Again Guns

[tatooedpunk]

sorry to bring up this old chestnut and you gun nuts will no doubt defend your right to "bear arms" i just read a story where a man killed a woman who he heard coming into his house,well guess what he was a 62 yo idiot and the woman he killed was the woman he was going to marry the next day. SURELY YOU REALISE IF HE DID NOT HAVE ACCESS TO GUNS NO-ONE WOULD BE DEAD

[12voltman59]

It is funny to me--one of the favorite sayings of the NRA and other pro gun crowd is "guns don't kill people--people do!"


Well--that is pretty much one of those bullshit things that only has a small bit of truth to it--yes--a gun doesn't operate and do its dirty deeds unless a person pulls the trigger--but a person baring some sort of weapon like a knife, machete, crow bar or basebball bat miight be able to take out a few other people--- in no case that I have heard of has a person armed as such is able to go into an office, factory, school or other location and kill dozens of people like those who go into such a place carrying an AK-47, a few Glock 40s, maybe a sawed off Remington 12 ga. double barreled shotgun, plenty of ammo and some body armour can!!

Sorry---it is just total 100 percent USDA prime bullshit that notion that "guns don't kill people, people kill people!"

I am so sick that so many people in our country buy that sort of BS--but then again--they seem to buy a whole lotta things that are also a bunch of BS-like "we have no problems with our health care system!!"

[Donkey_burger]

I was raised by a birthright Quaker and a reformed 70's hippy type. Of course, I'm against guns. It's one of things where I agree with my parents.

DB :flag3:

[lv69cpl69]

I guess I am "a gun nut" the death you posted is a SAD thing true and so are all deaths. BUT if we didn't have cigarettes or cars, it would save more life's than no guns. each kill more a year than guns. so by the logic that they kill, look up stats a lot of things kill more often why not start with the most frequent "killers" and work down? after all Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my guns and I have owned them from 8 years old and am 55 now. over 64,999,987 firearms owners in the us killed no one yesterday.

[eddy10]

What you all are saying would be perfectly true in a perfect world. But, there are some really, really bad folks out there that do not give a damn about anyone. I have the right to defend myself against those animals.

Not sure what this has to do with being bi.

[cand86]

I've always been a big proponent of the right to gun ownership (and still am), but I'm personally rather opposed to them. There are so many horrible accidents like this- I'd prefer not to be around them, honestly.

The lesson I take away from things like this is that if you're opposed to guns, the thing to do is to convince your loved ones not to have them in your or their homes.

Also, part of me thinks/knows that making gun ownership illegal in our country would never work. When I was in Japan, it just made a lot of sense- the deeply-ingrained law-abiding mentality they have there allows the "no guns" thing to work and help them have such low incidences of violent crime. We definitely don't have the attitude to pull it off, methinks.

[funlooker46]

some of the points about guns are unfortunately true,and the sad fact that you have to take classes and take a test in order to get a drivers license, but only have to make it to a certain age and not killed someone yet to buy a gun. lets not forget that the liberal media loves to put a lot of attention to these unfortunate events,but don't forget about the other side of the gun controversy. not all gun owners or gung ho shoot first and ask questions later idiots.
let me ask you this, if someone is breaking into your home,who do you call and why? the answer = the police,because he has a GUN. yes i know they have gone through training and have to test on a monthly bases. i have trained several police officers and have trained with many of them,and most of them had such an attatude that thay had a harder time learning than the housewife who realy wants to learn.
if they outlaw guns,only outlaws will have guns.

[lv69cpl69]

some of the points about guns are unfortunately true,and the sad fact that you have to take classes and take a test in order to get a drivers license, but only have to make it to a certain age and not killed someone yet to buy a gun. lets not forget that the liberal media loves to put a lot of attention to these unfortunate events,but don't forget about the other side of the gun controversy. not all gun owners or gung ho shoot first and ask questions later idiots.
let me ask you this, if someone is breaking into your home,who do you call and why? the answer = the police,because he has a GUN. yes i know they have gone through training and have to test on a monthly bases. i have trained several police officers and have trained with many of them,and most of them had such an attatude that thay had a harder time learning than the housewife who realy wants to learn.
if they outlaw guns,only outlaws will have guns.

by the time the police get there all they can do more times than not is INVESTIGATE what is over. But I have never needed mine for anything but target shooting.

[Long Duck Dong]

how many fucking times does it have to be said....

identify, evaluate, eliminate ...

id the fucking target BEFORE you pull the fucking trigger

guns kill... its why they were designed.... its the idiots using the guns that cause needless death by their failure to understand that you should id your target BEFORE you shoot

many times I have heard the saying * kill before you are killed *.... good point... but you are not in iraq, you are in your own home... there may be others in the house too.... so ID the fucking target BEFORE you shoot....
you know your house, a intruder most likely will not... you can have the added advantage of 2-3 seconds to id a target.....

I live in new zealand, we do not have the right to be arms... cops are getting killed cos the anti gun greenies opposed guns and tasers in the hands of cops... as a result a cop was killed and others shot, while doing a straight forward home inspection..... a taser in the hands could have saved a cops life that day......

remember, criminals do not care about the legal right to bear arms.... they do it anyway.... so yeah remove the right to bear arms, make the home owner defenseless against criminals that are happy to ignore the law and pack heat and use it.... then tell the family that removing the right to bear arms was the right thing to do....as they bury somebody that COULD have protected themselves....

98% of firearms shootings are the result of careless handling and usage... ie unsecured guns, mishandling, unidentified targets and people that do not have the ability to handle firearms......

I do have guns in the house, hidden and I do that because there are two people in the house, no children, only adults and we have dealt with home invasions before...
now I am a trained specialist with guns and a crack shot, and in a country where self defense in the home is NOT legal, I will end up in court for shooting a person.... but I sure as hell am not gonna sit idle while the house is robbed or I am attacked in my own house.....

but in any case, I will IDENTIFY my target, evaluate the thread level and eliminate the threat within reason and that means I will decide in a few seconds if you get a bullet in the knee, the arm or the shoulder.... I have no desire to kill you, only to rightfully protect myself and my property.....

it is not my right to bear arms, it is not my right to shoot any person.... but it sure as hell is my right to feel safe in my own home and my obligation to ensure that I protect it within reason against a clear thread, not a unidentified target

[Realist]

I wonder why the man fired at his target, before he could identify who she was? Was he living in a high-crime area? Had his life been threatened? Who knows, what he did was definitely wrong....and sad.

But, You can find stories to plead your cases with, no matter which side of the fence you're on. It's easy to use them to attempt prove your point, but emotionalism and theory are not always based on facts.

I have on two occasions prevented being robbed and maybe killed, because I had a pistol with me. Both times, my attackers were NOT armed with guns; one had a knife, and one with a crowbar. It doesn't matter to me; they were trying to take money I'd earned the hard way (I worked for it) and I wasn't going to give it to the dirt-bags, without a fight. On neither occasion did I have to fire; just showing them I had one was enough, but I was prepared to use it, if I had to.

Granted, I was in the military and have been trained extensively on weapon safety and how to use them proficiently. I think anyone who has any kind of weapon should be proficient in it's use. Any kind of weapon in the hands of a novice, or idiot, (as someone remarked) well, accidents, or just plain stupidity, are liable to happen.

If you say all I had to do was call a policeman...great, just think about the situation! One time, I was in the middle of nowhere in Georgia and one time it was sleeping in my car at a rest stop. Good luck in finding help, in seconds, under those circumstances!

Owing any weapon comes with an awesome responsibility and I agree that there's many who should not have one in their possession, or access to them. But, you'll have a hard time convincing me that I should give mine up!

