|
FBI Crime Reports: more than twice as many people murdered with firearms than all other weapons combined
Last Post 09 Jan 2013 03:33 PM by Shootin'J. 42 Replies. |
|
YH
Posts:252
 |
| 05 Jan 2013 08:44 AM |
�
|
|
|
| The REAL truth of the matter is- most people don't want the truth. They want what they want to hear. |
|
|
ahoffman2
Posts:184
|
| 05 Jan 2013 12:46 PM |
�
|
Nobody has tryed to deny those stats Yukon. The specific reason to post rifle only stats, is because of the bill that our admin is presently trying to get passed.
Personaly, Idon't own any of the typical semis. Have no desire to own one, however, I do own one semi that is included in thier bill.
My lil' .30 carbine, and it is included in the ban.
I carry this gun in the winter, when I'm out in the bush for wolf deterent. IMO, the ideal firearm for that purpose. I would loose the right to carry this firearm, just because some librel dork thinks I should be carrying a hammer or club instead! YAAA, I know, I do have other choices, as does the criminal, that no amount of legislation is gonna stop!
|
|
|
|
|
YH
Posts:252
|
| 05 Jan 2013 02:06 PM |
�
|
This is NOT the route you should take. If we start using this stat as a reason for them not to take your rifles- assault or otherwise- don't you think they are going to say "Holy crap- you guys are right. It's handguns we should be banning......." |
|
| The REAL truth of the matter is- most people don't want the truth. They want what they want to hear. |
|
|
ahoffman2
Posts:184
|
| 05 Jan 2013 02:46 PM |
�
|
We the people are not takeing any route!! It is the extreme left wing librels, lead by the sheeples mighty garu, the Holy"O", that are takeing that route! You can be sure, if they are succesful with the current legislation that they are trying to force upon us, then yes, they will next come after our handguns!
IMO, those dorks could care less about how many children were killed, with what type of firearm. The fact that a AR style rifle was used, just gives them the ammunition they need to try to push thier agenda of disarmament thru.
|
|
|
|
|
rthomas4
Posts:2343
|
| 05 Jan 2013 02:47 PM |
�
|
How about a table that shows the actual breakdown of how those gun related murders took place, as well as a breakdown as to race of the murderer and the murdered. I'm willing to bet that we would then see a rather complete picture that just might point towards a more social reason rather than choice of weapon!!! When I read about the drive by killings in major cities, especially ones where guns are already under strict control, it's always interesting to note (when the news provides them) the names of the victims and the names of the "suspects". It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out who is killing who; take Chicago as an example, or Detroit, hell even Atlanta, Charleston, Savannah, or any other inner city area and then extrapolate the racial and social information along with the source of the weapons used. The obvious conclusion is that it's not law abiding citizens who suddenly go on a rampage and kill, and it's not legally obtained guns that are being used in most of the cases; so how can the antis even justify blaming those murders on the choice of the tool used, rather than the fact of who actually pulled the trigger? The last time I saw a gun fire, it required a human to make it go off.
The same information is also very relevant, when comparing the homicide rates in the US to those of other civilized countries. For example, YH, how many gang bangers live in your neck of the woods, and what is your homicide rate? Need I get into specifics to point out the differences in population ratios of the US compared to other countries? Facts are facts, so in an evaluation of statistical analysis, all of the pertinent facts should be stated for the complete understanding of the facts!!!!!!
|
|
| NRA LM, NAHC LM, Buckmasters LM, Second Amendment Foundation, GOA, NAGR, Palmetto Gun Rights, DU, NWTF, QDMA, Everyday Hunter,OYOA, ASAdspalliance,D& DH, and PROUD SC redneck REBEL for life. If the South had won the war, Obama wouldn't be in the White House. |
|
|
Mr VJP
Posts:685
|
| 05 Jan 2013 07:56 PM |
�
|
I'm with RT4 on this one. It ain't the friggin' guns that are the problem. They don't shoot people by themselves.
|
|
| God does not subtract from your lifetime, the hours spent hunting and fishing! ---- Never shoot at game that can be hit. Always shoot at game that can not be missed! ---- Life Member of the NRA & NAHC as well as self appointed Jagermeister
|
|
|
abranch
Posts:515
|
| 05 Jan 2013 08:59 PM |
�
|
I lived in Southern California most of my life and I can remember politicians and activists lamenting that "guns are killing our young men" when the "young men" are killing each other and guns are a popular method----but certainly not the only one. Tons of other factors. |
|
| NAHC, NAFC, NRA, Vietnam Vet.'67-'68 188th AHC , Bullhead City, AZ.
