Who's for Gun Control?

Inspections are a racket. You will find that the price point is about $200, more and your customer will leave and go somewhere else. $200 or less, people will pay up. Your inspection sticker will hinge on getting something fixed and you can always find something that needs fixing.

 

"Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." (James Madison, The Federalist Papers #46 at 243-244)


"No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." (Thomas Jefferson, Proposal Virginia Constitution, 1 T. Jefferson Papers, 334,[C.J.Boyd, Ed., 1950])

 

Soooo..... you take a clip from an absolutely retarded TV show and use it as an argument for less gun control?

How about this,
http://youtu.be/-ExC7fE1LaY

 

I own several guns. I have total control over those guns at all times.
I do believe in concealed carry permits, and training. Even regular testing to be allowed to carry in public.

 

Testing? Who pays for it? What would be tested? Will you be disenfranchising the poor if you make them pay for it or would you pay it through taxes?

 

It's obvious our forefathers wanted the citizens to own guns.

First of all, they were against paying for a standing army. They wanted to use the average citizen as a ready militia in case of invasion, or a tyrant government.

Second of all, they wanted people to be able to hunt for food.

Thirdly, they knew you couldn't count on law enforcement to protect everyone.

 

I have no idea if that clip was from a retarded TV show or not, for my point being displayed in the video is that the WHITE guy ended up saving his and his partner's life because of his right to possess a handgun. And the WHITE guy could have killed the criminal if he wanted to and been in the right to do so as he had a witness there to claim he did it in self defense, but the WHITE guy gave the black hoodlum a break by only wounding the would-be attacker. So it looks to me that owning and posseing a gun should almost be mandatory for all of us who find life worth preserving and living it to its fullest. Gun control advocates are all wet on this issue.

 

Oh, so now you make gun control a race issue.

How predictability pathetic.

 

If you can afford to spend a few hundred dollars on a gun, you can afford to get proper training. Why wouldn't you want that? I shoot a bow (Hoyt Gold Medallist) and joined an archery club to learn how to use it correctly and safely. It's a no-brainer. 'Hoops', like driving tests, are implemented for a reason and it isn't just about money either.

 

You have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, that doesn't mean I have to pay for it for you.
You have the right to own guns, but I don't have to buy you one. My firearms training cost $45, if you can't afford that you can't afford a gun. I voluntarily maintain my certification, and pay to use the practice range. I have also paid for private marksmanship lessons in firearms, and several types of bows.
With rights, come responsibilities.

 

I am amazed at how loose the CCW restrictions are in Colorado. All that is required is a class, this requirement does not involve live firearms handling or range time.

My NRA class went above and beyond the minimum requirements and had range time. We were shooting at 3 and 5yds and one gentleman (who knew almost nothing about firearms, hadn't even cleaned his new in box Glock before attending the class) peppered his target. There was no grouping, just a full size man sized target peppered wioth holes.

At 3 and 5yds.

He has a CCW permit now. Seems like accuracy ought to be some sort of requirement.

 

Funny even when you prove our forefather were for the people to own guns, we still argue about it. It would seem to me, people just like to argue. Don't bother me with facts, my mind is already made up.

 

Yeah, like the shiny tires you didn't notice or couldn't be bothered to renew, and which sent you skidding off the road on a wet night.

 

Here in Arizona, you can carry a gun on your hip or hide it under your cloths, no permit needed.

 

Which is simply frightening to think that people without skill or training may carry a loaded firearm in public.

 

Makes you think twice before pulling a gun on someone now.

 

I agree that some sort of accuracy should be tested. I keep in practice, because I value human life and don't want to shoot someone accidentally if the need to defend myself ever arose.

 

Does it? Do you think the kind of person who would simply pull a gun on someone is the type of person who thinks twice?

Gun enthusiasts always seem to think they are preparing for a rational situation all the while projecting this Dirty Harry persona. If a person pulls a gun on you and you have yours holstered what make you think you will survive that encounter?

In what public scenario are you safer for carrying a gun?

 

Which might make sense if that was a demonstrable fact, which is something that is is not.

 

Ah yes, the symbolic emotionalism of "Dirty Harry". Just like the fears of "shoot outs like the OK Corral". Symbolism is important in gun control. It doesn't have to match reality but only convey a feeling to elicit an emotional reaction.

So, if you are in danger, would you rather have a phone and call the police so they can mop up after the crime, or be able to defend yourself. Every situation is different so don't try to shoehorn them all into one box.

 

You would be amazed at the argument against accuracy requirements.

Most humorous being that training actually causes accidents. When asked to cite a self-defense expert who also believes such, the room falls silent. Intellectual bankruptcy at its finest.

 

No, I'm not making it a race issue...the lame stream media has made it a race issue as the Martin/Zimmerman case beautifully coincides with my main points here of having the right and necessity to own and possess a gun, doncha think? Surely you don't need a refresher course on the race baiting of one al sharpless in order to use race as a backdrop to gun ownership, do you?

 

You have made it a race issue. Were you unaware that you had typed out that last post?

Its not that difficult to understand.

 

Regions and states with higher rates of gun ownership have significantly higher rates of homicide than states with lower rates of gun ownership.

Between 1955 and 1975, the Vietnam War killed over 58,000 American soldiers – less than the number of civilians killed with guns in the U.S. in an average two-year period

In the first seven years of the U.S.-Iraq War, over 4,400 American soldiers were killed. Almost as many civilians are killed with guns in the U.S., however, every seven weeks

Guns were used in 11,493 homicides in the U.S. in 2009, comprising over 36% of all gun deaths, and over 68% of all homicides

On average, 33 gun homicides were committed each day for the years 2004-2009

Where guns are prevalent, there are significantly more homicides, particularly gun homicides

In 2009, firearm injuries were the cause of the unintentional deaths of 554 people
From 2004-2009, over 3,800 people in the U.S. died from unintentional shootings

Over 1,350 victims of unintentional shootings for the period 2004–2009 were under 25 years of age

People of all age groups are significantly more likely to die from unintentional firearm injuries when they live in states with more guns, relative to states with fewer guns. On average, states with the highest gun levels had nine times the rate of unintentional firearms deaths compared to states with the lowest gun levels

Firearm-related deaths and injuries result in estimated medical costs of $2.3 billion each year – half of which are borne by U.S. taxpayers

Once all the direct and indirect medical, legal and societal costs are factored together, the annual cost of gun violence in America amounts to $100 billion

Firearm injuries are the cause of death of more than 18 children and young adults (24 years of age and under) each day in the U.S

Children and young adults (24 years of age and under) constitute over 38% of all firearm deaths and non-fatal injuries

In the United States, over 1.69 million kids age 18 and under are living in households with loaded and unlocked firearms

More than 75% of guns used in suicide attempts and unintentional injuries of 0-19 year-olds were stored in the residence of the victim, a relative, or a friend

A 2000 study found that 55% of U.S. homes with children and firearms have one or more firearms in an unlocked place; 43% have guns without a trigger lock in an unlocked place

Using a gun in self-defense is no more likely to reduce the chance of being injured during a crime than various other forms of protective action

Of the 13,636 Americans who were murdered in 2009, only 215 were killed by firearms (165 by handguns) in homicides by private citizens that law enforcement determined were justifiable

Every situation is different. Which one do you imagine your self in?

 

The issue with that though, is most self-defensive uses do not end in someone being killed.