[funlooker46]

it's better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6

[Falke]

It is funny to me--one of the favorite sayings of the NRA and other pro gun crowd is "guns don't kill people--people do!"


Well--that is pretty much one of those bullshit things that only has a small bit of truth to it--yes--a gun doesn't operate and do its dirty deeds unless a person pulls the trigger--but a person baring some sort of weapon like a knife, machete, crow bar or basebball bat miight be able to take out a few other people--- in no case that I have heard of has a person armed as such is able to go into an office, factory, school or other location and kill dozens of people like those who go into such a place carrying an AK-47, a few Glock 40s, maybe a sawed off Remington 12 ga. double barreled shotgun, plenty of ammo and some body armour can!!

Sorry---it is just total 100 percent USDA prime bullshit that notion that "guns don't kill people, people kill people!"

I am so sick that so many people in our country buy that sort of BS--but then again--they seem to buy a whole lotta things that are also a bunch of BS-like "we have no problems with our health care system!!"

Because we all know there were no murders/mass slaughters that occurred before guns arrived on the scene. :rolleyes:

There was once a time when the Pope banned the crossbow because it was once considered too powerful of a weapon, yet today if someone owns one no one gives it a second thought. They in their day were a deadly accurate machine that was great against any adversary that one could come against. That still stands to this day for the modern, or even original type. Guns are now the target because of their easy of use and the fact that the designs have evolved and are constantly improved over the past 700 or so years. Soon enough, projectile weapons will be obsolete and we will find new technologies that will serve the same purpose as the club/knife/spear/axe/mace/sword/bow/gun but will be more effective.

My point is, people have always found innovative/ingenious ways of harming each other, we have been doing it since the dawn of human existence and we aren't going to stop anytime in the near future. Hence, trying to blame an inanimate object for man's inherently violent tendencies is simply preposterous. In reality, if one wants to stop people from killing others, then one must find the reason why people kill each other. Taking away their weapons will only force them to find other ways to harm others, but it will not quell whatever thought that makes them think they need to. In that, taking away the tools to harm others is basically like using a band aid on a puncture wound. It may keep some of the blood in for a short time, but ultimately it will do nothing to solve the societal problems that cause these issues to keep popping up.

As far as the original poster, it is sad. It also showed a lack of common sense to start blasting away at an unknown target. He will have to pay for this mistake for the rest of his life knowing that he killed his soon-to-be wife. Hence why shoot first/ask questions later is a bad policy for anyone to adapt.

[diget]

i am an avid hunter and own many guns but i have to say if this 62 year old guy shot his woman cuz he heard her comin in his house he needs to have his brain checked once or twice, you never know maybe he was just one of those people who didnt need to own a gun?

[diget]

[QUOTE=12voltman59;14336Well--that is pretty much one of those bullshit things that only has a small bit of truth to it--yes--a gun doesn't operate and do its dirty deeds unless a person pulls the trigger--but a person baring some sort of weapon like a knife, machete, crow bar or basebball bat miight be able to take out a few other people--- in no case that I have heard of has a person armed as such is able to go into an office, factory, school or other location and kill dozens of people like those who go into such a place carrying an AK-47, a few Glock 40s, maybe a sawed off Remington 12 ga. double barreled shotgun, plenty of ammo and some body armour can![/QUOTE]

funny you should say that, i beleive any human being should have the right to own a gun, i also believe that guns should be taken away from idiots, becuase idiots are dangerous and they make a bad image for a person like me own happens to own a few guns. if idiots didnt own guns things like the Virginia tech indecent would not happen but at the same time taking a gun from a person like me does nothing at all because im not going to shoot any one.
i am just rambling here but i do have one thought, the idea is guns dont kill people people kill people is wrong in a way. gun can enable nut jobs to do crazy stuff being as that is if more people in the gov were smart enough the nut job people wouldnt have guns while harmless citizens like my self still would.:bigrin:

i lived in California for a while and they had some good and bad gun laws there.

example of a good law: you cant own a full auto rifle nor can you buy a pistol till your 21 plus if you do buy a pistol your name is atomaticly registered as a pistol owner.

Example of a good law: you can not posess a fire arm that has a foldaway stock in calofornia.

Example of a good law: you cant own 30 round clips for a pistol in california.

Example of a bad law: even if your weapon happens to be 22 caliber you cant own a 30 round clip for it even though 22 cal rifles arnt used in many crimes in California.

see i own a ruger 10\22 which is a small semi auto 22 cal rifle that i hunt with, on some hunting trips though i can go through a 10 round clip real fast because of this i would love to own a 30 round clip.
i thought though that maybe my want was unreasonable so i looked up crimes in California that involved ruger 10\22 and i only found 1, so how is this law in California protecting against 30 round clips for a rugr 10\22 protecting any one considering that not one wants to use a ruger 10\22 in crimes so allowing 30 round clips into California isnt going to enable any criminals any more than they were enabled before.

i supplied a picture of my 22 rifle below so you can see its not an "assualt rifle" or any thing like that, no one is thinking of using a rifle like mine to rob a bank or do a drive by with so whats so bad about me getting a 30 round clip for it?

[Hephaestion]

sorry to bring up this old chestnut and you gun nuts will no doubt defend your right to "bear arms" i just read a story where a man killed a woman who he heard coming into his house,well guess what he was a 62 yo idiot and the woman he killed was the woman he was going to marry the next day. SURELY YOU REALISE IF HE DID NOT HAVE ACCESS TO GUNS NO-ONE WOULD BE DEAD

Are you able to tell us where is this story to be found please?

.

[Long Duck Dong]

Example of a bad law: even if your weapon happens to be 22 caliber you cant own a 30 round clip for it even though 22 cal rifles arnt used in many crimes in California.

see i own a ruger 10\22 which is a small semi auto 22 cal rifle that i hunt with, on some hunting trips though i can go through a 10 round clip real fast because of this i would love to own a 30 round clip.
i thought though that maybe my want was unreasonable so i looked up crimes in California that involved ruger 10\22 and i only found 1, so how is this law in California protecting against 30 round clips for a rugr 10\22 protecting any one considering that not one wants to use a ruger 10\22 in crimes so allowing 30 round clips into California isnt going to enable any criminals any more than they were enabled before.

i supplied a picture of my 22 rifle below so you can see its not an "assualt rifle" or any thing like that, no one is thinking of using a rifle like mine to rob a bank or do a drive by with so whats so bad about me getting a 30 round clip for it?

its odd but simple logic.....

the size of the clip is the issue... the more bullets you can use in one go, the more dangerous the weapon becomes in the hands of a person that is intent on causing harm....

a 30 round mag increases the random shot hit chance by about 2000% over a 6 clip as you are removing the distraction of stop and reload for the average person and one shot kills would not require a 30 clip unless you are hunting in a mass populated area of rodents... like 1000 rodents per acre

look at the cops,... and you will often hear about shoot outs, and they fire 30 odd rounds... hit 4-5 times..... its called the random shot hit chance....
they are not aiming and shooting at a target, they are just shooting and hoping they hit the target.... and the more bullets, the higher the chance of hitting the target.....

same with criminals in a drive by, they are hoping to hit the target so the more bullets they shoot, the better... and so there is the increased chances of hitting everything else as often happens

in the hands of me and I am a specialist... a 30 round clip is merely more bullets to shoot in a single run, cos I can reload blind, ( never look at the rifle while changing clips, only at the target ) and with a one shot, one kill attitude, I would be very dangerous.....

now imagine going psycho in a town street with a 10/22 and you may see just why a 30 round clip is so dangerous
you gain better random fire ratio, 3x30 clips is less to carry than 18x6
minimun reload times means more targetting and shooting time and that in turns means less openings for targets to escape....
you do not need to focus as much on target seeking as you do, pulling the trigger for the random shot hit chance.......
etc etc etc

as the end of the day, you may be safe, you may be careful... but you are not the only gun user and there are others that are a genuine risk to the wellbeing of the public with a 30 clip

[goldenfinger]

funny you should say that, i beleive any human being should have the right to own a gun, i also believe that guns should be taken away from idiots, becuase idiots are dangerous and they make a bad image for a person like me

diget @, define idiots please, and who will have that job. In most cases, idiots are not idiots till AFTER they have done it.We are all idiots at some level, idiots an the road,idiots in the pub, idiots on the sports field.
Not long ago, a man walked into a gym and shot 7-8 women because he couldn't get a date, a law abiding person with a gun licence. Go figure.
Some people look for an easy way out, and a gun is just that.In a short time, they can kill more people then any other weapon.
Just saw a shoot-out on tv from a pub in the US. So many bullets flying and no one hurt.

