More Gun Insanity

Random Ramblings
61

Furnishedowner,

“You guys can rant and rave and carry on all you want.”

Furnishedowner, many people here keep presenting you with FACTS in response to your OPINIONS on the subject, and the fact that you don’t answer the questions regarding the subject, just shows us that you are not REALLY interested in DISCUSSING and EXAMINING the subject, but rather passing out “feel-good” solutions… Do you REALLY want to dicuss this or not??? If you are going to continue to COWER aware from the questions, AT LEAST provide FACTS for your arguments…

“Nothing changes the fact of an obscene number of gun deaths.”

What a ludicrous thing to say… DEFINE for us the number of death that make it obscene… At what point does it become “obscene” for you?

“Does any of you have the balls to say:
Yes, 34,000 dead in one year is too g…damn many!
Yes, we SHOULD stop indiscriminate private party sales, at least in gun shows.
Yes, we should try gun buy-backs, at least try pilot programs.
Yes, maybe we DO need universal laws so that they can be enforced”

Do YOU have the “balls” to say:

1. The gun deaths that we are actually talking about (i.e. - CRIMINAL activity) is around 9,326 (or 27.5% of ALL gun deaths), NOT the FALSE stat you keep pushing of 34,000. The other deaths (i.e. - suicide, accidental, justifiable homocides - SELF DEFENSE, law enforcement), even with ALL of what you want to enact would NOT substantially change the NET CRIMINAL number of 9,326. As a percentage of population, there will ALWAYS BE criminals…

2. Gun buy-back programs have been around long enough to have had STUDIES done on them, as well as the Surgeon General providing their own report on Youth Violence, and they overwhlemingly show that this program DOES NOT have the desried effect and in fact that the guns turned in at these buy-backs are the LEAST LIKELY to be used in a crime… so if yo uare SERIOUS about this issue, WHY do you keep advocating for something THAT DOESN’T DO WHAT YOU WANT IT TO DO??? In addition, BECAUSE these programs are NO QUESTIONS ASKED, who KNOW how many CRIMINALS GOT PAID to get rid of guns used in a crime?..

3. All universal FEDERAL LAWS do is STRIP power from the states and give it to the federal government EXPANDING what are SUPPOSED to be “limited” and “enumerated” powers… If a person passes a background check, why should YOU have ANY say as to what and how many guns they own?

4. If you can show a CAUSAL effect of private party sales in gun shows to CRIMINAL use of guns, you might have a start…

“You have not come up with one single reasonable idea to lessen gun crime.”

There have been MANY suggestions, so you have either NOT been reading them or just ignoring them because you don’t have any type of counter-point or REASON the suggestions wouldn’t work…

“You have mocked the very fact that I have tried to have a dialogue about this.”

NOONE Mocked you for bringing the subject up, but they are dumbfounded by your “solutions”… Just look at the above article posted by Propertymanager… NONE of what YOU espouse would have changed that incident to prevent the death of the innocent, but what WE propose, SAVED THE LIFE of the 11-year old girl who was the SECOND in line to be attacked… The two CRIMINALS killed the first 50-year old victim WITH A KNIFE… even IF they didn’t STEAL the victims gun, which he could have done NOTHING ABOUT, because he was now DEAD from a KNIFE, they would’ve used a knife in the second attack…

Fortunately for the 11-year old girl, it didn’t matter what weapon THE CRIMINALS/MURDERERS had (gun or knife), it DID matter what weapon SHE HAD…

I conclude by saying the same thing I said above… “I mean we could go on, but you are not REALLY interested in solving the issue, because when FACTS are presented to you, and your position challenged, and you are asked straight-forward questions, you COWER away from them and don’t ANSWER THEM… so how do you expect us to take you seriously?”

Sellinbama,

All EXCELLENT points…

62

PosOutlook,
To answer your questions…

  1. The number of gun deaths–34,000–is obscene when compared to an equivalent population, the European Union, with 1,200 gun deaths in one year for 376 million people. So the excess number of 32,800 dead Americans is obscene and unneccesary. Our quality of life is being eroded by excess gun violence. This excess gun violence is fueled by the sheer number of excess guns available to almost anyone.

  2. I disagree with your opinion that gun buy-back programs don’t work. Police departments in Oakland, Miami, Louisville, St. Louis, Cleveland, Chicago, Buffalo, etc. are doing buy-backs. The police know crime better than anybody. We should back their efforts and give the police all the support they need. We should make these programs work–they get guns off the street.

USA Today stated that “gun buy-back programs are abused by gun dealers seeking to unload junk merchandise.” Let’s fix that. Also, “In Oakland, the response was so overwhelming ($250/gun) that police ran out of money and had to issue IOU’s. One woman found a loaded .38 under her son’s mattress and turned it in…” She probably saved some teenager from getting shot, and maybe kept her son from committing another tragedy.

  1. THE STATES ARE DOING A CRAPPY JOB ON GUN LAWS. Just like the states did a crappy job on Civil Rights laws. It wasn’t until we had federal laws, backed up by the Justice Department, that all states had to treat people equally. It won’t be until we have federal laws, backed up by the Justice Dept., that gun laws can be enforced everywhere.

