Gun Laws sure do work! 67 people shot in NYC over weekend.

Apparently there is failure to understand the criminals don't obey your stupid laws.

 

......

A well regulated gun toting militia is just what the Constitution ordered.

And you are saying that guns are needed for self defense...what kind of self defnse are you talking about? Is your life in jeopardy if you do not carry a gun? Are we really in danger of being invaded by the British, or the French?

What does a well regulated 'militia' mean to you? The Constitution certainly did not mean for citizens to run around the city wth a concealed weapon to keep himself safe.

A well regulated 'militia' is a group of designated people to guard against any invasion of foreigners per the Constitution.

It does NOT mean 89% of American citizens carrying concealed weapons in order to protect themselves from harm. Or unlicensed guns being used for illegal purposes. The unparalleled misinterpretation of the Constitution by the NRA has needlessly cost many American lives because of lax regulations concerning the sale of guns.

Whenever I read about a man shooting randomly with an AK47 and killing many people at one time, I see how far the misinterpretation of the Constitution has been foisted upon the American people and is rapidly making them victims of the notorious NRA.

 

Again they do both, if they have reason to believe someone will be in daner they will protect him, even if no crime has been commited.

 

"This year’s top 5, in order, are St. Louis, MO, Camden, NJ, Detroit, MI and Flint, MI, and Oakland, CA. It’s no surprise that some of these cities carry the highest number of gun violence deaths. In 2010, 133 died from gun violence in St. Louis."

Lets see...All cities that are part of the top 5 are also democratically controled. And have been for some time now. hmmmm.

Yes, there are republicans in the cities too, but they are not the people voting in democrat liberals, nor have a base that is heavily populated with crime and votes 95%+ democratic.

Right, no citizen gets a gun for self protection. And no democrat votes for stricter gun laws that only hinder law abiding citizens from having guns. And no criminal looks for the easy target.

How does keeping people from being able to protect themselves "protect the average citizen"? And yes, criminals can vote agian, usually after the sentence is up.

So why restrict law abiding citizens from owning a gun under their 2nd amendment right?

Good, then we agree that gun laws or no gun laws don't stop criminals from having guns, so why restrict the law abiding citizen from having a gun?

I wasn't talking about changing the car, just changing the clothing.

DUH. But guess who is issued the tank when they are deployed?

Obama has stated twice now he would prefer to be a dictator than a president. Pelosi has encouraged Obama to just ignore congress and enact laws under executive orders. Speaking of executive orders, Obama has stopped deporting illegals even though the congress voted against the DREAMS act. Sure, no democratic regime has done anything that could be considered dictorial in nature.

 

There was a guy that made an appachee (sp) from scrap parts. The government took it away cause it was to close to opperational. RPGs ARE in the realm of civilian ability to put together BTW.

You already said having laws keeping these weapons out of the hands of civilians won't stop the criminals from getting them. What do you call a civilian that can't protect themselves from their government? Subjects.

 

Police don't stop the first crime, they only can try to stop the same criminal from repeating the action. 99.99999% of the time, cops don't know someone is going to commit their first crime. Why do you refuse to accept that?

 

Its merely a hint to another thread which states basically the opposite.
Its calling out hypocrisy.
But thank you for suggesting that gun laws have no affect on gun crimes. Its what its all about....criminals who will make use of weapons, regardless of how strict or lax the laws may be.

 

How, exactly, is your government terrorising you to the extent that you're living in fear of it, and feel you need protection from it?
I really need to hear this.

 

DING!!! You have it. Preventing an action just by the mere sight of the gun.

And intimidation is a form of defence. Do you think we are keeping several thousand nukes for anything other than intimidation?

 

Yes, because people will be less brazin to commit crimes against someone that can defend themselves with a gun. It is not like the liberal idea that you have to spend more to get out of debt, it is a physical deterant to keep criminals from taking advantage of the weak.

Gun crime goes up when the civilian population can't defend its self from someone with a gun.

And you analogy is poor. Even if there was a town with just one car, if the driver is irresponsible with the vehicle, there will still be an accident.

And you think gun regulation keeps guns out of the hands criminals...BWHAHAHHAHAHAHHHAH!

You are the guy that thinks criminals follow the new laws that passed. Perfect liberal ignorance.

 

You don't go out an buy the gun AFTER the government has taken over every aspect of life and makes it impossible to get a gun, you get it before. Thus preventing the attempt of the government trying to take over.

