them.

People need stop blaming the government for their insecurities. Take responsiblity for your OWN safety. Step up as a REAL adult. Choosing to protect yourself != living in fear. Legislation is a security blanket, no more. When it comes to your personal safety, the only person you can reliably trust (and should trust) is yourself.

Quote :

"So I'm part of the problem because I don't own a gun?"

As NRR said, you're part of the problem because you are infringing on others natural right to defend themselves. You don't have to like it and we can disagree on the subject. That's fine and I accept that. However, it's not fair for you, or others for gun control, to dictate how those opposing gun control should protect themselves because that's their business.

Quote :

" Owning a gun is more dangerous to me and my family than not owning one."

I don't believe this for a minute. There are safes and locks that can reduce/eliminate the hazards of a stolen firearm. Proper supervision, training, and education and also reduce/eliminate the danger that comes with firearms. Let me ask you this, where are your knives? Steak knives, kitchen knives? What about the keys to your car/vehicles? Tools in the shed (ie: axe, saw, hammers, etc) Those tools are just as dangerous as a firearm. It sounds to me you have a prejudged stigma of how firearms are "evil" and "bad." There are a lot of dangerous things in the world. But with proper education, you can teach family members to respect these tools and their proper use. Ignorance is the danger here. Not the firearm. If you prioritized the time and financing into the "world of firearms", you'd understand that they really aren't as dangerous as they are made out to be.


How much do you value life? Like if you had to put a monetary value on life, what is that amount?

How much do you pay for health insurance?

[Edited on December 18, 2012 at 7:41 PM. Reason : ,]

12/18/2012 7:37:58 PM

Before we go any further with the "teachers should be able to conceal carry" rhetoric, lets remember the right has been systematically trying to convince us that teachers are inept and over paid. I certainly don't want an inept and over paid slug toting guns around my children.

on a different note, you hear the right bemoan "ACTIVIST JUDGES" all the time and pretend they are constitutional scholars and the constitution is fixed, not living/breathing. Toobin, one of the great legal minds of our time, sheds some light on the judicial activism that changed the wording of the constitution to make sure we could all conceal carry to over throw the tyrants and hoodrats trying to break in to our suburban homes each day.

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2012/12/jeffrey-toobin-second-amendment.html

[Edited on December 18, 2012 at 9:27 PM. Reason : ...]

12/18/2012 9:22:34 PM

Quote :

"Tools in the shed (ie: axe, saw, hammers, etc) Those tools are just as dangerous as a firearm."

Kids don't run around chasing each other with pretend hammers. They are also not nearly as dangerous as a firearm, are you even thinking about what you're posting? The number of people accidentally killed by hammers is negligible (http://www.soyouwanna.com/soyouwanna-top-ten-causes-accidental-death-america-4008-full.html)

Quote :

"There are a lot of dangerous things in the world."

Yes, so I'll stick to the things that are actually necessary, like automobiles and medicine.

Quote :

"But with proper education, you can teach family members to respect these tools and their proper use."

I could also teach my family how to use hand grenades and really reduce the chance of accidents, or I could just not own hand grenades and completely eliminate that risk entirely.

Quote :

"How much do you value life? Like if you had to put a monetary value on life, what is that amount? How much do you pay for health insurance?"

I'm not seeing the connection between how much I pay for insurance and my reasoning for not owning a gun.

12/18/2012 10:02:10 PM

firearm owner/firearm rights supporter does not always equal republican, you know

12/18/2012 10:09:24 PM

I'd be fine with anyone buying a semi-auto rifle be required to provide verification that they own a gun safe.

[Edited on December 18, 2012 at 10:29 PM. Reason : ^ agree. I generally support the 2nd amendment but vote basically straight party D]

12/18/2012 10:28:03 PM

most of the safes residential security containers that folks buy these days slow thieves down very little



<2 mins

and a battery powered grinder with a cut-off wheel will make it nearly effortless



[Edited on December 18, 2012 at 10:49 PM. Reason : adsf]

[Edited on December 18, 2012 at 10:52 PM. Reason : i'm all for securing your guns, just don't think it's a golden bullet]

[Edited on December 18, 2012 at 11:03 PM. Reason : or is it "silver bullet"? ]

12/18/2012 10:47:09 PM

No big surprise there, American Eagle's jeans aren't the highest quality either.

12/18/2012 11:04:52 PM

It also ignores the point that our discussion has been about children or the common casual thief

12/18/2012 11:12:08 PM

gun safes and trigger locks still won't keep the owner from getting the gun out.

12/18/2012 11:12:21 PM

Quote :

"gun safes and trigger locks still won't keep the owner from getting the gun out. "

Why should it keep he owner from getting the gun out? I hope it wouldn't prohibit them, especially in an emergency situation, cause they are the OWNER after all...

Quote :

"I'm not seeing the connection between how much I pay for insurance and my reasoning for not owning a gun. "

You don't need to. I'm just looking for an answer. One with a monetary figure would be simple enough.

[Edited on December 18, 2012 at 11:16 PM. Reason : .]

12/18/2012 11:15:56 PM

just ignore E man

12/18/2012 11:20:32 PM

Quote :

"Kids don't run around chasing each other with pretend hammers. They are also not nearly as dangerous as a firearm, are you even thinking about what you're posting? The number of people accidentally killed by hammers is negligible "

Really? You might be right, you know with all the video games and stuff these days. Back in the day though, kids actually went outside and played...

Sarcasm aside, A hammer is as dangerous as a firearm. One blow to the head or chest could kill someone. I am thinking about what I'm posting, but clearly you aren't. You just skim the words for face value and don't see the meaning or apply any in depth thought to it. A hammer isn't a murder weapon. Hammers, axes, etc. don't have that stigma that a firearm does. If you look at things realistically, even a damn 2.5" pocket knife is deadly in the wrong hands. Tons of pocket knives out there, but you don't see people going on stabbing rampages. Restrict firearms, and the insane/crazy people will just move on to the next best thing.

These public shootings are terrible events. But they are singled out by the media, even worse if a firearm is misused. News are all about controversy and ratings, so of course they capitalize on airing shit like that. Open your eyes and your mind man. Take a deep breath and try to see deeper here.

12/18/2012 11:22:44 PM