Look at the results of your state laws! They are not working. We need tough Federal laws. Just like I mentioned earlier–income tax laws finally put away Al Capone–violation of federal gun laws could help clean up the streets. It won’t take a drug bust to nail a dealer, maybe just “Show me your gun registration and training certificate.” All law-abiding gun owners will have had background checks, training and registration. You will all do this because it is the law, and it is helping keep us safe.

  1. For a causal effect of unmonitored sales, look no further than the 18-year-old gun show buyer who sold her guns privately to Harrison/Klebold, the Columbine killers. I call for no unmonitored sales. Change in the laws like this would mean a big increase in gun training schools, background checks, and re-sale of legitimate guns. It would still be a thriving industry and you would still keep your arms. To pay for this, let’s figure out a tax that you think is equitable. It need not be a large tax because there are so many guns. But the enforcement money has to come from somewhere.

I have no problem of guns being used for self-defense! Why do people keep bringing up that idea?!

I have a problem with the slaughter of innocents. Here’s a list of people I have known or personally encountered KILLED BY GUNS, and I am just one person:

Mom and Dad next to my real estate office in Old Town, San Diego, shot by son in family argument
Man across street from that same office shot by ex-wife’s husband
Friend’s husband suicide by borrowed gun
Hayward neighbor shot wife, 3 kids, himself. Whole family.
My mechanic executed Oakland drug dealer in drug deal gone wrong
Ill neighbor gun suicide here last month, heard the shot while I was on the computer.

When I tell this to non-American friends/relatives, they are aghast and horrified that I could actually have KNOWN people killed by guns. Gun deaths are WAY TOO EASY. Just now I realized that none of those deaths were crime prevention…
7 were family disputes
1 was drug crime
3 were suicides.

You can go on and on about how those people could have been killed with knives, poison, strangulation. But you know in your heart that killing by just finger-pressure on a trigger, a moment’s rage or despair, is likely how it’s gonna go down. It’s soooo easy.

Let’s get to work on how to stop these senseless deaths.

Furnishedowner

63

Furnishedowner,

I CONGRATULATE you in that made an attempt to answer a few questions… we might actually get somewhere if you continue trying…

“1. The number of gun deaths–34,000–is obscene when compared to an equivalent population, the European Union, with 1,200 gun deaths in one year for 376 million people. So the excess number of 32,800 dead Americans is obscene and unneccesary. Our quality of life is being eroded by excess gun violence. This excess gun violence is fueled by the sheer number of excess guns available to almost anyone.”

Here is where we have a problem… you keep using 34,000 gun deaths, when the last deaths recorded by the FBI for CRIMINALS is 9,326… These are the ones you seem to have the problem with… The REMAINING gun deaths (i.e. - suicide, accidental, justifiable homocides - SELF DEFENSE, law enforcementaccidental, justifiable homocides - SELF DEFENSE, law enforcement) would likely have happened ANYWAY… Suicide doesn’t disappear with the disarming of the public, so why do you keep using the 34,000 figure? It creates a FALSE narrative…

[i][b]"2. I disagree with your opinion that gun buy-back programs don’t work. Police departments in Oakland, Miami, Louisville, St. Louis, Cleveland, Chicago, Buffalo, etc. are doing buy-backs. The police know crime better than anybody. We should back their efforts and give the police all the support they need. We should make these programs work–they get guns off the street.

USA Today stated that “gun buy-back programs are abused by gun dealers seeking to unload junk merchandise.” Let’s fix that. Also, “In Oakland, the response was so overwhelming ($250/gun) that police ran out of money and had to issue IOU’s. One woman found a loaded .38 under her son’s mattress and turned it in…” She probably saved some teenager from getting shot, and maybe kept her son from committing another tragedy."[/b][/i]

You are not disagreeing with me on this… you are disagreeing with the studies from the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the CDC and the Surgeon General… THEY concluded buy-backs don’t do what you want it to and went on to say that the guns handed in at buy-back programs are “the LEAST LIKELY to be used in a crime”… so now that you KNOW this, and it is not just my OPINION, do you hold onto your “feelings” on this, or do you modify your opinion based on the FACTS?..

[i][b]"3. THE STATES ARE DOING A CRAPPY JOB ON GUN LAWS. Just like the states did a crappy job on Civil Rights laws. It wasn’t until we had federal laws, backed up by the Justice Department, that all states had to treat people equally. It won’t be until we have federal laws, backed up by the Justice Dept., that gun laws can be enforced everywhere.

