quote:

ORIGINAL: painpup

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL:painpup

he gave out figures and I tend to agree with all He wrote

Yeah, he sure did.

Gave out all kinds of facts and figures.

When he proves to me that he just didn't pull them out of his ass I'll take him seriously.

When I quote statistics and figures I document them, so until I see that it's anybody's guess whether they are true or not.

like I said in another post Numbers can be fudged all depends on Who is doing the Fudging and as far as gov't trust  I havn't any well since Carter wow was that bad

Let’s start here with some basics.

Right now, all actual ASSUALT WEAPONS and all AUTOMATIC weapons are illegal to have in the United States. That is in ALL STATES.

The places with the most strict gun control laws HAVE THE HIGHEST VIOLENT CRIME RATES.

What media and politicians refer to as ASSUALT Weapons are actually NON-automatic weapons. If the same analogy was applied to cars then a Chevy Monte Carlo with #24 Jeff Gordon decals on it would be outlawed because it LOOKS like a NASCAR racing car.

I have a .223 rifle that has a nice beautiful wood stock and is a great hunting rifle. The caliber .223 is the same used in the NATO rifles. If I take the wood stock off and put a composite black stock on with a rail to put a laser pointer on it I can make it look like what the Military uses. It DOES NOT and CAN NOT fire like the Military ones, but it looks a lot like it.

The Olympics use real guns .22 Rim fire rifles, .22 Rim file pistols, Shotguns, and in the JUNIOR Olympics they use Air guns.

In countries where guns have been outlawed rate of violent crimes has escalated. For example in England as more severe restrictions on owning firearms have occurred the crime rates in general and murder in particular has risen.

In states where there are concealed carry laws AND the laws REQUIRES training and re-certification of how to use a weapon violent crime and murder has declined.

In states and places where gun carry laws are not available violent crime and murder has INCREASED. Washington D.C. and Chicago are two examples.

Guns are the ultimate equalizer in a fight. If guns are restricted then law abiding citizens are at a disadvantage to a criminal with a gun. In my opinion this emboldens the criminal because the criminal knows he will win. Crime rates go up.

The correct answers to lower gun violence are:
1 -- Stiffer criminal penalties for crimes when guns are used.
2 -- Concealed carry permits for all states with recurring training required.
3 -- Mandatory training for all fire arm owners.
4 -- Mandatory training for all CHILDREN about respect for guns
....a -- NRA's Eddie Eagle should be taught to ALL children. (NRA=National Rifle Association), and they put a very good child gun safety program.

Yes, I have many guns. My 12 year old son as an AK-47. Not the Military type. He saved his money, did his research and bought the most widely used and reliable gun in the world. He has been to 3 training camps. We hunt Coyote's and target practice with the AK.

I have shot pistols competitively. I think it is fun to pull a trigger and see a reaction 10, 50, 100 yards away (hole in paper to milk carton full of water springing a leak).

I view guns as a tool and just like any tool they require training and understanding if you are going to be around them or use them.

If you want to save more lives then outlaw CARS or require much more training to have a driver’s license. Cars kill more people than almost anything else in the United States.

Now, I can go on for a LONG time about this but let's get some research going because I believe when you review the research outside of the PROPAGANDA machine of Gun Control, Politicians and some News Media everyone will understand more.
 
I thought this article on International Homicide Comparisons was very good:
http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvinco.html
-- One of the things I found most interesting is that in 13th century Europe serveral studies estimated the homicide rate at 60 per 100,000. 

US Crime Trends:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance.htm#firearm
-- Crime trends have been going down as economic prosperity has gone up.

Britain, Australia top U.S. in violent crime despite strict gun-control measures:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=21902

US Violent Crime Rate: 475 per 100,000 citizens
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_01.html

UK Violent Crime Rate: 4,100 per 100,000 citizens
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs04/rdsolr1804.pdf

Violent Crime by Race / Gender / Age:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/cvict_v.htm
This shows that lower income and younger people are more often victimized.