HUNT HARD, KILL CLEANLY, USE WHAT YOU KILL, APPOLOGIZE TO NO ONE. |
|
|
ahoffman2
Posts:184
|
| 05 Jan 2013 09:49 PM |
�
|
I recently read another stat, of course, it may or may not be a fact, however, it claimed that more folks in the United States are killed by incompatent doctors and hospital staff, then killed by firearms!! Sure don't see any legislation to correct that problem.
I do understand were Yukon is comein' from. Us folks that live way outside of the Urbs, seldom see the rampant crime that befalls the folks inside of the urbs. I don't need, nor desire to own a AR style rifle, and even tho I do own many handguns, and am permited to carry at will, I seldom do, and could live without'um. However, If Yukon was forced to give up his way of life, had to live in down town Ottowa, or Edmonton, or---- were violent crimes do run rampant, he may have a more conservative view on firearms!
I have no intentions of giveing up what I have, fore the 2nd Ammendment clearly gives me the right to own such. I feel that a citizen should be able to pritect themself from th criminal eliment, and are intitled by the consitution to have anything in thier possesion that it takes to protect them self. |
|
|
|
|
YH
Posts:252
|
| 06 Jan 2013 05:13 AM |
�
|
I won't debate the source of most of the problems with you, RT.
However- what kind of Constitutional amendments would be required to remove all minorities and inner-city poverty?
AHoffman2, you may have a better grasp of my point of view than anyone on here. I've lived in the boonies for a long time, and have no need of either assault rifles or handguns (although a handgun might be nice...).
That said, I HAVE lived in cities with relatively (by Canadian standards) high crime rates- Winnipeg, Halifax, Victoria. Still didn't really try to chase down anything in excess of my .375 H&H. |
|
| The REAL truth of the matter is- most people don't want the truth. They want what they want to hear. |
|
|
swnoel
Posts:619
|
| 06 Jan 2013 05:46 AM |
�
|
Posted By YH on 06 Jan 2013 06:13 AM
I won't debate the source of most of the problems with you, RT.
However- what kind of Constitutional amendments would be required to remove all minorities and inner-city poverty?
I got it... it should be illegal for the government to provide entitlements.
Minority communities would have to work together to survive, they'd have to stop the violence created by themselves and they'd have to be responsible for their own actions.
Only a fool can't see that government has created and perpetuated this! The blacks will never be free from the slavery they now accept, unless they take the steps to become free!
I've lived in the boonies for a long time, and have no need of either assault rifles or handguns (although a handgun might be nice...).
That said, I HAVE lived in cities with relatively (by Canadian standards) high crime rates- Winnipeg, Halifax, Victoria. Still didn't really try to chase down anything in excess of my .375 H&H.
You are a perfect example of how Democracies become pits of despair with tyranny... with statements such as, if I don't need it, no one does! That's why individual rights are so important... this is why the US is superior to Canada and nearly all countries on the globe, individual rights are cherished and protected by our Constitution! The founders were light years ahead in their thinking.
The founders realized and knew , that Government over time ,becomes corrupt and disabling... this is why the right to bear arms was the second most important thing in our Constitution, the right to free speech being number one.
|
|
| "The BIG Lie"
The phrase was also used in a report prepared during the war by the United States Office of Strategic Services in describing Hitler's psychological profile:[5][6]
His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.[7]
|
|
|
mowgle
Posts:212
|
| 06 Jan 2013 06:52 AM |
�
|
Was an ar type weapon used? Seems to me it was found in the car with a shotgun, leaving 2 pistols as the weapons of choice. And another stat, where are the reports on people defending their lives using a gun in the USA? 4000 times a yr this happens but no news. Stat, there is 200 million guns in the USA right now with 30 thousand gun laws on the books, so let us pass another one that the so called bad people will not follow the law anyhow. Really I blame the parents of these kids, KNOWING that their child was out of control and not getting any help BEFORE all this happened. Also by allowing weapons to be around them. Take any big city in the USA that has restrictive gun laws and look at their rate of gun crimes. Nutcases and crooks do NOT play by the rules only law abiding gun owners do. |
|
|
|
|
rthomas4
Posts:2343
|
| 06 Jan 2013 07:38 AM |
�
|
YH, wasn't trying to debate, just thought I'd point out the flaws in the statistics. As for the amendment? I think sw makes a valid point. Laws that limit and regulate welfare recipients, along with requirements for cities to clean up their urban blight areas might serve as deterrents; but then with the requirements the Feds get involved in dictating to the state, so it's a catch 22 situation. |
|
| NRA LM, NAHC LM, Buckmasters LM, Second Amendment Foundation, GOA, NAGR, Palmetto Gun Rights, DU, NWTF, QDMA, Everyday Hunter,OYOA, ASAdspalliance,D& DH, and PROUD SC redneck REBEL for life. If the South had won the war, Obama wouldn't be in the White House. |
|
|
YH
Posts:252
|
| 06 Jan 2013 10:26 AM |
�
|
Okay- I'm just gonna come right out and say it- not only is the U.S. NOT the "freest" country on the planet, it barely cracks the top ten. And Canada ranks higher. So there. Nyah.
