Yay! USA! USA! We're number ONE in random carnage caused by firearms!

[Bluebear]

College campuses! Wendy's restaurants! Amish schools! Shopping malls!

And now, bracing myself for those who say "oh-oh, here come the gun grabbers!" . . . Well, have at it. This country has a sick culture of violence that is getting worse, and it's high time that a level of sane compromise be reached - fast - before we just rename our nation "The OK Corral".

==========

The NRA is doing better than ever-- they're riding high on the License to Murder law and are extremely pleased that they've passed concealed weapons laws (over the objections of most Americans) in almost all 50 states. And while they continue to erode our reasonable gun legislation, the guns they've put in our country are causing more and more problems.

Violent crime rose by double-digit percentages in cities across the country over the last two years, reversing the declines of the mid-to-late 1990s, according to a new report by a prominent national law enforcement association.

While overall crime has been declining nationwide, police officials have been warning of a rise in murder, robbery and gun assaults since late 2005, particularly in midsize cities and the Midwest. Now, they say, two years of data indicates that the spike is more than an aberration.

“There are pockets of crime in this country that are astounding,” said Chuck Wexler, the executive director of the Police Executive Research Forum, which is releasing the report on Friday. “It’s gone under the radar screen, but it’s not if you’re living on the north side of Minneapolis or the south side of Los Angeles or in Dorchester, Mass.”

Local police departments blame several factors: the spread of methamphetamine use in some Midwestern and Western cities, gangs, high poverty and a record number of people being released from prison. But the biggest theme, they say, is easy access to guns and a willingness, even an eagerness, to settle disputes with them, particularly among young people.

So the NRA can claim that crime is falling (and they probably will). But what they won't tell you is that gun-related crime is rising, and more and more Americans are dying because of firearms violence. When anyone can get a gun, and laws like License to Murder encourage them to use it at the first sign of trouble, we're going to see more and more blood shed on our streets.

Police officials say the violence tends to happen among young men in their late teens and early to mid-20s. In some cases, it is random. But in many cases, it is among people who know one another, or between gangs, as a way to settle disputes. Arguments that 20 years ago would have led to fistfights, police chiefs say, now lead to guns.

“There’s really no rhyme or reason with these homicides,” said Edward Davis, the police commissioner in Boston. “An incident will occur involving disrespect, a fight over a girl. Then there’s a retaliation aspect where if someone shoots someone else; their friends will come back and shoot at the people that did it.”

In Richmond, Chief Magnus said he would often go to the scene of a crime and discover that 30 to 75 rounds had been fired. “It speaks to the level of anger, the indiscriminate nature of the violence,” he said.

“I go to meetings, and you start talking to some of the people in the neighborhoods about who’s been a victim of violence, and people can start reciting: ‘One of my sons was killed, one of my nephews,’ ” he said. “It’s hard to find people who haven’t been touched by this kind of violence.”

We can't say it any clearer: this is a direct result of the widespread, easy availability of firearms, and a culture that encourages even young people to use them. Because our firearms laws are weakening, in states all over the country, gun violence is rising. This isn't an emotional issue, or anything having to do with "rights." It's about bringing these numbers back down, and saving the lives of Americans.

_Forty of the 56 surveyed police departments, or 71 percent, saw homicide rates increase since 2004. That translated into an overall 10.2 percent jump in murders. Between 2005 and 2006, the increase in murders was much lower: 2.8 percent.

_Robberies rose among the cities by 6 percent since 2005 and 12 percent since 2004. Between 75 and 80 percent of the departments surveyed saw a spike in robberies.

_Felony assaults dipped slightly, by 2 percent, between 2005 and 2006, but rose slightly, by 3 percent, since 2004.

_Gun assaults saw a 1 percent boost from 2005 but spiked by nearly 10 percent during the 24-month period.

Where there are firearms, there will be firearms violence. When we flood our country with guns as the NRA has done, it should come as no surprise that we see gun violence numbers spike. To control them, we'll have to act on the interests of the majority-- we'll have to ditch the extremist gun policy of the NRA, pass stronger gun laws, and make the safety of Americans our first priority.

http://www.gunguys.com/?p=1964

[ingac70]

1. Gotta be number one at somethin'! n/t.

[rpannier]

3. We're also number 1 in prison incarcerations

1% of the adult population is in a prison

[ingac70]

11. Some of that has to do with being #1 in gun crime....

but most of it has to do with our archaic drug laws.

[The Straight Story]

2. how many guns are out there versus how many are used in crimes

?

[ingac70]

5. There are over 200 million firearms....

held by private citizens in the US.

There are roughly 7500 crimes committed with hand guns annually, and a very tiny amount (like around %2 of all gun crimes.) involving "assault" weapons, rifles and shot guns.

[depakid]

19. How many other countries have you been to?

?

[fascisthunter]

44. lol

[The Straight Story]

139. How many are as large and diverse as the US again?

:)

[Pavulon]

177. 15 stamps in 3 years

Odd how some places like Sao Paulo and Mexico City can be very dangerous and Geneva or zurich completely safe.

Why is that?

[Mojorabbit]

4. If this article had not started out

with this ... "License to Murder law " I might have thought it was not biased.
There is a whole host of reasons that are causing young people to end up in gangs, poverty being one.
The violence is a symptom of a whole heap of problems which have for years been swept under the rug.
Banning guns would be a feel good measure but the problems which stoke the violence will remain.

[ingac70]

6. Bingo. n/t

[Bluebear]

7. "Banning guns" is not going to happen.

But certainly why are assault weapons needed on the street? Why can't we strengthen punishment for juveniles CCW? Etc...

I don't know the solution, I just know this is a uniquely American problem and it is getting worse. A paramedic was shot today at Wendy's exchanging his child's toy prize, the the gunman killed himself. This seems to be happening every other day :(

[ingac70]

8. Assault weapons...

aren't the problem. Handguns are. This stuff happens every day because this country is loaded with nutcases.

[superkia]

25. But couldnt the same CRAZY guy have drove his SUV through...

the window of the fast food joint and killed more people. How about just smashing his car through a metro bus stop, I think its time we banned cars too...oh wait no one would want that because its something that THEY use. I would like it if our country tried to address what the situation was that is creating a country of crazy, stressed out people instead of banning everything. After banning guns, whats next? We will eventually live in a padded country if its up to allot of you. Wake up and lets work on the actual problems instead of pointing at the weapon the crazy person used. No gun, go get a machete, a car, gasoline and burn people who knows.

Its like a parent taking everything from their child because they are misbehaving and have some issues. How about trying to figure our what is causing the child to act out and help them get better...you know the real problem, not a video game or tv or bicycle.

America has this new way of listening to the media and thinking they mean best for us, hint...their not on our side.

[Canadiana]

27. your argument does not hold up at all

and it is exremely easy to refute. Sure cars cause deaths, so do bicycles, gasoline, etc...however of all the things you listed only one thing is specifically made to KILL THINGS. Cars et al. are used 99.99% of the time to do other usefull things. Guns have no other use than to KILL.

[superkia]

35. Everyone that I know that owns a gun, has never killed anyone,...

their PURPOSE for their gun is home protection and some of them live in secluded areas where a home invasion could go unnoticed and could lead to some serious consequences. But that is still not my point, everyone is focusing on an object and not the problem. So even if you ban guns because the people you know go out and use guns to kill people and not to protect their families, crazy people will find another way to kill if we don't address the REAL problem. When people scream about guns, it only takes away from the core issue and gets nothing done.

Our system is corrupt so banning guns only insures that the bad people will be the ones with them and if someone wants one, its like drugs...they will get them. When I was 16, I was able to trade a home stereo that was given to me for a gun, not one that could be traced or anything. I am not sure why so many people see red when they think of guns and stop thinking, banning them does nothing to fix the problem, it will just give more bad people guns that aren't registered or traceable so more crimes will go unpunished. The crazy people will go at their rage a different way, the problems that drove them their will still exist and we will get more unpunished crimes do to more untraceable illegal guns.

My guess is that allot of the people that are against guns completely have either had a gun related crime perpetrated against them or are the people that live in a more padded world. Most of us that grew up in poverty and have seen the country from the bottom up, for some reason can understand how the world operates and know that objects aren't the problem, its society. I guess those that grow up a little fortunate cant look down to a lifestyle they have never seen, so its makes no sense to them?

