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  > Politics  > Gun Control      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 mrburberry
Joined: 5/27/2005
Msg: 101
view profile
History
Gun ControlPage 5 of 50    (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)
stealth2,

WHILE WE'RE ON THE SUBJECT OF CHINA HOW MANY FAMILIES DID YOU SEE OVER THERE WITH MORE THAN ONE KID? HOW MANY STREET CORNER CHURCHES DID YOU SEE? WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO TRADE YOUR BROTHER OR SISTER, CHRISTMAS, AND EASTER FOR WHAT THEY HAVE? OH YEAH TWO MORE WORDS : TINENAMEN (sp?) SQUARE!
 CountIbli
Joined: 6/1/2005
Msg: 102
Gun Control
Posted: 7/7/2005 10:23:32 AM


Regarding the US Constitution: the constitutional provision about the right to bear arms is linked to the need for a militia:


So what's the militia? Well according to US Code Title 10, Subtitle A, Part 1, Chapter 13, Section 311

"(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia."

That makes me part of the militia under federal law. Of course I'm also a citizen of Massachusetts. So what does Massachusetts Law say about the militia? Part 1, Title 5, Chapter 33, Section 2

"The militia of the commonwealth shall consist of all able-bodied male citizens and all other able-bodied males who have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States, between the ages of seventeen and forty-five, and who are residents of the commonwealth, and of such other persons, male and female, as may, upon their own application, be enlisted or commissioned therein pursuant to any provision of this chapter, subject, however, to such exemptions as are now, or may be hereafter, created by law."

What does the Massachusetts Constitution say about the right to keep and bear arms?

"Article XVII. The people have a right to keep and to bear arms for the common defence. And as, in time of peace, armies are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be maintained without the consent of the legislature; and the military power shall always be held in an exact subordination to the civil authority, and be governed by it."
 mrburberry
Joined: 5/27/2005
Msg: 103
view profile
History
Gun Control
Posted: 7/7/2005 10:25:10 AM
>>>>>Then it's, "Thomas Jefferson said we should take up arms if the gov't gets out of control... that's why we need them close by..." Yikes.<<<<

Let me calm down. Most of the people spouting off about no guns this and that, and how the Second Ammendment is obsolete are just clinging to what they were taught. You have been brainwashed and don't even know it. Think I'm lying? Go find a copy of your high school, middle, or elementary school government/poltics book and see how much is in there about firearms ownership. Better still, if you have kids read theirs. It's getting worse, tell me if I'm wrong.
 NittanyLion
Joined: 2/19/2005
Msg: 104
Gun Control
Posted: 7/7/2005 2:33:53 PM
your post is a little ambiguous, I'm assuming that you're actually AGREEING with my response of "yikes" to that post. After all, you look like a reasonable man...
 mrburberry
Joined: 5/27/2005
Msg: 105
view profile
History
Gun Control
Posted: 7/9/2005 12:18:17 AM
Remember what happens when you assume. TJ was right on the money.
 NittanyLion
Joined: 2/19/2005
Msg: 106
Gun Control
Posted: 7/9/2005 5:47:18 AM
Nobody wants to see violent confrontation between the populace and our govt, the RTKBA is primarily for defense, hunting and other shooting sports. The 'defense' against our own govt idea is theoretically true, but no one wants to see that become necessary. This would be an absolute last-ditch option for Americans should our govt become terminally oppressive, an option we all hope never becomes a reality.
Unfortunately, your "nobody's" and "no one's" are inaccurate. You'd be surprised, apparently.

On top of that, it's disturbing to me that there are a lot of people in this country who WANT weapons for "defense." Please do not waste your time explaining why. I UNDERSTAND why. I just disagree.
 LegalWizard
Joined: 5/2/2005
Msg: 107
Gun Control
Posted: 7/9/2005 7:58:20 AM
When Australia banned private possession of guns, home invasions and burglaries instantly spiked and zoomed off the chart because the criminals knew they had a disarmed population to prey upon.

