Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Current Events  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 bob0colo
Joined: 4/9/2006
Msg: 244
view profile
History
gun control in the usaPage 4 of 102    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41)
Not relevant!! In other words a criminal can have a firearm and a law abiding person can't and you are fine with that. I find that rather incredible to believe.
For your information the majority of gun owners in the US don't walk around strapped either. But it is our right to do so if we wish.
When guns are outlawed only the outlaws will have guns. and you are fine with that.
----------------------------------drg1301

Hang in there with all this all or nothing crap......
you dont want a data base to tie mental nut cases to a no buy......Mr Cho

You dont want any gun laws to work>

The NRA should shoulder this last shooting.

2nd

Until the industry allows the NRA to grow up, we are stuck with laws that dont work.

NO I am not some limp wristed clown. I carry a 410/ pistol every day.

You are a mouth piece for the Gun Industry.....do you really think they care if you are safe or have a JOB????????????
Cheap Guns......
 bob0colo
Joined: 4/9/2006
Msg: 253
view profile
History
gun control in the usa
Posted: 4/29/2007 2:32:10 AM
Yesterday, just 20 miles away from my home, 2 men tried to rob (using a Tech 9s) a convenience store. The store has been robbed 5 times since Hurricane Katrina. The clerk defended himself by fatally shooting one of the two men and held the other at gunpoint until authorities arrived. (18 minutes later...) I'd bet my favorite pair of Nike's that he wont be robbed again. No charges have been made against the clerk.
*Incident occurred in Forrest Hill, Texas*
________________________________disaronno amaretto

That is the kind of world we should want?
How many cops in Forrest Hill?
How about paying a little more for taxes?
(18 minutes later...) Ja ja (bush tax cut)
I want every clerk in every punk store to defend his life with a GUN>NRA..........

Hire a cop a real defender of life.

________________

As for BOB.......

you dont want a data base to tie mental nut cases to a no buy......Mr Cho

that law is already in effect.......from what I understand Mr Cho had not been
comitted so wouldn't be on the list anyway. Would you have anyone who has
ever saught counseling put on that list? What about marriage counseling? Should
someone who has checked themselves into a stress unit be put on the list wether
they've been "cured" or not?

You dont want any gun laws to work>

Blaming the gun laws on the books for not working is like blaming the guns for crime.
It's not that the laws aren't good enough.....they aren't enforced and prosecuted.

The NRA should shoulder this last shooting.

Now that's just insane.....the NRA is no more responsible than the gun manufacturer,
the 2nd ammendment, or anyone who supports gun rights......Mr Cho is responsible.

The only way to stop gun violence and crime is to go after the criminals....taking
MY guns away won't affect them at all......except for possibly making it easier and
more tempting to try to rob me. If you're considering robbing two people.....and
you know one of them has a gun.....which one will you rob? Then if you know that
the government has taken guns away from everyone who obeys the laws....doesn't
it stand to reason that you'll feel safer robbing more people.

____________________________________________________

Yes NRA and Gun Makers.
Who wants to take YOUR GUNs???????????? OR MINE?

Mr Cho wasnt a Criminal?

He was a nut and many knew it. The NRA and I guess you dont want a data base to make him a hit???????

I Colo we had no cooling of period....................

Some Clown with restraining orders killed his daughters and shot up a cop shop.........

In Colo we have a cooling of time...........Do you hate that??

The Criminal thing is crap.................This clown was not a criminal? Mr Cho ? Lee Oswald? Withman?


