Guns For Everyone!

Ridiculous. First, the article you linked counted absolute numbers without reference to total population. Second it clearly showed a DRASTIC drop for the 2 years immediately following SYG. Only then was there an increase which is just as likely linked to population increases as opposed to SYG. And I just saw on the news just today that the murder rate in FL is the lowest in 48 years.

 

Yes you do. You don't even know the law of your own state??

 

Then i retract my statement. Georgia Sucks.

 

If gun control laws work then Chicago and Washington DC should without a doubt be the safest cities in the US. Oh... they're not?!?

 

lol
It is not an issue of public safety (no need to lie, you cannot prove that bans on CCW actually protects anyone). It is an issue of property rights. If I want someone to carry a gun, who is the state to tell me that I cannot allow them to carry a gun? lol

No need to lie, I asked you about gun free zones. I note you completely ignored the obvious, schools, and public spaces. Mass shootings occur in those places, why do shootings occur in gun free zones?

What is the best way to prevent these shootings, other than give the victims of a self-defense (and removing the monopoly of force from the shooter)?

No need to lie. I specifically asked about firearms. I can cite plenty of instances where firearms registration was used for firearms confiscation.

You apparently cannot provide anything to the contrary.

That occurred in a gun free zone. With a shotgun. Sooooooooo... what is your point?

Look at the lax gun controls in Oklahoma, and then look at California, which one has more murders?

There is no reason to lie. If you actually research your position (instead of mindlessly repeating the bull(*)(*)(*)(*) of the gun control proponents) you would understand that:
#1. Poverty plays a role in crime.
#2. Population density plays a role in crime.

Gun control does not.

 

LOL! Yep that would make the flight extra exciting. Haha

 

I think you do as I think pretty much every state, if not most have a logical version. I doubt you have Florida's version so be glad about that. If you do have Florida's version just do like me and duck if you hear gunfire because the unarmed are legal to kill.

 

Sorry to hear that. Maybe next year.

 

Crime dropped everywhere didn't it? Not to worry we are slowly moving back up. All kills are not on the list of crime as you can fairly kill unarmed people here. Of course we do give women who shoot a bullet into a wall 20 years.

 

See why I didn't answer you initially? All you can do is switch around without making a single logical response to anything.

 

That's preposterous. All it means is that we don't have a duty to retreat, even if we can. You still have to be in reasonable fear that yourself (or someone else) is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm, or interrupting someone from committing a "forcible felony". In Florida, a forcible felony is "treason; murder; manslaughter; sexual battery; carjacking; home-invasion robbery; robbery; burglary; arson; kidnapping; aggravated assault; aggravated battery; aggravated stalking; aircraft piracy; unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb; and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual." (Fl Statute 776.0

Reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm is automatic in the case of a home invasion situation. (Which makes robbing houses in Florida a VERY dangerous occupation, because it doesn't matter if your armed or not, whether or not you think the premises is empty, or intend to harm. If you break into someone's home, they can blow you away, which is as it should be. Wrong house, mother(*)(*)(*)(*)er.)

So you are either misinformed or delusional.

 

No, we're NOT moving up. ALL categories of crime have been falling since the early 90's, and continue to do so. Your imagination doesn't change reality. Check fbi.gov, the stats are available for anyone interested.

 

Nothing Nathan Deal does ever makes any sense. He wants to kill a few more babies by doing away with Ronald Reagan's socialist bill that demands hospitals take in patients who can't pay for emergency visits like having babies then turning them away if they can't pay at the door. Instead of taking the federal Obamacare money, he would rather turn patients away to their own peril if they do not pay. Maybe the baby makes it and maybe the baby doesn't. And you don't even need guns for this scenario. Between his insane gun laws and this, the man just doesn't make sense.

 

Dear Overly-Dramatic Person,

You sound scared. No, terrified would be more accurate. Please calm yourself, tame your imagination and crawl out from under the bed.

Sincerely,
America

 

The Crime rate in Kennesaw Georgia plummeted.

 

What happens if the bar collects the gun from the gun owner who walks into the bar then the gun owner begins to drink and get drunk, then the drunk gun owner decides to go home, does the bar give the drunk gun owner his gun back? How does that work?

 

This bill will backfire on them in a big way. It's just a question of when.

 

That is cute.

Now, how about you address the questions?

 

It is illegal to consume alcohol and possess a firearm.

That is pretty straight forward.

 

If that's really true, why is it called "the wild west", not the polite west"?

- - - Updated - - -

So the bartender gets a side income from selling all of the guns that, by law, cannot be returned to their owners? Sweet!!!!

 

Sort of defeats the purpose of walking into a bar with a gun to begin with then doesn't it? If there are other drunks in a bar who see a non drunk with a gun, seeing that the drunk isn't with a level head, might appear to be threatening to the drunk, causing some potential problems. It would make sense to not have the non drunk with a gun go into the bar to begin with, seeing that there now would be drunks "around" firearms at the bar.

What's the difference in being illegal to consume alcohol and posses a firearm, versus being in a bar with a gun not drinking around a bunch of drunks?

 

And the world is made of chocolate. If you are going to drink, you do not carry a gun. You do not carry a gun if you are going to drink.

It is pretty simple and straight forward.

Do you have anything constructive to add?

 

How is anyone going to see the firearm if it is concealed....?

Again, a moot point.

Maybe one of the drunks will attack small children with cow licks. Who knows. We are not going to waste time entertaining the idea of restricting people's rights on the premise of far flung what if's.

 

No, you pretty much said it all. Which was absolutely nothing. Your scenario is far from reality and everyone knows it. You have either never partied in your life, or you choose willful ignorance to float around a picture that has no resemblance to today's reality. In other words, you're making excuses to carry guns in bars.

 

I am a CCW holder. You are not.

I have a better idea of what it is like to carry a concealed weapon than you do. I am yet to run into a drunk person who picks me out of a crowd because they cannot see a firearm. There are plenty of states that give property owners a right to dictate what occurs on their property. I am yet to see the "blood will run the streets" nonsense to be remotely accurate. I am yet to see your scenario occur in Colorado. Your scenario is non-nonsensical.

We are not going to waste time entertaining the idea of restricting people's rights on the premise of far flung what if's.