[Canadiana]

137. guns are not just objects

they are killing machines that, since their invention, have changed the way the entire world is run. Most people have read the best seller "Guns, Germs, and Steel", and understand how they are not just a simple object. They were a revolutoinary and violent invention that hugely impacted everything from collonialism to the way we fight wars.

[krispos42]

149. It changed the "how", not the "why"

The means, not the motive.

They are killing machines that have caused or defeated oppression, liberty, authoritarianism, freedom, despots, and democracy.

[SteveM]

52. "Guns have no other use than to kill." So, what is your point? (nt)

[superkia]

72. their PURPOSE for their gun is home protection to protect their...

family. MY point is that if we ignore the cause of a problem and try to fix it by taking things away, the problem still exist, crazy people will still find ways to go on killing rampages and we will more unsolved gun crimes due to the fact that they would be banned and the only ones on the streets would be the unregistered ones that make people feel even more prone to use it because it isn't connected to them.

If your child is acting out, why would you take all of their toys or games away from them and expect the problem to fix itself? Taking OBJECTS away does nothing to fix the problem at hand. I said this in a post above and obviously some people just cant get it. So I agree to disagree with many of you on this subject. Maybe the people that are flipping out are the same kids that had objects taken from them as children instead of parents willing to address their issues and they continue on their path until they break?

[Canadiana]

140. I get it.

I realize that simply taking guns away will not fix the problem immediately. However, if the next generation did not have the mentality in the first place that they have a right to own a gun, and that guns can solve problems or are a reasonable thing to play around with and guns are good then maybe, just maybe, you would live in a less gun-focused, violent, and deffensive society. As I have posted above, guns are a very special invention that changed the world, like the invention of the car or telephone....except that the sole purpose of guns is to kill, and that killing is not generally a good thing.

[Mojorabbit]

142. The mentality will always be there

as long as the police have tasers and guns and the military has their ray guns and space weapons and we arm youngsters and send them off to war. Unless all of that is eliminated you will have solved nothing.

[krispos42]

150. But we do have the right to own a gun

And when we have a mentality that we don't have right that we do, in fact, have, doesn't that play into the Republican's hands? Isn't that what they are trying to do regarding the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments, as well as habeas corpus?

And guns do solve problems. Thousands of times a day somebody uses a gun to protect themselves or their family from a violent attacker.


I do thing that the problem we are having is because we try to depress ALL violence. We do not differentiate between aggressive violence and defensive violence, and demonize both about equally. A bully shoves a kid to the floor in school, the kid bounces up and punches the bully. And both get equally in trouble?

I believe we have to activally promote defensive violence and demonize aggressive violence because that is what will reduce violent crime.

There is other stuff, too. Quite a lot, actually. But that is part of it.

[SteveM]

172. Since there is NO CHANCE of "taking guns away," how valid is your argument?

You have made a big point about the only purpose of a gun is to kill people, yet all you can say is that this "...is not generally a good thing." Who disagrees? Do you have evidence that there are tens of millions of gun-owners who think otherwise?

You say: "...if the next generation did not have the mentality in the first place that they have a right to own a gun..." etc. This argument has the same flaws used by drug prohibitionists: if we simply take away drugs and wait for the present generation to die off, then there will be no one left to pass on the values of "DRUGS can solve problems or are a reasonable thing to play around with and DRUGS are good then maybe..." etc. Believe me, I have heard the same stuff from these prohibitionists as well.

First, few gun-owners and gun "professionals" advocate "playing around with" guns. And guns can "solve problems" if you are attacked by those who would seriously harm or kill you; no guarantee, but guns then might solve a problem.

There seems to be a great argumentative set-up whenever a poster wants a gun-owner to admit that there is only "one purpose" for a gun: to kill. Yet, those who make this pronouncement do little to explain what they think is so bad.

I'm still waiting for your detailed explanation.

[Canadiana]

138. Point is

modern society NEEDS cars (to transport things), knives (to cut our food), 2X4s (to built things). These things can all potentially kill people, but we need them and they mostly are not used to do so.

What else can guns be used for? Nothing. My argument is that society would be far better off with fewer guns because their sole purpose is to kill! Less killing = good.

[Mojorabbit]

143. We don't really need cars

we did fine without them before they were invented. We have only had mass produced cars for about a hundred years. They make life easier but we don't need them.

[SteveM]

51. Again, prohibition. What will be next, shotguns? See NIU.

[ingac70]

60. There was no call for prohibition in my post. n/t.

[SteveM]

63. If handguns are the "problem," what do you propose?

[ingac70]

66. I have no proposal...

It's just something we have to deal with, an ugly fact of life.

[SteveM]

69. Understood. And I apologize for implying a prohibitionist stance.

[ingac70]

76. ...

apology accepted. :hi:

[Mojorabbit]

12. I am thinking more

of mentoring programs for young at risk kids. Community involvment to find problem areas that need improving. Apprenticeships to help teens find a trade. Addressing drop outs, drugs, and what is causing these children to join these groups. There are a host of things that need to be done.

Another problem that will be coming up as the economy tanks further are people who are desperate and hopeless. Crime will increase. Pawn shops are opening on every corner here like they did in the 80's.
There will be more hungry people showing up at food banks which is already happening. there will be stress in cash strapped homes with an uptick in domestic violence.

It is the underlying problems that need to be addressed. Guns will always be available on the black market if they are banned. In england both knife and gun crimes are on the increase and they have a ban on guns. It seems it a good number of these crimes are young people. There must be a way to reach them early and give them hope and help them toward a positive path. Forgive my writing, it is 3 am and I should be asleep.

[krispos42]

18. "Assault weapons" do not belong on the street.

Except in cases of extreme circumstances such as riot, revolution, invasion, prolonged natural disaster, or general economic or sociatal collapse, they don't belong on the streets.

However, they do belong in our homes, at our shooting ranges, and on our hunting lands.

Remember, "assault weapon" is an arbitrary and pejorative term, much like the right-wing framing phrases "partial-birth abortion", "cut-and-runners", and "death tax".

[brentspeak]

162. How about "assault rifles" or "assault pistols"?

Those terms aren't considered perjorative by authors of such books as "Assault Pistols, Rifles And Submachine Guns"

(http://www.amazon.com/Assault-Pistols-Rifles-Submachine-Guns/dp/0873643534/ref=pd_bbs_7/002-2254911-4214431?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1204750622&sr=8-7)

and the "AR-15, M16 Assault Rifle Handbook"

(http://www.amazon.com/AR-15-M16-Assault-Rifle-Handbook/dp/B000PSM83E/ref=sr_1_34/002-2254911-4214431?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1204750912&sr=8-34)

Something tells me the authors of those "assault rifle" books aren't connected to the Brady Campaign.

[14thColony]

170. 'Assault Rifle'

is a legitimate military term dating back to World War II. Ironically it was coined by Adolf Hitler after he test-fired the Sturmgewehr 44, the world's first assault rifle. I think the folks here are protesting the term 'assault weapon,' which has no history in military terminology.

[benEzra]

171. An M16 is indeed an assault rifle...

The book on "assault rifles" does indeed cover assault rifles. An M16 is indeed an assault rifle, as is a police Title 2/Class III restricted AR-15 with a government-use-only receiver and auto sear; a non-automatic civilian AR-15 is not, however.

The book on "assault pistols" (1) also appears to be about NFA Title 2/Class III restricted automatic weapons, and (2)is written by Duncan Long, who puts the word "assault" in the title of every other book he writes, and who is not particularly precise with his terminology.

"Assault weapon" is a pejorative term. "Assault rifle" is a long-established term with a clear definition, i.e. a rifle firing an intermediate-power rifle cartridge and capable of selective fire (which civilian guns are not). "Assault pistol" is a bit of an oxymoron, and is probably sloppy usage for "machine pistol."

[SecularNATION]

181. Assault Rifle does not = Assault Weapon

brentspeak, watch this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9cDbA8O9-c

and get an education

[SteveM]

50. My these arguments keep repeating themselves; again & again & again...

"Assault weapons" is a term of art, utilized by anti-gun interest groups to describe moderate power semi-automatic carbines. They are considerably less powerful than semi-auto deer rifles which have been around before Cab Calloway. MILLIONS of Americans now own them and these law-abiding AMericans WILL NOT be disarmed.