Highest Crime Rate:
The District of Columbia has very strict gun laws for the longest time.
Population: 550,000
Violent Crime: 1,371 per 100,000
Homicide: 35 per 100,000 (7 times national average)
Rape: 40 per 100,000
Robbery: 578 per 100,000
Assault: 716 per 100,000

Murders by City:
CITY   MURDERS
PER 100,000
(1) Washington, D.C., USA    69.3
(2) Philadelphia, USA   27.4
(3) Dallas, USA    24.8
(4) Los Angeles, USA    22.8
(5) Chicago, USA    20.5
(6) Phoenix, USA    19.1
(7) Moscow, Russia    18.1
( Houston, USA   18.0
(9) New York City, USA    16.8
(10) Helsinki, Finland    12.5

Washington DC – VERY Strict gun control
Chicago – Strict gun control
New York City – Strict gun control
Philadelphia – Semi-strict gun control

VICTOR’s NOTE: In each of these cities there is a high population of lower income people. It seems like minorities, the young, and those in lower income people are more likely to be victimized by, as well as commit, crimes -- REGARDLESS OF GUNS. Most crimes in the US cities also seem to be concentrated in certain areas, usually the poorer areas of said cities.

That is a few references.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crush

Ya know rule, I don't think there is hope for you if you can't see what is in a Constitution and what isn't.  
So yes, it is a "gift" from your government to be able to drive...a privilege to drive on the streets.

So, what you are telling me is we have no rights other than those explicitly stated in the Constitution and we are completely at the mercy of the government to allow us to do anything else?

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crush
Yes, believe it or not, I do keep up with the news.   So what's your point?  
A) I can show where many more than that have been kept from harm in that same time period.

Ok, show me.

quote:



B) These killings, other than the Alabama shootings, were in places that guns were not permitted or by individuals that had psychotic breaks.

Places where guns are not permitted?  Are you talking about the city, the state?  Because I don't anywhere that guns are banned.  If you are talking about specific prohibitions on particular places where guns cannot be carried you need to take another look at the murder sites.

quote:


C) What about the guy who was cutting off the heads of people in his family?

And you honestly think the nutcase in Binghampton would have been able to kill 14 people with just a knife before he was overpowered?

quote:


D) I could claim it has only happened since Obama took office, so it is his fault.  But I won't go there. So..
D') There are ALWAYS "bad guys" out there.  Does that mean good guys shouldn't be able to defend themselves?  I guess so, if you are at a school or in a government building.

Yes, that's obviously the solution, more guns.  Let's arm everyone, I'm sure things will much safer then.  

quote:


E) Gun control isn't about guns, it is about control.

Yeah, that's kind of how I feel about having to get a driver's lincense, car registration, and insurance.  But do ya' think those might just be beneficial?

quote:


F) Gun control isn't about crime control:   http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=3083618&page=1

 

Of course not, how silly is it for someone to believe that stricter gun controls would actually mean fewer guns in the hands of people who shouldn't have them.  What a ridiculous concept.

quote:


G) People kill one another with many things besides guns (see C above)

No???? Really??? then let's back up to my previous question.  Do you think the killer in Binghamton would have been able to kill 14 people running around the place trying to bash them on the head with a brick?

quote:


H) Guns don't kill people by themselves.  They need an operator.

Yes, guns don't kill people, people kill people.  Wow, that's pretty clever.  I just made that up by the way. 

No, wait.  Maybe I have heard that somewhere before,........................ but where?

By the way, heroin doesn't kill people by itself.  It needs someone to inject it into their veins.  But then again that's not contained in a severely misinterpreted section of a 200+ year old document that apparently has become the equivalent of the Bible for some.

quote:

 
I) Those incidents in the past month, while horrific, are the acts of very few individuals.  Given that there are around 52,000,000 homes with guns, what happened is barely a blip.  Less than the percentage of the budget "cuts"  of $100,000,000 proposed by President Obama versus the budget.