I honestly believe that if a law abiding citizen uses lethal force to stop a dangerous felony in progress, or as a bona fide self-defense justifiable homicide, that the federal goverment should bestow a ten thousand dollar tax-free bounty or reward to the party who is the subject of a grand jury "no true bill" (no criminal charges filed) each and every time a law abiding citizen using a registered gun is investigated and it is determined that no laws were violated when a firearm is utilized to apprehend, wound, or terminate with extreme prejudice, a felon such as a robber, rapist, murderer, or kidnapper.

No criminal that was shot in the act of perpetrating a crime has ever escaped or appealed his way out of a cemetery.
 CountIbli
Joined: 6/1/2005
Msg: 108
Gun Control - A comparison
Posted: 7/9/2005 12:39:17 PM
Comparing crimes rates between the US and Canada makes no sense. We are very different countries. There are numerous factors that cause crime so it's pretty stupid to single out guns as the deciding factor. The best way to determine the effect of guns on crime is to look at a particular locale which has changed gun laws. Then see how crime rates have changed (if at all). One finds that making guns more accessable reduces crime rates. Restricting gun ownership results in higher crime rates. This shouldn't be surprising since firearms are used over a million times each year in the US in self-defence (often they don't even need to be fired).
 NittanyLion
Joined: 2/19/2005
Msg: 109
Gun Control - A comparison
Posted: 7/9/2005 6:35:25 PM
Late: very interesting post. Thanks.

Count: re:
Comparing crimes rates between the US and Canada makes no sense. We are very different countries. There are numerous factors that cause crime so it's pretty stupid to single out guns as the deciding factor.

I think you must have skimmed the first paragraph too quickly. Not only was there no statement about a "deciding factor," but you apparently missed :
Although there are other factors affecting rates of murder, suicide and unintentional injury, a comparison of data in Canada with US data suggests that access to handguns may play a role.


There isn't an easy answer, but in general, dismissing information that doesn't support your point as "stupid" doesn't shed any light either, ya know?
 NittanyLion
Joined: 2/19/2005
Msg: 110
Gun Control
Posted: 7/9/2005 7:04:47 PM
Well, I guess there's nothing I can do if you don't respect my opinion. It doesn't really leave me wanting to give the clarification you seem to be asking for, but...

For the record, I respect your opinion, I just disagree. Perhaps we've had different experiences that bring us to our conclusions. A friend of mine was recently murdered in his home by an intruder (two intruders actually); turns out I still don't support increased access to guns. We could talk about it, but that wouldn't be too fun for me. Who wants to have a conversation when it's pretty clear your thoughts will fall on deaf, non-respectful ears?

Thanks for at least telling me, so I know not to waste my time.

Night.
 NittanyLion
Joined: 2/19/2005
Msg: 111
Gun Control
Posted: 7/10/2005 6:17:36 AM
Would your friend be alive if he had a gun? Would he have had a better chance?
No. My fault for saying anything about my friend. But you've missed the point (that I believe strongly about this.) Although I brought it up I would appreciate it if you wouldn't use that murder to try to prove your point. You've made your point. I understand your point. The comment was charming, though.


I hope neither of us ever need to defend ourselves with deadly force, but at least I will be ready if that horrible prospect becomes reality.

Are you done?

You shouldn't really be so appalled that someone disagrees with you on this. Lots of people do. You know that. Otherwise this wouldn't even be a discussion.

Meanwhile, I've told you my opinion of your questions. So please move on.
 BuzWeaver
Joined: 6/25/2005
Msg: 112
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/10/2005 9:25:09 AM
Gun Control, Just The Facts: http://www.justfacts.com/gun_control.htm


FIREARM USE IN CRIME AND SELF DEFENSE

* In the United States during 1997, people committed 15,289 murders. The perpetrators used a firearm in 10,369 of these instances.