Suck up the NRA crap "take your GUNS".............lol








 fixer 1234
Joined: 4/25/2006
Msg: 264
gun control in the usa
Posted: 4/29/2007 4:26:14 PM
well let me just say have you ever heard of Hitler the one over in Germany well this is what he done because he was such a nice guy just ask the Jews. its tragic because all those kids got killed
but the hard working good people of the US should not be punished and have there right to bear arms taken away because of some crazy person . And if you think about it with no way to fight the GOOD honest politicians can do anything they want. so all ways keep that in mind
 hungerforlove
Joined: 7/4/2005
Msg: 266
view profile
History
gun control in the usa
Posted: 4/29/2007 4:47:50 PM
Why don't you wake up idiot?????Or better than that go to Ireland;the toughtest gun
control in the world,and one of the highest crime rates.Or yet go to the Scandanavian countries where everybody owns a gun,the lowest crime rate in the world.Wake up,its whimps like you that want control over everbody else's lives,that
cry the loudest when their freedom is taken.
 dalek1967
Joined: 1/20/2007
Msg: 267
view profile
History
gun control in the usa
Posted: 4/29/2007 4:51:50 PM

The guy was out-to-lunch-gone- in- the- head[A.H.] which was probably a good thing for us. My point is; laws don't solve society's problems, people do, guns don't kill people, people do etc etc. There are already too many laws designed to make people feel safe. Education at the earliest opportunity in a childs life, or more correctly in every child's life is the answer to society's problems. You love them, why not give them the information they need to survive ?? I hope they don't NEED guns but they might...


I agree. I'm not a crook and have never been arrested. I would bet money that I can go buy a gun faster and cheaper on the street than I can by obeying the law. Anybody want to disagree with me on that? I mentioned this before, people that plan to break the law anyway, especially those that plan to kill themselves when they are done, could care less about any laws. They are going to do what they are going to do, period. The "law" will never apply to them if they are dead. You can't convict a corpse.

 LoonyTunz
Joined: 8/11/2006
Msg: 273
view profile
History
gun control in the usa
Posted: 4/29/2007 9:10:01 PM
Just curious Charles how does the level of education compare for the western provinces?

And way up there ^^^^ Washington D.C.'s ban is ineffectual simply because you have no useful National standard for gun control, when you can drive an hour away and pick up guns then the ban is rather pointless isn't it? Same goes for Cho orederring arms online. If you had a functional national standard and his name popped up on a "do not sell" list because of his documented mental problems .... well you see where that goes.
 LoonyTunz
Joined: 8/11/2006
Msg: 275
view profile
History
gun control in the usa
Posted: 4/29/2007 10:36:58 PM
Along the lines of lower education in relation to both firearms ownership and safety. Lol, maybe an IQ cut-off would help a little. But seriously the lower education thing also tends to relate to lower end economics aswell, quite a common denominator in misuse of damned near everything under the sun.
 LoonyTunz
Joined: 8/11/2006
Msg: 281
view profile
History
gun control in the usa
Posted: 4/30/2007 10:10:40 PM
Jerry those stats open a huge and entirely different can of worms. For instance thanks to radical feminist pressure "Sexual assault" can and does include "any unwanted touch" and has been at times enforced over some drunken slob thinking some woman he didn't know well wanted a kiss or a hug.

As for SE Ontario having the same problem, if you check localized crime reports Hamilton and Toronto do have a retarded violence rate compared to the rest of the province (being carried out almost exclusively with illegal guns btw of which atleast 50% come directly from the US states which have lax laws/enforcement). I can't say for sure if it is different in the US in this regard but the majority of guns in Canada are in a rural environment.
 LoonyTunz
Joined: 8/11/2006
Msg: 289
view profile
History
gun control in the usa
Posted: 5/1/2007 9:24:26 AM

Iran SHOULD be restricted from owning and developing WMD's......as should Iraq,
Saudi Arabia, North Korea, and any other country with a history of providing weapons to terrorists.

You mean like the US supplying Saddam, or the Taliban? Okay boys hand over all of your nukes and gases right now.


Wait......I don't understand.
If the majority of guns are in rural areas.......and guns are the problem....why
don't the rural areas have the highest crime rates? Especially if you look at the
statistics per capita......if they have the most guns and the fewest people their
per capita rates should be off the charts.
If your tough gun laws are so effective......how are these guns getting into your
country and why aren't the gun laws controlling that problem when they are?


