Would a significant decrease in suicides justify a gun ban?

I still do not understand how someone with ZERO EXPERIENCE, can pontificate about Guns, I knew I had to learn about Guns before carrying one, so I learned all I could at an early age.

An M-16 is NOT a weapon of Mass Destruction, it is a perfect Arm for Defensive purposes, set on semi auto, it is very controllable, on burst or full auto, fired in short bursts, you can face multiple attackers.
Of course, there are safety considerations, if you are in a crowded area, firing may not be advisable.

 

Certainly not republicans believe in free choice and opposing government control of individual freedom. How could they possibly support any Government action that would interfere with an individuals right to commit suicide.

 

There are accidental shootings you know.

 

Yes, which are lower than ever.

You're twice as likely to die on a bicycle.

 

Wow, assault by firearm is one in 358. Thanks for posting.

 

So on what is your expertise on firearms based, hear say ? posted comments ? abstract studies ? My firearms knowledge consists of classroom study with real experts in the field, Veteran Military and Law Enforcement Instructors, actual study and practice with many types of firearms including Military issued automatic weapons.

That is why many fields such as Medicine cannot be studied Online, and you need hands on experience and practice, same thing with firearms, you need hands on experience, and a few conflicts in combat or as a Police Officer does not hurt either.

 

You're welcome.

Sounds like a great reason for non-murderous people to have the ability to defend themselves eh?

Sounds like we definitely need tougher ladder regulations though.

 

No,there is no justification for that.
Nice trial balloon.
Allow me to introduce you to deez.

 

Doan forget Dem and Doze.....

 

You need hands on experience to wield a firearm, you do not need hands on experience to understand firearm legislation. You have studied and practiced in wielding a firearm, but I sincerely doubt that you have spent any considerable amount of time actually thinking about what the ideal state of firearm restriction is. You have a knee-jerk reaction, and you spend a great deal of time justifying and rationalizing that knee-jerk reaction, but it remains an impulse. I myself have an instinct towards Liberty in all states, but that is provided that said Liberty is not inclined to harm others, and I have not seen one drop of evidence that firearms don't harm others, on the whole. Not one drop.

 

Yes, you do need hands on experience for gun legislation. The assault weapons ban would've never passed had the legislators had hands on experience and realized that their preposals are useless in stopping crime.

 

However, I do have evidence, and more than a drop, having responded to numerous crime scenes, where a person was murdered in their home, an unarmed victim in a pool of their own blood, sometimes butchered with a knife from their own kitchen.

Personal Defense is no little matter and one really has to be personally dedicated to SAFE gun handling and training, this is something no Law can demand or guarantee, neither is Personal safety, each person must decide if they are willing to make some sacrifice as far as wardrobe and equipment that may at times be somewhat uncomfortable, in order to be Armed, and not only that, comply with all applicable Laws and safe Gun handling at all times.

 

Surviving more than one gunfight is experience I've had, and I learned from that experience but is also an experience I'd prefer not to repeat. It certainly wasn't Hollywood.

In the force on force classes I have helped develop, I try to impart aspects of what it is like to the real thing, but no matter how well we try to concruct the scenarios, including loosely structured combat situations with simunition and tangible penalties for being shot, it never approaches the real thing...That of actually being under fire and being hit, and then still having to continue the fight. Adrenaline and (*)(*)(*)(*), they seem to go together when you least expect it .... Hard to reproduce...

 

And what firearm legislation could be passed that would be observed by those who wish to commit murder?

The answer is not trying to keep harmful objects out of the hands of the murderous, but in keeping the murderous out of society. There are people walking around free right now who have killed multiple people. Why do we allow this?

The laws passed against pistol grips, flash hiders, bayonet lugs and magazine limits show the incredible ignorance of the gun-control crowd I'm afraid. The "high power" argument is ridiculous as well, since the caliber responsible for the most deaths is the lowly .22

Expecting people to give up their freedoms as a method to attempt to control the violent is also ridiculous, and doomed to failure.

 

The first time I was shot, I was a wet behind the ears young Constable in the tiny beautiful Country San Dorinde, training was very basic and mostly OJT in those days, and I knew very little about firearms or ammo, I was armed with a Colt Officer's model Revolver with a 6" barrel loaded with .38 special 158 grain RNL RP ammo, this was notoriously weak under powered ammo.

I was living in a large Pension type house, very old and made mostly out of stale cheese and crackers.
One night, as I tried to sleep, I heard loud munching, as if a large rat was chewing on wood somewhere in the house, it kept waking me up, I finally got tired of hearing it and got up, took my gun to shoost it in case I should see it.

I followed the sound to the front double doors and it was from outside, I went to one of the outer windows that flanked the doors and peeked out between the shutters, there at the front door, I saw a figure hunched over near the front doors, it was sort of dark where the figure was and a street light dimly lit the area behind the figure.

It was a bit startling, and I figured whoever it was might give up and leave.
I was wrong, the figure worked a bit more got up and shoved hard, the brittle mortise lock tinkled and broke like glass, and the figure slinked in and walked right on in, to my desk that occupied the front parlor as my consulting & tea room for receiving Guests, he started rummaging through the drawers, I flicked on a switch lighting up my desk lamp and an illuminated wall picture, The Savior.....

I said loudly, can I help you ?
the guy turned around with a revolver in his hand and fired, I remember it feeling like a thunder clap on my left shoulder, what a friend from India would later refer to as a thundering slap, I returned some poorly aimed fire, the last two splashing mush all over the portrait on the wall with brain matter making quite a mess of things.

I called HQ and they sent over some Constables and a Lieutenant and a Doctor, the guy on the floor was clearly dead, and I had only a minor bloody injury, although it felt as if I were on fire, I was given medications and Prescriptions, it was most telling in any case.

The dead guy was a career criminal from the age of 13, specializing in breaking and entering and robbery and rape.

 

Man,are you for real or do you bs a lot?

 

Why ? what makes you make accusations unfounded ?
It is a true account.

 

Naturally, you believe this to also include the right to free speech, the right to free exercise of religion, the right have an abortion, the right to vote...

 

You do, however need a fundamental understanding of the physical and operating characteristics of firearms to form a responsible opinion on said legislation.

 

Only a Constitutional amendment would justify a gun ban...

 

No linky?

 

Yeah that's not going to happen!! LOL!!!

AA

 

It would justify nothing of the sort.

 

Wrong.

The Founders of the USA believed the right of the people to protect themselves and their property was fundamental to a free society based on human history. There is always a drift towards tyranny and oppression, and that drift might be stopped if the people are armed.

Lessons learned from human history is why the right to be armed is an inalienable right. History is filled with examples of tyrants thinking carefully before attacking well armed people, while disarmed people are quickly subjugated, displaced, or eradicated. If you have property or built your home on desirable land, then someone else will want your stuff or your land (or your wife and children, or you as a slave) and you better be able to protect it, them, and yourself.

Don't you learn history where you live?

 

Dr. Who, I would tell you to ignore the guy, but I didn't take my own advice. Now, wherever I go I have a constant shadow. He tells people I lie; says I'm not who I am: didn't do the things I said I did. That was in spite of inviting him to go with me in my own neighborhood and ask people that have known me for 20 + years.

The anti-gunners have NOTHING, so it is to their advantage to question every experience you ever had because, if you existed before the Internet (as a majority of the Constables did) there is no link to the story. In my case, even the local paper was bought out by the New York Times and the archives only exist on microfilm at the county library.