Look at the results of your state laws! They are not working. We need tough Federal laws. Just like I mentioned earlier–income tax laws finally put away Al Capone–violation of federal gun laws could help clean up the streets. It won’t take a drug bust to nail a dealer, maybe just “Show me your gun registration and training certificate.” All law-abiding gun owners will have had background checks, training and registration. You will all do this because it is the law, and it is helping keep us safe."[/b][/i]

Then we don’t need state rights at all… give ALL the power to the federal government… Problem is, you haven’t shown how making LAW-ABIDING gun owners jump through all your hoops will “keep us safe”, and how this will stop CRIMINALS from getting guns… Think about it… England BANNED guns, not asking for “gun registration and training certificate”, BANNED from LAW-ABIDING gun owners being able to own them, and yet their gun violence and DEATHS DOUBLED and is continuing to INCREASE… how do you EXPLAIN this… you shouldn’t just be willing to give up your freedoms so casually…

“4. For a causal effect of unmonitored sales, look no further than the 18-year-old gun show buyer who sold her guns privately to Harrison/Klebold, the Columbine killers. I call for no unmonitored sales. Change in the laws like this would mean a big increase in gun training schools, background checks, and re-sale of legitimate guns. It would still be a thriving industry and you would still keep your arms. To pay for this, let’s figure out a tax that you think is equitable. It need not be a large tax because there are so many guns. But the enforcement money has to come from somewhere.”

I am glad you bring this up… Those boys parents could have been the ones who followed your proposal of gun registration and training certificate, and if those kids WANTED those guns, they WOULD have gotten them… The total ratio of CRIMINAL gun deaths vs. the number of guns n the USA is 0.00004663… a 1 in 1000 chance is represented as .001, and the lower the significance level, the stronger the evidence required… that’s how statistics work… if you don’t have the evidence, why should we even CONSIDER what you are proposing?

You are proposing all of this EXTRA expense, time, registration, TAXES, registration, etc. for the LAW-ABIDING gun owners, ALL without ANY evidence that what you want to IMPOSE on your fellow citizens, while at the same time INCREASE the government’s size AND power. How can this even be taken seriously?

“I have no problem of guns being used for self-defense! Why do people keep bringing up that idea?!”

Because it is one of the REASONS people own guns… but it is not just self-defense from CRIMINALS, but also against a totalitarian government… you don’t see this, nor do you agree with it… yet, it is what our Founding Fathers WARNED against, and WHY we have the 2nd ammendment…

More SPECIFCALLY, you are NOT able to show us how what you want to IMPOSE on LAW-ABIDING gun owners can stop CRIMINALS from getting guns…

[i][b]"I have a problem with the slaughter of innocents. Here’s a list of people I have known or personally encountered KILLED BY GUNS, and I am just one person:

Mom and Dad next to my real estate office in Old Town, San Diego, shot by son in family argument
Man across street from that same office shot by ex-wife’s husband
Friend’s husband suicide by borrowed gun
Hayward neighbor shot wife, 3 kids, himself. Whole family.
My mechanic executed Oakland drug dealer in drug deal gone wrong
Ill neighbor gun suicide here last month, heard the shot while I was on the computer."[/b][/i]

And not ONE of the above lives would have been saved through what you are proposing (i.e. - TAXES, licensing, permits, fees, etc.)… so you are using examples that your solution does NOT address… what’s the use in that??? The ONLY way ANY of those deaths could have been prevented is through disarming the poplace, and EVEN THEN, as we see in England, etc. gun deaths will STILL occur. And in Englands case, it didn’t change the KILLING, it INCREASED it, both in gun deaths and knife deaths…

In Haynes vs. U.S. 390 U.S. 85 1968, the Supreme Court held that “criminals do not have to obtain licenses or register their weapons, as that would be an act of self-incrimination”… and yet, you want the LAW-ABIDING gun owners to self-incriminate… How do you justify this?

“When I tell this to non-American friends/relatives, they are aghast and horrified that I could actually have KNOWN people killed by guns. Gun deaths are WAY TOO EASY. Just now I realized that none of those deaths were crime prevention…
7 were family disputes
1 was drug crime
3 were suicides.”

EXACTLY, and WHY NONE of what you want to IMPOSE on LAW-ABIDING gun owners would help EXCEPT to place a BURDEN on the wrong people…
Interestingly enough, my family on my mothers side is in England, Ireland, etc… (meaning they actuallly LIVE there), and they look at our country, and think we are CRAZY the amount of power we are giving the US government over its people. The quesiton I get is - isn’t that what your countrymen fought and died for? Isn’t that why your country was founded because of government intrusion?

Interesting perspective…

“You can go on and on about how those people could have been killed with knives, poison, strangulation.”

Facts are stingy like that…

“But you know in your heart that killing by just finger-pressure on a trigger, a moment’s rage or despair, is likely how it’s gonna go down. It’s soooo easy.”

You are telling me it is easier to pull a trigger to kill yourself than swallow some pills and go to sleep?

Somthing to consider… SUICIDES OUTNUMBER CRIMINAL gun deaths by 2-to-1, and where do you want to spend your time and resources?..

64

FurnishedOwner,

It’s interesting that you bought up Columbine. Do you really think that ANY law would have prevented this tragedy? Do you think that the two killers would have given up their killing spree if the laws you proposed were enacted? They weren’t old enough to buy the guns, but they got guns anyway. So, the law preventing underage kids from buying guns didn’t work. CRIMINALS DON’T OBEY THE LAW! If that law didn’t work, why do you think any other gun law would work? If the 18 year old girl hadn’t bought the guns at a gunshow, where else could they have gotten them? Could they steal them? Buy them on the street from one of those criminals you like to coddle? Borrow them from other friends? Maybe they would have turned them in during a gun buyback program instead of killing all those people! LOL! C’mon FurnishedOwner, you surely can think a little deeper than that!

