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.
Look at a rural state like MN with lots and lots of gun ownership. It's got about the same murder rate as Canada. Meanwhile, Illinois has a rate 4x higher and in Chicago the Austin neighborhood has a rate that is about 30x higher than Minnesota.
Basically, that tells me it isn't a "gun" problem but a gang, drug and social problem that MANIFESTS itself via illegal shootings.
Missouri has a murder rate 4x higher than neighboring Iowa. Are you honestly going to tell me that the problem is that Missouri has "more guns"? Heck no they don't.....but they have more gangs, drugs and urban woes....but that's not what you want to address to fix the murder problem. Why?
I'm not a statistician, but I'm going to give it a try - poverty and desperation nicely blended with a supply of guns like history has never seen before in any country of the globe.
The NRA is not any different than any other special interest group such as Planned Parenthood. Look at all the blood on the hands of PP, using taxpayer money, to ensure abortion on demand, paid by the taxpayers, despite the fact that the majority of Americans don't want to fund abortions.
What about tax-funded Viagra and Cialis? I'd rather people be getting abortions and have less of a burden on the system, than the burden of more births.
If guns are not available, we are a species that is able to reason and come up with a substitute that will work nearly as effectively. So, take away the guns, and something else will take their place. Doesn't take a lot of research to come up with a replacement. Today, you can even make a cheap gun out of PVC pipe. Quiet, but very effective. Can be just as lethal as anything you might buy in a gun store.
When you get done with firearms, when do you work on taking sugar off the shelves? It doesn't take a lot of effort to process it into an effective WMD or propellant. When are we going to stop addressing the instruments used and start addressing the causes of the misuse of those instruments???
That is a far more serious problem than the guns themselves.
As a non-gun-owner, I can't speak to the number or rounds, or the speed, or the distance with which guns can be fired.
I do know these things:
That guns can kill without having to be close-up and personal to the person, in other words from far away, as if I were a shooting target.
I also know that guns can be fired more than once.
I also know that guns can shoot bullets with great velocity, which means greater penetration (in fact, guns can come out of the body after doing the damage and be found elsewhere).
I also know that bullets can (depending on where they hit) "bounce" slightly, thereby hitting other vital areas. I also know that bullets can fragment, shatter, explode, and fan out on impact, causing even greater damage.
I also know that bullets can spin inside the body, tearing up the area, which is why exit wounds are larger than entry wounds.
I also know bullets can cause hydraulic shock (as seen in The Matrix, for those who don't know), just as any projectile can cause a hydraulic effect in living tissue, since living tissue is 90-something percent water, and can cause nervous system damage as well. This last can create a hemorrhage in remote areas away from where the bullet penetrated.
I also know that I can't move away at the same velocity that the bullet is coming at me.
I also know that I can't "avert" a bullet using my arms or other objects, as one would a knife.
I also know that the number of people that would be able to manufacture a gun and bullets in their basement that had the same capacity, velocity, and destructive force and abilities as those that I can buy over the counter, is almost impossible.
I also know that my arms and legs don't reach as far as the shooter is standing so I can't kick him in the b***s.
Those are only a FEW reasons, and I know almost nothing about guns. I'm sure someone with a gun might be able to add to these (as I've seen gun owners gleefully posting the killing power of their guns even on this site).
Want more reasons why these human-killing machines need to be prohibited? I'll gladly supply a few more, if you really long for them.
Which one would you prefer? Someone shooting at you, or someone holding a gun at your temple, or would you prefer someone coming at you with a knife? Don't lie for the NRA. They won't put you on their cushy payroll.
Of course the Executive Order will be challenged by the NRA lobby. Everything is challenged by the NRA lobbyists. That's what they get paid to do, to promote the gun manufacturers and keep them profiting nicely.
What's rude and condescending about what the NRA actually is?
Here's it is, plainly stated. It is a lobbying organization for the gun manufacturers, whose purpose is to increase profits, and billions of dollars are at stake for the gun manufacturers:
The National Rifle Association of America (NRA) is an American 501(c) organization[1] that has historically promoted firearm ownership, marksmanship, safety, hunting, and self-defense in the United States, and has more recently taken up a major role as a lobbying organization. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Rifle_Association
As for an M.D. not needing to know... really? Really?! An M.D. is supposed to treat and follow the Hippocratic Oath, but is to do it blindly, knowing nothing? Come on now. My nephew is a physician, and when he treats someone, and particularly someone who has been injured by someone, you BETCHA he needs to know if there whether there are guns involved. Further, there are things physicians NEED to report to the authorities. I don't understand how savagely you must view human beings, that gun-love has taken priority in your brain, over the safety of human beings.
Really. No need to know and no correlation with what you related in the last paragraph. I doubt you are able to make a proper logic connection justifying your comments.
As for the rest, again you are too dramatic to communicate with on this subject. You have acted in a manner that would be considered racist if the subject where about race due to your conclusions, close mindedness and stereotype fixing.
If anyone here has been behaving as a savage, it is you.
you are too dramatic to communicate with on this subject. You have acted in a manner that would be considered racist if the subject where about race due to your conclusions, close mindedness and stereotype fixing.
If anyone here has been behaving as a savage, it is you.
You saying, "you are too dramatic" means: "you disagree with what I like, and you've got good arguments, so I don't want to discuss this further with you."
As for racist, that's not exactly the word you need to use. You need to say that I disagree with your love of guns, and disagree with your fight for the further propagation of guns.
As a non-gun-owner, I can't speak to the number or rounds, or the speed, or the distance with which guns can be fired.
I do know these things:
That guns can kill without having to be close-up and personal to the person, in other words from far away, as if I were a shooting target.
I also know that guns can be fired more than once.
I also know that guns can shoot bullets with great velocity, which means greater penetration (in fact, guns can come out of the body after doing the damage and be found elsewhere).