(Let me preface the following statement by saying I don't believe that inner city crime rates and race are linked...)
Do any of you believe that the answer is to cut off welfare? When backed into a corner, where they don't have enough to eat, no where to live, no way to take care of their children, how many residents of the "urban blight areas" are going to say "Jeez, I better get a job"- and even those that do, when there ARE no jobs for them, would be saying "Hey- this guy has LOTS of money, and I have a handgun- maybe I'll just take his...".
I know. Let's cut 'em off, live in gated communities, arm ourselves to the teeth. Let anarchy rule.
OR...
Maybe we can fund social programs that help get kids out of these $hitholes- get them good educations, give them a chance. Maybe you guys hadn't noticed, but Canada has WAY better social programs... and less gang warfare. |
|
| The REAL truth of the matter is- most people don't want the truth. They want what they want to hear. |
|
|
Grizzly
Posts:2039
|
| 06 Jan 2013 10:59 AM |
�
|
Maybe we should send those that need a job to Canada. I hear they can't get enough help up there. |
|
| My house is protected by the good Lord and a gun. Better not show up here not welcome son! Member NWTF, Kentucky hunters coalition, League of Kentucky Sportsmen, NRA, SportsmenNA, Every Day Hunter, Heirloom Game Calls--Pass it on! |
|
|
YH
Posts:252
|
| 06 Jan 2013 11:10 AM |
�
|
That's true, Grizz...especially anyone with a trade. |
|
| The REAL truth of the matter is- most people don't want the truth. They want what they want to hear. |
|
|
Lunkerdog
Posts:922
|
| 06 Jan 2013 11:26 AM |
�
|
YH, as these gun control threads come up I notice a couple of recurring themes in them.
The first being that there are already plenty of gun laws in place, but criminals don't obey these laws (I.E. there were laws in place that made it illegal for the Newtown shooter to posses the guns that he had) So in effect more restrictive gun laws really only punish law abiding gun owners.
The second being that guns don't kill people until a human picks them up and takes action (I.E. The guns in my safe aren't hurting anyone) A concurrent theme to this is that if someone wants to do mass harm to other humans they'll find a way (I.E. Oklahoma City)
I don't recall ever seeing your response to these statements, so what say you?
|
|
  |
|
|
YH
Posts:252
|
| 06 Jan 2013 11:37 AM |
�
|
I say I agree with most of what you say.
The old saw "guns don't kill people- people kill people is absolutely true. Unfortunately (surely we can all admit this...) guns make it MUCH easier for mental deficients to kill a LOT of people at once.
Yes- there are those who would simply make a big jeezus bomb- but that takes a little more work, skill and research than picking up Ma's handguns and a few boxes of ammo. |
|
| The REAL truth of the matter is- most people don't want the truth. They want what they want to hear. |
|
|
Lunkerdog
Posts:922
|
| 06 Jan 2013 12:20 PM |
�
|
"The old saw "guns don't kill people- people kill people is absolutely
true. Unfortunately (surely we can all admit this...) guns make it MUCH
easier for mental deficients to kill a LOT of people at once".
Yes we can certainly agree on this, but this leads to another recurring theme in these threads. There are millions of responsible gun owners in this country that may be punished by laws created by gun grabbers as a result of the actions of a few mentally ill individuals. Does it seem right to punish the masses for the acts of a few?
As to the point RT4 is making. I'm trying to find the article that John Lott wrote, I'll post it if/when I do. He did a statistical breakdown on the murders committed in the U.S. I can't remember the #s exactly, but a majority of the murders were committed in just 3% of the county's in the U.S. It was a pretty telling stat.
|
|
| |
|
|
Lunkerdog
Posts:922
|
| 06 Jan 2013 02:15 PM |
�
|
YH, here's that article from Lott. You can find it in the archives on his site. The truth about Costas, Belcher and guns
By John Lott
Published December 03, 2012
FoxNews.com
Did Jovan Belcher, the 6’2” 228 pound linebacker for the Kansas City
Chiefs, need a gun to kill his girlfriend Kasandra Perkins? How about to
commit suicide? Apparently some think that Saturday's murder-suicide
tragedy in Kansas City wouldn't have happened if he hadn't had a
firearm. Amazingly, during halftime on NBC’s "Sunday Night Football,"
Bob Costas told viewers he believed: “If Jovan Belcher didn’t possess a gun, he and Kasandra Perkins would both be alive today.”