[MelissaMaven]

Well personally I think people should be allowed their guns for protection and hunting and all, especially since doing otherwise violates the constitution. But what's debatable is what a reasonable gun is. Assault rifles, for example, are not needed to kill a deer. There's really no legitimate reason to own any weapon that can fire that fast, no more than there would be to own a rocket launcher or a fighter jet.

When you ban guns, people just find other ways to kill you. In Britain, knife crime skyrocketed, despite the rampant use of security cameras. I don't know about you, but I'd much rather be shot than stabbed.

So while there will always be stupid people who handle guns (just the same as there's plenty of stupid drivers), it comes down to what's reasonable for them to handle. In my opinion, at least.

[izzfan]

Well personally I think people should be allowed their guns for protection and hunting and all, especially since doing otherwise violates the constitution. But what's debatable is what a reasonable gun is. Assault rifles, for example, are not needed to kill a deer. There's really no legitimate reason to own any weapon that can fire that fast, no more than there would be to own a rocket launcher or a fighter jet.

When you ban guns, people just find other ways to kill you. In Britain, knife crime skyrocketed, despite the rampant use of security cameras. I don't know about you, but I'd much rather be shot than stabbed.

So while there will always be stupid people who handle guns (just the same as there's plenty of stupid drivers), it comes down to what's reasonable for them to handle. In my opinion, at least.


I agree, law-abiding citizens in the UK can't even own mace/pepper spray or a taser. Criminals still carry guns, they don't really care about the laws anyway. However because guns are not so widely available, there are less armed [guns] criminals (proportionally) in the UK than there probably are in the US. Its a complex issue with valid arguments on both sides. Then again, as you said, the knife crime problem is the result of all this. Criminals will always find weappons of some sort, ordinary people should have some means of defending themselves (don't get me started on the useless self-defence laws here...).

Personally, I believe that you should be able to keep guns in your house to defend against intruders but I am strongly against any kind of "concealed carry" of firearms (or knives for that matter) in public. Law-abiding citizens should be allowed to carry non-lethal weapons in public for self-defence but no-one should be allowed to carry guns or knives.

[elian]

"Ready, Fire, Aim!" - Dick Cheney Hunting Club (I couldn't resist)

The trouble with lawless criminals is that they don't obey the law - so even if we had a law that said "No Guns" - the lawless criminal is likely to disregard this directive and continue to possess firearms.

I find it very peculiar that here in the USA I can have as many guns as I want - no questions asked, but if I were to go to a psychologist and ASK for mental help only then am I branded as "crazy" by society.

Society also says we should not promote "vigilante justice" .. guns are handed out in the name of defense - the difficulty is that people assume every citizen operates in a sane and rational frame of mind.

I have no problem with guns, as long as the person using it is of rational mind, and they have taken a hunter's safety course or equivalent training.

Funny that someone else brought up driving - people assume that driving your own vehicle is a basic right in the USA - thousands of 16 year old teenagers with 16 hours worth of formal driver training are on our roads.

I think it's interesting that in Scandinavian countries you get a gun too, after you serve a rotation in the Army. Similarly, in Germany you can drive 200 MPH on the Autobahn, as long as you have paid several hundreds of dollars for a license to do so and taken many hours of training. When you drive 200MPH you don't f'k around eating a cheeseburger and watching a movie while you are driving down the road.

If people in this country took their responsibility seriously maybe things would be better - instead we spend our time complaining, pretending and screwing around.

[eddy10]

One more shot from me. In the current world it is the valiant warriors that make it possible for the unarmed meek to exist.

[funlooker46]

this is a response to several other post on this thread.
the 22 cal.is about the most deadly round in the world,prefered by assassins because the bullet has enough energy to get into the body but usually not enough to get out,causing a lot of damage as it bounces around.
next ,who is the one that is going to say who is an idiot?
as far as assult weapons,the only thing they got right is that it's a weapon the media and the gov.are going after those FIRST because they sound like they were ment for only one thing,killing poor helpless defensless women and children.not for the protection of the people who put their lives on the line every day so that we can have the freedoms that we hold dear to us.
after the gov. and the media get rid of the scary weapons thay will go after the hunting rifles or as they will call them SNIPER RIFLES,so where will it end? it will end when the polititions can feel safe in the fact that they can do what they want and the pesents will have no way to defend them selfs or revolt against them.
if you are willing to do some research,read "the preamble to the second amendment" it will open your eyes.

[locotom]

carrying a gun is just like a penis extention it just makes you a bigger dick? what happened to the one on one fist fight or are they all cowards?

[lv69cpl69]

Death(s) 2,995 (including 19 hijackers)
Injured 6,291+

on 9-11 a lot more than all "mass killings with guns" in over 20 years in the usa put together

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. It was the most significant act of terrorism on American soil until the September 11 attacks in 2001, claiming the lives of 168 victims and injuring more than 680. The blast destroyed or damaged 324 buildings within a sixteen–block radius,destroyed or burned 86 cars, and shattered glass in 258 nearby buildings. The bomb was estimated to have caused at least $652 million worth of damage.

C.D.C. says cigarette smoking and exposure to tobacco smoke resulted in approximately 438,000 premature deaths in the United States

Deaths from Automobile accidents: 42443 deaths in USA 2001

ALL DEAD WITH NO GUNS USED! BUT GUNS ARE EVIL? no people are


I have 2 fully automatic "machine guns" legally in the us just need and have permits for them a lot of fun to fire not so much to clean, my wife and I have permits to carry concealed hand guns (don't often carry but can) I just like target shooting and to use my RIGHTS

No I don't NEED them, no I don't kill with them. if the question is of NEED you don't need a car that will go over 75 it's against the law to do that. So they should not be allowed to sell anything that will go faster in the states. Same logic.

By the way California has way too many stupid gun laws and oh yea they don't work.

[destiny200b]

The right to defend oneself, one's family, and other innocents from bad guys is a natural right, not granted by the constitution, but recognized by it. This is not a right granted by any government, it is a human right that exists for all people, for all time.
As for the original post,

sorry to bring up this old chestnut and you gun nuts will no doubt defend your right to "bear arms" i just read a story where a man killed a woman who he heard coming into his house,well guess what he was a 62 yo idiot and the woman he killed was the woman he was going to marry the next day. SURELY YOU REALISE IF HE DID NOT HAVE ACCESS TO GUNS NO-ONE WOULD BE DEAD

This is a tragedy, and he should have kept his finger off of the trigger (like you are supposed to do) until he was sure of his situation. However, I couldn't help but wonder, what if the intruder hadn't been his fiance and he had used his gun in self defense to save his life? You probably would not have heard about the story at all, just like the thousands of other crimes that are stopped by guns every year. Also, if it had been an intruder and the homeowner was killed, your thesis about access to guns falls short, as the lack of a gun for self defense would be to blame for the resulting death.