* In the United States during 1997, people committed about 7,927,000 violent crimes. The perpetrators used a firearm in about 691,000 of these instances.

* As of 1992, for about every 14 violent crimes (murder, rape, etc…) committed in the United States, one person is sentenced to prison.

* In the early/mid 1990's, criminals on parole or early release from prison committed about 5,000 murders, 17,000 rapes, and 200,000 robberies a year.

* Americans use firearms to defend themselves from criminals about 760,000 times a year. This figure is the lowest among a group of 15 nationwide polls done by organizations including Gallup and the Los Angeles Times.

* Approximately 11% of gun owners and 13% of handgun owners have used their firearms for protection from criminals.

* When citizens use guns for protection from criminals, the criminal is wounded in about 1 out of every 100 instances, and the criminal is killed in about 1 out of every 1000 instances.

* Washington D.C. enacted a virtual ban on handguns in 1976. Between 1976 and 1991, Washington D.C.'s homicide rate rose 200%, while the U.S. rate rose 12%.

Between 1977 and 1992, 10 states adopted right-to-carry laws. Dr. Lott's study found that the implementation of these laws created:

-- no change in suicide rates,
-- a .5% rise in accidental firearm deaths,
-- a 5% decline in rapes,
-- a 7% decline in aggravated assaults,
-- and an 8% decline in murder

for the 10 states that adopted these laws between 1977 and 1992.

* Using 1995 numbers, this amounts to:

-- 1 more accidental gun death,
-- 316 less murders,
-- 939 less rapes,
-- and 14,702 less aggravated assaults

in these 10 states annually.
 NittanyLion
Joined: 2/19/2005
Msg: 113
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/10/2005 9:32:16 AM
From Just the Facts, Inc.'s information page:

How We're Different

Truly Unique...

Just The Facts, Inc.™ is a unique hybrid research and consulting provider dedicated to establishing and maintaining an honest and dependable partner relationship with our customers. Our clients tell us it is this dedication to providing quality, insightful solutions to business research, intelligence and consultancy needs which really sets us apart from other similar services.

Highly Experienced...

Our highly experienced staff understands the needs of our clients. Because our roots come from within various well-respected, international corporate environments, we have sat at our clients’ desks and been faced with the same issues and challenges they have encountered. We’ve been in the strategic meetings and listened to senior management’s questions and concerns. As a result, we quickly understand clients’ needs. We’re true partners, always seeking methods to help our clients both understand and stay ahead of their competitors.

We Really Listen...

At JTF, we really listen to your research questions and analyze how best to address client concerns in order to provide actionable results. Our corporate mission and pledge is to conduct “the highest quality work” or “we’ll make it right.” We work with your organization, not against you… and this often means JTF personnel are highly flexible in addressing the requirements of a specific client’s unique situation.


I'm not disputing the truth to the "facts" posted in the previous post. Generally, though, getting your "facts" from consultants (whose primary objective for research is to serve the needs of their private clients) is not the most reliable way to go... regardless of whether it supports your point or not. Know what I mean? Unless, of course, you've hired them to back up your position on POF... lol jk
 lola05
Joined: 7/1/2005
Msg: 114
view profile
History
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/10/2005 10:37:56 AM
That site should be called : www.justfacts- with-a-radically-right-conservative-spin.com

The references for the gun control.."facts"... are laughable. But a link to the nra website was provided several times if anyone's interested.

They are not providing "facts" on many topics. ....Only 7 in fact. I checked out 2 more. The "facts" on Abortion are clearly Pro-Life. The "facts" on racism are clearly racist.

