And we care what the NRA leadership has to say, because......? (Reagan, crimes)

[the_windwalker]

Originally Posted by ellemint

It doesn't come in anywhere close to the bottom of rankings by country for homicide. It has a higher murder rate than most developed nations of Europe, Asia, or Oceania but lower than many nations in more troubled regions of the world in Africa and Central and South America. Canada's murder rate is 1.6 per 100,000 population. And the overall homicide rate for the Netherlands is 1.1 per 100,000, in the U.S. it is nearly 500 % higher at 4.8 per 100,000.

List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I was going by the numbers someone else posted on another thread and did not check them out myself... My error, obviously. However, it does not change the message. A gun is not the "killer". It is the tool used by the killers, and if it were not available, they would use another tool.

But, even with guns banned, there are internet sites that will sell guns to anyone... ANYONE. They will ship anywhere in the world, and ANYTHING is available. And the security is set up so complex that it takes a long time to unravel just where they are located. Or, another option would be using a "3D PRINTER" to print your weapon. This has also been done successfully, and the weapon has been tested at a firing range.

There are so many ways to acquire a firearm, trying to eliminate them is a losing battle. Just like the war on drugs, which has been going on for how long?????

[Hesster]

Personally, I would have more respect for the NRA if they didn't try to blame the media, movies, video games and just about everything else every time there's a high profile mass shooting. They should stick to providing gun safety education.

[Saritaschihuahua]

Originally Posted by the_windwalker

• Now, let's put the gun up on a wall with no one around it and see how long it takes for it to pull it's own trigger.

1) Do guns have a trigger? 2) Are they intended for killing? I rest my case. The bs about how guns don't shoot themselves has been a child-like ****-poor defense for keeping this country overrun with guns.

When I was in service, I did see one gun come out of a body, but it was propelled by a mortar round that landed next to it. Generally, it is the PROJECTILE that enters the body with a small hole and exits with a large, gaping wound.

• Mostly true. I won't knit-pick on terminology here.
• This one was actually covered two points ago.
• I do thank you for the new bit of information here. I was always taught that it was the blood vessels that ruptured and hemorrhaged. I stand corrected.
• Soooo.... You're saying.... You'll have to keep practicing in order to keep up with MATRIX???
• Again... More practice so that you can keep up with MATRIX???

All a waste of my reading time.

I'm afraid you lose that round very sadly and badly.

I'm not here to compete in a contest of any sort. I'm here to tell you that promoting guns continue to be sold is bs. I'm here to say that the chaotic hellhole rampant gun ownership has brought this country to, has got to stop.

I've travelled across this country quite extensively. Been in every one of the lower 48 at least a dozen times each. In that time, I got to see quite a number of weapons. Some came from the manufacturers, then were modified. A bolt-action .22 that was re-worked so that one squeeze of the trigger would about empty a ten shot clip. Fully automatic bolt-action rifle. In MS, I got a look at 12 guage shotgun shells that were reloaded with slugs that were armour-piercing/anti-personal. In MO, I got a look at ammo that would baffle police forensic experts. No part of the lead ever touches the rifling, and the caliber of the lead does not match the caliber of the weapon fired. In ID, I got a look at a .29 caliber handgun, semi-auto with a 16 inch barrel... Ammo was "necked-down 30-06. Also, in ID, I got to shoot a .48 cal that was a necked-down .50 cal. In CA, I got a look at a 20mm mounted in the trunk of a car, with explosive projectiles for ammo. In MN, a man is making his own guns, from single-shot, to multi-barrels, to semi-autos, to fully autos, in any caliber he can dream up. In PA, I got a look at a .22 necked down to .177. Also got a look at a .25 cal Saturday Night Special that got a new barrel to accept a cartridge that was necked down to .22 cal and the new barrel was several inches longer and accepted a suppressor. In WY, I got to shoot (just once) a handgun that would make a .454 look like a kid's BB gun. The 18 inch barrel actually did a lot of good against the recoil. These are not even beginning to look at the "doomsday preppers". In places like the Phillippines, kids are working in caves, with simple hand tools, and turning out guns/rifles that rival the SKS, AR-15, and the AK-47. These are being smuggled into countries like the Netherlands (where guns are currently banned), and authorities there estimate that there are, perhaps, 1.3 million illegal weapons currently in the country, and the number is going up. Places like Germany where authorities estimate that there are more than 3 million illegal weapons, and again, the number is going up, not down.

