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.
Scientific American Report: Do More Guns Make Us Safer?
I picked up my monthly copy of Scientific American magazine and found this article. It's also on their website, at the link below. The author investigated the claim by the advocates of unrestricted gun ownership, that having more "good" people carry arms, makes society as a whole, safer. She pretty much debunked that claim, but read it and judge for yourselves. Don't let the term, "Scientific" prompt you to reject it as false, as many rightists seem to do these days.
She didn't need to convince me, as I've known for a long time, how obsessed gun nuts are often untrained and not responsible, the way they use and safeguard their weapons at home. Several people I've known most of my life, have large collections of guns and I don't understand why. They have almost no experience in using them out in the field and none were ever hunters or have served in combat.
well since that was a liberal DEMOCRAT president that ordered that, then perhaps you need to take it up with the liberals, not me. i never said our government would never do anything wrong, so i have no clue where you came up with that idea.
Thinking there is a difference between the progressive left and the progressive right is where you miss it. Tyranny is tyranny no matter which side does it and I'd be more afraid of a repub doing it since they are the party of war more so than the left.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm
once again you are assuming that i am telling people what to do or how to do it, and that is not the case. i am merely pointing out that there are enough people with guns in this country that if necessary they could overwhelm the military. you are the one assuming something i never suggested.
Just having rifles isn't enough imo. And yes we the people out populate the military by millions.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 23 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,551 posts, read 16,542,682 times
Reputation: 6040
Quote:
Originally Posted by 509
That is a HUGE split in perception.
According to CDC...another 20% of gun deaths are black on black crime. Currently there are NO programs dealing with shootings in the black community. Develop specific programs to address this issue. Why do we accept black kids killing each other??
.
Take your own advice and ask yourself have you ever heard a single person say they "accept" black kids killing each other.
If the answer is yes, then you are lying. There is no sugar coating it.
But if the answer is no, then you need to ask yourself why you chose to post something like that or why you ever believed it in the first place.
all your arguments are weak at best. if you can come up with a gun control law that would have prevented this shooting, and respected the rights of law abiding citizens, then i would be all for it. the problem is that you cant do it. a democrat tried once to make an end run around the second amendment by trying to get legislation through that would put people on the no fly list on a no gun buy list as well. but there were serious issues with that legislation, specifically once on the list, even if put on in error, there was little way to get off that list, and that even assumed you knew you were on the list in the first place.
To say nothing about being against the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.
In short, if the government wants to deprive someone of their rights, they charge them and take them to court.
Putting someone on a list is not due process of the law.
With all the talk about "Doing Something" about gun violence, it got me thinking.
Most of ideas on here are completely unconstitutional (secret no buy list,outright bans) some of them are just plain ridiculous (camara's on guns)
How about this...If your caught with a stolen gun, caught stealing guns, Felon with a gun, caught with an illegal gun (modified to full auto etc.) You get the full monty, No plea bargain's ( DA's banned from bargaining) full maximum sentence+ with no parole, A judge can add to but not lower a sentence.
I would even go so far as to ban Governor's from being able to parole them.
What do you say, you want to do something right, right?
RR
It is in the fundamentals of our system of criminal justice that the DA's have the discretion to prosecute the cases they desire. What piece of paper says that, I can't tell you. It was something I was told when I was furious that the DA would not go after a government theft case my department had handled. As such, told that the DA would not prosecute, I could not arrest him.
HENCE, what you are suggesting here is against the fundamentals of the US justice system. So that would require a massive change, perhaps one so massive that it wouldn't be the US any more.
Removal of parole for one crime may require removal of parole for all crimes, so be careful what you wish for. HINT: Don't get caught by the Feds for this exists: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federa..._United_States
Finally, it reminds me of the basic concept of defense and prosecution, a judge, and a jury. If we were going to get so absolute on items.........why bother to have these concepts at all?
When the 2nd amendment to the constitution was added a rifle could fire one round in a minute. I don't think that they could have imagined or condoned assault rifles as the right to bear arms. The founders were very smart and forward thinking but what we have today would be unimaginable to them at the time.
Not necessarily so (here we go again).
The Puckle Gun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puckle_gun could fire 9 rounds a minute and featured an external magazine to load the weapon with. It predates the Constitution by around 60 years.
When the 2nd amendment to the constitution was added a rifle could fire one round in a minute. I don't think that they could have imagined or condoned assault rifles as the right to bear arms. The founders were very smart and forward thinking but what we have today would be unimaginable to them at the time.
So here we go again with irrelevant comparisons. We didn't worry about guns when I was a kid. In fact all high schools offered rifle training. People had open, wooden gun cases in their living rooms.
What has changed is our tolerance of misbehavior. Fear of authority is gone. Shame is gone. Swift justice is gone.
We have the society we want.
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.
Scientific American Report: Do More Guns Make Us Safer?
)
