43,644 people shot in America thus far this year

The problem is that the war is with lawful gun owners and not with those causing harm. This only gives killers an unfair advantage. Police officers are the first to the crime scene and see the results of unarmed victims unable to defend themselves. That is why cops are overwhelmingly in support of armed citizens.

 

You mean after a year of like constant rioting, you're telling me there was a lot of shooting going on?

 

I don't believe for one second that any rational police officer is in favor of a fully armed population.

 

Good thing opinion doesn't decide rights then huh?

 

No one fell into poverty because of Reagan in fact more people if all goes entered the middle class because of Reagan than under any president since at least Teddy. The only thing brought that success story to an end was the Democrats attempt to soak the rich and Daddy Bush going back on his no new taxes pledge.

 

https://www.police1.com/gun-legisla...st-solution-to-gun-violence-7uwWgZ75iwWz9vI9/

Police1 has scored a major scoop in police journalism by conducting a survey of more than 15,000 law enforcers regarding their thoughts on gun control in America.

These men and women — most of whom actually work the street — have a front row seat to see gun violence in America. They put their lives at risk when they do their jobs, actually coming face-to-face with violent encounters involving firearms.

And when it comes to finding ways to reduce gun violence and large scale shootings, most cops say a federal ban on so-called “assault weapons” isn’t the answer.

More than 91 percent of respondents say it would either have no effect or a negative effect in reducing violent crime. This is an overwhelming response by those whose job it is to actually deal with this issue on the front lines.

Instead, it is interesting to note that many respondents consider armed citizens as a potential asset in reducing the carnage from a mass murder situation; proactive choices dominate over gun and magazine restrictions and bans.

More than 91 percent of respondents support the concealed carry of firearms by civilians who have not been convicted of a felony and/or not been deemed psychologically/medically incapable.

A full 86 percent feel that casualties would have been reduced or avoided in recent tragedies like Newtown and Aurora if a legally-armed citizen was present (casualties reduced: 80 percent; avoided altogether: 60 percent).

For those who chose the option of casualties being avoided altogether, I took this to mean the deterrent effect of a show of force prior to an event would stop a potential predator from carrying out his murderous intent in the first place.

What checks the sociopath from completing his act is fear. Fear of the unknown or known gun carrier who is going to punch his ticket to hell right then and right there. This has an immediate effect on reducing violent criminal activity.

Cops on the street know the value of officer presence and being ready to go. Criminals see it too, and stay in check. I know from my own street experience how being in shape, being well prepared along with a sharp uniform appearance kept things from escalating time and time again.

More than 81 percent of respondents were in favor of arming teachers and school administrators if they were properly trained and vetted or at least proficient.

Yet, with a few notable exceptions, most teachers and school officials are opposed to this measure. Overcoming this kind of resistance will be a major roadblock to making our schools safer.

In addition, the survey asked, “On a scale of one to five — one being low and five being high — how important do you think legally-armed citizens are to reducing crime rates overall?”

Three quarters of you (75 percent) answered either four or five, with more than 50 percent answering five.

What would help most in preventing large scale shootings in public? The most popular answer among respondents – at 29 percent – was “more permissive concealed carry policies for civilians,” while 20 percent choose “more-aggressive institutionalization for mentally ill persons.”

More armed guards/paid security personnel (16 percent) and improved background screening to determine mental wellness of gun purchasers (14 percent) were the other two preventative measures most selected in the poll.

Clearly we have a majority of our gun carrying, member officers who feel that armed citizens are an asset in reducing violent crime and not a liability. This will be refreshing news for armed citizens who wonder about police attitudes in general on concealed carry.

From all ranks, from Sheriffs and Chiefs on down, the vast majority (95 percent) say a federal ban on the manufacture and sale of ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds would not reduce violent crime.

This is in sharp contrast to my own home state of Colorado, where the Colorado Association of Chiefs of Police stood in support of the magazine ban and other restrictions while many Sheriffs bluntly said in the press that they would not enforce any bans on magazines or so called assault weapons.

I will allow myself one personal observation. If you want to disarm yourself, that is your choice. The following quote is a favorite of mine and something to keep in mind when you make that choice.

“Sheep don’t tell wolves what’s for dinner.”

 

Gun violence grips Melbourne as deadly shootings soar


https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.th...violence-grips-melbourne-20200212-p5402v.html

 

It's true that firearms are a potent weapon. But, you of course fail to recognize that guns don't kill anyone- PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE. Guns are inanimate objects; they have no feeling, no anger, no hate, not intent to do violence. Until they are picked up by a deranged person with murderous intent, they have nothing to do with murders.

Now there are some that think that if there were no guns (except in the hands of the people you like) there would be no murders. However murder was taking place on a massive scale long before guns were invented- including most of the mass murders in history. In the beginning, there were hands and feet, and people were beat to death. Then as the hominoids learned to use makeshift tools, clubs and rock became the weapons of choice. When they learned to shape rocks, stone hammers and knives. When they learned to forge metal, bronze swords. Knives, bows and arrows, spears, the jawbone of an ass.... all were murder weapons before guns were invented. ALL methods except poisons needed muscle and power to wield- so weaker people were still the common victims. No matter what the weapon used.... it was always the deranged mind, the anger, the lack of character that produced and continues to produce murders.