"Assault rifles" is that class of weapons most militarys use around the world: carbines capable of FULLY-AUTOMATIC fire. These weapons, while legal for civilian possession, require background checks, letters of recommendation, special taxes, registration with the feds, and subjecting your place of residence to federal inspection. And they cost many thousands. Only a few hundred thousand Americans own these weapons.

I don't know how much you want to raise the penalties on juveniles (or ANYONE) for carrying concealed weapons, but this has been done in most states. So maybe we agree there.

I was taught to use firearms before I was 10 and was hunting by 12. Keeping kids in ignorance of how guns operate and what they do only whets their appetites for the forbidden. I suggest kids who want to be trained in firearms be given such training. BTW, did the murderer have a CCW permit?

I don't think mass murders and shootings in schools and businesses are very much out of line when compared with the past.

"We cannot but pity the boy who has never fired a gun;
he is no more humane, while his education has been
sadly neglected" -- Thoreau, Walden

[I work for workers]

116. If you can define an assault weapon for me,

I'll consider answering your question. No google, just type what you think an assault weapon is right when you read this.

[benEzra]

145. Rifles aren't a crime problem in the USA and never have been.

But certainly why are assault weapons needed on the street?

Rifles aren't a crime problem in the USA and never have been. Example, in Illinois in 2006 (latest year full data are available), there were 487 murders. All rifles combined accounted for 4 of them.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_20.html

Illinois stats:

Total murders...............................487.....100.00%
Handguns....................................380......78.00%
Edged weapons................................46.......9.45%
Other weapons (non firearm, non edged).......35.......7.19%
Hands, fists, feet, etc......................14.......2.87%
Shotguns......................................6.......1.23%
Rifles........................................4.......0.82%
Firearms (type unknown).......................2.......0.41%

National stats:

Total murders............................14,990.....100.00%
Handguns..................................7,795......52.00%
Other weapons (non firearm, non edged)....2,158......14.40%
Edged weapons.............................1,822......12.15%
Firearms (type unknown)...................1,465.......9.77%
Hands, fists, feet, etc.....................833.......5.56%
Shotguns....................................481.......3.21%
Rifles......................................436.......2.91%

"Assault weapon" is Brady-speak for the most popular civilian target rifles and defensive carbines in the United States; more people own "assault weapons" than hunt. The meme is merely an attempt to make sweeping gun bans sound reasonable, IMO.


----------------------
Dems and the Gun Issue - Now What? (written in '04, largely vindicated in '06, IMO)

The Conservative Roots of U.S. Gun Control

[villager]

9. yeah, controlling the guns is pointless -- all the drive-bys in L.A. will be done by Ninja stars

And the mall and fast-foot shootings will instead become large-scale piano wire garrotings...

[ingac70]

10. Wrong... black market guns....

Gun violence worsened in Britain after the outright ban....

[villager]

13. How's gun violence in Finland or Sweden or Denmark these days?

What? Gun lovers don't talk about those countries!?

hmmm....

[krispos42]

14. Most DUers don't read, write, or speak Finnish, Swedish, or Danish

Or whatever they speak in Denmark.

I bet that has something to do with it.

I bet it's also why we don't hear of the wonders of gun control in, say, Angola.


But if you can read and translate one of those Scandinavian languages mentioned above, then by all means inform us of the most recent crime report by their respective Ministries of Justice.

[villager]

15. Nice dodge. Newsflash: There's English-language news from Scandanavia!

As you well know. In fact, that is such a goddamn idiotic and pathetic reply, I'm going to invoke the ignore list.

[krispos42]

17. You didn't answer the question. Nice dodge, though.

I can't discuss Sweden's Ministry of Justice report on firearm violence when I don't read Swedish. So, and here's a fucking shocker, I don't!

And I don't really think it's realistic of anybody to expect me, or pretty much anybody else in this country, to be fluent in Swedish.



You're read this tomorrow. When Skinner puts the place on Red Alert, the ignore lists don't work. Toodles!

[LSK]

167. thats why there are international gun crime statistics

:eyes:

[ileus]

29. These countries don't have useless people running around everywhere.

[villager]

39. Useless people? You mean ne'er -do-well Republican heirs?

:shrug:

[krispos42]

42. Self-delete

Oops.

[ingac70]

82. ....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7085329.stm

[hogwyld]

99. Or Japan for that matter

One of the safest countries in the world.

[superkia]

100. Are their governments corrupt like ours? Our government wont...

do anything about the illegal guns or drugs that mostly kill poor inner city children for that matter. That could be a difference. Am I wrong if I guess that you didn't grow up in poverty or poor? If you did I would think you would understand the problem a little more than you are showing. Where I live, if you want a gun...go up a block, if you want drugs...go up a block. The system as well as many Americans that don't live in the shit have no clue and don't give a rats ass about the poor folks that do.

Sometimes its better to be poor and have common sense than to have some money, book smarts and no common sense. Many people think that reality is only what they see, also, its easier to look up and understand the top than it is to look down and understand the bottom. The bottom has to be experienced to truly understand.

[benEzra]

161. Finland doesn't ban guns...

nor does Germany or France for that matter. A lot of Brits travel to mainland Europe in order to shoot.

[SecularNATION]

182. What's the point?

villager, how many DUIs are there a year in Saudi Arabia? Not many, I suspect. The U.S. should reinstate the abolition of alcohol sales. It will save lives, after all.

[zanne]

23. Here we go...

According to gunners, we can't have stricter gun control laws, we can't prohibit CCW, it's not the guns it's the sick society, criminals will always have guns, a majority of Americans don't believe in gun control, etc., etc., etc.

I've heard it all, and it's all crap. They'll come up with any NRA, GOA excuse to have as many guns in any place they want to, even if it means letting people buy them through private sales with no background checks, through the newspaper loophole or the gun show loophole. (They'll argue those don't exist). Welcome to the Wild, Wild West.

[SteveM]

53. How much do you want to prohibit? Guns? Drugs? The use of certain words?

[zanne]

104. You already know what I want.

I want stricter gun regulations so people can be safer than they are now. You say you have your rights; well, I have my rights, too. I have the right to feel safe and secure, and our gun laws, especially CCW, make that impossible.
Even with the NRA behind you, you can't win all the time. We're trying to have a civilization here.

[krispos42]

147. Yet you insist on living in a pro-gun state

Why?

Massachusettes is directly south of you, and not very far away. Assault weapons ban, magazine-capacity limits, permit required to buy all guns, licencing of gun owners, strict concealed-carry-permit laws, etc. All things that will, apparantly, increase your feelings of safety and security which living in New Hampshire does not give you.

This is important, because prolonged mental stress is not healthy.

I have the right to feel safe and secure...

Truth. You have the right to feel anyway you want to. And that includes feeling a certain way regardless of whether or not those feelings are valid.

...and our gun laws, especially CCW, make that impossible.

Not valid. It's a personal opinion, not backed up by fact. You have the right to feel that is makes it impossible, which would mean that it is true to you.

Doesn't mean it's a valid reason to change public policy or disregard constitutional rights. We've had 8 years of a fucking nutjob running things based on "feelings" with the full support of neoconservatives ready and willing to take those feelings and turn them into power and profit and plutocracy. And that fuckign nutjob was preceded by 20 years of "feeling-based" Reaganomics, also with enthusiastic backers grabbing more profit and power.

[SecularNATION]

185. Is zanne from Mass?

Many people from Massachussetts have moved to southern New Hampshire, to native New Hampshirites chagrin. I would bet the "feelings" based woman aka zanne is one of those transplants.

[krispos42]

187. Dunno. She lives there, though.

It's not a big state, so it's not a distant move to all the gun control laws she wants.

[jmg257]

151. Impossible?? It is exactly CCW that allows ME to feel safe and secure. So now what?

MY right to feel safe and secure isn't trumped by YOUR right to feel safe and secure, is it?

Anyway, since the right (of both of us) to arms exists, and IS secured, that constitutional security trumps our "feelings".

[SteveM]

173. Your "safety and security" must be constitutional, not a prohibitionist whim...

You have also implied your support for drug prohibition in other threads. This means of effecting "social policy" is corrupt, socially divisive, expensive and counter-productive.

Civilization, most anthropologists believe, began with organized agriculture and permanent communities (as opposed to the hunter-gatherer and largely nomadic life previous to agriculture). And civilization gave rise to organized warfare. I mean, who invades a nomadic band of hunter-gatherers? The "better" choice is to accumulate a large army and invade a town with stored produce and take over.

