|
|
|
|
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/29/2008 1:17:17 AM | powervamp,
Self defence as in with a gun sir, thats whats not right. Self defence with your fists yes that is a human right. The arguments in favour of guns is feeble and nonsense. Just who's being protected here?. How many people killed each year in the USA?, I'd be willing to bet it's more than in Iraq. Texas for instance, where someone said allowing guns reduced crime. Whats the number of gun related crimes there?.
You must know that having guns endangers you, thats why you think you need them for protection. It's a vicious circle and the best way to get out of it to get rid of the constitutional right to have one.
I'm not going to comment on that silly coment about sueing the police. What sillly people you must be. They come toi help you and you sue them. How odd. I will however say that if they are taking an hour to respond to emergencies, then either you don't have enough officers on the streets or crime is so prevelant that they are losing the battle for your streets and then you will need that gun to protect you.
Sorrry to hear your AK's are only watered down semi's. How dissappointed you must be. bet you can't sleep at night worrying whther or not you should buy a fully blown AK47 from the smalll ads so you can feel really safe.
Does it never occur to anyone in America that the constitution which you rever so highly as if it was some ancient religious manuscript, was written in another time without know;edge of how the world has changed and that it might not be right for life in the modern world. You need a new constitution that prohibits guns in your community. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/29/2008 1:32:17 AM |
Each individual person has rights. This means that all people have rights.
So far , so good.
Collectively, one could say they have rights. If you take a single person out of that group, they still retain the rights they had; anything lost would be a privilege associated with membership in that group*.
Let's stop there, shall we ?
As an American, you have Constitutional rights not to be searched without a court ordered search warrant. You also have rights not to be searched by a peace officer, unless suspected of a crime by court or police officers. Anyone that tries that is in a world of trouble.
Now go to an airport in North America, and try and board a plane - especially in the USA.
Now being an American citizen is actually pretty worthless here, if you are arguing the all people have rights that cannot be impinged upon by the collective. This is exactly what happens to you when you try to board that plane.
If Arab, or "Arab looking" , and you may find yourself answering some questions. You may be physically picked, as one of the woman I know did - quite ironically a Jewish female.
She was pretty thoroughly searched, while flying to Florida last year. I'm talking a "going into prison" level of search, while clothed. 
Now no peace officer could ever do that without having valid cause.
But in America, this marvelous land of individual freedom ?
A "rent a cop" could perform that search on you at the airport. You could not refuse or resist, if you planned to fly anywhere soon. :sink:
More power than the state ever has ever exerted over people, real control, the ability to "detain" you and search you. That's exactly what's occurring at airports every day, all over America.
Add to that the right the state recently took when Bush was violating the FISA standards and lying about not doing so. Americans, any one chosen by the state, had lost their entire right to their privacy - the state could monitor them at will, without judicial review of the reasons for having to do so.
Compare the loss of rights there, provable ones to boot, to any gains made by this US Supreme Court decision and it pales in comparison.
So why does America allow these things to occur within it's borders ?
Something called 9/11.
So what we see here is a model of how even a nation state as concentrated on it's political rights and freedoms as the US is, it can still filter that model to suit their perceived reality.
The collective right to avoid being a passenger in a plane hurtling through a skyscraper easily allows those individual rights to be severely restricted - at least temporarily, for a few minutes.
Now the why of "why does this happens" is due to the fact that one iconic image sensitized the entire population with it's horror. The potential for avoidance of mass destruction of lives and property dulled any pain at resisting it - it was a logical conclusion, if one wanted to minimize any future chances of something like that ever being allowed to occur again.
Now here's the great irony in play here. Again, it's rather obvious. The total number of Americans killed in foreign terrorist attacks since the 1960's pales beside the numbers of Americans killed by their fellow Americans with firearms - used improperly and illegally.
Here's a pretty complete list of all Americans killed by foreign terrorists in recent history.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Terrorism/usvictims.html
You'll note a great many of them, the vast majority, occurred while outside America's borders, in hostile lands to Americans.
But again, that list would be buried under a mountain of paper, if we did the same for every misuse of a firearm in America, by Americans, on Americans.