Since you haven’t figured out the answer to the Columbine shooting; the Fort Hood shooting; or any of these other criminal shootings - let me help you out. The answer is to have a well-armed citizenry! If only one or two law abiding teachers would have been armed at Columbine, the shooting would have come to a rapid end before a lot of people were shot. In fact, if the killers KNEW that teachers were likely armed, they may not have attempted their shooting spree, because the chance of them succeeding in killing a bunch of innocent people would have been greatly diminished. At Fort Hood, if even a few soldiers (who are highly trained) were allowed to carry their sidearms while on base, this shooting would have been stopped before a lot of people were shot.

Believe this FurnishedOwner, this type of massacre (courtesy of the Muslim terrorists) IS coming to a mall near you. Several of these plots have already been broken up, but sooner or later the terrorists will get their act together and pull off a mall massacre. If they try it in Ohio, chances are that they won’t be very successful because well-armed law abiding citizens are everywhere. If their target is a mall in the land of socialism, you better look for cover because the criminals will have free reign for several minutes while you’re waiting for the police to arrive!

FurnishedOwner - you’re right about one thing - this gun issue is INSANITY! It is completely insane that you socialists walk around happy to be victims while only the criminals are armed.

As I type this, I’m on vacation in the land of socialism - California. We’re staying at a 5-star hotel in Downtown San Diego and I can tell you for a fact that FurnishedOwner has a reason to be concerned. The number of criminals on the streets in the heart of San Diego is shockingly high. You can’t look any direction without seeing a drug addict sleeping off their latest high right there on the street. As you walk down the streets (unarmed by the socialist state of California), you KNOW that at any time one of these scumbags could rob or attack you and you would be at a severe disadvantage (being the only person in the encounter that is unarmed). It’s an absolute FREAK SHOW out here with Hara Krishna’s walking the streets chanting their nonsense; homeless druggies LITERALLY on every corner; people shouting; and the constant sounds of sirens. Yes, FurnishedOwner - the land of socialism is wonderful.

I’ll be happy to get back to HillBillyTown in Ohio, where law abiding citizens can defend themselves and we at least try to throw the druggies in jail.

FurnishedOwner - your socialist ideas are WORTHLESS for preventing gun violence. If you’re serious about this issue, you should attempt some independent thought and do your own research. What you’ll find out is that gun laws won’t prevent gun crimes or suicides. What has PROVEN to work is to allow law abiding citizens to CARRY guns and enforcing tough penalties on CRIMINALS!

65

Furnishedowner,

Think of it this way… if you had a stalker after you, who wants to do you harm… do you think he would be LESS deterred in hurting you if you had a sign in front of your house saying - “This house is a gun-free zone… :biggrin”… OR, do you think he would think twice about entering your house to hurt you if he saw a sign that ANNOUNCED you protect your family with a gun? I don’t know, something like…

“I believe in God, Guns and Freedom… you’ll meet God with my Gun if you try to take away any of my Freedoms (Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness… in that order!)… Enter without being invited AT YOUR OWN RISK!..” with a picture of a gun underneath it…

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:n7hFha1w0f6nsM:http://www.pyramydair.com/images/crosman-c11-bb-gun_1085.jpg

Now, of course this is rhetorical… the answer is OBVIOUS, so consider that when a town, city or state becomes a “gun-free zone”, which sign do you think they are effectively posting for CRIMINALS? You are TELLING the CRIMINALS where they are safe from guns, which is also WHY the terrorist in Texas Ft. Hood was able to kill and injure so many people… He KNEW in ADVANCE that noone would have guns to OPPOSE him… It’s also why Washington, DC, a GUN-FREE ZONE, is the MURDER CAPITOL of the America… If in BOTH those situations, CCW was promoted, you now don’t see how it would DETER CRIMINALS and SAVE LIVES, primarily BECAUSE the criminal now has concern for his life?

From a paper on International Evidense regarding Banning firearms to reduce murder and suicide - “It is little wonder that National Institute of Justice surveys among prison inmates find large percentages saying fear that a victim might be armed deterred them from confrontation crimes. ‘[T]he felons most frightened “about confronting an armed victim” were those from states with the greatest relative number of privately owned firearms.’ Conversely, robbery is highest in states that most restrict gun ownership”

What you don’t seem to understand is that CRIMINALS don’t give a HOOT about gun control laws that are imposed on LAW-ABIDING citizens… They WANT YOU TO DO IT… it makes it SAFER for THEM and TELLS them where they are much safer to conduct their CRIMINAL activity…

In Michigan, CCW owners increased SIX-FOLD (from 25K pre-law to over 150K post-law) and they saw FEWER gun deaths AND suicides AFTER the law was passed, but during the same period, in England, where guns were BANNED completely for LAW-ABIDING citizens, they saw gun deaths go UP… how do you explain this, Furnishedowner?

