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.
Exactly, and yet (some) people still try and argue that guns are a good idea! Its incredible! Its like trying to argue that fighting fire with petrol is a good idea!
Well, you were referring to those harmed by guns.
Now, the question could be, how many were saved by them?
That figure is probably unknown but it is probably a very true situation.
As far as "Is there a fire prevention system that uses petrol?" I don't know but given that so much of modern life comes out of the petrochemical industry, I wouldn't be surprised to find something in fire prevention, fire fighting that comes from a refinery.
How that word salad could answer any question is beyond me. It reads like a Nostradamus quatrain, says nothing, but may be perceived as everything.
Not everyone has the problem of understanding my comments like you do, but rather than go on about the nature of your challenges, why not just quote me verbatim and explain what needs further clarification? I thought that comment simply explained that if/when the focus is on mass shootings, then statistics about that are relevant. Also, a focus on mass shootings does not mean we can't also be focused on the other problems and statistics related to; more general gun violence, suicides, etc.
Now, the question could be, how many were saved by them?
That figure is probably unknown but it is probably a very true situation.
As far as "Is there a fire prevention system that uses petrol?" I don't know but given that so much of modern life comes out of the petrochemical industry, I wouldn't be surprised to find something in fire prevention, fire fighting that comes from a refinery.
Unfortunately, when people are forced to pull a gun, and the assailant flees, they often don't report it, as there were no shots fired, nor any harm ultimately done, other than getting terrorized. However, there are thousands of documented incidents of people successfully defending themselves with a gun, and SAVING innocent lives. The Left never considers their right to life.
That's the problem. Their solutions never address the real problem, and never focus on the PERPETRATOR. Instead they focus on the law abiding, and punish them for the actions of criminals who are already breaking many laws. The real goal is to not reduce violence, but to take away guns from the law abiding to further control them, and make them further dependent on government.
Agreed, and how many problems do we have that force the good people to pay for the bad?
I'm always reminded about this problem and/or trade-off when I simply want to have a cold beer in a public park on a hot day. NO ALCOHOL signs and laws apply at pretty much all public parks and places in the United States. Why? Because some yahoos also can't control their liquor. Why should I have to be "punished" when I am a law abiding good citizen who simply wants to have a cold beer? Also in Europe and other parts of the world, for example, they are nowhere near as restrictive. Ironic, don't you think?
What is right and/or wrong when we are forced to address these problems created by bad people for all the rest of us good people? Awfully hard to say sometimes...
Agreed, and how many problems do we have that force the good people to pay for the bad?
I'm always reminded about this problem and/or trade-off when I simply want to have a cold beer in a public park on a hot day. NO ALCOHOL signs and laws apply at pretty much all public parks and places in the United States. Why? Because some yahoos also can't control their liquor. Why should I have to be "punished" when I am a law abiding good citizen who simply wants to have a cold beer? Also in Europe and other parts of the world, for example, they are nowhere near as restrictive. Ironic, don't you think?
What is right and/or wrong when we are forced to address these problems created by bad people for all the rest of us good people? Awfully hard to say sometimes...
Yes, the argument of "The Pubic Good", has been used, and abused to restrict many activities that are otherwise harmless due to the recklessness of a few. I say PUNISH the reckless few, not the vast majority of law abiding, responsible people. Yet EMOTION rules, and the politicians are forced to do "something", which often restricts our freedoms.
Unfortunately, when people are forced to pull a gun, and the assailant flees, they often don't report it, as there were no shots fired, nor any harm ultimately done, other than getting terrorized. However, there are thousands of documented incidents of people successfully defending themselves with a gun, and SAVING innocent lives. The Left never considers their right to life.
Just tossing this back out there into the discussion:
From above article:
The Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council released the results of their research through the CDC last month. Researchers compiled data from previous studies in order to guide future research on gun violence, noting that “almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year.”
