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.
I deduce we have a people problem, not an inanimate object problem. Somehow I believe a violent person will remain violent regardless how many "tools" they have access to.
And? What? What about the non-violent accidental killers? A curious 3 year old... two eight year olds playing... and what about the disproportionate increase in the amount of collateral damage a violent person can do with a powerful gun vs a Bowie Knife or Baseball Bat. If you really are trying to say that after a gun BAN, that we will still have a thousand mass murders a year, except that the weapons will become a wide variety of Lawn and Garden equipment and Kitchen Utensils, then I disagree completely.
America has already lost a critical mass of talented, useful and necessary people for preserving her future. One day we are going to want, no, need the young warriors that are being shredded on the streets of L.A., Chicago, Baltimore, St. Louis, and those warriors fighting abroad in the Middle East that make it back whole and then take their own lives with a gun (everytime). We are going to need these people. But they won't be here.
If they banned Alcohol (again) tomorrow I would be sad but I'd get over it. Cigarettes, non-issue, I've never had any interest. But I get that smokers would be upset. Alcohol lovers drink, smokers smoke. What do gun owners do? Carry. Carry a lethal lump of heavy metal around on the (very) off chance that they are going to use it to defend themselves. Right. And that happens how often? Anytime anything really gnarly goes down. It goes down. Guns have never prevented any tragedy of national significance from occurring. They are useless as a defense against the unexpected.
Gun owners murder unarmed petty thieves and aggressive individuals and call it "self-defense". Disarm them. You want to shoot a gun on a range. Fine. You want to carry a gun around town so you can kill anyone who looks at you cross-eyed. No. Buy a dog.
Ummmm....start by not voting for the political machine that perpetuates the problem. What have you got to lose?
Well, one, I don't live in Chicago, so I can't vote in that area anyway.
Two, Omaha is run by a Republican mayor. Nebraska is a Republican state. Nebraska has one of the highest Black murder rates in the nation. Sounds like it does not matter whether a state is run by Democrats or Republicans.
Three, my crime solution is already solved. I don't live in areas of high crime.
Four, what I have to lose depends on what kind of Republican is running. I personally have nothing to lose if I vote Democrat. I have a job, and a college education. I come from a middle class family.
Five, why is it your business who I vote for? You seem desperate for me to vote Republican?
Look, you don't know anything about me beyond being Black. I only know what you've written.
And? What? What about the non-violent accidental killers? A curious 3 year old... two eight year olds playing... and what about the disproportionate increase in the amount of collateral damage a violent person can do with a powerful gun vs a Bowie Knife or Baseball Bat. If you really are trying to say that after a gun BAN, that we will still have a thousand mass murders a year, except that the weapons will become a wide variety of Lawn and Garden equipment and Kitchen Utensils, then I disagree completely.
America has already lost a critical mass of talented, useful and necessary people for preserving her future. One day we are going to want, no, need the young warriors that are being shredded on the streets of L.A., Chicago, Baltimore, St. Louis, and those warriors fighting abroad in the Middle East that make it back whole and then take their own lives with a gun (everytime). We are going to need these people. But they won't be here.
If they banned Alcohol (again) tomorrow I would be sad but I'd get over it. Cigarettes, non-issue, I've never had any interest. But I get that smokers would be upset. Alcohol lovers drink, smokers smoke. What do gun owners do? Carry. Carry a lethal lump of heavy metal around on the (very) off chance that they are going to use it to defend themselves. Right. And that happens how often? Anytime anything really gnarly goes down. It goes down. Guns have never prevented any tragedy of national significance from occurring. They are useless as a defense against the unexpected.
Gun owners murder unarmed petty thieves and aggressive individuals and call it "self-defense". Disarm them. You want to shoot a gun on a range. Fine. You want to carry a gun around town so you can kill anyone who looks at you cross-eyed. No. Buy a dog.