Well, that's reassuring, but the analogy is just too ridiculous to waste my time responding to.

quote:


J) Over 200,000 women use a gun to defend themselves against sexual abuse every year.

Don't throw statistics at me unless you back it up with documentation.

quote:


K) Over 1,500,000 times a year a gun is used in self defense.

See my answer to J).

quote:


The stats go on and on. 

It seems some other things go on and on too.

quote:

There doesn't need to be a tweak to the 2nd Amendment. It is pretty darn clear and has been affirmed by the Supreme Court in DC vs Heller as an individual right.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant


Several of the amendments speak to the right to free speech (not inflammatory) and the right to petition the government to redress grievances.  Protests against governmental policies make use of these amendments...where would the left be without those amendments? 

Have the courts not decided that limitations on those free speech rights are acceptable and are those limitations not considered legally binding?

Your own "(not inflammatory)" statement was a court ruling that limited the right.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant
...I have no problem, which is why I had no problem with them limiting the second amendment when they put limitations on the types of arms you CAN own...such as an operable machine gun or certain types of assault weapons or operable bazookas.

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

So am AK 47 isn't an assaault rifle?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crush

Yeah, what seems to go on and on is your insistence to not bother looking at the cites in place already.  You'd rather "react" and deflect, instead of providing any counter arguments backed in fact.

Hence, you can't actually discuss and debate.   Got it.   mike's the same, so at least I'll accept that from now on.    
Really, it is a shame.  But hey, you are entitled to your prejudice, your "feelings" and your opinions, just like anyone else.  

Good luck with that.  

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u
So a fully automatic AK 47 is an assault Weapon!

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u
The point of course is moot....considering the Assault Weapons Ban was allowed to expire.

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

So a fully automatic AK 47 is an assault weapon!

quote:

The study, which just appeared in Volume 30, Number 2 of the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy (pp. 649-694), set out to answer the question in its title: "Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide? A Review of International and Some Domestic Evidence." Contrary to conventional wisdom, and the sniffs of our more sophisticated and generally anti-gun counterparts across the pond, the answer is "no." And not just no, as in there is no correlation between gun ownership and violent crime, but an emphatic no, showing a negative correlation: as gun ownership increases, murder and suicide decreases. The findings of two criminologists - Prof. Don Kates and Prof. Gary Mauser - in their exhaustive study of American and European gun laws and violence rates, are telling: Nations with stringent anti-gun laws generally have substantially higher murder rates than those that do not. The study found that the nine European nations with the lowest rates of gun ownership (5,000 or fewer guns per 100,000 population) have a combined murder rate three times higher than that of the nine nations with the highest rates of gun ownership (at least 15,000 guns per 100,000 population).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Victor59

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u
So a fully automatic AK 47 is an assault Weapon!

Yes, and they are already illegal to purchase.

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u
The point of course is moot....considering the Assault Weapons Ban was allowed to expire.

Not with talk of Obama and croonies making the Assault Weapons Ban again and making it permenant and increase it.

Biggest problem with this is the ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN did NOT ban assault weapons! It banned a weapon based upon it's looks!

Rulemylife -- read the above paragraph. I don't always agree with the NRA or the 2nd Amendment foundation or the other 10 orginzations that fight gun restrictions. Howevever, with the Obama administration being so unintelligent about guns I cannot trust them to make intelligent laws.

Personally, I feel if you put a magazine cap at 20 for pistols and 30 for long guns and outlawed the .50 caliber BMG that would be enough.

One of the first things Obama did was to recend the ability to carry weapons in national parks. That's fine until the next cub scout gets mauled by a bear or vacationer gets partially eaten by a lion. (yes both happened in the past 4 years).

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

So a fully automatic AK 47 is an assault weapon!

Who owns fully automatic AK 47's? You can't walk into Ma&Pa's Guns and Gas and buy one.