Ther are no peer-reviewed studies that show that crime increases when CCW lays are enacted… There are MANY that state the opposite…

LAW-ABIDING gun owners use guns over 2 MILLIION times per year for self defense to thwart being a victim… can you IMAGINE the increased work-load on the police force and court systems if this was NOT the case?

If people owning guns don’t deter crime, why do police have them? Unfortunately, in most cases, the police show up AFTER the crime has occured… England has recognized this, as well as the danger to their police officers, and not only are they arming police again, but with guns that shoot 800 rounds per minute…

So, feel free to DISPUTE ANY of the above… I am OPEN to consider your position, and I would argue more open than you are to receiving ours… but give us MORE than just opnion… Because what you are offering as a solution has been PROVEN not to work…

66

propertymanager,

You made exactly my point about Columbine. THE EXISTING LAWS DON’T WORK. How difficult would it be for 2 warped Harrison/Klebold-type teenagers to get all those guns in Britain? In Germany? In France? They would probably graduate or grow out of their mania before they could figure out how to get all those illegal guns from street buys. Would adult hoodlums have sold those kids guns, just like that, in Europe? I doubt it. I think that tougher laws could lessen the chances for another inevitable Columbine event.

How about YOU doing some independent thinking, instead of spouting the usual pro-gun mantra. How would YOU stop illegal gun purchases? Other than just shooting everybody?!

I suggest a law of “No private sales”. All sales must go through a licensed gun dealer who will do background checks, check the age of the buyer, check that they had taken a required gun safety course. How about jail time for a private sale violation?

Yes, I think that would have stopped that ignorant 18-year-old girl (who didn’t even want a gun) from being a strawman buyer for those teen killers. It could have stopped the Columbine massacre.

Just like we are having national debates on health care reform, we need national debates on gun law reform. We need everyone to know that they will be fined or jailed for gun law violations. It will stop a lot of stupid behavior, like buying guns for others.

You continue to preach that crime and criminals are the problem. That we should all arm ourselves so that we can shoot criminals dead in every classroom, post office, mall. You advocate an armed vigilante society, like gunslingers in the old West.

I am saying that gun crime and criminals with illegal guns are the problem. GUNS ARE THE PROBLEM, NOT THE SOLUTION.

Let’s get strict, enforceable universal gun laws. Let’s disarm criminals, and put them away. Let’s use buy-back programs to get guns off the streets–people were lined up for blocks in Oakland to sell their guns. This needs to be a national program, and it may take years to get the numbers of guns, and gun deaths down. Let’s hold gun dealers way more accountable for their actions.

Propertymanager, by the way, don’t be projecting your hang ups onto me. Before it was that I destroyed Black Families. Now it’s that I like to coddle criminals! I don’t want to coddle criminals. I want to DISARM them. I want to send them to jail for violating our strict, new, universal gun laws. Our Federal laws.

I want those licensed, registered guns in the locked gun closets of you trained, adult, sane, responsible gun owners. So you can use them for hunting, target practice, and of course self-defense. I have no problem with concealed carry laws either, as long as you fall into the above category.

I got your report from Downtown San Diego. When I lived in SD, downtown was always an area NOT to go after dark. The city tried to gentrify downtown and bring in tourists. Sounds like it’s not working too well. I saw a lot of deterioration in my old San Diego neighborhoods as well, last time I was there. California is in another cycle of decay, let’s hope rejuvenation follows. Big state, big city, big problems.

California coastal cities have always attracted the disposessed, the homeless, the druggies. They can’t go any further West, the ocean is at their feet, the rest of the country at their back. The weather is wonderful, a great place to over-winter. California gets more than its fair share of those people–but ask them–how many are FROM there? I’ll bet nobody homeless picks Ohio as a winter destination.

I hope you are enjoying your vacation and aren’t quite as cranky as you sound.

Furnishedowner

67

Its obvious FurnishedOwner is just going to ignore the facts Mike and PositiveO are presenting. You keep saying the same things over and over, and Mike and PO keep explaining why your wrong, then you say it again.

And again…

The problem with requiring Gun Safety Courses to everybody if you want a gun is…

You make having a gun a PRIVALAGE not a RIGHT.

Owning a gun is a RIGHT, therefor, no classes should be needed to have a gun.

68

Furnishedowner,

“You made exactly my point about Columbine. THE EXISTING LAWS DON’T WORK. How difficult would it be for 2 warped Harrison/Klebold-type teenagers to get all those guns in Britain?”

Well, considering ALL the guns the kids buy in Britain are ILLEGAL, kinda negates that altogether, don’t ya’ think?!

" It could have stopped the Columbine massacre."

In reality, these kids were going to kill… they had been though varuos “juvenile diversion” classes, including anger management classes a YEAR before the massacre after being caught stealing tools from a van… What were the tools for? Maybe for the 99 IED’s they built… so, you can see Furnishedowner, they were GOING to kill, one way or another DESPITE being medicated, under a psychologist’s care, and attending all the juvenile diversion classes, INCLUDING anger management PRIOR to the massacre…

Had they used the bombs, it could’ve been much worse, but had a LAW-ABIDING gun owner been armed, who know how many could have been SAVED… But that’s not your focus, is it?

“You continue to preach that crime and criminals are the problem.”