Now this one is reeeeally very simple. Our gun controls tend to actually work. This means that fewer "wrong" people have access to firearms. This trend does reverse in high density population centers in close proximity to US states with poor or ineffective controls. How do they get in? Easy drive across the border buy a gun where due to squabbling by the NRA and complete anti-gun lobbies there hasn't been any meaningful progress is using effective controls and drive back. Not every car is stripped to the nuts and bolts as it crosses. Which is also the reason I've stated many times that whatever controls are eventually instituted there MUST be federally mandated, individual states will only fvck it up, even if 40 of them get it right the other 10 will cause problems for all 50.
 neopol
Joined: 9/26/2006
Msg: 292
gun control in the usa
Posted: 5/1/2007 6:01:52 PM
Gun crime in GB increased almost 3.5X after the tougher measures were enacted. So, should we be as flippant as you were about "not putting on the crying act" for the victims of those crimes?



A question for gun control advocates:
Why did gun violence increase in Great Britain after their ban on guns following the shooting at Dunblane? Shouldn't gun violence have decreased?


I really dont know if your question actually was answered. If not, here's another supportive statistic sheet. You can see this trend over & over after dis-arming the general population when doing a simple before-and-after comparison:


re: gun laws

Date: 2007-04-29, 6:34PM

From: Ed Chenel, A police officer in Australia

Hi Yanks,

I thought you all would like to see the real figures from Down Under.

It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by our own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. First year results are now in:

Australia-wide, homicides are up 6.2 percent,
Australia-wide, assaults are up 9.6 percent ;
Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent)!
In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent.

(Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not and criminals still possess their guns!)

While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since the criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed.

There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly, while the resident is at home.

Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in "successfully ridding Australian society of guns." You won't see this on the American evening news or hear your governor or members of the State Assembly disseminating this information.

The Australian experience speaks for itself. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens.

Original URL: http://sarasota.craigslist.org/rnr/321231682.html
 Realityissubjective
Joined: 9/24/2006
Msg: 293
view profile
History
gun control in the usa
Posted: 5/1/2007 6:13:26 PM
...and heres the rest of that *report* according to Snopes.com

Origins: Although
the old adage says that "Figures don't lie, but liars figure," those who seek to influence public opinion often employ a variety of means to slant statistical figures into seemingly supporting their point of view:

Percentages by themselves often tell far from a complete story, particularly when they involve small sample sizes which do not adequately mask normal fluctuations or the potential influence of a number of extraneous factors affecting the phenomenon under study. A statement such as "The number of deaths attributable to cancer increased by 2% between 1973 and 1983" is probably much more significant if the number of cancer deaths increased by twenty thousand among a population of one million than if they increased by two among a population of one hundred. (In the latter case, for example, two people who already had cancer could have moved into an otherwise cancer-free small town, but it's far less likely that immigration would completely account for an increase of twenty thousand cancer cases amidst a city of one million.)

Context is especially important, and percentages alone don't provide context. A statement such as "The home run total in the American League jumped by an astounding 50% between 1960 and 1961" sounds misleadingly impressive if you don't know that after 1960, the American League expanded by two teams and increased the length of its schedule, thereby adding two hundred more games to the season.

