The Pernicious Myth of the Good Guy With a Gun

So nothing that's legal, Constitutional, effective or enforceable.

 

That is simply your opinion and nothing more

 

It does not matter how many times and different ways you prove wrong someone who isn't interested in honest conversation...

 

Agreed. Some people never learn

 

No, it's illegal to register guns at the federal level. The DOJ in their 2010 report "Summary of Select Firearm Violence Prevention Strategies" point out that UBCs aren't effective, and I didn't write that report. Licensing to exercise a right violates Murdock v Pennsylvania. Mandatory training would also violate the right to keep and bear arms.

 

All of those laws can be changed. And the supreme court gets to decide what is constitutional

 

"The Right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by horse drawn carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city can prohibit or permit at will, but a common Right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
-Thompson v. Smith

But the government can still require that drivers be licensed.

 

Is driving a protected right? Is driving the only form of transportation?

 

More apples and oranges.
The right to travel cannot be licensed.

 

Faulty logic, not normalized data. Crime data is normalized into crimes-per-100,000 people to avoid false conclusions. The VPC claims don't go to those efforts - obviously because its very difficult, and it probably provides a result that does not fit their political agenda.

And it is the VPC, discredited so many times they are not even a joke anymore.

 

Sounds like you don't like the facts

 

And even then, the rabidly anti-gun VPC cannot hide the fact guns are used in self-defense 2x more often than to take a life and 8x more often than to commit murder.

 

Even assuming such is accurate, ultimately what difference does it make? If someone wishes to end their existence, that is their decision to make, and they are going to do such. They are not simply going to give up just because a firearm is not available. The suicide rate for the nation of Japan is proof of such.

Then perhaps you should present the evidence to show such to be the case.

Then pray tell what is the link between legal firearms ownership, and criminal homicide?

Border security for the nation of Australia is reporting that they are intercepting approximately thirty five firearms being smuggled into the country every single week. Who knows how many they are failing to intercept?

Would you care for the names of members present on the forum who have voiced such? Or would you care for the citation by Dianne Feinstein about how if she could have gotten the votes in congress, she would have had all firearms outlawed in the united states?

Simply because something is claimed to be common sense, does not mean that it is. Licensing and registration requirements for legal firearms ownership is not common sense, because there has been no evidence from any country that such has been key in solving even a single crime.

And yet there have been countless pieces of legislation presented that does prohibit the ownership of legal firearms, based on vague and poorly defined criteria, authored by individuals who do not even understand the terms they use in their legislation.

Then pray tell why is there a topic demonstrating that such is indeed the case, by pointing out numerous media citations of people successfully defending themselves with a firearm?

Pray tell what percentage of an increase is being talked about? One percent? Five percent? Twenty percent? One hundred percent? Merely saying there is an increase tells nothing.

 

Many Dems really don't want to address the issue at the root, but want that perpetual campaign issue they promise to resolve, but merely enable perpetuation of the associated issues.

No, they, meaning the gun owner that comprise the NRA, educate Congress.

 

OWN Congress. I was quite clear

 

Back on the playground, eh? Try the seesaw.

 

You can change my words if you like...and I can change them back

 

Facts are fine. Misusing facts for political gain is not acceptable. And the facts are that the VPC is a propaganda mouthpiece for the Joyce Foundation (a gun banner organization).

 

Prove it.

 

The numbers used in the VPC "study" are not even close to being significant - data collected over a 14 year period, in a nation of 320 million people, and millions of concealed carry holders, and the VPC study comes up with 29 people who committed murder and 160 incidents in which 3 or more are killed as the database.

VPC has to add up 14 years of rare incidents and include suicides in order to come up with even those statistically insignificant numbers.

Its a total joke. Your entire thesis is pitiful.

 

In fact they are not rare incidents....that is the very point

 

the biggest number used is 160 - 160 incidents of 3 or more people killed, over 14 years. Trivial. There are roughly 8,000 firearm related homicides a year, and all VPC can come up with is 160 incidents over 14 years.

Statistically insignificant, a deliberate misuse of data.

 

And what do you think the average is for other first world countries?

 

The Vile Propaganda Conspiracy is one of the most dishonest marxist disinformation centers in the known universe.

 

why should we care? your attempt to support the BM agenda by pointing to unfree countries is worthless