Uhm… because they are??? Are you saying they are not? I think you may have just experienced a Freudian slip as to your real intentions…

“I like to coddle criminals! I don’t want to coddle criminals. I want to DISARM them. I want to send them to jail for violating our strict, new, universal gun laws.”

You mean the laws the CRIMINALS ALREADY don’t follow? Specifically, show us HOW you will disarm CRIMINALS…

“Let’s disarm criminals, and put them away”

Tell us how to disarm criminals who will get guns NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO… England banned ALL guns, and yet their gun deaths DOUBLED… how do you explain this, if what you want to do would work???

“Let’s use buy-back programs to get guns off the streets–people were lined up for blocks in Oakland to sell their guns”

As we’ve seen, buy-back programs DO NOT get the guns that likely to be used in a crime off the streets, so it is a WASTE of time and resources, unless all you are interested in doing is “feeling good” thinking that something is being done when it is NOT…

The fact that you keep pushing this DESPITE the FACTS about it just tells me that you are not SERIOUS about this issue…

“I want those licensed, registered guns in the locked gun closets of you trained, adult, sane, responsible gun owners.”

To make it easier to confiscate, right?

“Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security” - Benjamin Franklin

“GUNS ARE THE PROBLEM, NOT THE SOLUTION”

That’s like saying CARS ARE THE PROBLEM, NOT THE SOLUTION when it comes to vechiular deaths… :rolleyes if it is just the inanimate object, and not the user, how is this different?

Would the lack of GUNS have stopped the Columbine killers from using their 99 IED BOMBS they learned how to make off the internet? And your assertion that they couldn’t have gotten ILLEGAL guns, is just wishful thinking with the Internet… Two boys who downloaded instructions off the internet and then MADE 99 pipe bombs could SURELY do the same for guns, right?

Beyond jail time, which I think we could all agree on, EVERY ONE of your “solutions” is aimed at the LAW-ABIDING gun owners, NOT the CRIMINALS, why is that?

69

It is not the tool, but the intent… there are MANY tools to kill with, but one intent to spread across the array of tools…

Case in point… http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2730715/Butchered-man-used-for-kebabs.html#ixzz0WwGMMqLr

70

Im not a big fan of hydra shok ammo. If you do some research, you will find it is inferior to a good grade Law enforecement hollow point round. I like the speer gold dot round for my springfield XD. My concealed carry gun is the springfield XD 45 that holds a total of 17 rounds. That is almost unheard of for a 45 caliber. I have the clip extensions for this gun.

71
I am saying that gun crime and criminals with illegal guns are the problem. GUNS ARE THE PROBLEM, NOT THE SOLUTION.

Guns are not the problem - CRIMINALS ARE THE PROBLEM! Of course, you socialists are also a BIG part of the problem because you like to coddle criminals. I have given you the only answer that will work and here it is again: SEVERLY PUNISH CRIMINALS AND HAVE A WELL ARMED LAW ABIDING POPULATION!

You continue to preach that crime and criminals are the problem.

Now you’re getting it. If guns caused crimes, my house would be on the ten most wanted list. Yes, I have more than your proposed 2 gun limit. Believe it or not, we haven’t seen a crime spree at my house. Those guns just stay where they’re put and don’t shoot anyone (even though they’re fully loaded). If guns caused crime, why haven’t my guns committed any crimes???

That we should all arm ourselves so that we can shoot criminals dead in every classroom, post office, mall. You advocate an armed vigilante society, like gunslingers in the old West.

No, we should arm ourselves so that we DON’T HAVE TO SHOOT ANYONE! Having a well armed citizenry DECREASES GUN CRIME! Or, we could follow England’s socialist model; ban guns; and see gun crime EXPLODE!

72

Yes, let’s follow England’s model. You said gun crime exploded, SO OBVIOUSLY LIMITING THE NUMBER OF GUNS HERE WOULD NOT WORK. You are wrong. England had an initial increase in gun crime, which is why they had wanted to make handguns illegal. The “explosion” was an increase in firearm offenses (not deaths) in 1 year from 7,362 to 9,974.

Looking at facts, with my source being “Crime in Britain and Wales 2007-2008” by the British Home Office, here is what is happening NOW:

“Contrary to public perception, the overall level of gun crime in Britain and Wales is very low, less than 0.5% of all reported crime.”

“The risk of a fatal shooting in England and Wales is one of the lowest in the world.”

“The number of firearm offenses fell 2% in 2007-2008.”

“Firearms were involved in 455 serious or fatal injuries, compared to 468 the previous year, a drop of 3%.”

OUR FIREARM DEATHS ARE ABOUT 34,000 a year! FIREARM INJURIES ARE ABOUT 77,000! Their TOTAL death and injuries are 455 a year!

What don’t you understand about those numbers?! How can you not agree it is insanity to carry on like this?

PosOutlook and propertymanager both fail in the logic department; they feel that we need MORE guns in order to lessen crime. They feel that the English experiment PROVES that gun crime increases when you have FEWER guns on the street.

Now I quote from a Canadian study done by the University of Ottawa: “The level of gun ownership world-wide is directly related to murder and suicide rates and specifically to the level of deaths by gunfire.”

