Guns, the NRA, the constitution and senseless shootings

then buck, are you advocating 86ing every computer on the face of the earth so children won't be forced into having sex with dogs at 6 years old just because there's a sick fucking, yet very small, minority of people that jerk off to that kind of freak shit?

 

buck - child porn is violent in its very definition.

 

The only way this book makes any logical sense is if every single person on earth carried a gun and was proficient enough to use it faster than any assailant. However, since that is a pipe dream, the book is fraudulent.

I will also point out that this argument was debunked earlier as being nothing more the same tripe used by death penalty advocates. The theory that people won't murder others because when they are caught, they will be executed has done fuck all to reduce murder and crime. Thus is the same with this book.



Tom, you are going to the extremes with your argument. The computer's sole purpose for existence is NOT to provide child porn. It was invented for work. It continues to be used for work. The fact that some people hijacked it for their own sick pleasure does not mean it cannot do work any longer.

The same cannot be said about guns. Their sole purpose is to destroy. I have yet to read the story about the guy who fired his gun at his wife only to have flowers come out. Once that trigger is pulled, something will be destroyed.

You can't use the gun as a pillow. It is not very soft and not shaped properly for this use either.

You cannot use a gun to stir up some soup you making. Well, I guess you can if you enjoy the taste oil from inside the gun's barrel.

You can't sign a contract with a gun. You can't browse the web with a gun.

It is because of this that the gun discussion is different than just about any other.

 

Your own post contradicts itself on several points, there Buck.
"The well-regulated militia" clause is often touted by gun control advocates, yet they seem to want to leave that regulation to the government. Well, if the government is tyrannical, and the time comes to overthrow it, how will it happen if the right to bear arms is lost? Do you really think the government is going to put the second amendment back in the constitution once it's gone? Or give a pissed-off citizenry the means to overthrow said government?
The same could be said of free speech, fair trials and search and seizure.
And "well-regulated" seems to be the order of the day in any case. How many gun laws are out there, whether they're enforced or not? I'd say our government has done a pretty fair job of trying to regulate our militia.

And you say there's no such thing as 100% protection. That's true. I could be the victim of a gun-toting psycho tomorrow...or a hammer-toting psycho...or bat-wielding psycho...you get the idea. But evening the odds gives people a little more of a fighting chance.
If there was one lesson I thought would be learned from Hurricane Katrina, it would be how quickly society can break down when all of our creature comforts are stripped away. If, god forbid, there were another terrorist attack or hurricane, things break down. Looting occurs. There's no food coming in. Guns are tools in that type of situation, offering protection and life.

 

Sorry, but in order to be successful in defending yourself, you need to have the will to kill the attacker. Not everybody can do so. And if you can't do it, your own gun will be your own demise.

As to having a militia to overthrow the government... well, that is just BS. Sorry, but if the government became a dictatorship tomorrow, who the fuck is going to overthrow it? Seriously? Is Tommy Pistol going to use is 9mm to take down "the man?" How Johnny Backyard-Tank?

Sorry, but with today's weaponry and technology a few well armed individuals can't do dick.

 

How hard is it to understand? We have around 30,000 gun deaths in this country per year. Combine the populations of England, Ireland, Japan, Canada, Sweden and Australia and you're about at the population of the U.S., I'm guessing. They have less than 2,000 gun deaths, combined. I'm paraphrasing someone, I forget who, but do you think it's because Americans are more homicidal by nature? Or is it because those countries have strict gun-control laws?

 

Not to pile on, but...

See, this is part of this whole American cowboy mentality. Not picking on you Batman, but people have watched too many movies where the common citizen saves the day with his trusty firearm. It's a myth. Yes there are reports of people successfully defending themselves, but they are dwarfed by fatal gun accidents.

I don't get this at all. Katrina was such an extreme situation. Are you saying we need guns in case our city is flooded and law enforcement can't help? How often does that happen? As far as terrorists, this goes back to my point above. Do you think a gun in your closet is going to stop terrorism? That's a fantasy.

 

After England enacted some of the strictest gun control laws in the Western world, Scotland Yard saw the number of crimes committed by people using guns jump by 40 percent.

A firearm is a tool. You can use it in a variety of ways. You can win an Olympic Gold Medal with one. You can get a college scholarship. You can put food on your family's dinner table. You can use them as an investment. Yes, you can kill another person with one. But the people who do that are evil and should be punished, not those of us who will never commit a crime with our firearms.

 

How many gun deaths did England have?

 

What, you mean "Death Wish 3" wasn't a documentary?
Seriously, though, I think there's a real culture of fear about guns in this country -- hence, the push to ban them. If you learn about guns, one of the first things you're taught is never point it at anything you don't intend to shoot. After that, you're taught to look behind the target and NOT shoot if there's anything back there you don't want to hit.
That's not hard to grasp.
No gun has ever loaded itself, jumped up and pointed itself at someone and pulled its own trigger. Yet to hear some people say it, this happens every day. If you own a gun, I believe you should take a safety course and have a healthy respect for what it can do. But there's also no reason to fear it. A little education can go a long way.
You can ask if the culture has created this problem, but that's another topic entirely. Saying a gun was entirely responsible for shooting those 60 people at Virginia Tech is like saying a hammer and nails were entirely responsible for building the campus.

I don't get this at all. Katrina was such an extreme situation. Are you saying we need guns in case our city is flooded and law enforcement can't help? How often does that happen? As far as terrorists, this goes back to my point above. Do you think a gun in your closet is going to stop terrorism? That's a fantasy.

[/quote]

You missed the point entirely. I'm not going to buy a 9mm and go all Jack Bauer, hunting down terrorists and looking for Osama in downtown Detroit.
My point was, we're not as far as you think from complete chaos. This is still a big country, and a major disruption like a natural disaster or terrorist attack could create chaos. If a bridge is blown up, electricty knocked out for an extended period of time, or roads flooded or snowed in, it might be several days before help comes. In that time, you're on your own for everything. And there will be bad guys who take advantage of the situation that you need to protect yourself from.

 

All the noise about "illegal" gun purchases became irrelevant in this case this morning when the cops said they'd found a receipt for the guns in the shooter's bag.
For me, anyway.

 

If only that were true.

--- A while back, man sees car being stolen from his driveway. Instead of calling the police (who would have certainly caught the guy, given that the theft had just started), the man gets his gun and shoots through the window of the car, killing the thief.

Many will say "He deserved it; I would have done the same thing."

Except that car theft is not a capital offense. That man now faces manslaughter charges . . . charges he would not have faced had there not been a gun in his home giving him the idea of playing cop, judge, jury --- and executioner.

--- 10-year-old Johnny stumbles upon gun in dresser drawer. Plays around with it, shoots 6-year-old sister.

Johnny is a criminal who is evil and should be punished?

Give me some real numbers, or I'll just assume this "40 percent jump" was, say, from 10 to 14.