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.
Which you took out of context, that having been the lies told by gun-nuts as to how guns make people safer when all the numbers say having guns in the home puts people at increased risk.
That would put me at exactly none of the risk that was earlier suggested. As for you and others who might need to live or work in areas with high rates of crime, stay out of the worst neighborhoods. Don't for instance go over there to attend seedy nightclubs or play poker in an alley at 3:00 am. Be sure that the security of your own windows and doors has been brought up to par. If you rent and cannot make exterior alterations, fortify one interior room -- sort of like a storm cellar -- to retreat to should times of trouble arise. Travel at sensible hours and via main and well-lit routes. Complain to management if workplace safety has been ignored by an employer. Oh, and stop over-reacting. Even high crime areas are not war zones.
People should keep themselves as safe as possible. See the steps above. Note that confronting people and brandishing weapons are not on that list nor any sensible other one either. If you are hell-bent on getting yourself killed, go ahead and ignore all sage advice and go to war against what you already know is a superior foe.
lol.. "run, hide, fight?"..
in your own home...
it's just sooo much "safer" to attack an intruder with a folding chair or a pair of scissors than it is to use a gun to defend yourself..
My neighbor is retired law enforcement and we... meaning every last homeowner on the block are glad he is there... and yes, he still has and qualifies each year with his.
That's very nice. These are the people who are supposed to be armed. They have had extensive training in and experience with the proper use and storage of fireamms. Not to mention in controlling their emotions under pressure. Best to leave the heroics to those guys while doing what you can to keep yourself out of harm's way.
That's very nice. These are the people who are supposed to be armed. They have had extensive training in and experience with the proper use and storage of fireamms. Not to mention in controlling their emotions under pressure. Best to leave the heroics to those guys while doing what you can to keep yourself out of harm's way.
so in one breath you're saying "nobody wants yer gunz!", then in the next breath, you're saying "except *that* gun, you dont *need* it for any lawful purpose, so i wanna ban it, even though the stats show that this particular gun is one of the least likely weapons to be used in a homicide"..
Hello? You don't have a right to ANY particular weapon. All that is required under Heller (extended by McDonald) is that you be able to maintain weapons appropriate to self-defense in your own home. No one can whine about rights being taken away that they don't have to begin with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zippyman
you, my friend are exactly the *reason* that "gun nuts" went on a buying rampage - you dont need an ar-15, you dont need more than xx bullets in your mag, you dont need hollowpoint bullets, etc.. once you start down that slope, the noose tightens very quickly - why *not* make people take a 60 hour "safety" course? why not require a $900 annual licensing fee to pay for victims of gun violence? why not ban the sale of more than 50 bullets at a time? why not tax bullets at $1 each? - variations of all of those "why not's" have all been proposed, btw..
And some of them might have been very good ideas. You apparently believe that the Second Amendment simply lets you off the leash as far as guns are concerned. That is most assuredly not the case at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zippyman
As far as the Heller decision, that particular decision was the result of a local law *prohibiting* having a gun for home protection - exactly what you're saying "no one wants to do".. sorry, but some people in power *do* want to ban guns for protection inside the home, and Heller struck that law down as unconstitutional..
The parts of the DC law invalidated were with regard to ownership of handguns. The Court ruled that those amounted to a prohibited "banning". Within weeks of the decision, the DC Council passed new and even more restrictive gun control laws that stand up to the scrutiny of Heller. Those laws ban all bottom-loading weapons for instance. Perfectly okay under Heller since not all weapons are bottom-loaded.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zippyman
if you dont like guns, no one is forcing you to buy one.
That will start to matter as soon as you can promise that we will not be shot by one that we haven't bought.
There is. You simply prohibit private possession or trafficking in prohibited weapons, and if necessary, prohibit their manufacture as well.
Actually, the Navy Yard shooter acquired his weapons in Virginia. He tried to buy an assault weapon, but after being sued by other states for their lax policies, even Virginia has a waiting period for those, so he couldn't buy one. Freaking liberals!
No you can't. The Constitution prohibits that. Possession for the defense of your own home is protected. Have you never read Scalia's meandering and oddly crafted opinion in Heller?
If you think that would be simple, you don't understand this country at all.
Two of the three make sense. The third one doesn't. Fighting is for dummies and a few pitiful testosterone-slaves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zippyman
in your own home...it's just sooo much "safer" to attack an intruder with a folding chair or a pair of scissors than it is to use a gun to defend yourself..
Many states require that you make an effort to flee before resorting to a use of lethal force against an intruder, even in your own home. This is because fleeing is a valid harm-reduction strategy. Stand-and-fight is not.
That will start to matter as soon as you can promise that we will not be shot by one that we haven't bought.
we will never agree on this, like I said before, a ban isnt going to make 300 million guns just disappear, nor will it prevent them from being manufactured in garages and basements across the country. if anything, it'll lower the cost & increase the availability of machine guns.. (if all guns are illegal, why not make/smuggle full-auto weapons?).. enjoy your fantasy of a gun-free world.
yeah.. I'll call the cops after I'm done, thank you very much..
Chances are that you won't be ABLE to call the cops after you're done. The cops will be able to call your next of kin, however. But look on the bright side...maybe your pointless suicide mission will win you a Darwin Award.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zippyman
...but you're certainly welcome to call them whenever you feel they can help..
Yes, I know, and better them than me. I also know that anyone can post links to wrecked taxicabs in some off-the-wall attempt to discredit vehicles for hire.
That's very nice. These are the people who are supposed to be armed. They have had extensive training in and experience with the proper use and storage of fireamms. Not to mention in controlling their emotions under pressure. Best to leave the heroics to those guys while doing what you can to keep yourself out of harm's way.
Fairlaker, are you serious? Why do you want to remain helpless to defend yourself? This police officer isn't in the neighborhood 24/7. And honestly, most of the time the police are nothing more than a cleanup crew anyway. How often do they arrive during a crime and arrest the perpetrator? I'd be willing to bet that happens very infrequently.
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.