Most importantly, percentages don't establish cause-and-effect relationships — at best they highlight correlations which may be due to any number of factors. If (to continue our previous example), the total number of home runs hit by all teams increased by 30% from one year to the next while the number of games remained the same, a great many people might claim that the baseballs used in the latter year had obviously been "juiced" (i.e., manufactured in such a way as to cause them to travel farther when hit). But a number of other unconsidered factors (individually or collectively) might be responsible for the increase, such as an abundance of warm weather, or an expansion in the number of teams which brought more inexperienced and ineffective pitchers into the league.
In the specific case offered here, context is the most important factor. The piece quoted above leads the reader to believe that much of the Australian citizenry owned handguns until their ownership was made illegal and all firearms owned by "law-abiding citizens" were collected by the government through a buy-back program in 1997. This is not so. Australian citizens do not (and never did) have a constitutional right to own firearms — even before the 1997 buyback program, handgun ownership in Australia was restricted to certain groups, such as those needing weapons for occupational reasons, members of approved sporting clubs, hunters, and collectors. Moreover, the 1997 buyback program did not take away all the guns owned by these groups; only some types of firearms (primarily semi-automatic and pump-action weapons) were banned. And even with the ban in effect, those who can demonstrate a legitimate need to possess prohibited categories of firearms can petition for exemptions from the law.
Given this context, any claims based on statistics (even accurate ones) which posit a cause-and-effect relationship between the gun buyback program and increased crime rates because "criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed" are automatically suspect, since the average Australian citizen didn't own firearms even before the buyback. But beyond that, most of the statistics offered here are misleading and present only "first year results" where long-term trends need to be considered in order to draw valid cause-and-effect conclusions.

For example, the first entry states that "Homicides are up 3.2%." This statistic is misleading because it reflects only the absolute number of homicides rather than the homicide rate. (A country with a rapidly-growing population, for example, might experience a higher number of crimes even while its overall crime rate decreased.) An examination of statistics from the Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC) reveals that the overall homicide rate in Australia has changed little over the past decade and actually dipped slightly after the 1997 gun buy-back program. (The chart found at this link also demonstrates how easily statistics based on small sample sizes can mislead, as when the homicide rate in Tasmania increased nearly eight-fold in one year based on a single incident in which 35 people were killed.)

Then we have the claim that "In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent." This is another example of how misleading statistics can be when the underlying numbers are not provided: Victoria, a state with a population of over four-and-a-half million people in 1997, experienced 7 firearm-related homicides in 1996 and 19 firearm-related homicides in 1997 (an increase of 171%, not 300%). An additional twelve homicides amongst a population of 4.5 million is not statistically significant, nor does this single-year statistic adequately reflect long-term trends. Moreover, the opening paragraph mixes two very different types of statistics — number of homicides vs. percentage of homicides committed with firearms. In the latter case, it should be noted that the Australia-wide percentage of homicides committed with firearms is now lower than it was before the gun buy-back program, and lower than it has been at any point during the past ten years. (In the former case, the absolute number of firearm homicides in Australia in 1998-99 was the lowest in the past ten years.)

Other claims offered here, such as the statement that "While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months" and "There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly" are even more difficult to evaluate, because they don't offer any figures or standards of measurement at all. Do they deal with absolute numbers, or percentages? Do they reflect all incidents of crime, or only those committed with firearms? How much of an increase constitutes a "dramatic" increase? According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, the proportion of armed robberies involving firearms has actually declined over the last several years:

1995 - 27.8%
1996 - 25.3%
1997 - 24.1%
1998 - 17.6%
1999 - 15.2%
2000 - 14.0%


The ABS does report that the number of assaults on victims aged 65 and over has increased over the last few years, but hardly in a proportion one would describe as "dramatic":

Number of victims of assault aged 65 and over:
1996 - 1474
1997 - 1662 (12.8% increase from previous year)
1998 - 1663 (0.06% increase from previous year)
1999 - 1793 (7.8% increase from previous year)



The main point to be learned here is that determining the effect of changes in Australia's gun ownership laws and the government's firearm buy-back program on crime rates requires a complex long-term analysis and can't be discerned from the small, mixed grab bag of short-term statistics offered here. And no matter what the outcome of that analysis, the results aren't necessarily applicable to the USA, where laws regarding gun ownership are (and always have been) much different than those in Australia.