As for gun control measures potentially having an effect on decreasing casualties, the report expresses uncertainty: “Whether gun restrictions reduce firearm-related violence is an unresolved issue,” and there is no evidence “that passage of right-to-carry laws decrease or increase violence crime.” It also stated that proposed “gun turn-in programs are ineffective.”
Unfortunately, when people are forced to pull a gun, and the assailant flees, they often don't report it, as there were no shots fired, nor any harm ultimately done, other than getting terrorized. However, there are thousands of documented incidents of people successfully defending themselves with a gun, and SAVING innocent lives. The Left never considers their right to life.
I have had to pull a gun twice. Afraid to report it. Most police could not find their butt with both hands and would probably arrest me.
I'm a libertarian constitutionalist. Basically, I'm not full Libertarian because I don't believe the market should drive everything. The federal government should have a small hand is doing the 18 things as defined in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution.
The federal government outlawed the sale and consumption of alcohol by amending the Constitution. They reversed that decision by amending the Constitution again. How did they get the power to outlaw drugs? They didn't.
My sister died as a direct result of using recreational drugs that are deemed illegal by the federal government. Most people would in my situation would be for more federal drug laws or harsher penalties for dealers. That would go against my principles.
Same way for guns. While I do not want any more gun violence or violence in any form, the federal government has already infringed on my 2nd Amendment right starting back in 1934.
You can call me a tough guy despite the fact I've never been in a fight in almost 50 years. I think my reasoning is pretty logical. I would never be the aggressor with a weapon in any altercation but I am fully trained and prepared to return aggression 10 fold.
Thanks for what does seem pretty well reasoned opinion even if you are something of a Libertarian. Also very sorry to read this about your sister. I have a very good friend fighting that sort of demon now. Brother-in-law too. Very sad and all too challenging...
I guess you are not with Trump for wanting the death penalty for drug dealers then. Me either. Might go against your principles, mine and others, but more importantly is the penalty fit the crime and more importantly still, the strategies to prevent crime are also well reasoned, prudent and effective.
You don't seem like a "tough guy" to me. I think the last time I got into an actual fight was when I was in the 5th grade, but I have typically had a sense of being able to protect myself if/when "push comes to shove" as well. Still, I tend to wonder about all these comments about being "prepared to return aggression," with a gun. The problem is that a relatively small percentage of people (typically older white males) tend to think, feel and act this way, perhaps in part to make them feel stronger, more manly. Meanwhile, "10 fold" as many people simply don't think or feel that way, about using guns, having guns.
Right or wrong, of course you have your right to think and feel the way you do just like everyone else, and you have your right to bear arms too. Just saying the feeling is far from mutual. There are more and more people feeling less and less accepting of guns, because the numbers seem to suggest the huge number of guns in America is part of why we have so many more incidents of mass shootings and gun violence in general compared to other advanced modern societies.
There are more and more people feeling less and less accepting of guns, because the numbers seem to suggest the huge number of guns in America is part of why we have so many more incidents of mass shootings and gun violence in general compared to other advanced modern societies.
There's the rub...
And yet, the statistics prove you are wrong. As more guns have been bought over the last 20 years, the number of gun homicides has decreased, almost every year.
Criminals steal them, which is already illegal, and also buy them illegally on the street. Instead of letting them plea the charges down, and often walk, or get little jail time, how about we enforce the laws, and have mandatory, no plea sentences for criminals who use a gun in crime, steal guns, or buy guns illegally?
You are NOT going to eradicate 300 to 600 Million guns already in the U.S., most of them owned by the law abiding.
I think we tend to believe people using guns in a crime are getting off easier than they do. Each case tends to be different in any case, and as I understand it, the penalties for using a gun in a crime, assault or what have you are pretty stiff. For judge and jury to decide I suppose, or I can't really say without specific cases and facts to consider...
All those guns in America already is my #1 reason for having little faith in most gun control measures having to do with banning or restricting even some types of guns. Too many out there already. Right or wrong, 2A or not. "Genie out of the bottle."
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.
