Is crazy!
Assuming, of course, that the level of gun violence in Mexico is a direct result of those restrictions. No wonder there is so much public fury and outrage in Australia, seeing the fate that awaits them. One can hardly blame them for the massive rallies and demonstrations currently sweeping the nation.
Hmm, where did all those guns in Mexico come from, I wonder? Oh yeah, Fast and Furious. I almost forgot.
Weird story out of Texas City, Texas. Some excerpts:
"During the home invasion, Jacobson allegedly assaulted the mother and daughter, police said.
The attackers tied up all three residents and, at about 8 a.m., drove them to a field in Alvin, where they were to be killed, according to a police department news release.
On the way they stopped to buy two cans of beer.
Once they got to the secluded field, Jacobson gave Barnett his gun and allegedly told him to shoot the hostages, according to the police statement.
But Barnett refused, and since he was then in possession of the weapon, Jacobson had no choice but to cooperate with him, the release said.
The men next drove to another store and bought beer for themselves and soft drinks for the family. At that point, they returned the hostages to their home to help dispose of any evidence left there, the release said.
The teenage boy somehow freed himself, got the family’s handgun and confronted the intruders, who then fled.
About 11:10 a.m., the family called police, who arrived in less than a minute, the release said. With the help of neighbors, officers chased Jacobson several blocks and found him hiding in some tall grass."
Link: Two charged in Webster case involving sexual assault, kidnap and threatened murder
The teen showed remarkable restraint in not shooting one or both of the bumbling criminals, and I guess the criminals showed remarkable restraint by not only not shooting the hostages, but also buying them some sodas while they held them in the field, but I was very impressed that it took only one minute for the cops to arrive. According to gun nuts, that is not possible.
Well it’s certainly in spite of those restrictions.
“Poor Mexico, so far from God and so close to the United States.”
Porfirio Diaz, President of Mexico
Says the people who got the ban put in place but didn’t lobby to ban this sort of research at other agencies. If the NRa is so against any research into gun violence, why wouldn’t they try to shut down all research throughout government? I don’t endorse what the NRA did, like I keep saying, I think the report discredits the authors of the report (as well as the publishers of the report, at least on this issue) but I don’t think censorship is ever a good thing.
The supreme court explicitly ruled that the right to bear arms does not include the right to bear whatever you wanted. I think Heller and McDonald stands for the proposition that you can have whaever you need for effective self defense.
So am I, I don’t think that happens very frequently.
I still remember stories of cops driving away from criminals that were looting a store and leaving the store owner to fend for himself.
As with the CDC research issue, I’m not endorsing or supporting the idea. I’m just trying to tel you what people are concerned about. If it isn’t clear by now, I fully support national licensing and registration requirements. I think that a nataional gun license should give me the right to possess a gun in all 50 states plus the district of Columbia (and perhaps give me a right to carry (concealed or open) in all the states).
Here’s the part where I probably go a bit further than the run of the m ill gun but. I think that we should lift the ban on the sale of new machine guns to the public (under the current NFA rules which are much stricter than the national registration would be), In particular, I think they should start selling surplus M-16s and M-4s to the public, they currently go for about $25K. The US military could probably sell about a million surplus M-16s for $5000-10,000 each (to be totally honest, they could probably get more than that for one in very good condition).
Not really the question, now was it, hoss? All you are really saying is that the people who didn’t like the results said it wasn’t good science.
Well, OK, if they criticize the science, are they alone in that criticism? I asked the question quite clearly, who else criticized the methods of their studies, beside the people who’s ox was being gored?
Now, if half a dozen statistical academics, scientists or specialists in epidemiology had stepped forward to point out a flaw, then there would definitely be a case for suspicion. Did that happen?
When you broach this suggestion in public, do people have a tendency to back away slowly while making placating hand gestures, speaking in soothing voices and their eyes darting about looking for the nearest exit. There’s a reason for that…
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2013/03/this_is_a_kind_of.php?ref=fpblg
Zerlina Maxwell went on the Sean Hannity show to discuss “whether women should carry or have the right to carry firearms to protect themselves against rape and sexual violence.” Her point was that “it should be on men and the culture in general to make rape and sexual assault unacceptable rather than on women to arm themselves to not be raped.”
Since then she has been inundated with vile, racist and threatening Tweets, Facebook posts and other on-line attacks from gun nuts who felt threatened by her comments- threatened enough to call for her to be raped and murdered.
Why is it crazy?
But getting shot, especially in the groin, would make rape and sexual assault unacceptable! 
Seriously, does anyone but the most strident “rape culture” feminists really deny that most men understand that rape is wrong? Criminals and sociopaths are by definition the people that our society’s acculturation process has failed. What’s the point of preaching to the people who are already peaceful and gentle that they need to be still more peaceful and gentle?
Which kind of rape? Legitimate rape? Easy rape? Enjoyable rape?
It is a dumb thing to say. Rape and sexual assault are already socially unacceptable. If you are a high risk member of the weaker party/victim group, it might be prudent to carry an equalizer. Certainly woman should have the right to do so if they desire.
That is terrible. She really should consider getting a gun and take some gun safety and shooting courses.
And women do have the right to arm themselves if they choose, as you are well aware. It is indeed a shame that she may need to arm herself to protect herself from the gun nuts.
Per your own link they can’t on college campuses. First time I ever agreed with Hannity. You watch the video? She says if you tell men not to rape, they won’t rape. That’s crazy.
Cops: Perp Had Loaded Revolver In Her Vagina
Takes “gun lover” to a whole new level I guess.
Ooh baby. I get a bang out of you.
Yeah I’ve been seeing lots of jokes for this one.
“Three live rounds and one spent shell? Sounds like the start of a gang bang to me.”
“Where do you put the bayonet?”
- Chesty Puller
According to this recent news article, gun ownership is in steep decline.
“All the stories about people rushing out to buy guns after recent mass shootings may give the impression that more Americans have guns at home. Yet a survey reveals that the percentage of U.S. homes with a gun has been in steady decline over the past four decades, with a surprisingly sharp drop in the South and Western mountain states. Whereas an average of 50 percent of households owned a gun in the 1970s, that number declined to 35 percent in the 2000s, with 34 percent of households reporting gun ownership in 2012, notes the New York Times.”
The decline is attributed to decreased hunting, violent crime and rural living.