Last updated: 28 January 2004
 JustKelly70
Joined: 2/9/2007
Msg: 295
view profile
History
gun control in the usa
Posted: 5/1/2007 7:09:24 PM
It's too late to initiate any type of gun control in the states, Too many guns out there. Canada got a grip on hand guns years ago, I'm not saying there are not illegal ones out there. The new gun control on long arms is pointless, Hope it dies soon, the majority are law biding people who enjoy hunting.
 neopol
Joined: 9/26/2006
Msg: 296
gun control in the usa
Posted: 5/1/2007 7:24:59 PM
the old adage says that "Figures don't lie, but liars figure," those who seek to influence public opinion often employ a variety of means to slant statistical figures into seemingly supporting their point of view:



Welcome to OUR world...a world where gun banners have been using the same statistical spreadsheet scare tactics for years to dupe the general public into thinking private firearm ownership is somehow evil and winning restrictions to the 2nd amendment will solve society's ills. It cuts both ways of course. Turnabout IS fair play.

Nevertheless, it still begs the answer to the burning question: "Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in "successfully ridding Australian society of guns."

These sweeping gun restrictions always are born from some isolated gun violence act, then statistics are spun and presented in questionable ways(as you pointed out) and finally the persuaded but ignorant citizenry support the desired pending restrictive legislation, which always promises a safer utopian society, in order to garner support for its enactment. Of course it never delivers as promised, therefore more and more laws are enacted. We have seen it all before.

Considering the quote: "the average Australian citizen didn't own firearms even before the buyback".....why on earth was this monunemtal political feel-good measure enacted in the first place???? What a sad waste of legislative energy.
 Realityissubjective
Joined: 9/24/2006
Msg: 297
view profile
History
gun control in the usa
Posted: 5/1/2007 7:30:58 PM
Not my quote.... That was from Snopes, I posted the rest of the Snopes Report to the Letter you posted.
 LoonyTunz
Joined: 8/11/2006
Msg: 299
view profile
History
gun control in the usa
Posted: 5/1/2007 10:42:13 PM

Guns don't Kill people... People Kill people. Move to Russia or England if you don't care about our "RIGHT" to bare arms.



I FULLY endorse your "right" to wear a Tee-Shirt or a "wife-beater" if you choose.


......more strict enforcement of the laws and tougher penalties.

The first part True. And what has more strict enforcement? Ohhh that would be reasonable gun controls.
The second part completely false. Is there another industrialized nation with an incarceration rate as high as the US? I haven't re-checked the numbers, but I do recall a huge difference between the two countrys for that.
 LoonyTunz
Joined: 8/11/2006
Msg: 310
view profile
History
gun control in the usa
Posted: 5/2/2007 10:54:47 AM

NOPE! You're jsut wrong. Iraq DID have WMD's years ago and we know this
because Hussein used them......the idea that Iraq never had them is something
spread by the media and I'm surprised that someone who considers themselves
so knowlegeable doesn't remember or is unable to look that up.

Ummm I assume you mean that lovely chemical rain that Saddam dropped on the Kurds. The chems supplied BY the US (because he was in conflict with Iran and y'all thought they were the big baddies). Right there by previuos statements "any country that supplies terrorists with WMD's should not have them................... Oh and nice intervention on behalf of those Kurds too. But they didn't control oil fields like the Kuwaiti's did they?


How many industrialized nations enjoy the SAME freedoms we do? Further, the incarceration rate has virtually nothing to do with guns. Let us be honest, okay.

Hmmm my country is industrialized, yet my government needs just cause and a court order to tap MY phone. If I am arrested they must tell me what for and allow me to mount a defence with the same information as the prosecution. When the elected representatives of the people pass a bill my PM cannot veto it and thereby over-rule the will of the people as your president has just done.
Care to re-state that yet?

The problem is not gun owners, or guns in general, it is the criminals. We can put all the laws on the books we want...the criminals, who are the offenders, will not abide by them.