I enjoyed reading all of the opinions on this subject. They are interesting and I'm glad we have the right discuss the subject together, even if we disagree. Ahhh, freedom, you have to love it! :flag1:

[diget]

funny you should say that, i beleive any human being should have the right to own a gun, i also believe that guns should be taken away from idiots, becuase idiots are dangerous and they make a bad image for a person like me

diget @, define idiots please, and who will have that job. In most cases, idiots are not idiots till AFTER they have done it.We are all idiots at some level, idiots an the road,idiots in the pub, idiots on the sports field.
Not long ago, a man walked into a gym and shot 7-8 women because he couldn't get a date, a law abiding person with a gun licence. Go figure.
Some people look for an easy way out, and a gun is just that.In a short time, they can kill more people then any other weapon.
Just saw a shoot-out on tv from a pub in the US. So many bullets flying and no one hurt.

idiots are those more likely to be predispositions to shoot people diue to things like serious mental illness, a criminal record, or the shear fact that they may have anger issues or extreme hatred toward certain individuals who live legally amongst the public who have done them no wrong.

and the people who should have the job of discerning this is the government.:bigrin:

[diget]

this is a response to several other post on this thread.
the 22 cal.is about the most deadly round in the world,prefered by assassins because the bullet has enough energy to get into the body but usually not enough to get out,causing a lot of damage as it bounces around.
next ,who is the one that is going to say who is an idiot?
as far as assult weapons,the only thing they got right is that it's a weapon the media and the gov.are going after those FIRST because they sound like they were ment for only one thing,killing poor helpless defensless women and children.not for the protection of the people who put their lives on the line every day so that we can have the freedoms that we hold dear to us.
after the gov. and the media get rid of the scary weapons thay will go after the hunting rifles or as they will call them SNIPER RIFLES,so where will it end? it will end when the polititions can feel safe in the fact that they can do what they want and the pesents will have no way to defend them selfs or revolt against them.
if you are willing to do some research,read "the preamble to the second amendment" it will open your eyes.

i have been shot by the 22 cal round and ill tell you it cant hold a candle to a 45 or even a smaller round like the .556
i friend tom was shot 10 times in the chest with a 22 and 3 times in the face and he still alive and very well to this day. his father was shot about 4 times by the same person who died from injuries inflicted by toms father after he had been shot by the same 22 so dont give me that bull shit about 22's being the most dangerous in round in the world.

[diget]

its odd but simple logic.....

the size of the clip is the issue... the more bullets you can use in one go, the more dangerous the weapon becomes in the hands of a person that is intent on causing harm....

a 30 round mag increases the random shot hit chance by about 2000% over a 6 clip as you are removing the distraction of stop and reload for the average person and one shot kills would not require a 30 clip unless you are hunting in a mass populated area of rodents... like 1000 rodents per acre

look at the cops,... and you will often hear about shoot outs, and they fire 30 odd rounds... hit 4-5 times..... its called the random shot hit chance....
they are not aiming and shooting at a target, they are just shooting and hoping they hit the target.... and the more bullets, the higher the chance of hitting the target.....

same with criminals in a drive by, they are hoping to hit the target so the more bullets they shoot, the better... and so there is the increased chances of hitting everything else as often happens

in the hands of me and I am a specialist... a 30 round clip is merely more bullets to shoot in a single run, cos I can reload blind, ( never look at the rifle while changing clips, only at the target ) and with a one shot, one kill attitude, I would be very dangerous.....

now imagine going psycho in a town street with a 10/22 and you may see just why a 30 round clip is so dangerous
you gain better random fire ratio, 3x30 clips is less to carry than 18x6
minimun reload times means more targetting and shooting time and that in turns means less openings for targets to escape....
you do not need to focus as much on target seeking as you do, pulling the trigger for the random shot hit chance.......
etc etc etc

as the end of the day, you may be safe, you may be careful... but you are not the only gun user and there are others that are a genuine risk to the wellbeing of the public with a 30 clip

i can agree with alot of what you said but at the same time if you get into a gun fight using a 22 your as good as dead being as the 22 doesn't delivered enough lb per square inch to disable your enemy enough to stop them from killing you with some thing like a 9mm or a .45. fact is not many are going to use a ruger 10\22 in crimes whether they have a 30 round clip or not because its just not effective enough when it comes to killing people. read my other post and you will see i have met people who were shot repeatedly by a 22 in the face and chest and they survived.

[Slide n]

Well I hate to bring this up but, considering I know nothing about this case. I am guessing noone else does either. Let's consider the other side. Why on earth was she coming into his house unannouced? If she was, then who's the idiot? Maybe he didn't want to get married the next day, in which case the gun is a mute point cause he would have found another way. We also forget about the parents that go off the deepend and kill thier childern either by leaving them in acar and running it into a lake, or by drowning them in the tub. How many deaths by one person is considered a mass killing? All things considered the only reason we are discussing this is the media jumps on stories like these.

Just my:2cents:

[_Joe_]

Guns don't kill people. Monkeys hopped up on crack cocaine shot into their eyeballs with razor sharp knives strapped to their arms and set loose in sports arenas kill people. they kill loads of people.

[destiny200b]

Joe may have a point here!
:flag1:

[smartsexychick]

I am by no means uniquely qualified to speak to this, but it is a subject that is close, way too close. I have survived a crime involving guns that were likely acquired by ill-gotten gains. The episode was not quick, was not take the money and run. Seventeen years later, I still sleep with the lights on most nights. I broke my engagement, relocated from a home I loved, saw the career I had worked to build disappear in a matter of a few months. Whenever there is a major news event involving a gun crime, I struggle with having to talk myself out of having an anxiety attack. I worked with a trauma specialist, and most of the time this works, but the times it does not, I wish that I could just crawl into a hole until it felt safe to come out. I have touched a gun -- my parents have 2 pistols -- less than a handful of times, twice on really bad days a long time ago.

I would have thought that I would never in a million years contemplate having one, but I have 3 people in my life who have convinced me to think otherwise. They are all bi, they are all in the Pacific Northwest, and they all have a wide variety of experience with different types of firearms. The first thinks that I need to go to a gun range and fire one and take it apart, clean it, and really disempower it. He's right, and I will do this eventually, but there isn't one too close and I will need the right company to be with me. Also, he helped me to reframe guns in a completely different setting, appreciate their craftsmanship, precision, beauty, really. There was another discussion as well, one touching me in the hands of someone loving, letting me dance with the Devil, not be afraid. That, as were many of the experiences I had with him, was life-changing. The second man, he is in law enforcement, and like an Amex card, he doesn't leave home without it, even when he is off duty. We discussed how it is a tool you need to have extensive knowledge of, but never want to ever have to use. He had to once, and that is all he will tell me. That isn't something anyone with any sense would speak of proudly. The third, anxiously awaiting rifle season as we speak. Game meat isn't something exotic for him, but necessary for his health. The reverence with which he speaks of hunting, how he practices to be a good shot even though he has hunted since he was a small boy so that any suffering is minimized, how nothing is ever, ever wasted of the precious creature whose life was taken, all that has made this City Girl look at it in a whole new light. Where I am at, people who have guns flaunt them like they are putting their cocks on display. In the Northwest part of the country, it's not like that at all. Every has them, a lot of people pack them, and the problems are few and far between. There is a certain wisdom that comes with having seen them used, seen what they can do.