And it helps if that town is unarmed.

[SecularNATION]

183. No, you don't

"I have the right to feel safe and secure"

You have nothing of the sort. People don't have rights to their "feelings". zanne, you have continually demonstrated you operate on your feelings. Not logic, not reason, not facts, only your feelings. You are no different than the fools, who welcome the national security state dismantling what's left of our democracy, so they can feel "safe and secure".

[14thColony]

43. Gun violence in the UK is certainly increasing

It's becoming 'epidemic' by UK standards - nothing compared to the US of course, but bad for here.

For some time I've considered the possibility that there's something that pre-disposes all Anglo-Saxon cultures to this sort of spiral of violence. Britain is a far more violent place than most people would ever think. I've lived here for about 6 years, and I think the general populace here is easily as violent as the American populace, if not somewhat moreso. I wonder if guns were as easy to come by here, if the murder rate wouldn't surpass that of the US. I have no experience with Australia, but I do have experience with Australians here in the UK and I see little difference; they seem to be just as 'comfortable' with violence as a solution as Americans or Brits.

Perhaps there's something about our shared culture that's at the root of all this, and it just manifests itself worse in places where guns are more accessible and less so in places where they're not?

I've also lived in Germany and Korea, and comparatively those cultures are at least on the surface less violent than the Anglo-Saxon countries I've lived in.

[Mojorabbit]

86. Look at history

The history of the human population is one of violence. Viking raids, Roman conquests, etc. I don't know why people think things are any different now. The veneer of civilization is thin.

[14thColony]

108. Granted

But that veneer appears thicker over some populations and far thinner over others. I'm interested in why.

[Mojorabbit]

114. I'd be interested too.

I know that the human race's past if full of violence. The present is also.
We institutionalize a lot of the violence through having a military.

I saw a sixty min. piece on the happiest people on the planet being one of the scandanavian countries. I can't remember which it was. Low levels of violence. They had social services from cradle to grave. College students were paid to attend school.
Perhaps that social services type of security fosters peace. Knowing you will have enough of the basics ala Maslow's theory? Less stress, care for those with mental issues that trend toward violence, etc.

Still, if what they are predicting re climate change with mass migrations of people, competition for resources in the future comes to pass, I think a lot of that security will be undermined and that civilization will deteriorate. I think people will revert to survival instincts. I could be wrong. I don't know. It will be interesting to live through.

[14thColony]

144. I read an interesting study recently...

concerning violence in primates as a whole, especially among chimpanzee tribes, since they're thought to be the closest analogy to early proto-human groups. I wasn't aware of this, but chimpanzee society is incredibly violent; a male chimpanzee has a 30 percent chance of being murdered, by either a member of his own tribe or during nearly-constant inter-tribal warfare. Since chimps are true hunter-gatherers, the study than looked at the most primitive remaining human H-G groups, such as New Guineau highland tribes, which also had a similar level of murder between males, close to a 30 percent chance of that being the cause of death. Then more sedentary societies and so on up to modern industrial nations, which have the lowest rate of any population. The conclusion is that the genetic tendency towards violence is actually fading, with evolutionary pressure tending to dilute it since it's so disruptive to a sedentary urban culture like humans have had for at least the last 9,000 years. Perhaps some populations like the Scandinavians are seeing the predisposition fade faster than others. In a way it makes sense that the historically more-violent cultures (Romano-Italians, Viking culture, etc) might see a quicker fade because their death toll would have in large part been among the segment of their population that had the strongest genetic tendency towards violence.

It's also worth noting by the way that while chimpanzee society is very violent, bonobos (the little black chimpanzees) are very sedate, with murder being a rarity in bonobo society. The only difference between the two that researchers could point to: chimpanzee society is patriachal while bonobo society is matriarchal.

[Mojorabbit]

155. Very interesting

I'll have to look up more info on the studies. There have been martriarcal societies in the past. I'll have to research them too. Perhaps some of it is genetic? Thanks!

[benEzra]

159. The UK murder rate was no higher when guns were as available there as here.

Prior to WW1 or so, guns were as freely bought and sold there than they are now here in the USA, AFAIK. And prior to the mid-1990's, UK gun owners could own pretty much whatever Americans can (AR-15's, handguns, etc.), they just had to put up with much more red tape; your murder rate IIRC was lower then that it is now.

I work with two British expatriates, and both say (from personal experience and from talking with their family still in the UK) that the UK is a VERY violent place--more so than here--in terms of nonlethal violence (one of my coworkers is from Liverpool, BTW), but statistically the UK has always been relatively safe from a lethal-violence standpoint, both before gun controls and after. It would be an interesting study to compare societal differences other than guns--different approaches to the drug issue, mental health care, education, working conditions, views of authority, etc.

FWIW, I believe that Germans can own most guns that Americans can own (as can the French, AFAIK), although there is more red tape involved--still far less hassle than in the UK, though. The Swiss are pretty much spot-on with the USA as to what the average civilian can own, and they actually have greater access to automatic weapons than we do.

[superkia]

89. You left out the sarcasm tag. We all know that guns, like drugs...

will always be available, illegal or not. The thought of guns being banned is even scarier because then you know that the people with them have no connection to the weapon at all...kill and throw it away. I hope they keep making people register them, I cant imagine anyone that wouldn't want them registered.


Throw in the fact that our government is ignoring the constitution, breaking laws and is not accountable for anything just scares the shit out of me. America stepped up to knock down hitler, who will come help us? The world is starting to hate us. We have no defense and are at the will of corrupt and powerful people.

[malaise]

21. What else are they licensed to do?

The fact is that every Tom, Dick, Harry and his brother has access to guns and guns kill with unbelievable ease.

Guns are now as easy to buy as chocolates.

[SteveM]

48. Funny. When I went to school, poverty, bad education, discrimination...

poor family life, etc. were seen as reasons for violent crime. Now, post-LBJ "liberals" focus PROHIBITIONIST solutions on a large societal problem. Where have I heard that one before?

[krispos42]

16. And if we were #1 in knife carnage, would you be posting...

"Yay! USA! USA! We're number ONE in random carnage caused by knives!"

Do you care about the number of murders, or just how many were killed by bullets?

We can't say it any clearer: this is a direct result of the widespread, easy availability of firearms, and a culture that encourages even young people to use them. Because our firearms laws are weakening, in states all over the country, gun violence is rising. This isn't an emotional issue, or anything having to do with "rights." It's about bringing these numbers back down, and saving the lives of Americans.

Funny thing about this little statement... our friendly facist neocons say similar things about our other quaint "right", about how it's about saving the lives of Americans, terrah terrah terrah, etc.

IGNORE THESE FACTS!!! ONLY LISTEN TO WHAT GUNGUYS.COM SAYS!!! PAY NO ATTENTION TO THESE GRAPHS BY THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE'S BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS!!!

[depakid]

20. How I love the gun nut sophistry

One might say "go to hell," except that would be quite foolish, because you're making it very efficiently right where you are.

[villager]

40. All they have is sophistry - if we can call their NRA-fed talking points that.

n/t

[krispos42]

46. Says the people that exploit public ignorance of the difference...

between a military assault rifle and a civilian-legal semiautomatic rifle that has same ergonomics and similar mechanicals.

Try looking in a mirror.

[SteveM]

55. You got the facts. Now go troll. I welcome ALL Duers to watch.

[Bluebear]

95. "If" and "would" . . .I don't have time to ponder all the hypotheticals.

[liberal4truth]

22. Concealed Carry Permit gun nut shot and killed an unarmed person in a fight in Florida where......

they have a fairly new "shoot-to-defend" firearms policy, even though this was a
just fistfight turned "sour" by adding a gun into the mix; Bingo, you have another homicide.......

Well, that's the new Pax-America for you :-(

More at:

http://www.baynews9.com/content/36/2008/3/2/329234.html

[zanne]

24. Florida...

[Harry Monroe]

32. Another idea for a postcard would be...

Welcome to Sunny Florida. Don't stare too long at the crazy people!!

[SteveM]

57. I know plenty of good people from Louisiana and Florida (I'm from the latter)...

But I don't take on a whole state/culture as a substitute for meaningful discussion. The GOP has been doing it for years. Remember "San Francisco Democrats?" Sure you do.

