Gun Control

Wow. This link is interesting.

“For all the attention given to America’s culture of guns, ownership of firearms is at or near all-time lows,” writes political scientist Patrick Egan. The decline is most evident on the General Social Survey, though it also shows up on polling from Gallup, as you can see on this graph:



Six facts about guns, violence, and gun control

Bob Blaylock said:

“Slippery slope” is not always a fallacy. With regard to the 1994 “assault weapon” ban, the Brady organization boasted that once they got that in place, they would “show us the rest of the camel”. The promoters of this fraudulent ban openly admitted that it was a first step, to open the way for even more outrageous violations of the Second Amendment to come afterward.

Click to expand...

the only thing that stopped those odious scumbags from trying to pass say a 6 round restriction or an "arsenal tax" was the ass kicking the dems took in the 1994 elections mainly due to their unconstitutional gun control schemes

Captain America said:

Wow. This link is interesting.

“For all the attention given to America’s culture of guns, ownership of firearms is at or near all-time lows,” writes political scientist Patrick Egan. The decline is most evident on the General Social Survey, though it also shows up on polling from Gallup, as you can see on this graph:

Six facts about guns, violence, and gun control

Click to expand...

Either that or since the AWB survey respondents have learned the word "none".

Boo Radley said:

I quite disagree. The Brady bill was far from a ban, and assault weapons never had a huge following. But there was nothing close to banning all weapons. Congress would never even take up such a notion.

Click to expand...

the real purpose of the awb was to set the stage to desensitize people to other more sweeping bans.

DVSentinel said:

I wouldn't, I still like the meat from hunting that is not available in the super market and there are still coyotes, raccoons, possums, wild hogs and others that still present a danger to myself, my domesticated animals and garden/crops in my areas. The county does have a trapper/hunter for these problems, but only one for the whole county. The places where I live, these critters, not stupid humans are the main threat.

Click to expand...

Well, I could probably give up my coyote hunting if it meant saving my grandchild's life. But I'm funny that way. I would most likely take up my compound bow and just go Native American on the hogs. LOL!

iacardsfan said:

I have already posted one thread in regards to the mass shootings, trying to bring together ideas on the most effective way to slow gun related violence and try to eliminate these mass shootings.

This poll is more black and white because I am simply wondering would you be in favor of more gun control if it had the potential to reduce violence.

Click to expand...

Gun control is NOT the subject to be discussed when trying to impact violence. I could just as easily kill a person with a knife as a gun. That has been proven in the UK. How so? They have a 6 people stabbed to death a week in the UK. Yep. People who wish to resort to violence...do. I don't think the choice of weapon is that big of a deal. Their motivation is. So the question isn't how to disarm them...it is how to demotivate them to go on a killing spree.

Maybe we should start giving out free puppies? It is hard to want to go on a killing spree when I have to take care of an adorable puppy. Or maybe we should promote some peace and love? Or make it mandatory for ALL news networks to shut off for 12 hours of the day and play a puppy channel, or at minimum play happy moments. If there is a naturaly disaster and the world is ending (so the 21st)...they can cancel it. But unless we know for sure...puppy superbowl.

Seriously. Why is this still a topic? I know. The talking heads are still talking about guns are bad. How guns possess an ability like that of J.R.R. Tolkien's 1 "Ring to Rule Them All" and they poison the hearts of men. That guns are possessed by the souls of Manson, Hitler, Jack the Ripper, and Bin Laden all at once. Guns are NOT the cause of people resorting to violence because they are angry, or they have some wire plugged into the wrong place in their brain. It is just that. People having their wires mixed up cause the problem.

Maybe we should start with detection systems? We already have gun control laws that say a mentally defective person can't buy a firearm. Maybe we should start figuring out who is mentally defective? I certainly wouldn't allow a news caster or politician to have a gun...they think the world is a dangerous place and guns are only for killing innocent people en mass. I certainly don't want someone to have access to something if they think that is all it is good for. Then we can take their typewriters and soapboxes. I don't want someone thinking that to influence people.

Catawba said:

Show me what country has 10,000 knife killings a year?

Click to expand...

do you consider machetes "knives"

TurtleDude said:

the real purpose of the awb was to set the stage to desensitize people to other more sweeping bans.

Click to expand...

Always the conspiracy? Are we desensitized? :coffeepap

KevinKohler said:

And we need to do this quickly. We are fast approaching technologies that will be by their very nature accessible to all...fearsome indeed, if used to harm or kill. You're afraid of guns? I'm afraid of the future...

Click to expand...

I'm afraid of the ancient weapons: soapboxes and politicians.

Catawba said:

So you have an objection of my incorrect usage of "result" but you bristle when someone points out your incorrect spelling. Got it!




Nope, I am pointing out that in most massacres in the US and Mexico, the gun of choice is one that will accept high capacity magazines.

Click to expand...