For me, I am still trying to make my peace with them. I started reading a book the first one suggested for me, Tolstoy, "The Kingdom of God Is Within You". It discusses nonresistence, inspired Gandhi and MLK, Jr in their movements. I had to put it down for a while, but I have picked it up again. Those nights have been few and far between when I can turn off the lights.

Anyone else who has been on the business end of a being a grease spot is welcome to say anything you like. Anyone else, keep it to yourself.

[Realist]

SC,

Like many other things, familiarity can also give comfort in knowledge.

Case in point: An ex-wife had an awful fear of snakes. Her mother was a fanatical Penecostal lay preacher and snakes symbolized evil on earth. That fear was driven into her head from an early age. She's wake up in the night screaming, dreaming of them crawling on her, biting her, constricting her, so she could not breathe.

She was taking some college courses and met a lady who worked with reptiles. Amazingly, she got my ex to talk about her fears and she took her to a collector and they discussed the different types of snakes, poisonous, no-poisonous, characteristics and abilities of each. After that, she still respected them, but felt less fearful. She actually could look at one without feeling afraid, because she knew about them, understood their different capabilities and could identify them.

So, when you know how something works, become familiar with it, experience intelligent use of them, an understanding usually replaces the fear. Like most things, guns are a tool and evil can be done with them. But they can also be used to prevent evil from being done to you!

[rissababynta]

SC,

Like many other things, familiarity can also give comfort in knowledge.

Case in point: An ex-wife had an awful fear of snakes. Her mother was a fanatical Penecostal lay preacher and snakes symbolized evil on earth. That fear was driven into her head from an early age. She's wake up in the night screaming, dreaming of them crawling on her, biting her, constricting her, so she could not breathe.

She was taking some college courses and met a lady who worked with reptiles. Amazingly, she got my ex to talk about her fears and she took her to a collector and they discussed the different types of snakes, poisonous, no-poisonous, characteristics and abilities of each. After that, she still respected them, but felt less fearful. She actually could look at one without feeling afraid, because she knew about them, understood their different capabilities and could identify them.

So, when you know how something works, become familiar with it, experience intelligent use of them, an understanding usually replaces the fear. Like most things, guns are a tool and evil can be done with them. But they can also be used to prevent evil from being done to you!

I agree. Statistically, accidents do not happen as often with those who have grown up knowing about them, whether it be actively using it or just having proper knowledge about them.

[littlerayofsunshine]

Bang Boom Ow!!! (http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=246713&title=fun-with-guns)

[Argent 11]

If someone does not want to own a gun that is their choice. If someone chooses to own weapons that is their choice. No one has the right to make that choice for me. EVERYTHING comes back to responsibility. If you are not prepared to face the consequences of your choices then don't make those choices. Just as a criminal makes a choice to rob or rape he will face the consequences. Bottom line for me is this. Owning a weapon is like owning a sweater. Better to have it and NEVER need it, then to NEED it and never have it. Here endeth the lesson. ;)

[rissababynta]

Bang Boom Ow!!! (http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=246713&title=fun-with-guns)

My brother in law hit himself in the face with a gun a few days ago haha.

[Kentbi]

There's more to this story...it just doesn't sound right. More to come!

[BareHunter45]

by the time the police get there all they can do more times than not is INVESTIGATE what is over. But I have never needed mine for anything but target shooting.

When seconds count....the police are only minutes away.

A "gun nut" and proud of it!!!

[rdy2go]

I gotta give this my :2cents:,
In Canada, when it comes to guns, we have a failed gun registry (that cost the tax payers millions,) we have regulations out the wazoo on owning storing, and purchasing guns. I might be wrong but I think that there is a ban on owning hand guns unless you are a collector. There are those that feel their rights are being stripped from them because they can't have enough fire power in their houses to overthrow an entire city. There are those that scream for tighter controls, and those that would be happy if guns were banned outright. We can argue until we have no voices left about what the solution will be. You can ban everything more powerfull than a fart, but if someone wants a weapon to harm or kill another human being, they will get that weapon, it is a sure bet! Even if someone legally owns the weapon, if they decide to use it to harm or kill they will. And the gun realted "accidents" will continue. Personally I am not a fan of guns, I don't hunt, or belong to a gun club. Hell I've never even had a gun in my hands. Gun related crime in Nova Scotia is more common than it ever has been, and most of the illegal activity is carried out with illegal weapons. Educating the public isn't a 100% fix, banning guns isn't a 100% fix. There is no fix. The debate will go on forever, and people will continue to die. Accidentally or not, dead is dead. For most of us sane people regardless of which side of the debate you are on it is the sad, tragic truth.

[AdamKadmon43]

Guns don't kill people. Monkeys hopped up on crack cocaine shot into their eyeballs with razor sharp knives strapped to their arms and set loose in sports arenas kill people. they kill loads of people.

I am not real sure if you meant it that way or not (hard to tell with YOUR sense of humour), but I think that you have made a great case for the fact that the world, for the most part, is and always has been one great big slaughter house. People and other animals have developed a great deal of efficiency at killing each other for what ever reasons.

As far as the subject at hand is concerned..... I personally do not like guns, I do not own one, and I am fortunate enough to live in an area where I do not seem to need one for protection or any other reason. I do not eat meat, and there is no compelling necessity for me to go out and gun down soy beans, fruit trees, tomato plants, milkable cows, or other such things.... And I otherwise take no great joy in killing things... with the possible exception of those pesky deer that persist in eating up my yard.

If someone can come up with a workable plan for getting rid of guns ....ALL OF THEM..... I would certainly be willing to consider agreeing to consider agreeing with it, ......(WHAT?).....but otherwise, gun control advocates are most probably being very un-realistic in their expectations.

Like many human issues, this is mostly an emotional issue. And with mostly emotional issues .... we just decide what we want to believe and construct our arguments to support our beliefs.

[_Joe_]

http://www.crazyjoe.us/stuff/Dual-Shotgun-Baby-Stroller_500x500.jpg


The government has no right to tell me how to raise my kids, or handle my guns, or raise my guns with my kids. Damnit.

[boca.openminded]

ok. I read most of the 1st page but not all of the posts to this thread so I apologize if I am repeating what others have said.

lv69cpl69 stated that he grew up with guns since the age of 8. He is what the NRA stands for (saying that in a good way). I do not own a gun but I grew up with them around since I was born. I was educated by my parents about guns and the consequences.

Its very sad about that elderly man killing his fiance but accidents do happen. An accident is just that - an accident. I recently read about a mother who was drunk and killed her and her kids. Why arent we screaming about the alcohol companies or the automotive companies?

It is ridiculous how when something sad happens lets attack the gun owners & the NRA. What is the percentage of LEGAL gun owners per shootings? You know its very low.

Yes, the shootings at the schools were extremely tragic but again its a very small percentage. Car deaths related or not related to alcohol is far higher then gun shootings.

Bottom line is its our RIGHT to bear arms and if you reject that then you might as well reject FREEDOM OF SPEECH!

[diget]

If someone does not want to own a gun that is their choice. If someone chooses to own weapons that is their choice. No one has the right to make that choice for me.


damn right, some guy doesn't like guns so hes gunna take mine,wtf. no one should have the right to take a law abiding citizens guns.

[Long Duck Dong]

I agree, it is your right to bear arms... and I accept that as a gun owner....but I will amend it slightly...

it is your right to bear arms and be ABLE to demonstrate good gun sense, and be able to act safety and wisely with guns, ensuring the safety and wellbeing of others that could be placed at risk by your actions with any gun

its not the right to bear arms that is the problem, its the person with the gun that is the issue...