Who cares? So what? Again, they are killing machines, that's all I care to know.

Incidently, the guy in MN that makes his own weapons is also experimenting with various formulas of sugar in place of gunpowder, and he's getting some pretty impressive muzzle velocities. (See "CANDY-ROCKETS" on youtube. The formula is a bit different, but not by a lot.) If you honestly believe that weapons can not be built in a private workshop that will rival factory weapons, you've got a great deal to learn. Some that come out of a private workshop not only rival factory arms, but greatly surpass them. Banning guns will only give more people the incentive to try their own hand at it. Not a very smart move.

Really! Then I'm willing to let you gun owners go through the nightmare of having to make your own guns. I'll take that risk any time. If you can find time to manufacture your own guns, more power to you! Go on, build your own guns. But ban the ones made by gun manufacturers. (Guaranteed you gun owners will not be manufacturing your own guns if you can't buy the high powered ones already made).

I believe, if you do just a little research, you may find that alcohol kills more people each and every year than firearms do.

And? Who's talking about what decisions people take with regard to their own body? What in hell's name does drinking too damned much have to do with having to live in a country where millions are armed to the nose, and I'm having to beware of everyone because who knows what gun owner in "good standing" will turn nutjob overnight and start shooting, as happens every frikkin day in the good ole U.S. of A.?

Several years ago, I did have someone holding a snub-nosed .38. He'll never pick up anything again with his right arm. For the rest of his life, his right arm will be useless. When the police arrived, they were treating him like the victim and put me in handcuffs... Until everything got straightened out. Then they started asking me why I didn't just kill him. (Wanted for two shootings where two officers were wounded.)

Pretending to be a big macho man has never impressed me. In fact, it sends out a clear signal to me that the person I'm talking to is full of caca. People with true confidence and strength never need to go around advertising it. It's those who don't who have to advertise.

[Saritaschihuahua]

Originally Posted by JimRom

Stop behaving as if you can't read what I write or understand logical thinking and I'll stop cracking jokes. As of 4 or 5 posts ago, I stopped taking you seriously. I'm actually only in this for the amusement value of seeing what the next response will be at this point.

In case you missed my earlier post, you can try to compare the United States to the Federation of Mars, for all I care. None of the other countries in this world have the same socioeconomic issues that we have, nor do they have our constitution or ethnic diversity. There is no comparison.

Historically, this country is the only one of the so-called "advanced" nations that was founded as a democratic republic, and for 200+ years it has worked perfectly well. We've modified a few things here and there, but overall our system of governance has stayed the same. As soon as you find another country that can say the same about their history, I'll look to them for a comparison. Overall, I feel that the United States stands head and shoulders above the rest of the world. I don't always agree with what our government does, but I'd much rather live here than anywhere else.

1. As long as you keep repeating the 5-grader defense of guns, "Oh but guns don't shoot themselves! nyanyanya!" I will continue saying you're speaking pure nonsense.

2. I don't care what you're comparing it or not comparing it to. The gun madness in this country has turned it into a dangerous hellhole.

[natalie469]

Originally Posted by momonkey

"For decades it's been the good old boys in power."

Women outnumber and out vote men in every election.

It's been the good ol' girls deciding every election for a long long time.

I was talking about the NRA and who has the power there....which is the good old boys....specifically old white men. Where are the good old girls in the NRA that you are talking about. And sadly, money decides a lot of elections. Why do you think the NRA spends so much on elections. They are a huge influence with their lobbyists on the hill.

[JimRom]

Originally Posted by Saritaschihuahua

1. As long as you keep repeating the 5-grader defense of guns, "Oh but guns don't shoot themselves! nyanyanya!" I will continue saying you're speaking pure nonsense.

2. I don't care what you're comparing it or not comparing it to. The gun madness in this country has turned it into a dangerous hellhole.

So move to a country that doesn't have a 2nd Amendment and you'll be happy.

[Saritaschihuahua]

Originally Posted by JimRom

So move to a country that doesn't have a 2nd Amendment and you'll be happy.