[idovoodoo]

71. But unlike Mississippi, not everyone there belongs to the KKK

:eyes:

[krispos42]

41. Why isn't there one for Vermont?

Your neighbor to the west?

Vermont has the loosest firearms laws in the country. Vermonters don't even need a permit to carry concealed pistols. Where is the slaughter?

Unrestricted concealed carry. No registration of any gun. No training requirements. No waiting period. No firearm-handling safety requirement. No safe-storage laws. No ammunition registration. No magazine-capacity limit. No "assault weapon" ban.

And yet, it has one of the lowest crime and murder rates in the country.

I made one just for you, though. Feel free to save it for yourself.

[Lex Talionis]

133. Finally! A Common sense Question. But,

Your just spinning your wheels, here. Speaking of the UK. I trained a fellow from there, He says that one of the newest crimes, after guns were banned, is home invasions where the owners are there. The invaders are armed and force the home owners to tell where their valuables are hidden or forced to withdraw money. Plus, you get into a lot of trouble if you defend yourself from criminals in the UK.(google it)
He probably was just exaggerating though, I'm sure that it is Paradise there with no guns and everyone respecting each other, while the Government lords over all.

[jmg257]

134. How 'bout "Florida - don't let the criminals see you leave the airport - they KNOW

you are not armed".

Wonder why THAT would be important..

[idovoodoo]

70. You conveniently neglect to mention he was arrested and charged.

Well, that's a typical lying gun-grabber for you. :-(

[Perry Logan]

26. This is why most Americans want more gun control.

[jmg257]

34. Actually, recent polls show just the opposite:

"Support for gun control dropping
Public support for stricter gun laws has been declining since the 1990s, according to the Gallup Poll. In January 2007, the number of people who supported stricter gun laws was at 49 percent, less than a majority for the first time since at least 1990."

*****************************

"LOS ANGELES, Aug. 21 {2007}/PRNewswire/ — A recent Zogby International poll question conducted for Associated Television News found that 66% of the American voting public in a recent poll of 1,020 Americans from August 8-11, 2007 (margin of error of +/- 3.1%) found that the American public rejects the notion that new gun control laws are needed.

The poll asked: “Which of the following two statements regarding gun control comes closer to your own opinion?

Statement A: There needs to be new and tougher gun control legislation to help in the fight against gun crime.

Statement B: There are enough laws on the books. What is needed is better enforcement of current laws regarding gun control.

Conversely, only 31% of the American public think new and tougher gun control legislation are needed."

[SteveM]

58. Yet, over 70% of Americans believe in an individual RKBA (Gallup, since '59)

[SecularNATION]

186. Not the case....

...as jmg257 has shown you. Perry, how did you get to be your age and still not understand, gun control has done more damage to the Democratic Party, than any other issue? George W. Bush would never have become President in the first place, if not for it. As for your frequent comments bitching and moaning about guns, it begs the question, why the fuck do you live in Texas, of all places? Why not just STFU, or move to Mass or NJ. Texas will never change its guns laws to suit you. Never.

[ileus]

28. The NRA is a firearm dealer??? Humm....didn't realize that.

Most of their offerings are in the 1200 buck range are are gold plated.

the spread of methamphetamine use in some Midwestern and Western cities, gangs, high poverty and a record number of people being released from prison. But the biggest theme, they say, is easy access to guns and a willingness, even an eagerness, to settle disputes with them, particularly among young people.

I'll agree firearms need to somehow be kept out of the hands of crackheads, methmouths, bums and convicts. Let me keep my weapons and you can take all their weapons anyday I won't mind. Gun ownership should be tied to the W2 form, don't have a job no gun for you.

[depakid]

30. "a record number of people being released from prison."

From the country with the record number in prison.

Yay! USA #1.

[SteveM]

61. Maybe this is more of a problem than guns. (nt)

[fascisthunter]

45. No... They are a Gun Manufacturer's Lobby Front Group

hiding behind "rights" to deregulate for profits, not rights.

[jmg257]

132. As long as they protect the 2nd amendment - sounds good to me .

Besides, wihout gun manufacturers, we couldn't get guns and wouldn't have the means to the right to arms.

[jmg257]

31. Crime rates go up, crime rates go down, while the number of guns increases steadily.

This 1st from an anti-gun site...

The following chart shows the general climb of both the murder rate and firearm sales in the U.S.:
Murder rate (per 100,000) and firearm sales (millions of constant dollars),

Year--Mdr Rate--Firearm Sales (millions)
-----------------------------------------
1985--7.9--$1,548
1986--8.6--$1,647
1987--8.3--$1,667
1988--8.4--1,810
1989--8.7--1,777
1990--9.4--1,602
1991--9.8--1,859
1992--9.3--1,829
1993--9.5--2,095

"Since 1989, manufacturers and importers introduced an average of 3.5 million new guns into the U.S. market each year. By contrast, the U.S. resident population has grown an average of 2.7 million a year. That's roughly 800,000 extra guns a year. "
********************************

Now, they lazily, or more likely purposely, had NOT updated the figures since 1993. I wonder why? Probably because as gun sales continued to increase, crime rates steadly DECREASED:

YEAR-----TAX-----VC RATE----Mrd Rte---Murders---- Firearms
***---($,000)----(100K)-----(100K)------#----------%
-----------------------------------------------------------------
1992----139,652----757.7----9.3
1993----124,215----747.1----9.5
1994----139,990----713.6----9.0
1995----184,302----684.5----8.2
1996----157,816----636.6----7.4
1997----150,803----611.0----6.8-----15,837----67.7%
1998----158,383----567.6----6.3-----14,276----64.8%
1999----167,448----523.0----5.7-----13,011----65.2%
2000----197,840----506.5----5.5-----13,230----65.5%
2001----175,959----504.5----5.6-----14,061----63.22%
2002----205,025----494.4----5.6-----14,263----66.8%
2003----193,420----475.0----5.7-----14,465----66.9%
2004----214,987----465.5----5.5-----14,121----66%
2005----------------469.2----5.6-----16,692----68%
2006----------------473.5----5.7-----17,034----67.9%
*The violent crime rates have indeed gone up slightly again this last year.

(NOTES: The TAX column represents total excise tax on firearms and ammo sales, when broken out, the best indicator of total gun sales. The crime figures are from the FBI, the TAX figures from BATF. ALso, while the number of guns and gun owners has increased, the percenatge of gun-owning Americans has decreased slightly the last couple years)

Please notice that as firearms sales continue to rise, violent crime (VC) rates, and murder rates DROPPED steadily for 10 YEARS - 1994-2004. Also notice that the percentage of firearms used by criminals to commit murder is basically unchanged, despite the estimated "3.5 Million new guns every year". Did the anti-GunGuys report THESE FACTS??

"The 5-year trend (2006 compared with 2002) indicated that violent crime decreased 0.4 percent. For the 10-year trend (2006 compared with 1997) violent crime fell 13.3 percent."


The anti-constitution yahoos in this country must get over themselves and accept the truth: GUNS AIN'T THE PROBLEM! There are MUCH MORE relative social issues associated with crime rates then the number of guns. 66% of violent crimes don't involve guns AT ALL (about 1 MILLION of 1.45mil). For examples, there is much greater correlation between the number of 15-25 yrs olds and crime rates, the level of drug activities, the penalties involved for offenders, and the number of people living in metropolitan areas:

"In 2006, an estimated 90.6 percent of the murders occurring in the Nation were within Metropolitan Statistical Areas"
"A large percentage of offenders and victims {of gun violence} were 15-21 years of age."
"One fifth of offenders had been arrested for a prior gun offense, and three-fifths had a history of drug charges."
"Approximately one-third of offenders or victims associated with murders and armed assaults were members of neighborhood "groups" believed to be involved in other illegal activities. "

[jmg257]

33. And as far as shall-issue Concealed Carry goes, guns again not the problem...

From an anti-gun group's report "An evaluation of state firearms regulations and homicide suicide rates", from a Univ of Pittsburgh.

Now - 1st thing, while looking at gun laws, they compare "homicide" and "firearm homicide" rates - NOT "murder", "gun related murder", or other gun related crimes, so what exactly they were trying to prove escapes me; they do mention however the attempt to study "the benefits of shall issue laws enacted with the goal of curtailing fiream deaths"... Hmmm...OK...I thought shall issue laws were enacted to give the people the right to self-security, to avoid letting we the people be unwilling victims of violent criminals, and to further enjoy their 2nd amednments rights, but...