Mexico bans most guns for most civilians so that is a worthless comment

most killings in the USA with firearms involves handguns-often low powered revolvers and rim fire semi autos

the most traumatic assassinations in the USA involved low capacity bolt action rifles or a 22 caliber revolver (JFK, MLK and Robert Kennedy) using YOUR "logic" you basically want to ban just about everything. the stuff you call assault weapons are still not nearly the most popular criminal tool

Goshin said:

The majority of gun deaths are in fact suicides. Some are cops killing perps, some are citizens killing perps. They should not be counted when considering homicides.

Gun murders are about 10,000 per year.... same as stabbing deaths....

Click to expand...

Context is what you missed Goshin. My post to Lachean was to show an apples to apples comparison of the total deaths (30,000) resulting from gunshot wounds to the total deaths (10,000) that resulted from knife wounds.

Lachean said:

Will America suffice?

How many knife related deaths occur in the USA each year? | ChaCha

"About 10,000 people die a year from stabbings."

Click to expand...

....................

DVSentinel said:

Your point?

Click to expand...

emotion should override our rights

Captain America said:

Wow. This link is interesting.

“For all the attention given to America’s culture of guns, ownership of firearms is at or near all-time lows,” writes political scientist Patrick Egan. The decline is most evident on the General Social Survey, though it also shows up on polling from Gallup, as you can see on this graph:

Six facts about guns, violence, and gun control

Click to expand...

I read that site earlier today. Most people have no pratical purpose for a gun. I think that plays more than anything else today.

Catawba said:

Banning guns in this country will only come about if more reasonable measures are not enacted to reduce the number of massacres in this country.

Click to expand...

in other words, if we gun owners don't accept idiotic laws gun haters like catawba want, he and his ilk will ban them. Good luck with that. Nothing you have ever proposed concerning guns is reasonable

Boo Radley said:

Always the conspiracy? Are we desensitized? :coffeepap

Click to expand...

I a merely reciting what the Washington Post said was the main reason for the gun ban-to desensitize people so they will accept further bans. and yes, there is a conspiracy. it starts with disgusting turds in office using emotion to convince the weak minded that gun bans are to make people safer

Boo Radley said:

I read that site earlier today. Most people have no pratical purpose for a gun. I think that plays more than anything else today.

Click to expand...

your definition of what is practical has no relevance nor logic behind it. that is as stupid as saying most people have no practical purpose for fire insurance, or golf clubs for that matter

Catawba said:

Now try addressing what I actually said:

Click to expand...

You say after not addressing my post. :lol: You hypocrites sure are funny.

Catawba said:

"Banning guns in this country will only come about if more reasonable measures are not enacted to reduce the number of massacres in this country."

Responsible gun owners can either help implement measures that will help reduce massacres of innocent people or face broader gun control as our society evolves.

Click to expand...

That sounds like a threat to me, sounds to me like "Do what we say or we'll do worse."

The Onion should do a piece on Sith Lords + Vader seeking a laser ban. Just sayin'. (im not saying American politicians are Sith Lords) Damn Rebel scum.

Captain America said:

Wow. This link is interesting.

“For all the attention given to America’s culture of guns, ownership of firearms is at or near all-time lows,” writes political scientist Patrick Egan. The decline is most evident on the General Social Survey, though it also shows up on polling from Gallup, as you can see on this graph:

Six facts about guns, violence, and gun control

Click to expand...

That sounds kind of fishy.


Considering this article was written in 2007 then that means there is almost 300 million firearms in the hands of private citizens.
U.S. most armed country with 90 guns per 100 people | Reuters
The United States has 90 guns for every 100 citizens, making it the most heavily armed society in the world, a report released on Tuesday said.

U.S. citizens own 270 million of the world's 875 million known firearms, according to the Small Arms Survey 2007 by the Geneva-based Graduate Institute of International Studies.

About 4.5 million of the 8 million new guns manufactured worldwide each year are purchased in the United States, it said.

Catawba said:

"Banning guns in this country will only come about if more reasonable measures are not enacted to reduce the number of massacres in this country."

Responsible gun owners can either help implement measures that will help reduce massacres of innocent people or face broader gun control as our society evolves.

Click to expand...

Part of this I posted this in another thread, it is however applicable to this thread, and apparently some have not seen it.

The Constitution grants ownership of weapons. Without a Constitutional amendment, it is not legal to pass laws taking peoples guns away without there being a specific cause, such as mental defect or conviction of a felony. Further, the Constitution prohibits, Ex Post Facto laws, meaning any law can only be carried forward, it cannot be back dated, therefore anyone already owning guns prior to the passing of said law/Amendment would still be allowed ownership. Therefore, any law demanding the seizure of legally owned guns would be illegal and unconstitutional.

Would I fight to defend my right to own a gun?