Belcher apparently killed Perkins, the 22-year-old mother of his 3-month-old daughter, at home.
The horrible tragedy occurred in front of Perkins’ mom. He then drove
to the Chiefs' practice facility where he committed suicide.
Guns can make it easier to kill people, but that isn’t relevant here.
Even if no weapon existed, the strength differential is so large that
Belcher could have easily killed Perkins in any number of ways. The same
is true, sadly, about suicide. There are so many ways that Belcher
could have killed himself, including crashing his car at a high rate of
speed into a wall or even another car as he drove to Arrowhead Stadium.
What Bob Costas ignored on Sunday is that guns save a lot more lives than they cost each year.
Unfortunately, pointing to two deaths here does nothing to advance
the case for gun control. Costas’ rant falls under the category of if
gun control could save just one life it would be worth it. The argument
makes as much sense as saying we shouldn’t have gun control if guns can save one life.
The question is the net effect of guns, and what Costas ignores is
that guns save a lot more lives than they cost each year. And that's not
even mentioning the roughly 2 million times a year that people use
guns defensively.
Whether people like Costas like it or not the facts speak for
themselves: Murder rates consistently rise when guns are banned. This
is not just a US phenomenon in places such as Washington, DC and
Chicago, but has been observed worldwide. When guns are banned, even in
island nations such as the UK, Ireland, and Jamaica, the pattern has
been the same. The problem is that gun bans disarm law-abiding good
people, not criminals. With disarmed victims, crime is easier to commit.
Gun control advocates frequently point out that the majority of
murders are committed by acquaintances, trying to make people fearful of
letting relatives have access to guns. But this claim regarding
domestic violence irresponsibly makes people afraid of those who they
have no reason to be afraid of. What isn’t mentioned by these same
advocates is that most of these acquaintances are not people who are emotionally close
to each other. They involve rival gang members who know each other.
Acquaintance murders also include prostitutes and their pimps or Johns
as well as cab drivers who are murdered by their fares.
To put it bluntly, criminals are not typical citizens. About 90
percent of adult murderers have an adult criminal record. They tend to
have low IQs and long histories of social problems. Murders are also
very heavily concentrated among minorities in urban areas. Over 70
percent of murders occur in about 3 percent of the counties in the US.
Even if our country passed laws banning guns, most of these murderers
are not the kind of people who are going to voluntarily turn in their
weapons.
If women want to protect themselves, they should get a gun. The FBI’s
National Crime Victimization Survey indicates that by far the safest
course of action for women to take when they are confronted by a
criminal is to have a gun.
There are two groups of people who benefit the most from gun
ownership: people who are weaker physically (women and the elderly) and
those who are most likely to be victims of violent crime (primarily
poor blacks who live in high crime urban areas).
The research by economists overwhelmingly shows that gun ownership
has no impact on suicide rates. To the extent that gun control has any
impact, restrictions just change the way in which the suicide is
committed.
Bob Costas’ emotional reaction to the deaths of Belcher and Perkins
is understandable, even if a rant on gun control during a football game
is misplaced. But hopefully cooler heads will prevail before we enact
laws that will unintentionally lead to more deaths.
|
|
| |
|
|
Lunkerdog
Posts:922
|
| 06 Jan 2013 02:24 PM |
�
|
YH, this was another interesting article I found on that same archive page. 12/2/12 - 12/9/12
Canadian Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau calls long-gun registry 'a failure'
This is a pretty amazing statement by Trudeau.. . . "The
long-gun registry, as it was, was a failure and I'm not going to
resuscitate that," Trudeau said while visiting the DART Aerospace plant
in Hawkesbury. "We will
continue to look at ways of keeping our cities safe and making sure that
we do address the concerns around domestic violence that happen right
across the country, in rural as well as urban areas in which,
unfortunately, guns do play a role." "But there are better ways of keeping us safe than that registry which is, has been removed," Trudeau said. The Liberal leadership hopeful made the comments after he was asked for his view on the now-defunct long-gun registry. "I grew up with long guns, rifles and shotguns," explained the son of former prime minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau. "Yes, the RCMP
guarding me had handguns and I got to play with them every now and
then," said Trudeau, quickly adding that the RCMP was "very responsible"
around him and his siblings. . . . Trudeau voted against the abolition of the federal long-gun registry. . . . The registry cost a lot of money, but didn't solve any crimes.From
2003 to 2009, there were 4,257 homicides in Canada, 1,314 of which were
committed with firearms. Data provided last fall by the Library of
Parliament reveals that the weapon was identified in fewer than a third
of the homicides with firearms, and that about three-quarters of the
identified weapons were not registered. Of the weapons that were
registered, about half were registered to someone other than the person
accused of the homicide. In just 62 cases — that is, only 4.7 percent of
all firearm homicides — was the gun registered to the accused. As most
homicides in Canada are not committed with a gun, the 62 cases
correspond to only about 1 percent of all homicides.
