Guns and 6 year olds..... (in response to Jab1)

[jab1]

I’m going to make a lot of posts in the next ninety minutes, so bear with me.

Originally posted by Freedom:
I do not want to change my position.

What would give you a reason to change your mind?

Punish law abiding citizens for the actions of a criminal.

Why do you see it as punishment? I see it as preventing future crimes. I see it as preventing deaths. Please understand, though, that I do NOT want the government to confiscate your weapons. That would start a Second Civil War. I’m hoping, fervently, that you’ll do it of your own free will. If you don’t, I guess I’ll have to live with it. (And I frankly hope we never meet IRL. You make me nervous.)

Of course you are led by the hand to skip over anyone actually taking any responsibility for their actions, and led to the PC conclusion of blaming the gun.

I blame the gun AND the irresponsible owner and thief and parents. As someone pointed out above, if something ELSE had been stolen, that killing would not have happened. And please don’t call me PC again.

Surely you don’t think trigger locks and 5 day waiting periods would have helped prevent this murder?

The five-day waiting period would not have helped. But a properly-designed trigger lock would be impossible to remove without damaging the weapon to the point of making it useless, unless one had also stolen the key.

I am tempted to call you elitist.

You say that like it’s an insult. I AM an elitist. I DO think some people are better than others. But I make my assessments based on behavior and character and nothing more. The asshole adults in this case are most definitely worse than I am, but I say that only because of their appalling lack of judgement and common sense.

I am tempted to assume that you live in a safe neihborhood with a short police response time. I am tempted to think that you do not live alone.

I live alone in Downtown L. A. I couldn’t tell you what the police response time is here. I don’t know where I’d get that information.

**Are you really trying to say that a 105lb. woman who has already been raped and now lives alone is a coward because she wants to be armed?

Do you really feel that a single mother who lives in a community that is having a recent spate of break-ins during the night is a coward because she wants to be armed?

Do you really think that a man who lives in the country with his family is a coward for having a gun, even though the police are 15-20 minutes away?**

No, I’d say they’re over-reacting and are paranoid.

What I really think, is that you are reacting exactly as planned. The media is controlling your puppet strings like an expert. You have seen something that has been finetuned to hit all your hot buttons and get you motivated.

:rolleyes: Ah, the vast left-wing conspiracy of government and media raises its ugly head again!

I’ll continue this on another post.

---

When all else fails, ask Cecil.

[Czarcasm]

Guns ARE dangerous when used improperly.
But more importantly, they are absolutely deadly when used properly. They have only one purpose, and that is to kill. Target practice is merely that-practice for it’s real purpose. They are NOT a defensive weapon. A magic shield does not pop up when you pull the trigger, a bullet flies out of the barrel at a high speed towards the target, which it will either hit, maiming or killing the target, or miss, speeding off to hit ghod knows what. Or who.
The high rate of gun use in this country has been blamed on such things as morality, liberalism, drugs, and various other straw men. All of these can be found in numerous other countries, but their violence statistics are nowhere near ours. The only thing different in this country is the large number and easy access of weapons to the lowest common denominator of mankind.

[jab1]

Originally posted by Melin:
I’ve come more and more to the conclusion that we should de-criminalize drugs. I still am not going to be pro-drug, but I think that we need to eliminate the obscene profit that illegal drugs generate, and take away the motive to protect one’s drug trafficking by violence.

I stated on another thread (can’t remember which one, though :o) that if the cops do not have the resources to enforce every gun law as the NRA demands, then perhaps we should legalize drugs (perhaps not all of them). That would have the effects of reducing the police’s responsibilities to a more manageable level and reducing the prison population. (Although the prisons might fill up again with folks serving for gun-related misdemeanors.)

---

When all else fails, ask Cecil.

[tracer]

a resident of a household with a gun is three times more likely to die by homicide and five times as likely to die by suicide, than a resident of a gun-free household.

Gee, that’s funny, I remember hearing about a different study, written up in a medical journal, that indicated no significant increase in ones chances of being the victim of a homicide in a home with a gun in it. (The study did show a significant increase in ones chances of being the victim of a suicide in a home with a gun in it, though.)

