Based on census data, we issue every household a smooth bore musket, a brace of flintlock pistols, a barrel of black powder and another of shot. Every other firearm is forbidden except for law enforcement officials, members of the armed forces, and National guardsmen (a well regulated militia).
Hunters can still hunt. Households can still defend themselves from highwaymen and brigands (with whom they will have firepower parity). Tinfoil-clad survivalist can defend themselves from the jack-booted thugs of whatever Federal authority they fear with about the same chances of survival they currently enjoy in their fevered, Tom Clancy-fueled fantasies. The Second amendment is preserved although it will be much harder to spray down an elementary school cafeteria.
That’s a non-sequitur. As I pointed out, every soldier, whether on reserve duty or regular service, walks around armed, with a full-automatic weapon, all the time, everywhere, on base and off. If you visit Israel, you will see people walking around with M-16s and Galils all the time. That has nothing to do with private gun ownership. Yet no “Wild West” shootouts. Or “casual violence” as the US military puts it.
The point of discussion upthread was why does US military disarm its personnel on base (or off, for that matter). Apparently it was for fear of “casual violence” among them.
And, by the way, rest assured that in Israel, wherever you go in public, there is a very high chance that there is someone (or a dozen someones) with a firearm within shouting distance. No matter what the “private ownership” policies are.
There are no school shootings in Israel (or mass shootings in general) in spite of all the terrorists who would love to perpetrate one. Maybe this is why.
Nah. Shotguns. Just the sound of pumping one gets a dude’s attention. And they’re non-concealable, so there are some practical limits to criminal uses.
To follow up: there were two school shootings in Israel in the last 10 years. In one the perpetrator was shot by people in the school and a passerby before the damage could be higher. In the other the armed soldiers from a nearby base arrived and prevented bigger casualty count.
If either of the incidents happened in the US, the casualty count would have been much higher.
That’s right. There are fewer instances of mass shootings in Israel because fewer of the criminally insane can buy semi-automatic weapons, not because there are more right thinking patriots ready to fight back if they dared.
Do I? Okay, let’s say you have 10,000 murders per year with handguns. How many legitimate self-defenses with handguns? Canada has far fewer handguns, so we presumably have far fewer legitimate self-defenses with handguns, but we also have far fewer murders with handguns. About 100, actually.
So how many legitimate self-defenses with handguns are against other people with handguns?
Just for fun, I checked this cite and found the following information shockingly edited from the above post:
The check of the theaters occurred on August 14th and 15th, nearly a month after the shootings. There is no indication whether the theaters were showing The Dark Knight Rises on July 20th, particularly at the sold out midnight showing.
A very selective edit also occurred in the second closest theater to Holmes’ house, the Cinema Grill. As posted by Projammer -
The unedited info from the citation -
That would have been a useful bit of information to include, don’t you think? The movie wasn’t even showing there until a month after the shooting.
This guy is most likely deep-dish batshit pizza crazy. Do you think there is really anything to learn by examining his decision making?
He might have originally intended some other theater, and maybe he changed his mind on the basis of risk analysis and prudent guidelines for massacre management. He may stopped at one of the theaters, and decided against it because they had no policy preventing guns.
Or he may not have liked it because it smelled like unicorns.
100 killings in (I am guessing here based on the fact that we had 598 homicides in 2012) a population of 30 million, in one year. That’s almost 200 more than Detroit alone had, with its population of over 700,000.
The U.S. has a rate (wikipedia, go hard) of 4.8 homicides per 100,000. Canada is 1.6. We could probably drop our murder rate to zero if we gave everybody a couple of handguns to keep them safe.
We need some background checks for alcohol purchases. Maybe there should be a GED level (at least) test you should have to pass to consume alcohol. Also, yearly driving tests that include vision and physical tests. I’m sure a large number of deaths could be prevented.
Seems common sense to me. That would save far more lives than banning guns.
Joe Biden would tell us, like he did his wife, to get out on the porch and shoot 2 warning shots out of a double barrel chamber. Gotta love the guys ability to put his wife into a situation where she is now exposed, unarmed, and now has to take the time to reload. Of course, the story is a fabrication that he was attempting to use as a means to grab evil guns while letting harmless shotguns still be available. A sensible gun grabber.
Did Aaron Alexis used Joe Pa’s advice, but just accidentally hit some guard using a warning shot from a shotgun?
People who are in favor of gun control have reasoned arguments and peer reviewed articles in science journals, the gun nuts have half understood movie listings from Colorado and a deep fear of the outside world.
