More likely to shoot yourself with a gun than a criminal

We see the claim that a country at peace should put the guns away.
That works for countries. Mothball the fleet, and dip all of the guns in cosmoline, and hope that we never have to bring them out again. But all of those war making implements are still available, in the event that conflict comes again.
It doesn't work for Citizens. Once the 2A is infringed, it's never "unfringed".
If there was a foolproof system in place where I was expected to cut back my gun use to only one gun of each type during documented periods of little or no crime, I could agree to that. If the system was established so that any increase in overall crime would allow me to put my "moth balled" guns back into service, I could agree to that system. It might work in a way that is similar to the WHO classification of epidemic risk. Various events, like this recent release of so many thousands of convicted illegal aliens would cause that scale to go from yellow to orange. But you'll never see that, because "sensible" gun control is not the objective of the gun grabbers. Once some or all of my guns were rendered inactive, there is no way that they would ever be reactivated, regardless of what happened, or how severely the public crime risk increased. "Common sense" is a meaningless catch phrase to the antis.

 

Crazy thing is that you have advocated for a complete ban on firearms.

Therefore, you are a liar.

At least own up to your bull(*)(*)(*)(*).

 

I'm going to tell a little story.
One night,about 4am,someone comes beating frantically upon my door.What did I do? i chambered a round.
I asked who it was; she said"call the police"
I'm like "ok" I don't want this to end up like that girl that got murdered.
so..i open the door,there's some young black girl there..
I called the popo
they told me"be inside and have your guns up" wtf?
She's like "what are you doing with a gun?" I'm like "It's 4 o'clock in the mornin" Why are you here?
She puked some red stuff on my doorway
She asked to come in and use the bathroom;I told her:"I can't do that"
The popo showed up
They ushered me inside.
and I'm not sure what became of that.
I don't think it was right,though
I failed to mention that some friends of mine had a girl beat on their door one night for help and she was killed that morning by her crazy boyfriend..Yeah..I kinda remember that.So..Well.I didn't do like that by design....
That girl was crazy..or scared for her life,idk..
It was a crazy night, I'll tell you that.

 

That's flat out wrong. Homicides by firearm have been decreasing steadily since 1992, there were 8,438 in the US in 2013 (https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/u..._20_murder_by_state_types_of_weapons_2013.xls) and 15% of those were in gun banner run California (Los Angeles area).

You are just making up numbers.

 

For someone who claims gun rights supporters are afraid of data, you have no data and just make up stuff.

Even Obama's own CDC report after Sandy Hook refutes all your claims.

 

Well duh.

ALL laws "only apply to honest people" that's why people who violate laws are called "dishonest" (or actually, criminals, but I assume you are conflating the terms as otherwise your post makes little sense)

This is another common weasel thought tactic of gun worshippers. Gun laws are not 100% effective, therefore they are an utter failure. Gun laws can be violated, therefore we shouldn't have any, and gun laws only apply to people who won't violate them, like any law.

 

There's just one problem there. Anti gun posters are just daring to say something you disagree with, they're not advocating the "rights" of insane human offal to be heavily armed so they can more easily kill innocent people wholesale for no reason.

 

This "study" utilizes very questionable methods to say the very least. For instance, like similar studies, this study fails to distinguish between legal gun ownership and illegal gun ownership. The authors also fail to distinguish whether or not the homeowner (or other inhabitants in the home) have a criminal history. It baffles me that such obvious characteristics were not controlled for. If this study was serious about its hypothesis, then it would have set exclusion criteria for households with convicted felons or households with illegally purchased firearms.

Additionally, the authors state that, "To produce more reliable estimates, Blacks, persons less than 35 years of age or older than age 100 years, and persons who died from external causes of homicide, suicide, and unintentional injury were oversampled in this survey. " Yet, the authors fail to explain why oversampling Black people, young people, and extremely old people would produce a "more reliable estimate." Logic would dictate oversampling these populations would yield much less reliable estimates.

Lastly, the authors state that, in Table 2, of the 490 homicide deaths, 339 involved a firearm (151 involved an "other method"). Yet, of the 490 total homicides, only 188 households had a gun in the house. Thus, 302 households did not have a gun. With that being said, the study fails to determine whether it was the homeowner's gun that led to homicide (for all the authors know, a gun may have been brought in from an outside source).

In conclusion, this study, which fails to set even the most basic exclusion criteria, is garbage, and the authors have no data that actually links legal gun ownership to homicide. The only conclusion that the authors can legitimately make is: Households inhabited by potential criminals containing illegally or legally purchased weapons may possibly have a higher homicide rate of those dwelling within the household compared to households not inhabited by potential criminals with firearms. Yeah, thanks Captain Obvious for that brilliant deduction.

On the contrary, I love stats and data (like the data from the CDC and FBI that shows states with strict gun control do not have a lower homicide rate than states with very lax gun control). What we don't like are heavily biased "studies" that fail on every level to adhere to the basic principles of the scientific method.

 

It sounds like the firearm in question was defective. No modern firearm can discharge a round in the chamber simply from being roughly set down on a shelf or counter, unless there is a defect in the design that the factory is obligated to fix upon discovery.