I guess if you’re anti-gun, you’ll quote the first study, and if you’re pro-gun, you’ll quote the second study. And neither side will be swayed by your slanted arguments.

---

The truth, as always, is more complicated than that.

[jab1]

Originally posted by Freedom: Check out Japan’s suicide rate. They have less guns, and less people, but a huge suicide rate.

Suicide is not considered a mortal sin in Japan. In some circles, it’s considered an honorable way to die. Perhaps the kid described in your article saw himself as like a kamikazi. Kids in this country emulate super-heroes, sports stars, actors, musicians and soldiers, among others. And some consider suicide when they think they’ll never live up to their ideal, though that’s often because that ideal is impossible to reach.

I don’t want to sound too harsh, but I do not plan to live my life in a “suicide safe” enviroment just because some people want to die. After we get rid of guns we can knock down all the bridges, put up fences around all cliffs, put lifeguards every 100 feet around water, make sure nobody is ever alone, confiscate all razor blades and knives, only dispense pills from the pharmisist directly into people’s mouths, etc…etc…etc…

Oh, I’ve heard this argument before. I’m frankly tired of it. All those other things you mentioned were NOT DESIGNED TO KILL. If you kill yourself with any of those things, you are MIS-using them. If you kill with a gun, you are using something FOR ITS DESIGNED PURPOSE. BTW, some of those precautions you mentioned ARE used on people who are potential suicides. But no one has ever advocated applying them to EVERYONE.

---

When all else fails, ask Cecil.

[tracer]

Ah, but jab1, a gun is designed to kill others. By your logic, if you kill yourself with a gun, you are also mis-using it.

[jab1]

Glitch, I don’t know which parts I should quote, but you know which post I’m referring to, the one with the examples of people defending themselves from rapists and other criminals.

Rape is a terrible crime, but not a capital one. It is not punished by execution, not in the USA, anyway. The same goes for breaking and entering, robbery, theft, assault… In short, you’re saying that an individual has the right to administer a punishment that no court in the land has the authority to dispense.

---

When all else fails, ask Cecil.

[jab1]

Originally posted by Freedom:
Therefore, suicides should not be included when talking about gun deaths.

You’re talking to someone who would be dead now if a gun had been available at the right time. And I would be one of those statistics you so casually dismiss.

Be back tomorrow.

---

When all else fails, ask Cecil.

[Freedomx]

America’s gun violence is often compared to other country’s rates. It is hard to come up with a hard and fast rule that explains this. I thought this take on it was interesting and thought I would throw it over here.

An opposing point of view is taken by Salon reader Jukka Hohenthal in Uppsala, Sweden:

Comparing murder rates between the U.S. and my native country of Sweden is a frightening exercise. And it is not only gang and/or drug- related murders that are the difference. In Sweden, the law-abiding citizen will use his fists on his wife and her lover when catching them in the act, while the American law-abiding gun owner will shoot them. When the police arrive at the scene of the crime in Sweden, they will find people shouting at each other; in the U.S. they will need body bags.

How can you seriously claim that gun-ownership is no big problem? You are much more likely to use a gun if you have one, and since guns’ major function is to kill living beings, you are far more likely to kill someone when using it than you would by using your fists or some other blunt instrument. Or is your claim that the price for the odd father killing his daughter’s boyfriend, in the belief that he is a burglar, is worth paying for the security you say it gives in an emergency? Even in an emergency you are likely to be worse off if everyone has a gun than if no one has one.

These arguments are very compelling. However, what Europeans sometimes fail to fully realize is that the U.S. is enormous – the size of a continent, with many states bigger than European nations – and that our population lacks the ethnic and racial homogeneity of Scandinavia. Whatever its internal disputes, Sweden is historically much more of an extended family than is the U.S., with its massive history of immigration and its competitive minorities.

The American frontier is still open here – a spatial as well as cultural fact. Our people have a thousand forms and faces, and our quarrels and our creativity are in dynamic relation. American guns are the dark side of American genius. Our aggression overflows into violence but also empowers our brilliant entrepreneurship in technology as well as the vitality of our popular culture.