No, I would do it for others to have legal ownership. I don't expect to personally survive the experience should such circumstances ever occur. They may in the future, but I don't see them occurring during my lifetime. One reason I don't believe so is that due to the question of constitutionality, any such law would immediately have an injunction placed against it prior to it being enforced and that it would only be lifted once the Supreme Court has ruled. I would probably, with the exception of my personal defense gun, hide all others to avoid their confiscation until the Supreme Court has ruled.

I have in the past given an oath that I still try to live by, that being "to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic". It is every citizens right, I would say duty, to support and defend the constitution. If constitutional amendments were somehow made that striped away not only the Right to Bear arms but also preventing Ex Post Facto, then I would either fight, if I was able, or leave. I could not be part of any society that would allow Ex Post Facto law to exist.

Responsible gun owners have been trying for a longtime now to "implement measures that will help reduce massacres of innocent people". We have been trying to free up ours and others ability to have the means to effectively defend themselves and others.

As I pointed out in another post (to which you didn't respond on the subject) the only proven way to reduce violent crimes and murders is to expand gun ownership and laws that allow for greater self defense and defense of others. Have you now figured out another way, since we know that guns are not going away, at least not anytime soon? If you have, Please share it.

Lachean said:

You say after not addressing my post. :lol: You hypocrites sure are funny.



That sounds like a threat to me, sounds to me like "Do what we say or we'll do worse."

Click to expand...

its sort of like the rant that if the rich don't agree to more and more taxes, the masses will rape and pillage.

Gun control gets unlikely backers in Congress; WH says Obama to make it second-term priority

Monday, December 17, 2012

"WASHINGTON - Prominent gun-rights advocates in Congress are now calling for a national discussion about restrictions to curb gun violence, signaling that the horrific shooting at a Connecticut elementary school could be a tipping point in a debate that has been dormant for years.

"Everything should be on the table," West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin declared Monday. He is a conservative Democrat, avid hunter and lifelong member of the National Rifle Association. Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa proposed a debate not just about guns but also about mental issues."

"This time, the president has vowed to use "whatever power this office holds" to safeguard the nation's children against gun violence, suggesting he may put political muscle behind an assault weapons ban. He has long supported reinstating the ban, which expired in 2004, but never pressed for in his first term. Liberal Democrats on Capitol Hill are already laying the groundwork for legislation to outlaw the military-style arms."

"Virginia's Mark Warner, one of the few Senate Democrats who has found favour with gun rights groups, reversed course to back restrictions on assault weapons.

"The status quo is not acceptable anymore," he said.Virginia's Mark Warner, one of the few Senate Democrats who has found favor with gun rights groups, reversed course to back restrictions on assault weapons.

"The status quo is not acceptable anymore," he said."

Gun control gets unlikely backers in Congress; WH says Obama to make it second-term priority

Catawba said:

Gun control gets unlikely backers in Congress; WH says Obama to make it second-term priority

Monday, December 17, 2012

"WASHINGTON - Prominent gun-rights advocates in Congress are now calling for a national discussion about restrictions to curb gun violence, signaling that the horrific shooting at a Connecticut elementary school could be a tipping point in a debate that has been dormant for years.

"Everything should be on the table," West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin declared Monday. He is a conservative Democrat, avid hunter and lifelong member of the National Rifle Association. Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa proposed a debate not just about guns but also about mental issues."

"This time, the president has vowed to use "whatever power this office holds" to safeguard the nation's children against gun violence, suggesting he may put political muscle behind an assault weapons ban. He has long supported reinstating the ban, which expired in 2004, but never pressed for in his first term. Liberal Democrats on Capitol Hill are already laying the groundwork for legislation to outlaw the military-style arms."

"Virginia's Mark Warner, one of the few Senate Democrats who has found favour with gun rights groups, reversed course to back restrictions on assault weapons.

"The status quo is not acceptable anymore," he said.Virginia's Mark Warner, one of the few Senate Democrats who has found favor with gun rights groups, reversed course to back restrictions on assault weapons.

"The status quo is not acceptable anymore," he said."

Gun control gets unlikely backers in Congress; WH says Obama to make it second-term priority

Click to expand...

its amazing how many of the Obama slurpers attacked me for saying that Obama is anti gun and would try to instigate attacks on gun owners if he got a second term.

oh well 20 years after 1994 would be a good time for a major ass kicking of gun haters in congress-especially now that the supreme court's ruling in heller is going to make it tough for lower courts (which they could do pre heller) to find that bans are acceptable

TurtleDude said:

I a merely reciting what the Washington Post said was the main reason for the gun ban-to desensitize people so they will accept further bans. and yes, there is a conspiracy. it starts with disgusting turds in office using emotion to convince the weak minded that gun bans are to make people safer

Click to expand...

Most likely an editorial by someone who loves a good conspiracy.

TurtleDude said:

your definition of what is practical has no relevance nor logic behind it. that is as stupid as saying most people have no practical purpose for fire insurance, or golf clubs for that matter

Click to expand...

If that makes you feel better. But frankly, there is much less need for one today.