There are no guilty guns- only guilty people, and pretending the guns are at fault is a delusion. AR-15's? More people are killed each year by fists and feet than by rifles of all kinds.
Just think- if we eliminated fists and feet, we could have prevented all those murders.

 

Reagan was the first President to take our debt growth exponential; he more than doubled our National debt. With that kind of cash influx of course the economy grew. It took time for deregulation and disastrous debt growth to catch up and bite us on the ass. It was Reagan's debt growth that forced "Daddy Bush" to raise taxes. It was Reagan's polices that began the exodus of industry and jobs. You will say that Clinton's NAFTA was a huge mistake, but our economic decline began with Ronald Reagan.

Democrats are not trying to "soak" the rich. During War 2 the wealth were taxed at rates as high as 93%, Reagan cut taxes on the wealthy from the mid 70's, nearly in half to 38%. Government programs and projects were starved to death, yet NOTHING trickled down, and never has. Donald Judas Trump's tax cut is nothing more than voodoo 2 and will hurt the poor the most while enriching the wealthy even more.

 

Putting guns in the hands of the unwashed masses is a recipe for disaster which we have day in and day out in the good old USA

 

Well, now that's not elitist at all. Such support for the impoverished. Must be one of those supremacists I keep hearing about.

 

LOL. Law enforcement officers are the primary concealed weapons course instructors here. Sheriff department dispatch has asked me to use my firearm to perform a responsibility of the department in their absence when they couldn’t respond in a timely manner. Officers here are not only in favor of an armed populace, they actively promote it—and depend on it.

 

Spending is done by congress.
The rest of your claims are fatuous nonsense. DC has a spend problem. Until that's brought under control tax rates won't matter a damn. Oh and the only time the rich don't get richer is when everyone is starving.

 

IF you don't agree, we are never going to agree.

 

Be nice to see a reference.

 

The facts aren't in dispute high taxes and too much bureaucracy destroy countries. Freedom doesn't. The problem isn't legal gun ownership, almost every homicide in the country is committed by someone who would fail even a rudimentary background either because he is under age or because he has a previous. All too many homicides this year are being committed this year by people who should have already been jail with bail because they were already arrested for a previous felony murder but the numerous Soros back DAs refuse to take them off the streets until trial.

 

People who are police officers are, oddly enough, people. They have views as diverse as those found on this board.

They do, however, all swear an oath to the constitution. Not all of them abide by it. It is, after all, a document that limits their ability to do their job. Try remaining silent the next time you're stopped. Many will try to figure out how to illegally hem you up for a made up charge like obstruction for not being cooperative.

 

If you've lived a long life and never been in a situation in which you needed a firearm, you have, indeed, lived an uneventful life.

Because the only home I could afford to buy was in a somewhat rough neighborhood, I've had at least 3 instances in which having a pistol saved me from individuals who were not intending to make me any healthier, wealthier or happier.

Now, I live in the country and rarely carry a pistol because it's both a hassle and a liability but I still carry especially at night because deer - auto collisions are frequent and often result in a severely injured animals that need to be put out of their misery.

Firearms, then, are critical multipurpose tools like fire extinguishers, spare tires, roadside flares and flashlights.

Re:

Such a puerile and insulting attempt at an analogy could only come from a pampered hoplophobe who has never faced an emergency and always relied on armed and better equipped individuals to protect them and their families when life goes sideways.

You are welcome to continue to rely on the courage and good will of armed individuals to protect you and your family but don't complain when no one answers at 911 or the dispatcher "doesn't feel like talking" (1)




(1) "911 dispatcher didn’t feel like talking so she’d just hang up"
https://www.heraldnet.com/nation-world/911-dispatcher-didnt-feel-like-talking-so-shed-just-hang-up/

 

I am in my 80's and the only times I have used or thought I needed a weapon was when I was a member of the U.S Army in the 1960's. I have lived and worked in Boston, Newark N.J and the Philly area all 3 of which have their crime ridden areas and despite traveling through them I NEVER felt the need nor had the desire to carry a firearm.

 

Do you believe that what's best for you is best for everyone?

Should we all just be clones of you and what you do?

 

I've had my disagreements with the NRA over the years, but hey, at least they're not the SSAA.

 

Might not be a bad idea???

 

You've had to use your gun to defend yourself 3 times since you've lived where you are? You need to move.

I've never had any such confrontation in my entire life and I've lived all over, Nor have I ever observed anyone else doing so in my vicinity.

If your response to my post which was an ad hominem breaking of the rules on a moderated board is typical of your actions in the broader existence I begin to see why you use your gun so much. If you will excuse my giving you some well-meaning advice ; stop bullying people. It can only end badly

 

Hear, hear

This is the overwhelmingly common response. Even policemen who have gone through full careers and not drawn their guns at hazard even once are so commonplace as to be proverbial. I think gun advocates who say guns are a necessity for everyone live in a fantasy and may very well be dangerous to us all.

 

IMO, you are not even fooling yourself.
By now everyone knows the only serious "insurrectionists" were either agents of the FBI or fellow travelers.