 

Yeah, good luck with that. I can just see it; a 300 pound, lard-arsed armchair warrior 'rising up' against the US military's tanks, APCs, drones, gunships, satellite surveillance with his nicely polished gun collection.
Then you have the lunatic survivalists in their wilderness compounds with their bibles...waiting for 'The Day'...

 

Right, cause the colonies went head to head with the British during the revolution. And Veitnamese went straight head strong against the military forces. Do you see the Taliban fighting the tanks and APCs with their AKs?

 

Its kinda deceiving... It should be by city not by state.

Look at Washington DC, Theyre in the lead for murderers....

 

This is the top 5 by city.

Notice how all five are demcratic strong holds?

 

Morons shouldn't own guns?

 

LOL you watch to much TV. In the real world if a criminal buys a gun on the corner and approaches you with it, unless the police just happen to be around the corner - your time to do something is very limited.

Of course it does. So why deny a law abiding citizen the right to defend themselves in the small chance it does happen? Nothing is stopping the criminals from getting them...

It does matter. You will not get a concealed carry in NYC. My father and brother were both on the NYPD along with most of my cousins and many friends. They will all tell you the same thing, NYC does not give out concealed carry licenses. "technically" it is allowed but you need to show a "need" to have one.

And more...

http://www.ehow.com/how_2064614_get-permit-carry-concealed-weapon.html

More...

http://www.saysuncle.com/2008/05/30/concealed-carry-in-nyc/

I can go on if you would like if you insist on talking about an issue that you have no clue on.

 

Pssst: didn't say they had no effect. Again you're a typical gunnut who says stupid things like -- since we have traffic lights and accidents still occur, traffic lights don't prevent accidence.

The sad illogic of the gun nut.

Regulation guns work better than not regulating them. Just because gun regulations don't stop every gun nut from killing people doesn't mean regulation doesn't work. It does mean we need more regulation.

 

Like in DC and detroit where a total ban of guns was on the books...yet they are the highest gun crime areas of the US. Awsome job on the logic fail liberal ostrich.

 

Yep, works well in washington dc, chicago, etc..

 

Typical illogic of those who worship government. If there's more violence, why there must be a need for more regulation that disarms peaceful people. If there's yet more violence, then more disarmament by regulation is needed.

 

The more I look at these peoples posts that are against our rights for guns, the more I KNOW we need our guns. These people are fricking crazy.
Seriously, I wonder if they ever read their own crap they write?

I can tell these people one thing, if they ever pass a law banning my right to have my guns, I will be criminal. But, Texas won't allow that to happen.
Just look at the states that have restrictions on guns. The thieves, drug runners and criminals have the guns and the poor helpless people in the crossfire with their family getting killed has nothing to defend themselves!!!

 

Intimidation IS a defense weapon.

Thieves rarely break into houses with alarm systems because of intimidation
Criminals rarely commit crimes near police stations because of intimidation
Criminals stay away from security cameras because of intimidation
People don't try to fight professional martial artists because of intimidation

scare tactic is the main weapon

and if it doesn't work, a capable weapon is important and necessary.

 

I am ashamed of the gun laws in New York, the founding fathers would be rolling over in their graves. Unfortunately, I think the state and city is too far gone for anything to be done. You can count on 67 more incidents where law abiding citizens will not be able to defend themselves they way they rightfully should be able to.

 

The question was gun regulation, how is the gun regulation in those cities.

BS again you dont have shred of proof for such a thing, you dont even know how those people voted or if they even voted at all .

I never said nobody should have a gun or criminals dont look for easy targets. As for democrats they dont restrict guns so people wouldnt have guns, they restrict guns to get rid of some of the problems that come from lots of guns in a society. You can ignore those bad side effects and make up reasaon why people act but reality isnt going to change.

Depends

It protects them from a criminal market flooded with guns, it protects them from accidents, it protects them from escalating violence ,...

Same way pot is very heavily restricted to protect people.

because this means you barely have advantages but a lot of disadvantages for society.

You talked about being able to protect yourself at home. Again you seem to imagin a coup where there isnt 1 soldier involved. Thats not how those work

Btw have you already found a stable democratic gouvernement being turned over like this? havent gee that because there arent any in the entire history. yet you still are afraid of it.

Taken out of context BS.

Perfecty legal, federal and states do this all the time.

Then you dont know your own democratic system.