Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"firearm-related murder and non-negligent homicide" rate was 6.6 per 100,000 Americans in 1993. Following the exponential growth in the number of guns, that rate fell to 3.6 per 100,000 in 2000.
The second time the data proved the anti's wrong, when they initiated studies to prove their ignorance, which is exactly what it did, prove them ignorant.
Yeah...and there were no shootouts in the streets as predicted by the anti-gun crowd either.
Somewhere there is a man in a bright yellow suit and hat looking for Obama...
Nope. He's here, along with his big yellow hat and his monkey. Following close behind him are several white-coated men with butterfly nets. Let's listen in to what they're saying: "Anybody seen Cyborgt800 lately? Which way did he go?"
Hopefully you get that I'm only picking at you in a friendly way. I support the Second Amendment, AND I support logic, reason and and the hard, cold light of reality. I'm an equal opportunity sort of guy because I'll call "Bullsh*t!" on a pro-gunner just as fast as I will on an anti-gunner.
The mere presence of GUNS doesn't prevent crimes and tragedies any more than the mere presence of a first aid kit prevents pain, disability and death. In both cases, they're only tools. Also in both cases, in order to be effective, the tools must be appropriately used by one or more appropriately-trained persons.
I live in a neighborhood where the houses are pretty close together. To be quite frank, I don't want my next-door neighbor to have a GUN unless he/she actually knows how to use it. I've been narrowly-missed by bullets more than once, and really don't want to repeat the experience, ESPECIALLY in my own danged home. (It's quite difficult to make a believable claim that one was narrowly-missed by a first aid kit...)
With all due respect I'd like to see a whole lot more thinking and reasoning and logical discussion than I've seen in this topic area so far.
-- Nighteyes (who is armed & well-trained, and has a first aid kit, but who is neither 10 feet tall nor bulletproof)
Last edited by Nighteyes; 12-05-2013 at 04:18 PM..
Nope. He's here, along with his big yellow hat and his monkey. Following close behind him are several white-coated men with butterfly nets. Let's listen in to what they're saying: "Anybody seen Cyborgt800 lately? Which way did he go?"
Hopefully you get that I'm only picking at you in a friendly way. I support the Second Amendment, AND I support logic, reason and and the hard, cold light of reality. I'm an equal opportunity sort of guy because I'll call "Bullsh*t!" on a pro-gunner just as fast as I will on an anti-gunner.
The mere presence of GUNS doesn't prevent crimes and tragedies any more than the mere presence of a first aid kit prevents pain, disability and death. In both cases, they're only tools. Also in both cases, in order to be effective, the tools must be appropriately used by one or more appropriately-trained persons.
I live in a neighborhood where the houses are pretty close together. To be quite frank, I don't want my next-door neighbor to have a GUN unless he/she actually knows how to use it. I've been narrowly-missed by bullets more than once, and really don't want to repeat the experience, ESPECIALLY in my own danged home. (It's quite difficult to make a believable claim that one was narrowly-missed by a first aid kit...)
With all due respect I'd like to see a whole lot more thinking and reasoning and logical discussion than I've seen in this topic area so far.
-- Nighteyes (who is armed & well-trained, and has a first a id kit, but who is neither 10 feet tall nor bulletproof)
I like your style Nighteyes! You'll call Bull**it on a pro gunner just as quick as an anti-gunner! I like that attitude. I'm the same way, and I call Bull**it on the premise of this thread. I'll add to what you have already said. The mere presence of guns doesn't make us as a society any safer. Yes, gun ownership has increased the last twenty years and crime has decreased the last twenty years, but the two aren't necessarily related. You know what else has increased at the same time that crime has fallen? Drug use. Maybe the increase in drug use is responsible for the lower crime rate? LOL. No. These statistics do not mean that the increase in guns is the cause for the drop in crime. What they do prove, is that more guns does NOT equal more crime, which shatters the gun control narrative.
There was also a statement from Oct. by an ex BATF official (from the Clinton admin, no less) who said that he now believes an armed citizenry is beneficial in an age of terrorism. He made reference to the recent terrorist attack at a mall in Kenya. I posted it in PO&C, but no one commented.
Nobody open carries around here because there's not much crime but I'd like to see more of it. The more guns in plain sight of criminals the less they'll think about being criminals and the more 'normal' it will become so joe public doesn't go calling the cops every time they see a plain clothed person holstering a weapon. I really think the gun culture works well logically even in a progressive society with the exception of areas where large numbers of criminals gather in one area (inner city) in which case half of them are already in possession of illegal automatic weapons anyways so they don't care about gun laws. Ending the 'drug war' would also help with inner city crime.
the presence of guns does reduce crime. An armed society is a polite society. When the criminals know that lots of the people they're looking to prey on own guns, and lots of them cary guns, hell, even that they CAN carry and own guns, it makes their chosen profession very unappealing.
a good example is this current ridiculous fad amongst inner city kids called "the knockout game". There's been at least a couple instances already where a couple kids got shot by the person they targeted to knock out. Word will spread as it keeps happening, and the game will go away.
There's a reason cities like Chicago have such high crime yet super strict gun laws. You create a bunch of defenseless sheep for the wolves to prey on, of course crime is going to go up. You start sprinkling a good amount of sheepdogs in with the sheep, and the wolves will start to fall and will move to easier hunting grounds. These anti-gun people are un-intelligent, pure and simple. It's blatantly obvious that having lots of guns in the hands of law abiding citizens deters crime, everyone knows it, they just choose not to acknowledge it. The only place I feel that large numbers of guns in the hands of citizens would be iffy is in NYC. Just way too many people in way too small an area. Maybe if they were extra stringent on background checks and required training, both in how to handle the weapon and in situational awareness/decisions making. Like keeping in mind whats behind your target before you go emptying your clip willy-nilly in a panic. In NYC that could mean 7 innocents die.
As a left leaning voter and gun owner( I only have one because that's all I need to stop an intruder into my home) I find it interesting that many right leaning voters are so easily duped by their political leaders.
If one just looks at the political maps of the USA you can clearly see where the Democrats are in control and where the Republicans are in control.
The Democrats control the Northeast, West coast, and the wealthy area of the Midwest.
The Republicans control the South, Midwest and most of the rural areas where the less educated and less wealthy are the majority.
It's pretty simple the Republicans don't have enough well educated, wealthy voters to control congress.
So how do they get lower educated and no so wealthy on their side? Scare tactics and it has been working for years.
You convince all those hard working but lower educated folks that the evil Democrats want to take your guns away.
If your a Republican you know that's true right?
Contrary to what the Republicans would have you believe there are many left leaning gun owners. Not because they want to protect themselves from the govt. but because many of them are hunters, target shooters and many of them like myself just like to have a weapon to defend against home intruders plus target shooting is fun.
The Republicans need voters for many of their religious influenced policies that left leaning voters do not agree with.
The left wants to keep religion out of the voting booth and the right wants to keep your there.
So they use guns as one of their scare tactics along with forced abortions, forced gay marriage because after all most people would really rather marry their own sex, forced health care (Oh My Gosh the horror of everyone having health care)
If your one of those former Southern Democrats who finds them selves in the Right Camp and you are buying every gun in sight along with thousands of rounds of ammo you are doing exactly just what the Republican leaders hoped you would.
And they thank you for your votes.
I'm curious....what statement of mine was actually called out as BS? That's what I thought!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
, forced health care (Oh My Gosh the horror of everyone having health care)