..ANYWAY, from

Table 2:
Rates per 100,000...
Firearm Homicides {with shall issue law}: 5.00
Firearm Homicides {w/o shall issue law} : 5.90
All Homicides {rate with shall issue law} : 7.5
All homicides {rate w/o shall issue law} : 8.99

"Summary Point 3::A "shall issue" law that permits the carrying of a handgun in an unrestricted fashion MAY be associated with an increase in homicide rates." {emphasis mine}
WHAT????? But the numbers...right there...BOTH "w/ shall issue" homicide rates were lower WTF???

And from

Table 4 Suicides
Rates per 100,00...
Firearm Suicides {with shall issue law}: 9.70
Firearm Suicides {w/o shall issue law} : 10.20
All Suicides {rate with law} : 14.5
All Suicides {rate w/o law} :14.5

"Summary point 4: Little evidence was observed that any of the laws evaluated (they include legal age 21 laws) were associated with a significant reduction in either firearm homicide or firearm suicide rates."
GREAT - not that THAT is an issue, but what about the fact that...THE CHARTS - YOUR CHARTS - show a reduction in not only Firearm Homicides, but all homicides AND a reduction in firearm suicides with shall issue laws vs. w/o shall issue laws, so WTF again???

What the study REALLY showed, besides not relying on Stats when discussing unalienable rights, is:

"with regards to the enactment of shall issue laws, even firearm homicides and suicides did not get worse, and in fact, they went down slightly. Giving the people the opportunity to defend themselves in NO way made homicide/suicide rates worse, but instead made them slightly better."

[Jennicut]

36. America was raised on gun violence

Really, the United States has always had a love/hate relationship with guns. In the Wild West gun violence was out of control and some sherriffs and marshalls had to start a gun ban in town to quell the violence. Back in the 1800's as well as today people chose to end arguments through guns. That is nothing new. What is new is the increase in random violent acts in stores, places of business, and schools. These random massacres have always happened but seem worse since Columbine. Maybe it took two teenagers to set off ideas in some crazies's heads that said this idea was okay and legitimate. Who knows? But these problems with guns seem more psychological than anything else. Gangs, drugs, isolation from mainstream society. These are the real issues. Not to mention anger-management. Its like the story the other day about the woman who tried to apologize to the crazy guy on he side of the highway the other day. He just picked her up and threw her into the middle of traffic. People in the United States never learned how to appropirately deal with their anger. We are a nation of seething pissed off people and Bush and his cronies have only made things worse. Everyone seems on edge these days more than ever. With a recession coming I think it will get worse. I'm not sure what the answer is, more guns laws, less gun laws. Neither argument gets to the bottom of the problem. How do we deal with our anger? Why do we choose to retaliate against others instead of solving/working out our problems? Why do people who are at the end of their rope choose to blast a room full of people and then kill themselves and think thats okay? Why do poor kids in inner cities think its okay to deal with a small minor argument by shooting the other person? Where is the reasoning or logic? It seems like we are almost the worst in that respect compared to other industrialized nations. Yes, we have freedom. But freedom means responsiblity. While most of us are responsible there is a growing trend towards others falling off the deep end. How do we stop it?

[SteveM]

68. Thanks, I appreciate your thoughts. We are a nation of "seething pissed off people..."

You can see it in this thread and other threads many of the "anti-gunners" now choose to post in general discussion. Though it is uncomfortable to see the hatred upchucked from these "gun-controllers," I welcome it so others in Democratic Underground can see and understand how this kind of animosity doesn't solve societal problems, won't help the Democratic Party and only seems to get the "gun-controller" off by directing so much hatred to millions of gun owners.

This is not directed toward folks who have disagreements over policy questions.

[4_TN_TITANS]

37. I love my guns

but have noticed a big increase in incidents in the Nashville news. As the economy deteriorates, poverty and depression don't mix with guns. The other morning the Channel 5 anchors ran through a long list of violence, shootings, etc. and at the end one said 'so how about some good news now'.

[Ordr]

38. ...and I'll say it again:

Blaming guns for murder is like blaming Iraq for September 11.
It is the same buck-passing dreck that is used to obfuscate the real problems due to our inability to solve them.

[fascisthunter]

47. But, But, But... Guns Make Society Saferrrr...

burp

[Missy Vixen]

49. I've said it before, and I'll keep saying it, because it's true

>We can't say it any clearer: this is a direct result of the widespread, easy availability of firearms, and a culture that encourages even young people to use them. Because our firearms laws are weakening, in states all over the country, gun violence is rising. This isn't an emotional issue, or anything having to do with "rights." It's about bringing these numbers back down, and saving the lives of Americans.<

The "gun grabber" fetishists refuse to admit the following: THEY DO NOT CARE about those who die or are injured as a result of gun violence in this country, because their guns are more important to them than the lives of innocents that die in gun-related violence daily.

PERIOD.

We have debated this over and over and over and over. What kind of mental contortions are necessary to dismiss the murder of thirty-two people in a classroom, for instance? What kind of cognitive dissonance happens when people are murdered for nothing more than being in a fast food restaurant and trying to get some lunch, and the reaction is, "Oh, that's too bad"? If you or I were shot to death tomorrow morning in a spree shooting, they'd be clutching their guns even more closely. We are nothing more than collateral damage to any of them.

There's no reasoning with any of them, frankly, and I'm tired of trying.

Have your personal habits changed because of spree shootings? Ours have. How many freedoms is the average Americans willing to lose before they've had enough?

Julie

[Ordr]

54. Well then.

I guess because you disagree with something, we should give up our rights. You obviously know better than the rest of us. Let me be the first to thank you for your selfless and life-saving decision making. The rest of us couldn't do it without you. :)

[Missy Vixen]

62. Again, your right to pack a gun is more important than the safety of those around you

I might also mention that your claims that "guns have as much to do with murder as Iraq did with September 11th" is laughable.

Guns are used to commit murders daily across the country.

Of course, I'm sure those people had it coming, didn't they?

Julie

[Ordr]

64. Okay.

I might also mention that your claims that "guns have as much to do with murder as Iraq did with September 11th" is laughable.
You may laugh all you want.
Guns are used to commit murders daily across the country.
As are knives, blunt objects, hands, etc.
Of course, I'm sure those people had it coming, didn't they?
Doubtful, but perhaps some did.

[idovoodoo]

65. How exactly do you suppose you're going to take away my guns?

Here's a hint: you ain't.

[Missy Vixen]

84. Frankly, I don't want your guns. You'd be lost without them, wouldn't you?

What I do want is the assurance that I, and millions of others, can move freely in public once again without the knowledge that, anytime or ANYWHERE, we could be the victims of yet another spree killing.

Here's a hint: You and your fellow fetishists care more about your firepower than the other rights in the Constitution, and more for your arsenals than the health and safety of others. Just admit it.

Julie

[Mojorabbit]

88. I hate to tell y ou

that you will never be totally safe from bad things happening no matter how many things you ban. Life is like that. If you are afraid to go out in public because you think you might be shot you might have a distorted view of reality.

[Missy Vixen]

92. Anyone who doesn't think twice before entering a public place now

is kidding themselves. Spree shootings are happening once a week in the United States now, and there have been several weeks that featured more than one.

My view of reality's just fine, thanks. I don't need a gun to let everyone know how much of a bad-ass I am, for example.

Julie

[Mojorabbit]

93. Sorry

I stand by my statement. The news sensationalizes these stories and if you watch the evening news one would think nothing good happens in this country, only crime and misfortune. The odds of you being shot are pretty low. If this is your worry, you have a distorted view of reality. I worry more about getting in a fender bender. The odds for that are much higher.

[Missy Vixen]

102. I stand by my statement, too

My husband and I have both had encounters with those in the workplace who insist on packing heat at such dangerous venues as software companies, architectural and engineering firms and my former yarn shop.

The gun fetishists can keep insisting that those of us who have curtailed our public activities are "distorting". Maybe you should call the family members of the firefighter killed in YESTERDAY's spree shooting at a Wendy's and let them know. I'm sure they'll be comforted by your logic.

Julie

[Mojorabbit]

112. Are you telling me

you had a gun pulled on you or were shot during these encounters? I seriously doubt it.I don't show disdain for those family members who lost a loved one through violence nor for those who lost a family member due to an auto accident. Feel free to live your life in fear.