Even Tim McVay didn't trigger that almost Stalinesque level of temporary individual rights repression for security reasons . Neither did World War Two, or World War One, and both arguably were cases where enemy sabotage would be likely to be expected.
But being killed by a FOREIGN terrorist ? Now that's where we draw the line.
Each day of every year, the very real threat of gun violence is faced far more directly and effectively by many more Americans than ever will be threatened by a foreign terrorist. I
Average number of firearm thefts that occur every year in the US: 341,000
(Source: US Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Guns and Crime, 4/94)
Number of federal firearms licensees in the US: 124,286
Number of ATF agents to regulate them: 391
Number of trace requests responded to by the ATF in 1996: 139,092
Number of ATF employees who work on trace requests: 41
Number of federal safety standards that apply to the manufacture of teddy bears: 4
Number of federal safety standards that apply to the manufacture of firearms: 0
(Mother Jones, Jan-Feb/94)
Number of firearms in the US: 223 Million
(Source: US Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Guns Used in Crime, 7/95, from ATF data)
Percentage of L.A. High School students who say they could obtain a gun for less than $50: 25
(Source: ACLU report: From Words to Weapons, 3/97)
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/guns/more/facts.html
So how many people die each year, killed by these "domestic terrorists" misusing their right to firearms ?
Every year, approximately 30,000 U.S. civilians are killed
by guns. The number of U.S. civilians killed annually by guns is ten times the number of
people killed in the September 11 terrorist attacks. More U.S. civilians are killed by guns
every two years than the total number of U.S. soldiers killed in the entire 11 year
Vietnam War.
Gunshot wounds are the second leading cause of death for children ages 10-19 in the
United States, with only motor vehicle accidents taking a higher toll. A child in the
United States is far more likely to catch a bullet than the measles. The homicide rate for
U.S. males ages 15-24 is more than ten times higher than in most other developed
countries. The much higher rate of gun violence in the United States as compared with
other democratic countries corresponds with a much higher rate of firearm ownership in
the U.S. and much less stringent gun control laws.
In 1997, the Centers for Disease Control
advocated more stringent gun control laws after publishing a study showing that children
under the age of 15 in the United States were 12 times more likely to be killed by guns
than children in the other leading 25 industrialized countries of the world. Congress
reacted by cutting the CDC's funding for research on firearm-related issues and by
placing a permanent ban on the use of federal funding for research advocating gun
control.
The Shameful Epidemic – Gun Violence in the USA
By Bill Durston, M.D.
There is a war raging out there across the land, and it's not simply one of the question of individual rights.
TEN times the numbers of Americans killed in 9/11 are killed EACH and every year in the USA by their fellow individual rights holding fellow citizens misusing their iconic firearms granted to them without much in the way of any real limitation to owning one by their good government.
This is allowed, and even applauded, by some defending the power of individual rights over any state limitation of his rights.
He's the guy in the suit getting a really close pat down by a twenty year old high school graduate on his first job making near minimum wage, who's skillfully repeating everything he saw on that corporate training video.
A guys gotta make a buck, right ?
She was singled out, told to strip off her shirt in public and obtrusively patted down at airport security. But actress Patti LuPone is not complaining about the search, she's just asking for better communication.
It happened at Fort Lauderdale International Airport, when she was picked out for a "secondary screening" that turned into a humiliatingly intrusive experience.
"I kept going, 'this is really rude, what is going on? What is going on?'" LuPone told "Good Morning America" today. "I was shocked that I had been felt up."
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/News/story?id=277647
Had Patty been a gun owner, limited in her right to her iconic weapon with it's great potential lethality, by some government agency ?
There's a civil rights case, for ya.
Getting "felt up" by a rent a cop ? No problemo.
Ironically, you are ten times LESS likely to get killed by a foreign terrorist than you are by one of your fellow Americans misusing a weapon he's pointing at you - or himself. The simple fact is that the image of 9/11 is far more horrific and iconic.
That number of gun victims each and every year there is a very chilling statistic, if you live outside of America. A great number of people die there, due to very light access restrictions and demands placed upon them for responsible weapons ownership and good gun stewardship.