What we need is mandatory sentences, harsh sentences. I have an idea, if you use a gun in the commission of a crime then you earn an automatic life without parole sentence. How long do you think it would take for word to spread on the street? Not that that would stop the criminals, but at least it would take those persons off the street, so that is one less criminal my daughter and I will have to worry about.

How many times can I say this without you understanding.
Yes the problem IS you gun laws. Sure you have plenty of them and a few even make sense. But because it leaves so much upto each state they all too often either outright contradict eachother or undermine the benefits that you SHOULD see from them if it were UNIFORMLY applied. Your federal laws are too weak, it is the state laws that have it all messed up.
On the last bit. Is that an ad campaign from your "for profit" prisons? Both Australia and Canada do not incarcerate people at the same rate you do (in the 90's I saw a stat that 20% of the adult male population in Texas was either in jail or on parole). BTW take 10 gangbangers off the street and out of the gang you really haven't done squat to prevent gang violence , the gang is still there and will just keep recruitting.
 gentlepatrick
Joined: 3/26/2006
Msg: 313
view profile
History
gun control in the usa
Posted: 5/2/2007 2:25:24 PM
I love it folks say how we gave something to saddam so what he did with it was our fault.


you seem to miss the significance of that ..let me help you understand. If you give a butter knife..or a gun... to your friend or neighbor and he unexpectedly uses it to kill someone, no you do not share the blame. However, when you give the potential weapon to someone you know is a psychotic...a killer...a 'loose cannon', you do have blood on your hands. What in the world would be your reason for giving a gun to someone you know is psychotic and a killer? However, that isnt really the point - the point is that we supplied Saddam with weapons of mass destruction and then used them as our justification for invading Iraq.

But all that is off topic.

As an American and non gun owner, my thoughts are simply these:
1. any attempt to look at stats of 'gun control states' in the US are meaningless since the laws vary from state to state and yuo can buy guns in one state and simply drive them into the next state.
2. At the end of the day, America has a strong tradition of gun ownership and a Constitutional protection for that right and the number of guns in existence plus the number being manufactured probably doubles our poplulation. Guns are and will be part of the American landscape.
 neopol
Joined: 9/26/2006
Msg: 315
gun control in the usa
Posted: 5/2/2007 4:10:52 PM
The US is the exception. I consider it an experiment. No other developed country has such a focus on gun ownership. You keep going with this experiment, if it works out for you, I'm sure the rest of the world will adopt a right to bear arms. If you decend into a hell of your own making, I'm glad there are several thousand miles of water between you and me.


It is not an experiment....it is the 2nd amendment of our constitution. Period. Not the 4th, 13th, 21st...the SECOND...right after the FIRST - freedom of speech. Thanks to your imperialist monarchy, we today enjoy the unique liberty that few nations on this earth dare grant. Your system, the sytem we rejected over 200 years ago, just doesnt trust you I suppose.

This is what citizens of other nations dont understand. The right to bear arms was and is that important...because in colonial days, Americans realized there was ONLY several thousand miles of water between here and Britain.
 HalftimeDad
Joined: 5/29/2005
Msg: 316
gun control in the usa
Posted: 5/2/2007 5:00:54 PM

If someone did I missed it. Is there anyone who has tied firearm ownership to an increase in crime or firearm restrctions to a decrease?

Sseriously. Does anyone in the anti-gun position have real and *relevent* data?


Pretty simple. Compare the US with any similar nation (average income, democratic system, level of urban vs rural, etc.). Then look at the level of gun violence in the US compared to that country. Whether you pick Canada, Australia, Belgium, even Ulster for that matter, you'll find a much higher rate or murder and gun violence in the US. Most gun nuts point to New York or Washington DC as examples where gun restrictions don't work, ignoring that within a 30 minute drive anyone there can buy a gun across state lines.
 LoonyTunz
Joined: 8/11/2006
Msg: 337
view profile
History
gun control in the usa
Posted: 5/4/2007 10:41:01 AM

New Zealand. Yes Firearms, no high-murder.
Sweeden. Yes Firearms, no high-murder.