[Missy Vixen]

117. Oh, so I have to be shot in order to be menaced with someone else's gun?

Just brandishing a gun is a crime, at least in Washington state.

>Feel free to live your life in fear.<

Feel freet to live YOUR life in denial.

Julie

[Mojorabbit]

119. I get it

you saw someone's gun and freaked. I don't live my life in denial. I enjoy it to the fullest without irrational fear. Seeya.

[Missy Vixen]

122. Actually, you don't

Nice to know that the standard of criminality to the gun nuts on this thread is actually being shot.

Welcome to my "ignore" list.
Julie

[Mojorabbit]

124. Glad to be on it

I was raised to be a strong responsible woman and I don't get the vapors easily.

[idovoodoo]

127. Can I be on it too?

Please!

[zanne]

168. Don't feel bad, Julie RB...

I have several gun loons on my ignore list. They're a waste of time.

[jmg257]

Was the offender arrested? I HOPE SO!

[Mojorabbit]

125. I would bet

no one pulled a gun on her. I'd lay money on it.

[Missy Vixen]

152. Calling me a liar, Mojorabbit?

It's against DU rules.

Julie

[jmg257]

153. So what happaned when he was arrested? Did he lose his carry permit? His gun? Anything?

[Missy Vixen]

157. Not only was arrested, was also evicted from the office space we both had a shop in

Does that answer your question? Good.

Julie

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

164. What about the other incidents?

Were the cops called at your husbands workplace? What was the outcome there?

David

[Missy Vixen]

166. I have no idea

You'd have to ask him.

He left the company shortly afterwards.

Julie

[jmg257]

165. Yes it does! And it IS good!..to see he was punished for breaking the law/being irresponsible.

[Mojorabbit]

154. I thought you had me on ignore

I was waiting for your story about how you had a gun pulled on you.

[jmg257]

120. Delete DP

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

163. Did you call the police?

Did you report this to your supervisor and have them call the police? I can't imagine any of the concealed carry permit holders I know brandishing a firearm unless they were getting ready to defend themselves.

David

[jmg257]

94. Ohh Ohh pick me! I admit it! Our right to arms is as, or is more, important then your health.

Sorry - that's the way it is. There are some rights that are of such a nature that they cannot be surrendered - including the right of defending lfe. There is no guarantee anyone (or the Constitution) can make about your health, just that there are laws set in place that try to protect it. Those laws attempt to penalize those who may abuse/misuse their rights such that they inflict on the rights of others. These laws aren't always effective, no matter how compelling they may seem, or how unreasonable they may be. Sometimes you have to take on a bit more responsibility yourself. There are rights secured to allow that too.



"The common good, therefore, is the end of civil government, and common consent, the foundation on which it is established. To effect this end, it was necessary that a certain portion of natural liberty should be surrendered, in order, that what remained should be preserved: how great a proportion of natural freedom is necessary to be yielded by individuals, when they submit to government, I shall not now enquire. So much, however, must be given up, as will be sufficient to enable those, to whom the administration of the government is committed, to establish laws for the promoting the happiness of the community, and to carry those laws into effect. But it it is not necessary, for this purpose, that individuals should relinquish all their natural rights. Of this kind are the rights of conscience, the right of enjoying and defending life, etc.

Brutus 2

[Missy Vixen]

98. Whatever blows your skirt up

In the meantime, I'm sure some of the keyboard sharpshooters here are much more likely to shoot themselves or a family member with their guns than any armed intruder or someone committing a crime using a gun, so my worries may well be unfounded.

Julie

[jmg257]

103. EXACTLY! Thanks! You do NOT have to worry about my guns unless you plan on robbing me or my family

raping my wife/daughter, hurting my kids, or in any other way violently imposing on me or mine.


:toast:

[Missy Vixen]

115. Gosh, just as long as nobody steals them

The gun fetishists are grasping at straws. They'll do anything to retain their precious firepower, because it means more to them than anything else in their lives.

Julie

[jmg257]

118. That's what safes/alarms are for. And we WILL do just about anything, because OUR KIDS mean more

to us then just about anything. Can't talk for everyone, but keeping my kids safe is MY #1 concern - tied with my wife's safety of course. They are WELL WORTH IT. MY liberties would be #2.

We don't take these responsibilities lightly.

NO grasping at straws required, just using the means to our unalienable rights.

[jmg257]

79. Isn't it "OUR right" Mr Hand? Does "your" right to freedom of expression cause kiddie porn?

Does "your" right to free speech/press cause internet & sexual predators? Does "your" right to being protected from warrantless search & seizure cause terrorism? Does "your" right to freedom of conscience cause radical extremists? Does "your" right to due process cause violence? cause rapes? cause murders?

Hmmm...are they only "OUR" rights if we ALL choose to take advantage of them? Hardly...OUR rights exist whether you use them or not. They are NOT some bunch of radical "feel good" ideas, nor some group of diabolical notions; they were not chosen to be enumerated carelessly - only a very few were so explicilty secured by the people - and they are ALL deemed unalienable for a reason - because OUR very freedoms, liberties and security depends on them - on ALL of them.

But if you don't want we the people to have the right to arms, fine...get a vast majority of the people & the states to agree with you, and get the constitution changed to specifically allow infringements.

"The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress"

[villager]

101. Gun-lusters would make horrible detectives: "This gun, and these bullets, had nothing to do

...with this crime! Why, it's not even evidence!" (Though, can you hand it here for my "collection..."?)

[jmg257]

107. Maybe - maybe not. What we DO NOT do is blame an object for a criminal's actions.

For instance - it would be QUITE hard to get a conviction for a handgun, rifle, shotgun, etc. Atleast most of us are smart enough to realize that.

[SteveM]

74. Perhaps there is no reasoning with you? A little "PERIOD" projection?

[Missy Vixen]

85. I beg your pardon?

>Perhaps there is no reasoning with you? A little "PERIOD" projection?<

Are you inferring that I'm premenstrual? If that's the case, congratulations on your cleverly worded misogyny.

Julie

[SteveM]

175. Ha! You won't get it!...

No, I was referring to your quote: "PERIOD." You can't hope to snare me in such a an obvious 2nd Wave Feminist pratfall. So, there!

To be clinical, how can anyone, complaining about the inability to reason with the opposition, hope to reason with anyone, when ending a statement with a "PERIOD." Jeez, irony ain't what it used to be.

BTW, when I'm on the range, there are too many women blasting away for me to drop such a misogynous Holy Thunderer (Zappa). Besides, they couldn't hear me.

[Paladin]

135. You Just Can't Underestimate A Gun Nut

Tell us all, SteveM: On what basis did you decide that it would be a really good idea to make a smutty "joke" about a woman's menstrual cycle? You've checked your mail lately, and you know it's 2008, not 1958---right? And you are aware that this is the Democratic Underground site, not Free Republic or your neighborhood gun club---correct?

Every time I think that the gun extremists can't say anything more ugly or make themselves look any worse, someone like you comes along. I'd tell you to be ashamed of yourself, but I doubt you have any more capacity for shame than you have for avoiding public humiliation of yourself. With enemies like you, my side of this argument needs a lot fewer friends. Keep up the good work.....

[SteveM]

178. A prohibitionist pulls out the Sexist card! Pretty lame, buddy...

Re-read Julie's quote, re-read my response. I used her word (all caps, as it were) to illustrate how someone who says it is impossible to reason with others falls all over his/her self by making a blanket statement, ending in "PERIOD." Like, no discussion; like no reason. Got that, Paladin?

So take your -- ahem -- wife-beating question ("On what basis did you decide that it would be a really good idea to make a smutty "joke" about a woman's menstrual cycle?") to the moderator and see what she/he will say. You do more good for the far right than any Second Amendment advocate could dream up by accident.

BTW, I don't know about 1958, but your approach sounds like 1968: pouncing on every opportunity
to play the "-IST" card.

[Paladin]

188. Go Back To The Gungeon And Trash Some More Liberals

No-class spooge-bucket....

[jmg257]

109. My personal habits have changed - I bought more guns. THAT freedom is 1 we prefer not to give up.

But I usually guard against that eventuality by buying another gun or 2, and more ammo too...semis typically, as they will likely go 1st.

Since ex-post facto laws are unconstitutional, I figure I will be OK.


I also carry much more then I used to, and I also wrote to the superintendent of my kids' schools to get permission to carry on school grounds.