To repeat,
during these seven years, there were only 62 cases — nine a year — where
it was even conceivable that registration made a difference. But
apparently, the registry was not important even in those cases. The
Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the Chiefs of Police have not yet
provided a single example in which tracing was of more than peripheral
importance in solving a case.
The problem isn’t just with the
long-gun registry. The data provided above cover all guns, including
handguns. There is no evidence that, since the handgun registry was
started in 1934, it has been important in solving a single homicide. . .
.
Labels: Canada, gunregistration |
|
| |
|
|
rthomas4
Posts:2343
|
| 07 Jan 2013 12:13 PM |
�
|
YH, my solution to inner city crime would be to fence them in with electrified concertina wire and guarded by machine gun posts around the perimeter, remove all police and fire from inside the area, cut off the water and power supplies and let the strongest survive. Then when the total population has been reduced to a manageable number, dispatch Apache Helicopters armed with heat seeking missiles and wipe out all remaining life forms. That makes more sense than trying to take away gun rights and penalize the segment of society that doesn't contribute to criminal activities and eliminates a drain on the nation's resources. The other option would be to ship 'em all to the Middle East and see if they can kill off our other largest enemy population!!!!!!!!! |
|
| NRA LM, NAHC LM, Buckmasters LM, Second Amendment Foundation, GOA, NAGR, Palmetto Gun Rights, DU, NWTF, QDMA, Everyday Hunter,OYOA, ASAdspalliance,D& DH, and PROUD SC redneck REBEL for life. If the South had won the war, Obama wouldn't be in the White House. |
|
|
ckell
Posts:790
|
| 07 Jan 2013 01:59 PM |
�
|
Posted By rthomas4 on 07 Jan 2013 01:13 PM
YH, my solution to inner city crime would be to fence them in with electrified concertina wire and guarded by machine gun posts around the perimeter, remove all police and fire from inside the area, cut off the water and power supplies and let the strongest survive. Then when the total population has been reduced to a manageable number, dispatch Apache Helicopters armed with heat seeking missiles and wipe out all remaining life forms. That makes more sense than trying to take away gun rights and penalize the segment of society that doesn't contribute to criminal activities and eliminates a drain on the nation's resources. The other option would be to ship 'em all to the Middle East and see if they can kill off our other largest enemy population!!!!!!!!! Do we give the inocent and the few good ones  a chance to get out before we do that RT, or just killem all and let God  sort them out.   |
|
| The 1st Amendment insures our Right to speak out when it or our other Rights are Transgressed. The 2nd insures the 1st. Native Texan |
|
|
Lunkerdog
Posts:922
|
|
ckell
Posts:790
|
| 07 Jan 2013 02:16 PM |
�
|
It sounds like a plan, but I am a little concerned about insocent, details, details. |
|
| The 1st Amendment insures our Right to speak out when it or our other Rights are Transgressed. The 2nd insures the 1st. Native Texan |
|
|
ahoffman2
Posts:184
|
| 07 Jan 2013 03:44 PM |
�
|
While we're about it RT, lets throw a bunch of them librel left wing poloticians inside that fence with the perps.
|
|
|
|
|
rthomas4
Posts:2343
|
| 07 Jan 2013 05:22 PM |
�
|
There aren't any innocents. The good folks have already hauled azz and left it to the bad guys! |
|
| NRA LM, NAHC LM, Buckmasters LM, Second Amendment Foundation, GOA, NAGR, Palmetto Gun Rights, DU, NWTF, QDMA, Everyday Hunter,OYOA, ASAdspalliance,D& DH, and PROUD SC redneck REBEL for life. If the South had won the war, Obama wouldn't be in the White House. |
|
|
YH
Posts:252
|
| 07 Jan 2013 06:49 PM |
�
|
This, of course, leads to another, age-old question...
Why do I keep coming here? |
|
| The REAL truth of the matter is- most people don't want the truth. They want what they want to hear. |
|
|
ckell
Posts:790
|
| 07 Jan 2013 11:45 PM |
�
|
Posted By YH on 07 Jan 2013 07:49 PM
This, of course, leads to another, age-old question...