That's acceptable there, because it's a kind of hidden epidemic, without any real impact on the public right to not be exposed to it. It's numbers are far greater, and the real terror felt by Americans due to firearms being misused is far more than any from any foreign terrorist threat.
But those filters allow one image to pass, and block the other.
Any right restricted on a firearm is the first step towards tyranny in the nation
"Sir....step into the chamber....we'd like to see what you look like nude......electronically, and without touching you."
"A-OK , SIR !" .
I guess tyranny is where you find it, I suppose.
You try and do the same things with helmet laws ? The same thing occurs. Americans have a constitutional right to bash their brains out on a tree as they spin off the road - and God help anyone standing in the way. 
Meanwhile, those soon to be deceased motorcyclists are looking as great as Gary Busy did - before he hit that curb.
Again, this is something that's so "American" it's almost stereotypical when you hear certain things expressed here.
You live in the same society that thinks a man who doesn't carry an umbrella to protect himself in a rainstorm is a fool....
.... and one that's driving along on that Harley at eighty miles per hour with his long hair proudly blowing in the breeze ?
..... or ones that walk out of a gun store with a handgun in their coat pocket, a loaded one ?
Both great American iconic images.....until reality hits. Failure to protect yourself in both cases is seen as quite patriotic right up until about then. If that Harley hits the pavement, or that guy walking out of the gun store with the rifle is about to recast himself as an anonymous mass murdering sniper taking out his psychotic rage against society - hey, welcome to the new paradigm. 
Compare the reaction of the Washington area to the American sniper that was killing people at random. Think a Muslim terrorist one wouldn't have created a far different paradigm ?
It doesn't matter to the victim which one shoots him, he's as dead or damaged either way by the same weapon firing the same ammunition.
It matters a lot to the issue of civil rights, however.
A foreigner can go to your country, stay in a hotel three months, and walk into a gun store to buy a weapon. You have no idea of his real intentions, until he walks out of that store and nothing changes afterwards for the negative.
That's pretty trusting of people's good intentions, in my opinion. He's not even American, and yet he's given a firearm freely as long as he has the required cash, and passes a basic quick check.
It's the same thing with ammonium nitrate, which is still easily available years after the Murrow Building attack. It's literally a rather good weapon of mass destruction, in the wrong hands.
So filters are at work here, quite obviously. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/29/2008 2:21:53 AM | IMO, you are brilliant in this post, Montreal Guy. But we aren't going to institute significant gun control in this country, at least any time soon. So, IMO at least, what's most valuable about your post is the way it flags up our troubling response to 9/11. You are talking about airport controls, but they are merely a microcosm of what we're allowing more broadly when it comes to the level of intrusion into our lives, our conversations, etc. Americans have given up their right to privacy and EVEN conversation, not to mention our rights to due process before the law. For some, that's OK, and SOME even measure our rights by the standard of free gun ownership. Many people who will argue vociferously for their right to "bear arms" don't give a damn about the right to due process, and have no problem at all with things like people being held without charge, and even the fact that we, as a nation, have now accepted torture as an acceptable part of American policy.
I don't pretend to be able to engage at your level, but I do think I saw the point in your post. And gun control aside, it's pretty alarming. I've never been "stopped" at an airport, but if I were, I'm sure I'd end up in court before I'd strip for the cause. For some that would make me a problem, but many of those same people, I'm sure, would never dream of giving up their firearms, even if George told them it was necessary for "homeland security." | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/29/2008 3:16:05 AM | Well beachbum, what matters is that the court is on the right side. meaning the correct side, as many liberals are also gun owners too.
There are dangers in every choice we make. We see more people die in car crashes every year than guns, should we ban all cars too?
Also 100% of babies being born today will die sometime in there lifetime, so should we make it illegal for woman to get pregnant in the first place?
80% of business fail in the first year, should we just give up and not try to beat the odds?
I have a good idea of what you would say to all those questions already. You see you believe in the state collective, and I believe in the individual. We have two conflicting world views, and will never see eye to eye.