Hey BuzWeaver , thanks for sharing your "facts" .
 NittanyLion
Joined: 2/19/2005
Msg: 115
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/10/2005 10:40:08 AM
Do I even WANT to look at the ones on racism?!
 lola05
Joined: 7/1/2005
Msg: 116
view profile
History
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/10/2005 10:49:39 AM
No Nittany, you don't. !
 CountIbli
Joined: 6/1/2005
Msg: 117
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/10/2005 3:01:56 PM


The references for the gun control.."facts"... are laughable. But a link to the nra website was provided several times if anyone's interested.


Oh, so let's here you dispute these facts. Laughter was never a convincing counter-argument.

Now it's true that the NRA is referenced in 5 out the 65 footnotes. But Handgun Control is referenced in 4 of the footnotes. If you have evidence that gun control works then please provide some.
 NittanyLion
Joined: 2/19/2005
Msg: 118
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/10/2005 3:21:49 PM
Count, I think you might have misread. We're talking about the SOURCE.
 CountIbli
Joined: 6/1/2005
Msg: 119
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/10/2005 3:25:44 PM


The "facts" on racism are clearly racist.


This probably deserves its own thread. Which facts are you talking about? The site tries to link racism to evolution via Darwin and Huxley. But I could see nothing on the site that promoted racism.
 CountIbli
Joined: 6/1/2005
Msg: 120
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/10/2005 3:27:33 PM


Count, I think you might have misread. We're talking about the SOURCE.


I take the "source" to be the Just the Facts website. Am I wrong? Or do you mean the sources the site uses?
 NittanyLion
Joined: 2/19/2005
Msg: 121
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/10/2005 3:33:26 PM
My fault. I thought you were asking lola to dispute the facts themselves...

What we were talking about is the subjective approach to fact-gathering when one is a private consultant hired by corporations, or anyone else for that matter.

Sorry I misunderstood.
 lola05
Joined: 7/1/2005
Msg: 122
view profile
History
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/10/2005 8:58:03 PM

CountIbli ... "Now it's true that the NRA is referenced in 5 out the 65 footnotes. But Handgun Control is referenced in 4 of the footnotes. If you have evidence that gun control works then please provide some."


Within the 65 footnotes, only 17 links are provided.
* Most of the ....Statistics... are quoted from, the NRA and 1 crime study entitled,
" More Guns, Less Crime" done by 1 person at the University of Chicago.


"Evidence that gun control works", has already been provided on this thread.
I refer you to Msg: 320 by late™. --- Statistics provided are from Health Canada.
A government agency that monitors statistics on variables that impact the health of Canadians.
- Not a fly by night website with a right wing political agenda, such as, .... " Just facts."
- Or the NRA who falsifies statistics for financial gain.




CountIbli ... "But I could see nothing on the site that promoted racism."


That doesn't surprise me.
 BuzWeaver
Joined: 6/25/2005
Msg: 123
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/10/2005 9:02:04 PM

That site should be called : www.justfacts- with-a-radically-right-conservative-spin.com

The references for the gun control.."facts"... are laughable. But a link to the nra website was provided several times if anyone's interested.

They are not providing "facts" on many topics. ....Only 7 in fact. I checked out 2 more. The "facts" on Abortion are clearly Pro-Life. The "facts" on racism are clearly racist.

Hey BuzWeaver , thanks for sharing your "facts" .


They aren’t my facts and if you have something that contravenes those facts feel free to post it.
 BuzWeaver
Joined: 6/25/2005
Msg: 124
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/10/2005 9:05:39 PM
Feel free to use the NCPA information too.



http://www.ncpa.org/pi/crime/crime21.html
 Frrosty
Joined: 3/21/2004
Msg: 125
Re: Gun Control
Posted: 7/10/2005 10:09:50 PM

Now it's true that the NRA is referenced in 5 out the 65 footnotes. But Handgun Control is referenced in 4 of the footnotes. If you have evidence that gun control works then please provide some."


It depends who has the guns. I think I'll need mine soon.

It's time to hand them....

back.

I'm no Angel; I'm just practicing.

May all our moves be "just"
Show ALL Forums  > Politics  > Gun Control