[lv69cpl69]

http://bounddragon.com/?p=22

As the nation debates whether more guns or fewer can prevent tragedies like the Virginia Tech Massacre, a notable anniversary passed last month in a Georgia town that witnessed a dramatic plunge in crime and violence after mandating residents to own firearms.

In March 1982, 25 years ago, the small town of Kennesaw – responding to a handgun ban in Morton Grove, Ill. – unanimously passed an ordinance requiring each head of household to own and maintain a gun. Since then, despite dire predictions of “Wild West” showdowns and increased violence and accidents, not a single resident has been involved in a fatal shooting – as a victim, attacker or defender.

The crime rate initially plummeted for several years after the passage of the ordinance, with the 2005 per capita crime rate actually significantly lower than it was in 1981, the year before passage of the law.

[bi-the-way]

I couldn't have said it better! I have owned and shot firearms since I was 9 yrs old. I am an avid hunter. I have never even come close to shooting anyone, but should I stand by and let someone come into my home and rape/murder my wife? I don't think so. Where I live, the police cannot respond quickly enough to be affective. I don't believe we should all be helpless victims.

bi-the-way



how many fucking times does it have to be said....

identify, evaluate, eliminate ...

id the fucking target BEFORE you pull the fucking trigger

guns kill... its why they were designed.... its the idiots using the guns that cause needless death by their failure to understand that you should id your target BEFORE you shoot

many times I have heard the saying * kill before you are killed *.... good point... but you are not in iraq, you are in your own home... there may be others in the house too.... so ID the fucking target BEFORE you shoot....
you know your house, a intruder most likely will not... you can have the added advantage of 2-3 seconds to id a target.....

I live in new zealand, we do not have the right to be arms... cops are getting killed cos the anti gun greenies opposed guns and tasers in the hands of cops... as a result a cop was killed and others shot, while doing a straight forward home inspection..... a taser in the hands could have saved a cops life that day......

remember, criminals do not care about the legal right to bear arms.... they do it anyway.... so yeah remove the right to bear arms, make the home owner defenseless against criminals that are happy to ignore the law and pack heat and use it.... then tell the family that removing the right to bear arms was the right thing to do....as they bury somebody that COULD have protected themselves....

98% of firearms shootings are the result of careless handling and usage... ie unsecured guns, mishandling, unidentified targets and people that do not have the ability to handle firearms......

I do have guns in the house, hidden and I do that because there are two people in the house, no children, only adults and we have dealt with home invasions before...
now I am a trained specialist with guns and a crack shot, and in a country where self defense in the home is NOT legal, I will end up in court for shooting a person.... but I sure as hell am not gonna sit idle while the house is robbed or I am attacked in my own house.....

but in any case, I will IDENTIFY my target, evaluate the thread level and eliminate the threat within reason and that means I will decide in a few seconds if you get a bullet in the knee, the arm or the shoulder.... I have no desire to kill you, only to rightfully protect myself and my property.....

it is not my right to bear arms, it is not my right to shoot any person.... but it sure as hell is my right to feel safe in my own home and my obligation to ensure that I protect it within reason against a clear thread, not a unidentified target

[bi-the-way]

I personally feel anyone whom would use a firearm to do harm without good cause, should be given the death penalty. All I can say is sorry you had such a horrible experience, smartsexychick. Nobody deserves that. I commend you for facing your fears and working to overcome them. Few people are that strong! I wish you nothing but peace and happiness.

btw



I am by no means uniquely qualified to speak to this, but it is a subject that is close, way too close. I have survived a crime involving guns that were likely acquired by ill-gotten gains. The episode was not quick, was not take the money and run. Seventeen years later, I still sleep with the lights on most nights. I broke my engagement, relocated from a home I loved, saw the career I had worked to build disappear in a matter of a few months. Whenever there is a major news event involving a gun crime, I struggle with having to talk myself out of having an anxiety attack. I worked with a trauma specialist, and most of the time this works, but the times it does not, I wish that I could just crawl into a hole until it felt safe to come out. I have touched a gun -- my parents have 2 pistols -- less than a handful of times, twice on really bad days a long time ago.

I would have thought that I would never in a million years contemplate having one, but I have 3 people in my life who have convinced me to think otherwise. They are all bi, they are all in the Pacific Northwest, and they all have a wide variety of experience with different types of firearms. The first thinks that I need to go to a gun range and fire one and take it apart, clean it, and really disempower it. He's right, and I will do this eventually, but there isn't one too close and I will need the right company to be with me. Also, he helped me to reframe guns in a completely different setting, appreciate their craftsmanship, precision, beauty, really. There was another discussion as well, one touching me in the hands of someone loving, letting me dance with the Devil, not be afraid. That, as were many of the experiences I had with him, was life-changing. The second man, he is in law enforcement, and like an Amex card, he doesn't leave home without it, even when he is off duty. We discussed how it is a tool you need to have extensive knowledge of, but never want to ever have to use. He had to once, and that is all he will tell me. That isn't something anyone with any sense would speak of proudly. The third, anxiously awaiting rifle season as we speak. Game meat isn't something exotic for him, but necessary for his health. The reverence with which he speaks of hunting, how he practices to be a good shot even though he has hunted since he was a small boy so that any suffering is minimized, how nothing is ever, ever wasted of the precious creature whose life was taken, all that has made this City Girl look at it in a whole new light. Where I am at, people who have guns flaunt them like they are putting their cocks on display. In the Northwest part of the country, it's not like that at all. Every has them, a lot of people pack them, and the problems are few and far between. There is a certain wisdom that comes with having seen them used, seen what they can do.

For me, I am still trying to make my peace with them. I started reading a book the first one suggested for me, Tolstoy, "The Kingdom of God Is Within You". It discusses nonresistence, inspired Gandhi and MLK, Jr in their movements. I had to put it down for a while, but I have picked it up again. Those nights have been few and far between when I can turn off the lights.

Anyone else who has been on the business end of a being a grease spot is welcome to say anything you like. Anyone else, keep it to yourself.

[swmnkdinthervr]

Shame on everyone so bent on banning guns, any intrusion into our rights is unacceptable!!! (I don't own a gun) I ride a motorcycle and wear a helmet but I don't want anyone dictating to me whether I have to wear one or not! Continue to erode our freedoms and you will have people telling you what kind of sex it's ok to indulge in...hmmm, seems they are trying to do that too...be careful what you wish for!!!

Shouldn't we address the real issue first...oh, that's right...there's no way to ban stupid!

I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.
~James Madison, speech, Virginia Convention, 1788

[smartsexychick]

http://www.sho.com/site/locknload/about.do

http://joshtryan.homestead.com/index.html

There is a relatively new cable reality series on the Showtime Channel in the US called "Lock 'N Load" which takes place in a gun shop in Englewood, Colorado, less than a 10 minute drive from Littleton, where the Columbine Massacre occurred. I have made myself watch the series, and it has helped me cope with seeing guns and not feeling the panic and nausea that has often plagued me, having been the victim of a gun crime.


The Ft. Hood shooting has been esp difficult. Not just because of what it is, a psychiatrist taking all those lives, but I used to live there during summers when I was in middle school. My sister and her husband were there for many years, and a niece and a nephew were actually born in that medical facility. I did get a lot of strength from seeing the woman who actually brought the doctor down and stopped the massacre. I thank God for that but I wish he had not lived, frankly. The only possible hope for this son of a b*tch who is taking up our good oxygen, is that they may discover others like him, and can either treat them or in his case, get them out or prevent from ever getting in the military in the first place. With this guy in particular, there was waaaaaay too much that was not addressed, and it may have been just a matter of time.