I'm pretty sure it's as easy to off oneself with OD on drugs vs handgun. You have less than 1/10 of 1% of dying in a mass shooting. If "saving lives" were the actual motif we need not even look at guns as you point ed out, drinkers drink, smokers smoke and die from it far more than gun owner's shooting ammo. Drinking and smoking has never prevented a tragedy either.
All I've ever done with any weapon is put food on the table.
Gun owners murder unarmed petty thieves and aggressive individuals and call it "self-defense". Disarm them.
Would you be fine alone with an "unarmed" petty thief and an aggressive individual in your home? Want to take a gamble with how safe and innocent they are with you all by your lonesome?
Don't steal, you won't get shot by the armed (thankfully!) homeowner you're stealing from. When thieves steal property, all some people see is the property itself, and conclude that it's not worth the thief's life. They'll say it wasn't the victim (homeowner, by the way, NOT the thief) who had the "right" to make that call. Bull----. The thief created the situation, had the thief not began breaking the law, the victim wouldn't have had anything to do with them. Aren't you the same people who argue that even if a woman walks alone into an unlit alleyway at 3 AM she shouldn't be told that was unwise if she was raped? Same concept. The homeowner didn't ask for the situation AT ALL. Not to mention, YOU may not value property, but if you are a hard working person making only say, $35,000 a year and you buy a dependable, $15,000 car you saved up for to get you and your family around, and some punk tries to steal it from you, that's about half a year's earnings. Half a year that someone toiled over, saved, to get them and their family to work, school, doctors' appointments, groceries, etc. Some thug steals your car.... they just stole all that time and effort they'd put in honestly and legally. Time away from their family, their ability to get to their livelihood, etc. What value did the thief bring to honest society? The world is better off without them.
Regarding aggressive individuals, are you willing to be beaten to a pulp and end up in a hospital with six figures in medical bills? All so you can feel "morally superior" to "lowering yourself" by responding with a firearm? Screw that. People die every day on this earth, but better the predators and thugs be taken out instead of the good guys.
You want to disarm non-criminal gun owners? Step up to the plate and start knocking on doors. It'd be fun to see how you do.
America has already lost a critical mass of talented, useful and necessary people for preserving her future. One day we are going to want, no, need the young warriors that are being shredded on the streets of L.A., Chicago, Baltimore, St. Louis...We are going to need these people. But they won't be here.
Chicago's gun restrictions are a joke. But they are still too restrictive for many. Nothing less than total firearm freedom will make them happy. So, despite the fact that, really, any white, middle-class citizen of the U.S. of America can have a CCW if they want one, we get a continual parade of threads like this. Like any of you really care that gang-thugs shoot it out on the South Side. Give me a break.
While the red flag of thug on thug exchanges of ordnance waves over our heads, the reality of outlier levels of gun violence and gun accidents among what can be described as "polite society" continues unabated. The cute towhead who shoots his young mother dead as she is driving him to daycare, the mall shooter who kills 12... ... these are the kinds of tragedies that we want ended, and its only a matter of time.
There is coming a time when you will no more want to own a gun than you would want to drive any distance in a car without your seatbelt. A gun BAN is coming. Yes, the thugs will still have them. And? They have them now. And? When was the last time a thug was anyone's problem but to another thug? I can't remember the last time a thug shot a dozen people in a movie theater, but suburban teens are disproportionately represented in the population of mass shooters. Disarm them. Do it now, before they hurt anymore important, valuable and necessary citizens.
"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one". The needs of a few literal Constitutionalists to re-enact Colonial Era life and liberty is outweighed by the larger societies need to have protection from random gun violence!
"So, despite the fact that, really, any white, middle-class citizen of the U.S. of America can have a CCW if they want one"
WRONG. Try getting in MD, NY, CA, etc.
"There is coming a time when you will no more want to own a gun"
Prefect example of why Indiana needs to get its illegal guns under control.
According to the 2nd Amendment and McDonald v. Chicago, there is no such thing as illegal arms.
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.