Why do I keep coming here? Well lets see here, based on observation, and my own stupid ares opinion. You come to a forum where you know your opinion will face opposition, by people you feel are questionable in their intelligence and will tell them so quickly. So I going to say, you enjoy the debates, and seeing who gets riled up. And maybe share a laugh or two, or if not share at least get one for yourself. |
|
| The 1st Amendment insures our Right to speak out when it or our other Rights are Transgressed. The 2nd insures the 1st. Native Texan |
|
|
copperhead70
Posts:139
|
| 08 Jan 2013 09:23 AM |
�
|
Posted By YH on 05 Jan 2013 09:44 AM
And THIS is the truth...
Just an up-dated version YH....
|
|
| The untutored person with passion
is more persuasive than the most eloquent without.
|
|
|
flatbkman
Posts:153
|
| 08 Jan 2013 09:44 AM |
�
|
Does anyone think that the one of the reasons there are so many guns in the ghettos is because of the goverment? Look at all the other free things like cell phones, computers, free food, free lodging, cards that let a person withdraw cash to by cig, booze, and play at a strip club, free medical, and free transportation that the goverment provides and calls "necessities" in order to survive. |
|
|
|
|
ahoffman2
Posts:184
|
| 08 Jan 2013 11:39 AM |
�
|
Yukon, in regards to your last question, I hope that you are here because you like us! I for one, eventho we may be of opposeing political opinions, enjoy what you have to say. After all, at my age, my mind is slowly turnin' into a pile of moldy slime, and I find your opinions very thot provocative. A good thing for moldy, slimy minds!
One stat that isn't being mentioned, which is very critical to us ol' farts, who are on medicare, over 190,000 folks died because of malpractice last year!!! Compare that with your gun stat deaths!
Allen
|
|
|
|
|
GooseIsland
Posts:112
|
| 08 Jan 2013 12:41 PM |
�
|
Getting back to specifics, if that nut in CT just wanted to kill kids and didn't have access to a gun, he could have simply gotten into a car and run them over at a school bus stop. Would there be an outcry to ban cars? |
|
| They can have my guns when they can pry them from my cold dead fingers. A man with a gun is a citizen, a man without a gun is a subject. |
|
|
copperhead70
Posts:139
|
| 08 Jan 2013 12:59 PM |
�
|
So when is Congress going to address the problem of fully automatic scary-looking assault hammers?
 |
|
| The untutored person with passion
is more persuasive than the most eloquent without.
|
|
|
Mr VJP
Posts:685
|
| 08 Jan 2013 01:06 PM |
�
|
Posted By YH on 06 Jan 2013 11:26 AM
Okay- I'm just gonna come right out and say it- not only is the U.S. NOT the "freest" country on the planet, it barely cracks the top ten. And Canada ranks higher. So there. Nyah.
(Let me preface the following statement by saying I don't believe that inner city crime rates and race are linked...)
Do any of you believe that the answer is to cut off welfare? When backed into a corner, where they don't have enough to eat, no where to live, no way to take care of their children, how many residents of the "urban blight areas" are going to say "Jeez, I better get a job"- and even those that do, when there ARE no jobs for them, would be saying "Hey- this guy has LOTS of money, and I have a handgun- maybe I'll just take his...".
I know. Let's cut 'em off, live in gated communities, arm ourselves to the teeth. Let anarchy rule.
OR...
Maybe we can fund social programs that help get kids out of these $hitholes- get them good educations, give them a chance. Maybe you guys hadn't noticed, but Canada has WAY better social programs... and less gang warfare.
MAYBE PEOPLE THAT AREN'T CAPABLE OF FEEDING THEM, SHOULDN'T BE BREEDING THEM! OH, I FORGOT, THE FED WILL FEED THEM WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS!
I HAVE NO SYMPATHY FOR PEOPLE WHO'S MISERY IS SELF INFLICTED! FUGG SOCIAL PROGRAMS. THEY JUST MAKE DEPENDENTS OF THE STATE THAT WILL VOTE FOR THOSE THAT KEEP GIVING THEM FREE STUFF!! THEY'VE BEEN TRYING THAT CRAP FOR DECADES AND IT AIN'T WORKED. HOW LONG BEFORE PEOPLE START TO SEE IT'S A FAILURE AS A SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY??
|
|
| God does not subtract from your lifetime, the hours spent hunting and fishing! ---- Never shoot at game that can be hit. Always shoot at game that can not be missed! ---- Life Member of the NRA & NAHC as well as self appointed Jagermeister
|
|
|
ahoffman2
Posts:184
|
| 08 Jan 2013 02:21 PM |
�
|
Yukon, in regards to your statement, that you do not believe that crime in the inner city is race realted, 74% of all violent crimes on the east coast are commited by young Black men. On the westen states, 82% are commited by young black and hispanic men. I believe that this pretty well indicates that our violent crimes are race realted!