Yes, I must admit, in this country we are more concerned with the restless rights of the individual than with the claims to comfort of the majority. We prefer the adrenaline rush of the random to the consoling drowsiness of cradle-to-grave socialism. I apologize (as a worshipper of Sweden’s national treasure, Ingmar Bergman) if this seems too harsh!

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a38c081647955.htm

You will find that to be an excerpt from the OP there. Just food for thought.

[RTFirefly]

(RTF) And if we distribute an object among large numbers of people, we have to assume, statistically, that it will be abused in whatever manner possible. Census forms will be returned to the Census Bureau with “Government is evil!” scrawled across the front of the form.

(Freedom) Where is the abuse in this again?

I knew I’d set myself up for that!

---

Second Place (tie), Most Valuable Poster (GD)
Second Place, Best Scientific/Expert Explanations (GD)
Not that it’s gone to my head or anything.

[justwannano]

jab 1 said

You’re talking to someone who would be dead now if a gun had been available at the right
time. And I would be one of those statistics you so casually dismiss

I’m doubtful of that. There are just too many ways to do yourself in to say that. We all have that momentary thing when depression seems to overwelm. If everyone that ever thought about it even for a moment actually did it then you would have a point. hope you got a good nights sleep.
Have a nice day

[David_B]

Slythe said:

They are NOT a defensive weapon.

The best defense is a good offense.

[Glitch]

Rape is a terrible crime, but not a capital one. It is not punished by execution, not in the USA, anyway. The same goes for breaking and entering, robbery, theft, assault… In short, you’re saying that an individual has the right to administer a punishment that no court in the land has the authority to dispense.

And you seem to be forgetting that they legally are permitted to do so. And this is an eminently moral action to boot (again I urge you to read Ayoob’s “The Truth About Self Protection”, even though I doubt you will since you would rather maintain your POV rather than gather facts).

In any event, this demonstrates the wonderful hypocrisy of many of the pro-gun control people. A crime committed by an illegal gun is a terrible thing. But a crime prevented by a gun, well that’s an unfair execution.

So, to sum up Jab’s apparent position:

He would rather that the woman in #1 was raped for three hours, had foreign objects stuck into her body, and had her genitals slashed. The criminal could have ended up assaulting numerous more people before being caught (the police admit they were nowhere near catching him at the time of the fourth assault and onlt tied him to the three previous rapes afterwards).

He prefers that the man in #2 was brutally beaten to death while his wife was forced to watch, and was eventually cut up herself.

He would rather that the woman in #3 was savagely beaten, and perhaps killed.

He would rather that the woman in #4 was raped and murdered in a secluded wood.

He prefers that the woman in #5 was savagely tortured and raped for TWO DAYS!

I can only assume that any of the stories I can pull forward Jab would rather have had happen. And yet I am sure Jab would call himself moral, for prefering these terrible things to have happened instead of a (likely) recividist criminal being shot and stopped or shot and killed. With a twisted sense of morality like that who needs immorality. I am so glad that you would wish those things upon those people Jab rather than them legally and morally defending themselves.

I don’t know if you are married or not Jab, but if you are replace your wife with the woman in stories #1, #4 and #5. Because there is a 1 in 8 chance that she will be a victim of a violent crime in her lifetime. Yeah, I know I am just being over-reacting and paranoid.

[Freedomx]

Glitch,

Do you know about the lady in Texas that had her family members killed in front of her? She was licensed to carry a concealed handgun, but it was against the law to carry it into a restaraunt so she left it in the car. Of course the nut job that came in disregarded the law and killed a whole bunch of people.

She ran for office in Texas and is now a congresswoman (I think) there. I am looking for a link to here on the web. Do you have any info on her to help me find a link that gives the details of her story?

[Glitch]

No, the first time I heard about it was from you. If I come across it I’ll let you know.

[Glitch]

Just got this link from my a former student currently serving in the LAPD.
http://www.azcentral.com/news/0202kidnap.shtml

Way to go Bricie! Rather than let somebody kill her, her husband and her 9-yr old nephew, the assailant was shot and killed.