A WELL REGULATED MILITIA, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Are you in a militia? No? Then ****. The 2nd was not intended so that a bunch of Clint Eastwood-imitating nutjobs could run around with semi-automatics pointing them at anyone they think (OR HOPE) are their enemy. You people LOVE to misinterpret the 2nd and continue to do so. Further, you don't bother to read history and figure out why militias were required back in the 1700s, and even if you did, since it doesn't support your primary goal (which to keep guns in the hands of gun nuts), you'd dismiss it asap.

[JimRom]

Originally Posted by Saritaschihuahua

A WELL REGULATED MILITIA, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Are you in a militia? No? Then ****. The 2nd was not intended so that a bunch of Clint Eastwood-imitating nutjobs could run around with semi-automatics pointing them at anyone they think (OR HOPE) are their enemy. You people LOVE to misinterpret the 2nd and continue to do so. Further, you don't bother to read history and figure out why militias were required back in the 1700s, and even if you did, since it doesn't support your primary goal (which to keep guns in the hands of gun nuts), you'd dismiss it asap.

Take it up with the U.S. Supreme Court. That argument has already been tried, and SCOTUS ruled that the 2nd Amendment protects the individual's right to self defense. If you don't like that ruling, tough. The 2nd Amendment, unless changed by some fairly major legal action, is here to stay. You can continue to wring your hands and cry about the "evil gun owners" or "gun nuts" all you want, but that won't change the law of the land. Your emotional pleas and passive-aggressive arguments aren't going to convince anyone with a shred of logic that you support the 2nd Amendment, no matter what you say. The only thing you've managed to do in this thread is to prove that the anti-gun crowd bases their arguments on emotion rather than reality and will do absolutely anything to try to make firearms owners look evil or idiotic.

My knowledge of history is, most likely, better than yours. As is my understanding of human nature, apparently. If you'd bother to study the actual history of the United States, rather than concentrate on what you think the history was, you would realize that almost every published quote from our founding fathers that relates to the subject makes it very clear that their intention in writing the 2nd Amendment was to insure that the U.S. Citizen would always have access to firearms in order to defend themselves and their property from others, whether those others were individuals, foreign enemies, or a tyrannical government.

In other words, if you have anything constructive to add to the conversation, please do so, but if all you're going to do is ignore logic and rehash arguments that have already been resolved to the satisfaction of the Supreme Court then responding to your emotional idiocy isn't worth my time.

[Saritaschihuahua]

Originally Posted by JimRom

Take it up with the U.S. Supreme Court. That argument has already been tried, and SCOTUS ruled that the 2nd Amendment protects the individual's right to self defense. If you don't like that ruling, tough. The 2nd Amendment, unless changed by some fairly major legal action, is here to stay. You can continue to wring your hands and cry about the "evil gun owners" or "gun nuts" all you want, but that won't change the law of the land. Your emotional pleas and passive-aggressive arguments aren't going to convince anyone with a shred of logic that you support the 2nd Amendment, no matter what you say. The only thing you've managed to do in this thread is to prove that the anti-gun crowd bases their arguments on emotion rather than reality and will do absolutely anything to try to make firearms owners look evil or idiotic.

My knowledge of history is, most likely, better than yours. As is my understanding of human nature, apparently. If you'd bother to study the actual history of the United States, rather than concentrate on what you think the history was, you would realize that almost every published quote from our founding fathers that relates to the subject makes it very clear that their intention in writing the 2nd Amendment was to insure that the U.S. Citizen would always have access to firearms in order to defend themselves and their property from others, whether those others were individuals, foreign enemies, or a tyrannical government.

In other words, if you have anything constructive to add to the conversation, please do so, but if all you're going to do is ignore logic and rehash arguments that have already been resolved to the satisfaction of the Supreme Court then responding to your emotional idiocy isn't worth my time.

The Supreme Court is not the Constitution. The Supreme Court, as you well know, consists of 9 people, each of which has opinions, biases, political beliefs, and makes mistakes as huge as you and I. In fact, The Supreme Court has made decisions that were so f'd up, that they have had to be reversed. This generally happens through the making of a new decision on a new case which contradicts with the previous decision. So don't come at me with the Supreme Court, as if the Supreme Court were God. It isn't and will never be.

Again, unless you are in a MILITIA, as the 2nd states quite clearly off the bat, don't be telling me that you the 2nd told you you can have a gun. It did not, unless you are IN A MILITIA. When you are in a militia governed by the State, give me a holler, will ya?

[Felix C]

^^Supreme Court so stated on a number of occassions in our lifetime the 2nd deals with self defense.