[DakotaT]

I've owned guns since I was about 14. Never even came close to using one to hurt anyone but did use my 22 rifle to scare the crap out of a peeping tom one night. My mother screamed that someone was looking in her bedroom window. Dad was at work. I was about 16 yrs old. I grabbed my Remington Nylon 66, quickly loaded a few rounds, stepped out on the front porch, and fired those few rounds into the air. You should have seen that guy run! I'd say about a 9.6 100-yard dash! She was never bothered by the peeping tom again! Those types of things happen all over the country and they never make the news because a crime was averted instead of committed. Who knows what would have happened if I hadn't been there with my 22. Rape, maybe, I don't know but I shudder to think.
Anyway, there is no GOOD reason why law-abiding citizens shouldn't be allowed to own guns whether for hunting, target-shooting, collecting, or protection. There will always be the occasional accident just as there are with knives, cars, motorcycles, ATVs, ladders, tools, etc. Liberal application of "common sense" would eliminate 99% of those! Why in the world did that guy shoot BEFORE identifying his intruder first? Why was she entering his house in the middle of the night without making sure she announced herself? We may never know the story behind the story.
One other thing that I don't think anyone has mentioned: Guns are not really "high-tech" anymore. Any machinist with a Shopsmith type Lathe-Mill-Drill machine in his garage (as I myself have) can make a crude but shootable single-shot hand-held gun within a few hours and can make a pretty decent firearm within a couple of days. I dare say that with the inexpensive shop machinery available today, there would be a flourishing black-market gun business just as there were numerous back yard stills around during prohibition. It didn't work for alcohol and it won't work for guns.
Anyway, if you don't like guns . . . . fine. . . . nobody's gonna make you own one. If you get threatened, robbed, etc., you can call the police, who will come, with their guns, to protect you. That's your perogative. Just don't try to deny me my constitutional right to protect myself instead of
w a i t i n g. . . . . on the police to arrive!

[jamiehue]

Im from the detroit area....

[tenni]

I gotta give this my :2cents:,
In Canada, when it comes to guns, we have a failed gun registry (that cost the tax payers millions,) we have regulations out the wazoo on owning storing, and purchasing guns. I might be wrong but I think that there is a ban on owning hand guns unless you are a collector. There are those that feel their rights are being stripped from them because they can't have enough fire power in their houses to overthrow an entire city. There are those that scream for tighter controls, and those that would be happy if guns were banned outright. We can argue until we have no voices left about what the solution will be. You can ban everything more powerfull than a fart, but if someone wants a weapon to harm or kill another human being, they will get that weapon, it is a sure bet! Even if someone legally owns the weapon, if they decide to use it to harm or kill they will. And the gun realted "accidents" will continue. Personally I am not a fan of guns, I don't hunt, or belong to a gun club. Hell I've never even had a gun in my hands. Gun related crime in Nova Scotia is more common than it ever has been, and most of the illegal activity is carried out with illegal weapons. Educating the public isn't a 100% fix, banning guns isn't a 100% fix. There is no fix. The debate will go on forever, and people will continue to die. Accidentally or not, dead is dead. For most of us sane people regardless of which side of the debate you are on it is the sad, tragic truth.

1/ It is incorrect to believe that Canada's Long Gun registry has been a failure. The Canadian equivalent to the US NRA has been sending out messages that the registry is wrong. However, the RCMP and Police Chief Association has come out in favour of the Long Gun registry as a means to reduce domestic gun violence. If there is a domestic violence call, the police are able to know whether there is also a long gun in the house. It prepares them better(Chief Police viewpoint)
2/ Ownership of a handgun in Canada is not illegal but difficult to get a license for a legal hand gun.
3/ Most gun violence happens in Canadian cities and most guns involved are illegal. They have either been stolen from this gun collector group or smuggled in illegally from the US. In recent years, the smuggling of guns that were illegally sold in the US has increased quite a bit. The US gun laws create problems in my country. The location of where guns are sold illegally has been found time and time again. The US agents shut them down and they simiply re open under a different name.

There needs to be an approach to "fix" the illegal ownership of guns in Canada. Rural owners of long guns may have a use for these guns on their farms etc. but they are still used to kill people. It happens there too. What that "fix" is doesn't seem to be clear right now. Gun related accidents may happen but what is happening in gang warfare in Toronto etc. is not an accident. Foolish youthful confused thugs are not the same people who have been taught respect for gun ownership from the age of 8.

[Annika L]

When the winged monkies finally descend to destroy us all, I for one am going to be looking to you gun nuts to protect me! Um...if you haven't all shot one another (or me) by that time.

[Spartik]

Actually I grew up in the era of the assasinations of the 2 Kennedy brothers, Martin Luther King, the shooting of George Wallace and Ronald Reagan and 2 gun attempts on Gerald Ford. During the last 40 years, I can only think of 2 shootings outside the U.S., Pope John Paul II and the Israeli prime minister. For some reason, the United States vastly overshoots his own population over other nations. I used to favor strong gun control. But I have decided that, like against cigarettes, strong action is politically impossible. Besides, I think people should have the choice.

I would now favor gun owner training, like driver training, to prevent people mishandling their guns or acting stupidly, illegally (no, you can't just shoot an unarmed intruder), or unsafely. Many people buy a gun with no more knowledge of that deadly weapon than they see on TV.

As for me, I decided a long time ago that I would rather be shot by the bad guys because I didn't have a gun that to have myself or one of my family killed because a loose gun was used in a moment of carelessness, stupidity, anger or depression.

[TwylaTwobits]

I grew up with guns around, learned to shoot them from my dad. We lived out in the country and coyotes were around not to mention three kids alone after school for a couple hours. We were responsible and knew not to touch a gun for any reason other than to shoot and to know what we shot at.

Now that I am living alone, I don't have a gun here but I wish I did. We have more people out this way and they are not all "good" people, ie a meth lab exploded a few miled down the road.

I was also taught by my cousin, who was metro narcotics, if you are shooting make sure the gun will go through the door. This is not the case of someone trying to sneak in after hours, this is the case of the person trying to break down a door to get at any property or people inside a dwelling.

LDD teases me about coming to visit and me shooting him but all in all it is a true statement that guns do not kill people, it's the people with the guns who pull the trigger.

No you wouldn't have seen a story about a mass murder involving a knife or an axe, but the woman in this story would have been just as dead if she was attacked before he identified her. As was pointed out, we don't know everything. He could have been the victim previously of a break in and bought the gun for protection. So many variables that we do not know and to make a blanket statement smacks of bias.

[MissLady91111]

We really like that show Lock 'N Load. I wasn't into guns either but the guy is a hottie, and it's funny. I think it's really cool that it helped you get over your fear of guns. Sho.com has a message board for that show, you should share your story there, it's kewl. (http://www.sho.com/site/message/boards.do?groupid=1620) Not sure if it will last, but just thought I'd respond to the post.

Misslady, UK

[jimisbi]

The story as related in the OP is probably an urban legend. It is only a few weeks ago that a similar story was making the rounds on the internet. Only in this case it was a cop who heard a noise and shot his daughter who was only days away from getting married. The lesson to be learned from the OP is that one should not believe everything one reads or as the old saying goes "believe only half of what you see and none of what you read."

[Doggie_Wood]

When the winged monkies finally descend to destroy us all, I for one am going to be looking to you gun nuts to protect me! Um...if you haven't all shot one another (or me) by that time.