Mr. VJP, I do understand were ya are comeing from. Nothing is more fustrateing then seeing that your hard earned tax dollors is going to support a 4th---5th--6th generation welefare family, or a bunch of illeagal aliens. However, I personally know folks from welefare familys, that were emmbarassed by thier hand outs that they had to recieve to survive, and did pull them self out of that rut to become hard working, respectable members of the community! With out the help of our social programs, they could not have done so.
I know, only 1 or 2 out of thousands, but, none the less, IMO, durn well worth saveing!
Allen
|
|
|
|
|
holly
Posts:2245
|
| 08 Jan 2013 07:47 PM |
�
|
ahoffman2 Iknow families that used it as a crutch to get by until they could get on their feet .then i know of one family that has for generations have been on welfare . The parents were on it when we were in school and they stayed on it after school . Know their kids are on welfare .Just like a family tradition |
|
|
|
|
Shootin'J
Posts:199
|
| 08 Jan 2013 08:03 PM |
�
|
I'm alittle late in commenting on this and just got done reading the stats. IMO, it's quite a "Simple" report, and only states total numbers. My question is; (If it hasn't already been addressed/answered) of all those numbers, how many of those deaths were from people who "ILLEGALLY" own/posses the stated weapons as opposed to those who "Legally" and responsibly obtained/own these same weapons? And further, why did the report NOT include these statistics? It's the FBI, and as thurough as they may plight to be, why did they refrain from providing such information in that report to simple idiots like me that are bound to ask? Do you think the report was prepared to SWAY certain social groups or the general public? Go figure. |
|
| Sgt '82-'88 US Army, Ssg Active Army Reserves '88-'91, Everyday hunter, NAHC TLM 2009, DAV, NRA, USCCA, LWB |
|
|
ahoffman2
Posts:184
|
| 09 Jan 2013 01:32 AM |
�
|
Holly, I think that all of us have probably ran into that family of parasites, that have been suckin' our teets for generations, and we also know those that had to use the system, just untill they got thier feet back under'um. The problem is, we can't pick and choose who we help/or support for ever. However, I sure think the programs could be managed better and more efficiantly!
Allen |
|
|
|
|
rthomas4
Posts:2343
|
| 09 Jan 2013 08:18 AM |
�
|
SJ, probably 99.99% of the guns used in that report were obtained illegally, the other .01% were used by lawful gun owners who thwarted a criminal by using a gun in self defense. The report failed to segregate lawful, legitimate use from criminal use!!
Allen, I don't think anyone is opposed to short term assistance when it's truly justified. The problem comes from the long term abuses that dominate the programs. So, in a manner of speaking, we could pick and choose who receives the benefits by establishing a better more concise vetting process.
|
|
| NRA LM, NAHC LM, Buckmasters LM, Second Amendment Foundation, GOA, NAGR, Palmetto Gun Rights, DU, NWTF, QDMA, Everyday Hunter,OYOA, ASAdspalliance,D& DH, and PROUD SC redneck REBEL for life. If the South had won the war, Obama wouldn't be in the White House. |
|
|
Lunkerdog
Posts:922
|
| 09 Jan 2013 11:45 AM |
�
|
RT4, I understand that your being speculative, but 99.99%??? Not to be misunderstood I don't doubt that the greater majority of the guns were obtained illegally, but I think your shooting a little high (pun intended) with your #'s.
Also, this may just be a matter of semantics, but is a killing committed in self defense classified as a murder? In other words can the FBI include those #'s in this particular stat?
|
|
| |
|
|
rthomas4
Posts:2343
|
| 09 Jan 2013 12:38 PM |
�
|
That's the problem Lunker, the FBI report didn't segregate criminal activities from suicides, self defense, or "accidents". I still believe that in the case of criminal use of a gun the #s are probably 99.99%. |
|
| NRA LM, NAHC LM, Buckmasters LM, Second Amendment Foundation, GOA, NAGR, Palmetto Gun Rights, DU, NWTF, QDMA, Everyday Hunter,OYOA, ASAdspalliance,D& DH, and PROUD SC redneck REBEL for life. If the South had won the war, Obama wouldn't be in the White House. |
|
|
holly
Posts:2245
|
| 09 Jan 2013 01:01 PM |
�
|
Maybe this should be put here . The Second Amendment: 27 Words, Endless Interpretations would not link so here it is . |
« Back to
news | | The Second Amendment: 27 Words, Endless Interpretations | | January 9, 2013 | |
View and comment on NPR.org
| The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is like:- an Etch A Sketch. You can make it into pretty much whatever you want.