I'm willing to agree to disagree. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/29/2008 3:31:27 AM | I was talking to that beachbum idiot who favors removing our guns
the united kingdom is getting the point where you would have to ask GOV if it's ok to give your child a hug, or even a kiss
it makes me sick | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/29/2008 4:04:23 AM | What are you talking about powervamp?.
Your not making any sense to me. Are you saying to me that the statistics just given to you by Motreal guy are an acceptable level of killing on your streets?, that Collumbine and a whole raft of other massacres was about freedom of the individuals?. Comparing to car crashes and pregnant women WTF.
If you would find these statistics alarming, then I can assure you that we do indeed see eye to eye on this matter, what we do disagree on and will unlikely never agree upon is who's responsible for the carnage. You think it's criminals and I think it's you and your unfathomable belief that having guns is a right that must be protected. It is a right that should be taken away immediately and you should rejoice at it's demise.
I'm not even sure what your talking about with the state collective thing, whats that?.
I'm talking about your kids being safer on the front line of Afganistan or Iraq than they are on the streets of America and all because Americans see everything as 'individual rights and freedoms' when that is not what I thought the consitution is about.
I seem to remember from school some 30 yars ago, it started off "We the people", those words imply to me that whatever follows is about the collective good of the community and that the rights and freedoms of the individual must sometimes be curtailed for the benefit of the wider community.
Not having guns on your streets would be better for every single American. No one benefits from living in what must be like a war zone if the statistics I just read are true. Even more so when you look at the suicide statistics using guns too.
Whether or not you like it, America is now part of a wider world community and most nations around the world do not allow for their citizens to be armed as you all are. You already have the greatest military capability the world has ever known to protect you and yet you still need to carry guns at home for protection,. Just how are you protected?. They do not protect you and have no place in a modern country in todays world. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/29/2008 4:17:15 AM | joey-sana,
You are a silly little girl who should be put over someones knee and given a good spanking until your backside glows red like a babboons arse.
Making threats to me via email would get you arrested in my country and you would be facing a very stiff penalty from the courts and almost certainly facing a custodial sentence.
I have come to understand that in the skewed reality of the American people who think that having freedom of speech entitles you to say whatever you wish without rebutal or legal constraint, that you think it's acceptable. I can assure you that it is not.
If ever I needed support in my arguments against gun possession, then it is the contribution of ill-informed and ill-educated people like you who strengthen my case knowing that you have access to them.
Go and do some growing up. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/29/2008 4:19:14 AM | I once had a guy say he didn't want a GI Bill or extra pay, but he was in the military, I asked if he was an idiot and was banned for ten days. . .
Joey, you are out of line! | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/29/2008 4:22:09 AM | What are you talking about powervamp?.
Your not making any sense to me.
Yup...of that I have no doubt.
I'm talking about your kids being safer on the front line of Afganistan or Iraq than they are on the streets of America and all because Americans see everything as 'individual rights and freedoms' when that is not what I thought the consitution is about.
You have no clear idea of what its like here in America. To say that, is totaly laughable.
If ever I needed support in my arguments against gun possession, then it is the contribution of ill-informed and ill-educated people like you who strengthen my case knowing that you have access to them.
Are you saying people who aren't college educated are prone to be criminals? If so, that shows a real elitist attitude on your part.
You don't hear me b*tching about your laws, do you? Unlike you, I try to show respect for the customs of your people. Why don't you try showing my nation some repect? You have no idea of what my education is, yet you make foolish statments like that. None the less, I have the law on my side, and people who are smarter than the both of us did the right thing. That's all that matters. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/29/2008 4:28:58 AM | hey moron, I didnt threaten you
I told you shut up, and called you a few cuss words
you stupid idiot
hows that a threat you idiot?, it isnt
I didnt say ID harm you or anything like that you jackass
you old anti gun jerk. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/29/2008 4:32:18 AM | oh S up you anti gun nut,
FREEDOM IS NOT SOMETHING you just throw away because you dont like guns, if you throw away guns you might as well do away with bats, poisons for killing rats, knifes, and anything else
I pose this question to you
"Who do you call to protect you when the cops are the ones causing you the problem?"