[Canadiana]

141. I could not have said this better myself. n/t

[L. Coyote]

56. Not to mention the non-random carnage, like stealing a continent from the Natives,

wars, ....

[idovoodoo]

59. If you are operating under some idiotic delusion that you can take my guns away,

bring it fucking on.

[Tyo]

67. Oh for crissake you've got nothing to worry about

Your penis collection is safe in this country, always has been, always will be. Enjoy.

[Name removed]

73. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tyo]

75. Hey, I'm not the one who collects 'em

B-)

[Ordr]

77. Hey, I'm not the one who collects 'em

Dahmer did, I think.

[Tyo]

80. He might have. I wouldn't know.

Not really into the true crime stuff.

But do I detect a bit of hostility behind that remark? If so, i think it's totally undeserved. I mean come on, I'm on your side.

[Ordr]

91. But do I detect a bit of hostility behind that remark?

Nope, I was just trying to think of an actual instance where someone collected penises, lol.

[idovoodoo]

105. Maybe not but I know what you -do- with them.

...

[SteveM]

78. Enjoy? I have to go around with a wheel barrel when I take a walk!

You're a little slow. Usually the "penis envy" of gun-controllers starts up half-way down the thread. You must be new, here.

[Tyo]

81. Naw, I just don't hang out here much cuz

I keep letting myself get roped into random discussions like this. Sorry if I was a little slow on the penis envy thing.

[SteveM]

179. No problem, we have some newby gun-controllers...

Strange that some of the gun-controllers now launch their blow-outs in General Discussion. Maybe it was getting to tough to deal with the arguments in the Gungeon. It has gotten to be old-hat to use the penis thing because millions of women now own firearms; in fact they are the fastest growing demographic in the community of gun owners. But I did see one poster who tried a gender-neutral approach by saying something like "penis/vagina" enhancement. Visually, a little strained, but I appreciated the effort to remove "sexism" from the argument. Looking up stream, you can see where I was accused of it! Same ol', same ol'.

[Mojorabbit]

90. I will say this again

and every time someone says this. I am an armed woman and I can assure you I have no penis envy. Equating guns with penises is adolescent and frankly offensive. I also own a food processer,butcher knives, and a mixer.

[Canadiana]

169. LOL

[Bluebear]

96. Oh, I'm terrified. Are you "locked and loaded"? All that testosterone...

[Name removed]

106. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bluebear]

110. Oh SWOON!

[Missy Vixen]

123. Makes me hot! Doesn't it make you hot, too?

OOOh! Why did I marry my husband when I could have had one of the keyboard sharpshooters around here?

Julie

[Bluebear]

129. Your loss. What a big, strong stud he must be.

[Name removed]

130. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

126. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[walldude]

83. Another quality post BB.... thanks

And I agree with you fully. What we need are stronger gun laws. I'm not for taking guns away from people but any responsible gun owner should have to agree to a full background check and then be certified in a safety course. I have had people tell me that that is intrusive but fuck that. If you are really going to use your gun for target shooting, hunting or home protection then there should be no complaints about having to submit to a check and safety course. It's obvious that this country will never fully agree on the subject of gun ownership, so the people who are for all Americans carrying deadly weapons need to compromise a bit and put up with the checks and safety classes.

[Bluebear]

97. Yet, look above: "You idiots want to 'TAKE MY GUNS AWAY'!"

Nothing about rationality, or compromises, or reaching a solution. Just freeflowing testosterone and a bumper sticker mentality.

[villager]

111. the gun-lusters are deranged, and they wonder why anyone thinks they shouldn't pack heat

...in schools, shopping malls, etc...

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

113. Safety Courses

If you want to carry a gun you do have to go to a safety course and qualify on a range and have a background check. If you want to hunt in most states you have to have a Hunters Safety Course if you were born after 1970 or something. Those are all things that the pro-gun people agreed to. The NICS is supposed to be a background check if you want to buy a weapon but there are flaws in that system, I have seen several "gun-nuts" call for public access to the NICS to ensure that if they are selling a weapon privately they can check the buyer against the NICS. That seems reasonable to me, you would have to make harsh laws for misuse of the NICS though. I think we should teach gun safety in schools, we teach fire safety all the time, successfully I might add. We don't even have a bunch of juvenile pyromaniacs out there setting fires after our classes. I know I'm willing to deal with some reasonable checks and balances to protect the public. But unless someone breaks into my house and doesn't get licked to death by the 9 dogs that are there, and manages to steal my guns, then the public is in absolutely no danger from MY guns. Again wall thx for the welcome.

David

[Initech]

87. And what's the solution? More guns!

:sarcasm:

What are we, fucking stupid? We should just make them tougher to get. They can be legal, just tougher to get.

[I work for workers]

121. The article does not make clear whether its statistics

pertain to gun crime or overall crime rates. Does anyone know? A rise in robberies vs a rise in robberies with guns are two very different trends. Although I would suspect the authors would want to use the latter, the article suggests they used the former.

[NaturalHigh]

128. I suspect we're also #1...

in naive hand-wringers telling anyone who will listen that everything would be all tangerine trees and marmalade skies if we'd just take away everyone's guns.

[Bluebear]

131. A completely idiotic post, sorry. Nobody said anything about "taking away everyone's guns"

[varelse]

136. Perhaps the core problem here is that violence is so often marketed as "the" solution

For example, our political leaders starting an illegal war against a country that had nothing to do with the planes being steered into the World Trade center and marketing this as a war on terror - that was violence marketed as a solution to insecurity, grief and fear in the aftermath of 9/11.

Maybe guns are the most popular vector, but the mass marketing of unchecked violence is the disease.

[slackmaster]

146. I stopped reading at "License to Murder law"

Because it was obviously propaganda, and I correctly guessed it was from the lying sack of shit "gun guys".

[sarcasmo]

148. USA, USA, USA.

#1 in Prisoners and #1 in Carnage. Last in Health Care. USA, USA, USA.

[Thothmes]

184. Also the first in automobile accidents

[ramapo]

156. Imagine if Muslim terrorists were doing the shooting?

Soccer moms and the small town folk are all freaked out about the keeping the terrorists over there so they can't hurt us here.

Meanwhile we're doing a fine job of killing each other.

Imagine the scene if we had random mass killings in our schools instigated by the "terrorists".

[benEzra]

160. Hmmm, I'll bet Bushco would be using those rare events...

to scare people into giving up civil liberties, even though that wouldn't actually make anyone any safer. Sort of like the repubs at the Brady Campaign are doing right now.

You know that the proposal to bar anyone on the Administration's secret blacklist from owning a gun originated with Alberto "No Habeus Corpus" Gonzales, not Lautenberg, yes? Lautenberg was merely carrying the water for the administration on that issue. And the original Federal AWB was the brainchild of arch-right-winger William J. Bennett.



----------------------
The Conservative Roots of U.S. Gun Control

Dems and the Gun Issue - Now What? (written in '04, largely vindicated in '06, IMO)

[geardaddy]

158. ...

:popcorn:

[ileus]

174. I think you left out IRAQ and several countries in AFRICA.

[Pavulon]

176. You tell me WHY

the swiss have machine guns in 20% of their homes and there is a fraction of the rate of DEATH (suicide included) that there is here?

Not black replicas, fully functional select fire rifles.

WHY by the availability logic are there not mass shootings going on by deployed soldiers of other deployed soldiers. I can tell you I have never been as stir crazy and angry as when away from my home and life for a year with a few pricks (most guys were cool). Fights happened, no one ever shot anyone. No legal booze, no women, lots of down time, and weapons. Other than old land mines and heavy equipment accidents I felt pretty safe.

You can start with socio economic and racial divides in this country that land 1 - 9 African Americans 18 - 32 behind bars. Look at that number, it is a fundamentally wrong thing. There are big problems, banning is an easy solution for those unwilling to address root cause. Help for the mentally ill and a path to stability for those destroying their communities.

Break the numbers out by
suicides (untreated mental illness)
drug/gang/inner city violence (socio economic/cultural)
true random violence. (fraction of the total)

I am for a free media but content is an issue, it modifies behavior, if it did not millions would not be spent for 30 second ads.
NRA culture is not stacking bodies.

It sure is easier to blame guns than to talk about things no body wants to address.

[Wcross]

180. Sombody pulled the trigger.

The guns did NOTHING but what they were designed to do. Gun problem or people problem?