Again, assuming she had no gun and this 9-yr old was put to death by the criminal how many of you pro-gun control folks would be OUTRAGED and wishing she had of has a gun to stop the assailant? Perhaps you think he wouldn’t have killed them? Ha! Think again. Earlier that same night he raped and shot another woman three times (she survived). Criminals don’t change their MO, if they are killers then they kill, pure and simple and this guy was a killer (see just about ANY book on violent crime, but since I recommend it so much and for convience see Sanford Strong “Strong on Defense”). Those three people (including a 9 yr old boy) would be dead or seriously injured were it not for the quicking thinking and armed Bricie.

[Glitch]

And in the very next mail he sent me.

Gun Law Failure

Australia Crime Increases After Guns Are Confiscated
It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed, a program costing the government more than $500 million dollars.

And now the results are in: Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent; Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent; Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent). In the state of Victoria, homicides with firearms are up 300 percent. Figures over the previous 25 years show a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms (changed drastically in the past 12 months). There has been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly.

Australian politicians are on the spot and at a loss to explain how no improvement in “safety” has been observed after such monumental effort and expense was successfully expended in “ridding society of guns.”

He didn’t provide a link. I’ll ask him where we can find it.

[Glitch]

From a recent speech by Clinton.

`But when first-graders shoot first-graders, it’s time for Congress to be guided by their hearts and their heads,

As he has previously, Clinton called for legislation to require gun-makers to sell child safety locks,

Sounds like a good idea to me. Wouldn’t have made a difference in the shooting we are discussing, but still a good idea.

ban the import of large ammunition clips

Depends on what is meant by “large”. Currently, most civilian pistols have a maximum 10 rounds (well, most H&K do anyway and I own H&K so there you go) + 1. From a self defense perspective I would hate to see that get reduced. The average trained police officer hits 1/4 shots in an explosive violent encounter. Trained civilians do about the same. 11 shots/4 = 2-3 hits which is roughly what it takes to stop a person.

So, if we are talking about banning the imports of clips larger than 10 rounds well that make sense since such a clip is probably illegal anyway.

Also, wouldn’t have made a difference in this shooting.

and require background checks for gun-buyers who purchase firearms at gun shows, just as they are required in gun stores.

Sounds like a good idea to me. I am all for measures that will make it harder for an illegal gun purchase to be made. This probably effectively means an end to sales at gun shows, which again is fine by me.

This might have made a difference in this shooting.

He said he also wanted three other measures aimed at curbing gun violence: the development of so-called smart guns that can
be fired only by the adults who own them,

I am going to start a thread on this.

a photo license requirement for new handgun owners

Sure, what the hell. Doesn’t bother me at all.

Wouldn’t have made a difference in this shooting.

and the hiring of 1,000 new gun prosecutors.

An excellent idea. Maybe we can start prosecuting all those gun laws that are currently plea bargained out! Like I say, if you use a gun in a crime I hope they nail your hide to the wall.

Wouldn’t have made a difference in this shooting.

So, although I generally agree with the measure proposed, I find it funny that perhaps 1/6 might have made a difference in this shooting depending on whether this gun was purchased at a gun show or not and yet that is the reason Clinton is now pushing ahead to have Congress pass this bill. Talk about head in the sand.

[pashley]

You pro-gun bastards make me sick. All you can think about is yourselfs, and your wonderful need to have guns.

An innocent child is dead because another kid brought a gun to school and shot her. That’s a fact. If that gun had had some child safety lock on it, odds are the kid wouldn’t have been able to fire, or at least have been delayed enough to have been disarmed.

But you cowardly asses won’t even support something like a simple lock. You make me sick. I hope some bastard takes your gun and shoots your kid, then you’ll know the emotionally crippling trauma the parents of Kayla are suffering.

---

Patrick Ashley

[pashley]

And furthermore, I don’t see any of you pro-gunners showing any sympathy for this child. All you do is throw around some statistics. Again, evidence that all you are concerned about are yourselfs, and feeling like big men, not with children and society at large.

---

Patrick Ashley