HOMICIDE RATES ARE DIRECTLY RELATED TO FIREARM OWNERSHIP LEVELS. You can try to manipulate that fact but it is proven. If it looks like a duck, and walks like a duck, it is a duck. If you have an excessive number of guns, you will have an excessive number of gun deaths.

If you have a populace of gun owners, who do not want ANY CHANGE from the poor, non-working laws governing guns, you will continue to have an excessive number of gun deaths. That is a fact.

How are they dealing with gun crime in Britain?

  1. Strengthening the law.
  2. Minimum 5 year sentence if you possess an illegal weapon
  3. New regulations on air guns, converted air guns, age to use air guns
  4. Tackling the rise in gun culture
  5. Tighter security on import routes, monitoring online firearm dealers

Gun rampage deaths in the US by licensed, trained firearm users, like the Army Major, will be almost impossible to prevent. But we can prevent thousands of innocents slaughtered by guns. We can make gun ownership taxed, licensed, and permitted. We can put those who don’t comply away for 5 years like the Brits. Think about it! If every car pulled over, full of wanna-be drive-by shooters, goes to jail for 5 years, would that not clear the streets? The cops just need to find a weapon–unlicensed, no permit, no registration…

There can be an amnesty period, a “buy-back” period with police departments coast-to-coast. A federally-funded buy-back.

We will ALL be safer if we get serious about gun violence.

But first you have to believe. First you have to be absolutely disgusted with all these unnecessary deaths. You have to be willing to talk about change.

Furnishedowner

73
"Contrary to public perception, the overall level of gun crime in Britain and Wales is very low, less than 0.5% of all reported crime."

You’ve got to learn to comprehend what you’re reading. Gun crime here in the US is also a very small percentage of all reported crime. I doubt if gun crime here is greater than .5% of “ALL REPORTED CRIME”. Yes, it’s true that there are a lot more petty crimes than shootings.

We can make gun ownership taxed, licensed, and permitted.

If you’re proposing taxing, licencing, and permitting constitutional rights, I would like to start with your RIGHT to free speech. If you’re going to post this ridiculous nonsense, I think the least you could do is to buy a permit; be taxed; and buy a permit to spew this socialist nonsense! Let’s start by taxing, licensing, and charging socialists for free speech permits!

We can put those who don't comply away for 5 years like the Brits. Think about it!

Let’s see, you socialists would like to put law abiding citizens away for 5 years for exercising their constitutionally guaranteed rights, but you want to coddle the scumbag criminals that actually perpetrate gun crimes! That is literally INSANE and is certainly the dumbest thing I’ve seen posted on this forum EVER!

If every car pulled over, full of wanna-be drive-by shooters, goes to jail for 5 years, would that not clear the streets? The cops just need to find a weapon--unlicensed, no permit, no registration..

Once again, you don’t know what you’re talking about. We ALREADY have laws in place that disqualifies criminals from owning guns, BUT YOU SOCIALISTS WON’T ENFORCE IT!!! That’s the problem FO - you socialists WILL NOT PUNISH THE REAL CRIMINALS.

My wife and I went to the Reba McEntire concert last night in San Diego. On the way to the convention center we walked down Broadway Ave, which is one of the main streets in downtown San Diego. It was absolutely unbelievable. There were druggies literally every 10 feet along this main street. Some were hanging around in small groups and some were passed out sleeping on the sidewalk. There was gang tagging present throughout the downtown area and I saw a couple of criminals who were carrying concealed handguns (gangbangers). We, of course, were unarmed - like all the other law abiding citizens in the People’s Republic of Kalifornia! This is totally unacceptable and totally the fault of socialists like FurnishedOwner! Yep, the anti gun crowd is doing GREAT things in California - the streets are literally FILLED with druggies and criminals! Good job!

On the way home, we took another route because walking down Broadway simply was not safe! I’d like to know what you socialists in California are going to do about this outrage.

74

Furnishedowner,
When you understand the history of the people exterminated by their governments you might begin to understand the RIGHT not privilege to bear arms.

Here’s the first part of a video that would be a good start:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwdO2FLg1Rs

Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaAr_1ugxu8&NR=1

75

FurnishedOwner doesn’t understand history, nor care about the government starving; hanging; working; or hacking MILLIONS of people to death. She doesn’t care that this has occurred over and over in RECENT history in almost every one of the socialist countries that she loves so much!!! She certainly doesn’t believe that it could happen here. I’m sure that none of the people believed that it could happen where they lived (until it did). Her only focus is on those evil inanimate objects (guns).

FurnishedOwner is NOT serious about stopping gun violence, she is interested in the socialist agenda and giving the government TOTAL CONTROL of our lives. She’s a good little comrade!

76

Propertymanager,
I think that Furnished is like many in this country. They have good intentions but haven’t learned the history behind some of the debated issues. And, more importantly how that history fits into the “big picture”. I put the majority of the blame on our educational system.
Our system is based on the Prussian model of education. It is designed to educate people just enough to be productive and contribute to the economy but still be passive and easily controlled. One of the widely unrecognized but otherwise intended consequences is that good intentions and consensus is used as replacement for history and scientific fact. But hey, If I say a stop sign is red and the other 9 in the room say it’s green, They must be right!