 

Pray tell what is the point of having laws that prosecutors outright refuse to enforce in nearly all circumstances? In nearly every criminal case where a firearm is involved, prosecutors do not seek charges for firearm-related offenses. They drop those charges in order to offer a plea bargain, and expedite a conviction on reduced charges.

So tell us, what is the point of having laws that will not be enforced?

 

Then why do people who actually know what they're talking about, like the police and the ATF, say that the laws we have are pointless and passing more of them is also pointless. No law is 100% effective that is true, but most gun laws are less than 1% effective (such as prosecuting those caught lying on background checks).

If you want to be effective in anything, do you focus on the 95% that isn't a problem or the 5% that is?

If you truly want to be effective you focus on the 5%. Are you familiar with Project Exile in Richmond Virginia? If this were implemented across the nation (by you know, actually enforcing EXISTING laws) gun-control concerns would be a nil issue.

The truth is the Obama administration is more concerned with being called racists than saving lives.

 

As a 5th generation gun owner in my family with no negligent discharges my odds are looking pretty good. A very small percentage of unintentional discharges are caused by mechanical failure or other true accidents. Most of them are caused by negligence. A savy gun owner knows how to properly handle firearms and proper handling techniques will further reduce chances of injury or death by mechanical failure.

 

Yeah there have been a few cases of manufacturers defects (like one very popular long rifle), but most of them are probably cheap pieces of crap blowing up in your hands.

I've never known anyone who practices muzzle control, is aware of what is beyond their immediate point of aim, and performs proper maintenance and cleaning of their firearms to have a problem.

The people that shoot themselves most often are the same people shooting others: gang banging idiots.

 

zactly why I called him out on his anti-gun rhetoric Good post

 

No. As I stated they've remained the same for about a decade or more.

No. Gun related homicide rates are not decreasing.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/08/us/study-gun-homicide/

Would you care to amend your claim to more accurately reflect facts?

 

Gee, I don't really know, but then I can't for the life of me figure out the point of this whole post, it has no relevance to the subject at hand I can see. Oh, wait, prosecutors might just see gun charges as an easy thing to drop to get plea bargains in crowded dockets, that might be it, but again, how that has any relevance here escapes me.

Isn't deflection to unrelated topics a well known weasel tactic too? You want some protein pellets?

 

Do you have a link as to who these "people who know" actually are and what they are actually saying?

I've always thought Project Exile was a very good idea, and should be more widely implemented. However, I think more comprehensive background checks would also be a good idea and they might net more convictions if prosecutors would prosecute them more vigorously. Which the might do if they weren't afraid of running afoul of the NRA, ever vigilant as they are to protect the rights of potential right wing psychopaths out to murder beautiful women for no reason

 

like everything else you have spewed concerning gun issues, that makes no sense. gun haters should stop pretending their hatred is based on a legitimate desire to control crime and instead is based on the fact that gun haters have a cultural hatred towards the pro freedom attitude of gun owners. Gun ownership often accentuates feelings of timidity among the many cowards who make up a substantial part of the anti gun movement. Additionally, the collectivist mindset of gun banners is offended by the individualistic mindset of gun rights advocates

- - - Updated - - -

that's stupid

laws that ban criminals from owning guns or laws that punish the MISUSE of guns or ENHANCE prison sentences of those who use guns to perpetrate crimes of violence only target CRIMINALS.

your gun laws are designed to harass honest people not punish criminals

 

Sure.

The ATF links I won't even bother with since in your above post you don't see any relevance in their hands being tied by lack of prosecution.

Also background checks might work better if the money Obama promised to fund NICS was allocated, instead of like 10% of the promised amount.

Here's a police survey on police opinion, although there are other examples of police avoiding or refusing to arrest people for stupid gun laws.

http://www.policeone.com/Gun-Legisl...ey-11-key-lessons-from-officers-perspectives/

Project Exile was a good idea, and was/is being done in other cities. Detroit has adopted the methodology as well. Another example of police supporting armed citizens: Police Chief James Craig actually REQUESTED Detroit civilians to arm themselves in their homes to stop crime.

You're wrong about the NRA though, as they backed Project Exile. They even helped get it funded.

The NRA is not the boogeyman, that would be the Obama administration.

 

You are the one attempting to argue that the notion of laws not being obeyed does not mean that new ones should not be created. Instead of entertaining such nonsense, it is being asked why new laws should be created when history tells us that they will not be enforced or used.

So you are being asked again. Why should any new firearm-related restrictions be enacted, when prosecutors will not utilize them against those they were intended to be used against? Why have something if it will not be used?

 

the purpose for more gun control is not to inhibit criminals but to harass honest people-which of course is the main goal of the Graboids in office and their minions in the public

 

automatic FAIL.

- - - Updated - - -

A Colt 1911? really?

 

LOL most killers who use guns are people who vote DEMOCRAT most of the time. RW psychopaths sound scary but tend to be but a drop in the bucket of the murderers in the USA-most of whom tend to be black urban "utes"

 

Especially a 1911, the safety blocks the sear with a big plug of hardened steel. If the safety breaks the sear will catch on the half (*)(*)(*)(*) notch and prevent an AD. We haven't even gotten to the grip safety yet.