- an optical-illusory M.C. Escher staircase that climbs back into itself.
How can something apparently so simple — a 27-word sentence
— be so confusing? What is so hard to understand about "A well
regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the
right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"? As
it turns out, after more than 200 years of intense scrutiny by people
more versed in The Law than you and I — and in the face of seemingly
endless American gun violence — the meaning of the Second Amendment
continues to baffle and elude. In this case, the country's Founders have
left us to founder. With the tragic multiple shootings recently
in Colorado, Oregon, Connecticut and other places getting so much
attention, friends and enemies of guns are, as usual, pushing and
shoving each other. And the Second Amendment, also as usual, is caught
right in the thick of it. Some Americans defend it. Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, tells NBC News
that he is not interested in participating in a presidential task force
to reduce gun violence "if it's a panel that's just going to be made up
of a bunch of people that, for the last 20 years, have been trying to
destroy the Second Amendment." Others howl for an overhaul. "America needs to repeal the Second Amendment," writes Kurt Eichenwald in Vanity Fair. And he wants to force gun owners to buy liability insurance. Is
it a sweeping constitutional guarantee that individuals have unfettered
access to guns, or a practical agreement that allows for citizen armies
in times of extraordinary national need? Maybe it would help
everyone to think about this complicated dictum in a more slant way,
hold it up to the light and look at it from different angles, the way
poets approach other tough concepts — such as love, hate and injustice. A Tone Poem After all, says U.S. Poet Laureate Natasha Trethewey, poetry has the "ability to help us deal with difficult things." Poetry, she says, "is the best repository for our most humane, ethical, and just expressions of feeling." So
maybe we can understand the Second Amendment a little better if we
think of it as sort of a tone poem. And use the language of the poet —
metaphor and simile — to explore the beauty that lies within. So what is the Second Amendment like? The Second Amendment, says Karen L. MacNutt, a Massachusetts attorney and contributing editor to Women & Guns,
"is like a good dog because it lies obediently at your feet but has big
teeth to keep the bad guys away — even if you are poor, weak, male or
female, black or white." "The Second Amendment is like a Rorschach test," Andrea Sachs wrote in Time. "Observers tend to examine it and discover whatever they already believe about gun control." The Second Amendment "is like a condom," noted a commenter on the Current TV website. "It's better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it." The Second Amendment, according to Heraldblog,
"is like the crazy uncle living in the attic. Nobody wants to address
the problem, so we just accept the absurdity of a constitutional
amendment that protects unfettered gun ownership." Legal writer Stuart Taylor, co-author of Mismatch: How Affirmative Action Hurts Students It's Intended to Help, and Why Universities Won't Admit It, says
"deriving the meaning of the Second Amendment from studying the
entrails of dead hamsters would produce exactly the same result as has
the Supreme Court's painstaking parsing of the amendment's hopelessly
inscrutable language and history." Conservative and liberal
justices alike, Taylor says, "would confidently arrive at diametrically
opposed interpretations perfectly matching their personal political
opinions. They would be wiser to leave such subjective policymaking to
elected officials." Because in the end, trying to find a meaningful metaphor to help explain the Second Amendment is like, well, it' |
|
|
|
|
|
Shootin'J
Posts:199
|
| 09 Jan 2013 03:33 PM |
�
|
Posted By rthomas4 on 09 Jan 2013 09:18 AM
SJ, probably 99.99% of the guns used in that report were obtained illegally, the other .01% were used by lawful gun owners who thwarted a criminal by using a gun in self defense. The report failed to segregate lawful, legitimate use from criminal use!!
Allen, I don't think anyone is opposed to short term assistance when it's truly justified. The problem comes from the long term abuses that dominate the programs. So, in a manner of speaking, we could pick and choose who receives the benefits by establishing a better more concise vetting process.
My point exactly RT. But as lunker put it, your #s may be a bit high. I'd be content if the numbers were even as high as 49% legal, and 51% illegal. After all that's how the crooked pollies are elected into office, and we are forced to "JUST DEAL WITH IT". Their still crooked pollies, and always over-ride the people's attempts to contest it, yet they are still there. So why don't they use that same tactic to tell the liberal whiners to STFU! |
|
| Sgt '82-'88 US Army, Ssg Active Army Reserves '88-'91, Everyday hunter, NAHC TLM 2009, DAV, NRA, USCCA, LWB |
|
|
|