JP

77

JP,

I agree, however, the highway to hell is paved with good intentions. Good intentions based on complete ignorance led to the rise of Hitler, Mao, Stalin, and most of the world’s other dictators (who murdered hundreds of millions of people in the VERY RECENT PAST).

The socialists know that the ONLY way to solve gun violence is to PUNISH CRIMINALS, and yet they coddle criminals and promote punishing law abiding citizens. The socialists should know that gun registration and gun bans are the first step to the MASS murder or millions of people by tyrannical governments, but they must have been in a group hug instead of paying attention during history class (or they’re complicit in wanting to destroy the country).

I believe that civil war is rapidly approaching, thanks to the socialists. The government is already pushing the edge on first amendment issues, like the gag order by Obama on the two EPA employees who produced a video telling the truth about cap and trade, or the attempt by Obama to ban Fox News from the press pool recently. This is SERIOUS STUFF, but the socialists simply don’t understand the end result.

If I say a stop sign is red and the other 9 in the room say it's green, They must be right!

No, it’s still red!!! Moreover, WE (freedom loving Americans) outnumber the socialists in this country. It’s true, that we have been busy leading quiet, honorable lives and being politically asleep; but we are now waking up and we don’t like what we see! Change is in the air and it’s not the change that our socialist president is seeking!!!

78

Amen

79

always refreshing…

Keep it up Mike.

-Mike

80

What bizarre and illogical nonsense by propertymanager, and seconded by you others! Hard to believe!

One way to tell when you have won an argument is when the other side starts using deflection…I don’t like your facts, so I’m going to change the subject…

I told you that the British experiment now seemed to be working well. The British had started dealing with an increase in gun crime, fueled by youth gangs, drug dealing, poverty, unassimilated immigrants, and the glorification of gun culture. So they toughened up the laws, they got guns off the street, they decreased the number of guns. They got SAFER.

You respond with posts on a fear of genocide! The Boogie Man is coming! You say that every socialist country has been bathed in blood from genocide! That only you armed, vigilant warriors can prevent more genocide!

You buy right into pro-gun propaganda videos without any critical thinking whatsoever. You are drinking from a poisoned well. For heaven’s sake, take a University level world history class. They are available by audiotape as well. Those are interesting and balanced courses. Not propaganda by the huge gun industry and their lobbyists.

How about some facts:

The only genocide done in this country was WITH firearms, on the native Indian population. How would arming every Indian have helped that? How would that armed populace have prevented their own killing? IT WOULDN’T HAVE. It was the politics of that day, the “Indian Problem”. It was a political decision to wipe out the Indians. The Cavalry fought them until resistance stopped. Had they all been armed to the teeth, the Indian Wars would have lasted longer, and been even more bloody. But there is no doubt about the outcome.

Genocide takes place when there is overwhelming political and military force on a subject people, without external aid. The Khmer Rouge killed by millions, by every means. The Armenians (I saw the video, too) had firearms, but didn’t use them. So how did that work out for them? Instead they gave them up. Genocide takes place when there are despots (Stalin, Hitler, Saddam Hussein), when there is a population to blame economic problems on, and when there is overwhelming political and military might to effect the genocide.

Arming the Jews in Germany would not have helped them! They were up against the Wehrmacht, the SS and “Gott Mit Uns!” Nazi philosophy. Their only hope was to get out of the country when they saw the first signs that the rule of law had broken down.

Property manager is worried sick about those vicious Socialist countries.
The Socialist Scandinavian countries are amongst the safest, most Democratic on earth. They have been operating peacefully (no internal genocide) for more than a thousand years. They are model states, with their populations consistently the happiest and safest in the World.

If you want to worry, worry about the new “rabid right”. Worry about the home-grown militias. Worry about those uninformed, hot-headed so-called “patriots” who don’t know what they are supposed to be fighting for. Worry about the civil rights of whomever those ignorant “patriots” encounter, and view as being on the wrong side of their current belief system.

I am not a Socialist. I am not a Californian, although I lived there some years ago. I do not want to put law-abiding citizens in jail for 5 years for having guns! I WANT TO PUT THE CRIMINALS IN JAIL FOR VIOLATING OUR NEW FEDERAL GUN LAWS. So we can get those scumbags off the street.

Contrary to what you think, Hoosier, having a gun IS a privilege, not a right. If you are a felon, no gun. If you are insane, no gun. If you are a child, no gun.

We need to decrease gun violence. We need to decrease the number of guns. An excessive number of guns, in the wrong hands, means excessive gun violence. This is indisputable.

You are not at risk for genocide! You are at risk of Mom-Pop shootings, of break-ins to steal your guns, of random gun-shooter violence, of having a firearm in your hand while you are inordinately depressed.

Let’s get sane about guns. Let’s start a National dialogue about some laws that make us safer. Federal laws with teeth.

Insanity is continuing to do what ISN’T working. Insanity is calling our current gun violence acceptable.

Furnishedowner