My advice: get a gun and protect your freedoms | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/29/2008 4:48:29 AM | | This is not a gun problem it's a people problem. As long as their are murders, rapists, and people that want to do us bodily harm, law abiding citizens will always have firearms to keep the scumbags out of their homes. If your not a gun owner, put a sign in your yard that you have no guns in your home so the criminals will know where they can safely practice their trade. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/29/2008 5:05:47 AM | Oops I guess Beachbum said the uneducated remark to joey-sana, but I stand by what I said, cause that was still uncalled for. Showing disrepect towards somebody is no way to get them to agree with you. The same can be said to joey-sana, I really can't defend cussing at people either.
So if you don't agree with our gun laws, thats fine. It doesn't mean that people who do support them are scared uneducated morons who are dying to kill sombody. It is true there is a nut thrown in here and there, but thats no reason to take away a civil liberty.
| |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/29/2008 5:14:41 AM | >>>Our freedoms are being stripped by this administration, our guns and freedom of the press have done nothing to deter that, so what good are our guns?
I'm surprised no one picked up on this.
If the Government turns tyrannical, and strips you of all rights and enslaves you, you couldn't possibly think of a single reason to have a gun?
>>>This is not a gun problem it's a people problem. As long as their are murders, rapists, and people that want to do us bodily harm, law abiding citizens will always have firearms to keep the scumbags out of their homes. If your not a gun owner, put a sign in your yard that you have no guns in your home so the criminals will know where they can safely practice their trade.
Thread Winner. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/29/2008 5:27:25 AM | If the Government turns tyrannical, and strips you of all rights and enslaves you, you couldn't possibly think of a single reason to have a gun?
Exactly. I guess the antigunners have already forgotten what happend to the disarmed citizens in Nazzi Germany. Can you say death camps?
Governments disarm citizens so they can have total contorl over it's people. In the US we have guns to keep the citizens in control of the government. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/29/2008 5:33:40 AM | I'm more worried about being attackrd by another nation at this point. It's always possible that the US could go tyrannical, but I think there is a higher chance the UN or China would turn on us.
If the US Tried it, I think the military would split. I just can't see most of our troops being willing to attack their own country.
I have no faith in the politicans, but I still support the troops. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/29/2008 5:37:11 AM |
but I think there is a higher chance the UN would turn on us.
The UN is not a worry. They have proven to be a paper tiger. Look what they did when Sadam violated all of the UN sanctions. Absolutly nothing. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/29/2008 5:46:50 AM | WOW back so soon joey-sana and with a new identity. Kinda tells you something doesn't it eh!.
There are murderers and rapists in other countries too. Funny how you having 223 million guns to hand hasn't made it stop there isn't it?. Would you like to trade crime statistics with me on just how safe they make you compared to people elsewhere. There can be no justifiable reason to have guns, you're promoting the slaughter of your own children.
Well no actually your not are you?, your promoting the ritual slaughter children of the poor black and hispanic communities if the statistics I've been looking at are correct. It's not the white middle class American getting killed. Now I'm starting to understand. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/29/2008 5:51:49 AM |
Well no actually your not are you?, your promoting the ritual slaughter children of the poor black and hispanic communities if the statistics I've been looking at are correct. It's not the white middle class American getting killed. Now I'm starting to understand.
Maybe if you lived here you would understand. Based on what you just posted you don't. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/29/2008 6:10:24 AM | | He's a European boot licker..pay him no mind...he says that Britain has a "rightful place" as a world leader...still pissed about 1776 i guess. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/29/2008 7:11:55 AM | And just what is it that I might understand better if I lived in the USA?. That you live in fear. Fear of being attacked in the street, fear of being attacked in your homes, fear of being attacked by terrorists. Give me a break. What you should be afraid of is having guns so readily available just because some antiquated document written hundreds of years ago says you should. If your constitution allows for the bearing of arms then it should be confined to the scapheap of history and a new constitution written appropriate to todays world.
It is your own statistics that show the majority of the victims of gun crime are poor black and hispanic teenagers. I didn't make that up. The white middle class americans dying from guns are from suicides. Again, your data not mine. Maybe I should just think of it as a way of culling the numbers effectively.