I'll protect you Annika. I have a Winchester 30-30 for the ones a far flying your way. For those tha manage to get closer I'll use my .357 then my Glock .40 cal while you reload my .357. And I am highly proficient at hitting what I shot at.

Doggie :doggie:

[lv69cpl69]

click to view

[rissababynta]

click to view

LMAO that is messed up haha.

[TwylaTwobits]

unashamedly stolen and already well used in an argument elsewhere, thanks for that lvl.

[lv69cpl69]

never said it was mine but is my feelings:male:

[Mmonty]

I tried to find this incident, but couldn't. It may be true, or it may be urban legend, I don't know. If the man was scared he could have just as easily stabbed her with a knife, knocked her brains out with a cane or a lamp or a hammer, etc. Why he didn't give a warning or call out to see who was there and why the woman was essentially sneaking in and not letting him know who it was, was just plain stupid.
There are people who shouldn't have guns that do. Unfortunately, they tend to be criminals....who would get them illegally anyway. I don't happen to own a gun. I don't mind that others do. A weapon is a tool just like any other tool. It demands respect and sober use. Cars kill far more people than guns.

[abennyb]

Only and solely one of all countries in the western world allow their citizens to own guns. - USA.

It has more gun related deaths than any other western country.

Privately held handguns are effectively outlawed in Canada.

Statistics Canada:

"The U.S. rate of gun homicide is nearly eight times Canada's, the agency says."

"Handgun ownership in Canada has been restricted to police, members of gun clubs or collectors for over 80 years. Very few people (about 50, in the entire 34 million inhabitant country) have been given permits own handguns for "self-protection" on pre-specified occasions."

...nuff said.

[rissababynta]

I tried to find this incident, but couldn't. It may be true, or it may be urban legend, I don't know. If the man was scared he could have just as easily stabbed her with a knife, knocked her brains out with a cane or a lamp or a hammer, etc. Why he didn't give a warning or call out to see who was there and why the woman was essentially sneaking in and not letting him know who it was, was just plain stupid.
There are people who shouldn't have guns that do. Unfortunately, they tend to be criminals....who would get them illegally anyway. I don't happen to own a gun. I don't mind that others do. A weapon is a tool just like any other tool. It demands respect and sober use. Cars kill far more people than guns.

I didn't even think about it this way. If he really was scared and wanted to cause the individual harm he could have easily used any method. The one he happened to use was a gun.

[BareHunter45]

Well lets see...The US has a population of about 300 million, which is about 8 times Canada's population of 34 million, so one would expect the nnumber of homicides to be 8 times greater.


Only and solely one of all countries in the western world allow their citizens to own guns. - USA.

It has more gun related deaths than any other western country.

Privately held handguns are effectively outlawed in Canada.

Statistics Canada:

"The U.S. rate of gun homicide is nearly eight times Canada's, the agency says."

"Handgun ownership in Canada has been restricted to police, members of gun clubs or collectors for over 80 years. Very few people (about 50, in the entire 34 million inhabitant country) have been given permits own handguns for "self-protection" on pre-specified occasions."

...nuff said.

[darkeyes]

Well lets see...The US has a population of about 300 million, which is about 8 times Canada's population of 34 million, so one would expect the nnumber of homicides to be 8 times greater.

Wud make sense Hunbun, if the world made sense an/or stats showed everywer wos the same.. but the world don make sense..nor dus handguns or ne otha kind..but not gonna go inta that argument..jus suffice 2 say.. the no a homicides in the US is sumwot gr8er than 8 times that a Canada.. an sumwot moren 6 times that a the UK (pop 60 mill)... considerably sumwot gr8er.. 2 many 'ere an all.. but tf for restrictive gun laws.. cos ther wud b far more if guns wer freely available or as easily available as in the US... our cultures r diff.. our attitudes r therefore diff... hav me own opinion as 2 wich is best.... as no doubt dus yasel...

[goldenfinger]

Just read in the paper a father killed his 15 year old son, shot to the head, after he admitted to sexually abusing his 3 year old half sister.The father is now charged with first degree murder. Is this what can happen when you act in the heat of the moment.
It took place in Michigan. Only sketchy news found it way to Australia, but would like to hear some details.

[deepseven504]

That's all I have to say!

[lv69cpl69]

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. >From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated
------------------------------

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
---- ------------- -------------

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
------------------------------

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
-----------------------------

Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.
------------------------------
This part is now approximately 10 years old, but the statistics were accurate....


It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by their own Government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first year results are now in:

List of 7 items:

Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent.

Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent.

Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!

[tenni]

You seem to have forgotten a little country called Switzerland. They have one of the highest gun ownership rates in the world and allow their citizens to fully automatic weapons (they actually encourage it). They also have a tiny fraction of the crime rate in the US. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_gun_laws


Why do you suppose that Switzerland has what you consider only a fraction of the death rates by guns then?

Might it be that every male must spend time serving in the Swiss military and continue to take two months a year off serving in the militia until they are at least 30 years old? Might it be that they are trained and educated to treat a military gun with more respect and restrictions? Might it be that there are better education systems both systemic and public education about the value of a life?

Even still with that type of educaton and experience lacking in the US, the Swiss are taught that it is a "responsibility" with certain behavioural expectations rather than a "right" without any restrictions beyond perhaps a very simple training of safety. There is no invasion by the Swiss for centuries while in the US there seems to be a rather unhealthy attitude and a lack of respect for the sovereignty of other nations. When was the last time that the Swiss invaded another country or even entered a war? They have guns for self protection from invasion and not the other way round. In my opinion, the Swiss have a much better attitude towards respecting the life of an indivual and what it really means to protect your country.

Even with those things, the Swiss have 300 deaths due to the use of the guns by suicide, family violence and accidental deaths. There are 7.6 million Swiss as of 2008 and 300 million plus US citizens. Figure it out ratio wise. The entire homicide rate in Switzerland is about 2.94 per 100 000 with and without guns (data is 2004 and not 2008). The murder rate in the US is 38 per 100 000 in 2008. Quite a difference.

What you write is not a logical argument and there is very little connection between the US approach to gun ownership and the Swiss.

As far as a comparison between gun banning in Australia and an increase in crime, how can that be explained? There is not a logical connection there but just an empty vague attempt to connnect the two premises! Nonsense and hysterical attempt to connect personal safety with gun ownership.

What type of assaults have increased (sexual, physical, etc.)? Previously, how often was a gun used to prevent an assault in ratio to assaults by other things such as fists, knives etc. If gun ownership is banned, where are the guns used to commit crime coming from? (maybe illegal exports from the US like is happening in Canada?...but it seems like a long distance)

[rissababynta]

I think that taking away guns isn't a good solution, but perhaps better and more widespread gun education would be benefitial.

[tenni]

I think that taking away guns isn't a good solution, but perhaps better and more widespread gun education would be benefitial.

Where is your proof that gun ownership is a good thing as far as personal safety?

Do you believe that the US population would adapt the Swiss approach or do you see that it is violence is too deeply ingrained in the US culture? There would have to be an entire change of attitude and approach in the US for the US to come anywhere near the lower gun death rates?

[goldenfinger]

Here is a link to the story"Father kills son"
http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2009/11/dad_accused_of_forcing_son_int.html
Was he a law abiding person, or a criminal without a license before he killed his own son. Had he not had a gun, he might have been able to cool down before he acted.

[12voltman59]

I loved the part of Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" where he had the people who created the animated Comedy Central program, "South Park" provide a short video piece called "A Brief History of America" that mentions our love of guns-"We luvs our guns, we luvs our guns!"

The segment might be somewhat hyperbolic--but not by much. In my opinion, the video is pretty much on the mark.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zqh6Ap9ldTs