There are a few bullshit points there.

New Zealand is more comparable to Canada actually. And although Sweden has mandatory military service and the general population at the ready to defend the country you are a complete fvcking moron if you think for a second those armed people include the mentally retarded, criminally insane, convicts, or the otherwise irresponsible and unreliable citizens.

But in refusing to accept that Canada, Sweden and New Zealand although they all have guns they also all have WORKABLE gun controls that prevent "people include the mentally retarded, criminally insane, convicts, or the otherwise irresponsible and unreliable citizens." from having easy access to firearms, you refuse to admit that there are infact some residents in the US that really shouldn't have guns despite your 2nd amendment, or that those that wrote it didn't really believe "Jerry the retard down the street" should be totting a .44 to school.
 BRASS
Joined: 12/8/2005
Msg: 338
view profile
History
gun control in the usa
Posted: 5/4/2007 4:32:04 PM
I'm all for Gun Control.
After all isn't 'Gun Control' hitting your target.

Dial 911,
Call for a Cab,
Order a Pizza,
What gets there first?

I figure I'd rather have my Browning Hi-Power then a cell phone.
It doesn't run on batteries......
 LoonyTunz
Joined: 8/11/2006
Msg: 343
view profile
History
gun control in the usa
Posted: 5/4/2007 8:49:10 PM

A number of years back a teen in the Netherlands committed a mass murder. Netherlands has complete gun control. Gun control does not stop the criminals from procuring a gun. Gun control only controls law abiding citizens.

Yes look at your own words "a number of years back" .......... What is the US school shooting tally for just this school year so far? 5? And ONLY illegally acquired guns are ever used in crimes? Think again V-Tech is only the most recent.

Never once did I state that it will cure all of the problems, the aim is to cut down the problems to a respectable level.

And for the poster that thinks this is "america/american bashing". No it is not, we are just as quick to take issue with stupid policies that occasionally get enacted here (we still have people pissed about free-trade). If we happen to make fun of someone of limited intelligence it isn't because they are american, it is because they are relying on rhetoric and propaganda to bolster empty arguements.
 LoonyTunz
Joined: 8/11/2006
Msg: 345
view profile
History
gun control in the usa
Posted: 5/4/2007 11:14:25 PM
Ummm Sassy you DO realise that post came from an american, right?
As for jumping th egun being an american trait ... no we do that here too just not asmuch.
You have permission to be embarassed now.
By the way not catching that the poster is American from either her post (it is pretty self-evident if you read it) or checking the profile, it has been determined that you personally will only be allowed long guns of the bolt action single shot variety . Repeaters and semi-autos being reserved for those with better use of judgement before they jump.
 GREENEYES269
Joined: 7/30/2006
Msg: 349
gun control in the usa
Posted: 5/5/2007 10:43:36 AM
BarnBabe GOD BLESS YOU You got it right. Any one who says we don't need guns has never had to see what happens when you are not armed. Think of how many shotings would be differnt if everyone caried a gun. All the school shottings Would not have happened like they did. How much happier would thoes faimlys who lost someone be today. Criminals do not go to houses they think they might get shot in they are not as stupid as people think they are. It is everyones right to bear arms or arm bears what ever we want. Criminals will always have guns. People have a choice Be a armed citizen or a unarmed victim. There choice. When Guns are outlawed I'll be a outlaw.
 poz55795
Joined: 2/7/2006
Msg: 350
gun control in the usa
Posted: 5/5/2007 11:28:49 AM
Rid the world of criminals and guns wouldnt be a threat. Get real people. Guns arent the problem. It's the people behind them..................If they didnt have guns they'd beat your head in with a rock..............or a knife............or a fork
Show ALL Forums  > Current Events  >