If you wish to discuss whether or not Britain is a world leader, I would be happy to do so. One thing for certain is that America is twenty years behind the rest of the world when it comes to matters such as immigration, terrorism, international politics and gun control.
Do you have any justifiable reason for wanting to live in a war zone or is it acceptable because it's in the poor neighbourhoods where the dying gets done mostly. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/29/2008 7:28:44 AM |
That you live in fear. Fear of being attacked in the street, fear of being attacked in your homes, fear of being attacked by terrorists.
I don't live in fear. I would live in fear if I didn't have anyway of protecting myself.
That's like saying people that wear lifejackets when out in a boat have a fear of drowning. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/29/2008 7:28:51 AM | http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-guns-defense_bd_29jun29,0,491295.story
A gun owner’s view
'I wouldn't be here' if not for gun
By Stacy St. Clair | Chicago Tribune reporter
June 29, 2008
Glen Soustek knows a handgun saved his life.
"If it weren't for my gun, I wouldn't be here," he said. "The last the world would have heard about me would be a blurb on Page 8: 'Coin shop owner shot dead in backroom.' "
Soustek had just opened for business Nov. 3, 2006, when a 40-year-old man exited his Mercedes and walked inside Westlake Cards, Comics & Coins in Roselle. Geoffrey Webb browsed for 10 to 15 minutes, making small talk with Soustek about coin collecting.
Suddenly, Webb jumped over the counter and pulled a .357 Magnum from his bag. Soustek, then 49, grabbed his own revolver and the two began shooting.
In 2.8 seconds, a dozen rounds were fired. One of Soustek's bullets hit Webb's spine and knocked him to the ground.
A bloodied Soustek, who had been hit in the left arm, fled the store and sought help at a nearby restaurant.
Unable to move, Webb, a convicted bank robber who had stolen the Magnum from a security guard days earlier, put the gun to his head and pulled the trigger, authorities say.
Soustek, who had handgun training in college and had registered the weapon properly, was treated for his wound and released the same day. After reviewing security camera footage of the botched robbery, officials declined to press charges against the store owner, calling the shooting a "clear case of justifiable force."
When the shop reopened less than two weeks later, people stopped by to high-five Soustek and congratulate him. The reaction rattled Soustek, a Democrat who never considered himself a "gun nut" or aligned himself with the National Rifle Association.
"Do I think everyone should have a gun? No," he said. "Do I think you need an automatic assault rifle to kill squirrels? No. But people should be allowed to protect themselves as long as they get the proper training."
Soustek continues to keep weapons in his shop, though he won't go into detail about his security measures. All his adult employees have gun training, he said, so they can use firearms responsibly if the need arises again.
His staff, however, is instructed to refrain from any kind of force unless it's brought upon them.
"Our first rule is if they just want money, unplug the cash register and carry it out to the car for them," Soustek said. "We don't see ourselves as the second line of defense behind police officers or anything like that, but we will protect ourselves."
Soustek says he understands the intent of the Chicago gun ban, but he doesn't believe it works. The city still has a high crime rate, he says, and there are shootings in the news almost every day. Handgun opponents argue that personal weapons often get used against the owners during crimes, but Soustek contends the city's stringent laws put law-abiding people at risk.
If used carefully and responsibly, he says, guns can save lives.
After all, he says, a revolver saved his. "I may be the exception," he said. "But the laws have to provide for the exceptions too." | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/29/2008 7:28:56 AM | | Right we are all racists because we believe in our right to own guns...what a ridiculous argument....If you lived in America you would be familiar with the phrase guns don't kill people ,people kill people...guns are not the problem, how many murders are committed by law abiding gun owners? The estimate is somewhere around 230 million guns in America how many murders by gun shot each year?How many of these are committed by career criminals or mentally unstable individuals? Liberal mentality doesn't apply to everything many Americans do have the ability to act in their own self interest and do not need the Government to intrude so often. | |
|
| Court: A constitutional right to a gun
Posted: 6/29/2008 7:42:22 AM | | How many murders are committed with Law abiding citizens guns? Where do you think criminals get guns? They steal them from law abiding citizens. | |
|
|
| Page 8 of 13
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 |
|
Home
login 