I also know that bullets can (depending on where they hit) "bounce" slightly, thereby hitting other vital areas. I also know that bullets can fragment, shatter, explode, and fan out on impact, causing even greater damage.
I also know that bullets can spin inside the body, tearing up the area, which is why exit wounds are larger than entry wounds.
I also know bullets can cause hydraulic shock (as seen in The Matrix, for those who don't know), just as any projectile can cause a hydraulic effect in living tissue, since living tissue is 90-something percent water, and can cause nervous system damage as well. This last can create a hemorrhage in remote areas away from where the bullet penetrated.
I also know that I can't move away at the same velocity that the bullet is coming at me.
I also know that I can't "avert" a bullet using my arms or other objects, as one would a knife.
I also know that the number of people that would be able to manufacture a gun and bullets in their basement that had the same capacity, velocity, and destructive force and abilities as those that I can buy over the counter, is almost impossible.
I also know that my arms and legs don't reach as far as the shooter is standing so I can't kick him in the b***s.
Those are only a FEW reasons, and I know almost nothing about guns. I'm sure someone with a gun might be able to add to these (as I've seen gun owners gleefully posting the killing power of their guns even on this site).
Want more reasons why these human-killing machines need to be prohibited? I'll gladly supply a few more, if you really long for them.
Guns actually can't kill from far away. People using guns can, but guns themselves aren't doing squat without someone at the trigger.
Also, while a homemade gun may or may not be as effective as one made in a factory, if the guns are removed from possession of private citizens it won't really matter, will it? If the criminal has a homemade gun and you have a knife, who do you think is going to walk away from the confrontation? As for the ease with which a homemade gun can be made, I've seen zip guns made out of a ball point pen by prisoners in a maximum security prison. I'd say it's pretty easy.
So, you've seen the evidence which shows that crime is going down while the number of people carrying firearms is going up. You've seen plenty of information showing that crime is related to poverty and social circumstances far more than it is to firearms ownership (you even almost admitted this one). Yet, you still want to take guns away from people who have done absolutely nothing wrong with them. At this point, I'll have to assume that your logic and critical thinking skills have been run over by your emotions and the desire to "do something" to "protect the children" even though reality shows that the action won't accomplish anything. I'm just going to put you in the knee-jerk gun grabber category and let it go at that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saritaschihuahua
Which one would you prefer? Someone shooting at you, or someone holding a gun at your temple, or would you prefer someone coming at you with a knife? Don't lie for the NRA. They won't put you on their cushy payroll.
I'd prefer neither, actually. However, until you figure out a way to take guns away from criminals I'll keep my firearms, thank you very much. Since the police aren't required to protect me in any way, shape, or form, and I've been in situations where having a handgun kept me from being assaulted, I prefer to be at least as well-armed as the criminals.
Guns actually can't kill from far away. People using guns can, but guns themselves aren't doing squat without someone at the trigger.
Also, while a homemade gun may or may not be as effective as one made in a factory, if the guns are removed from possession of private citizens it won't really matter, will it? If the criminal has a homemade gun and you have a knife, who do you think is going to walk away from the confrontation? As for the ease with which a homemade gun can be made, I've seen zip guns made out of a ball point pen by prisoners in a maximum security prison. I'd say it's pretty easy.
So, you've seen the evidence which shows that crime is going down while the number of people carrying firearms is going up. You've seen plenty of information showing that crime is related to poverty and social circumstances far more than it is to firearms ownership (you even almost admitted this one). Yet, you still want to take guns away from people who have done absolutely nothing wrong with them. At this point, I'll have to assume that your logic and critical thinking skills have been run over by your emotions and the desire to "do something" to "protect the children" even though reality shows that the action won't accomplish anything. I'm just going to put you in the knee-jerk gun grabber category and let it go at that.
I'd prefer neither, actually. However, until you figure out a way to take guns away from criminals I'll keep my firearms, thank you very much. Since the police aren't required to protect me in any way, shape, or form, and I've been in situations where having a handgun kept me from being assaulted, I prefer to be at least as well-armed as the criminals.
Guns don't kill? Really? Really?! What, are they used as, flower vases? Hats? As a stirrer for soup?
And here we go with the "but crime is down!" argument. You must be kidding me, right? This is the advanced country with the highest GUN crime PER CAPITA, in the world. Let me repeat that, PER CAPITA. We're not talking sheer numbers alone, we're talking per each 100 people counted. And you're going to tell me, "oh but gun crime is down" because it fluctuates from unfrikkinbelievablyridiculously high to unfrikkinbelievablyridiculously high minus 1 or 2 people? Oh for chrissakes.
As for taking your gun away, I don't want to take your gun away personally. I simply want to make it illegal for you to carry one.
Guns don't kill? Really? Really?! What, are they used as, flower vases? Hats? As a stirrer for soup?
And here we go with the "but crime is down!" argument. You must be kidding me, right? This is the advanced country with the highest GUN crime PER CAPITA, in the world. Let me repeat that, PER CAPITA. We're not talking sheer numbers alone, we're talking per each 100 people counted. And you're going to tell me, "oh but gun crime is down" because it fluctuates from unfrikkinbelievablyridiculously high to unfrikkinbelievablyridiculously high minus 1 or 2 people? Oh for chrissakes.
As for taking your gun away, I don't want to take your gun away personally. I simply want to make it illegal for you to carry one.
Don't be silly. A gun would look ridiculous wearing a hat, and stirring soup with it would cause unnecessary cleaning.
Also, we don't have the highest per capita gun crime in the world. Far from it. We're not even in the top 20.
Btw, I must amend my earlier description. It is now:
Emotional, illogical, possibly unbalanced knee-jerk gun grabber.
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.
Abortions?
