DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: sirs on July 26, 2012, 02:34:49 AM
-
The facts gun-grabbers won't consider
About the tragedy in Aurora, Colo., rapper/actor Ice-T made more sense – and has a better understanding of the Second Amendment – than gun-control proponents.
Asked by a London news anchor about America’s gun culture, Ice-T said: “Well, I’d give up my gun when everybody does. Doesn’t that make sense? … If there were guns here, would you want to be the only person without one?”
Anchor Krishnan Guru-Murthy, Channel 4 News: “So do you carry guns routinely at home?”
Ice-T: “Yeah, it’s legal in the United States. It’s part of our Constitution. You know, the right to bear arms is because that’s the last form of defense against tyranny. Not to hunt. It’s to protect yourself from the police.”
Anchor: “And do you see any link between that and these sorts of (Aurora-type) incidents?”
Ice-T: “No. Nah. Not really. You know what I’m saying, if somebody wants to kill people, you know, they don’t need a gun to do it.”
Anchor: “It makes it easier, though, doesn’t it?”
Ice-T: “Not really. You can strap explosives on your body. They do that all the time.”
Anchor: “So when there’s the inevitable backlash of the anti-gun lobby, as a result of this instance, as there always is –”
Ice-T: “Well, that’s not going to change anything. … The United States is based on guns.”
Security experts say a determined killer, willing to give up his own life, cannot be stopped. The odds, however, can be shifted in favor of the victims and would-be victims. How?
In Pearl, Miss., a gunman who killed two students and wounded seven at a high school was stopped by an assistant principal who rushed to his car and got his gun. The assistant principal, running back with his .45, spotted the rifle-carrying shooter in the parking lot. Ordering the teen to stop, the vice principal held his gun to the shooter’s neck until police arrived.
In Salt Lake City, a man purchased a knife in a grocery store, walked outside and stabbed and critically injured two men. He was threatening others, when a store patron with a concealed-weapons permit drew his gun, forced the attacker to the ground and held him until police arrived.
In Grundy, Va., a disgruntled student on the verge of his second suspension at Appalachian School of Law shot and killed the dean, a professor and a fellow student. Two students, both off-duty peace officers, ran to their cars, retrieved their guns and used them to halt the attack.
No one knows whether Aurora would have turned out differently had there been an armed patron or two inside the theater. But at the 2007 Virginia Tech shooting, where 32 people died, there was a no-guns policy – just as, apparently, at the movie theater in Aurora.
For a guaranteed blank stare, ask gun-control proponents how often Americans use guns to defend themselves. They can’t tell you, because they don’t ask.
Suppose a guy goes to a baseball game. “Honey,” his wife asks afterward, “who won the game?” The husband says, “The Dodgers scored four runs.” What’s missing? Obviously, the wife still knows nothing about the outcome because she knows only one-half of the equation. Well, how can one responsibly discuss “how many people die because of guns” without discussing the other half of the equation – how many people would not be alive without their defensive use of a gun?
So, how often do Americans use firearms for self-defense?
Criminologist Gary Kleck estimates that 2.5 million Americans use guns to defend themselves each year. Out of that number, 400,000 believe that but for their firearms, they would have been dead.
Professor Emeritus James Q. Wilson, the UCLA public policy expert, says: “We know from Census Bureau surveys that something beyond 100,000 uses of guns for self-defense occur every year. We know from smaller surveys of a commercial nature that the number may be as high as 2 1/2 or 3 million. We don’t know what the right number is, but whatever the right number is, it’s not a trivial number.”
Former Manhattan Assistant District Attorney David P. Koppel studied gun control for the Cato Institute. Citing a 1979-1985 study by the National Crime Victimization Survey, Koppel found: “When a robbery victim does not defend himself, the robber succeeds 88 percent of the time, and the victim is injured 25 percent of the time. When a victim resists with a gun, the robbery success rate falls to 30 percent, and the victim injury rate falls to 17 percent. No other response to a robbery – from drawing a knife to shouting for help to fleeing – produces such low rates of victim injury and robbery success.”
When asked if additional gun laws would be beneficial or have no effect, most Americans, like Ice-T, get it. They oppose shifting power to the criminal. And they don’t need the National Rifle Association to tell them: The only people willing to abide by additional gun laws are the law-abiding (http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/the-facts-gun-grabbers-wont-consider/)
-
SIRS....it's funny watching the interviewer's reaction
you can tell it's like "whooops this ain't going the way we want it to"
Rapper Ice-T Defends The Right To Bear Arms! 07/20/12 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sx4mylCC9Y#ws)
-
8)
-
I don't know this guy well, but his attitude, in this interview, sounds a lot like mine.
I don't consider this to be a rare attitude at all, and I note that he is comfortable to speak on behalf of his country.
This interviewer could probly have found some American of the opposite opinion to also interview, but in the "both sides " style of interview , whose job is it to state that one side represents a much smaller minority?
-
It is amazing that there is anywhere to walk in countries that outlaw guns, what with all the corpses of the murdered laying about.
Gun nuts and just NUTS.
-
yeah see history for the millions slaughtered by those who had a monopoly on the guns.
another issue where you are attempting to over-ride the majority of Americans that support gun ownership.
you dont give a rats ass what the American people want....control freals never do...they think know better
but ya'll come try to take the guns....BRING IT ON!.....and bring those wussies from the UN too.
-
It is amazing that there is anywhere to walk in countries that outlaw guns, what with all the corpses of the murdered laying about.
Gun nuts and just NUTS.
You mean like Natzi era Germany?
They got pretty good at disposing of corpses , even lots of them.
How is it that you are trying to say something absurd , but only manage to state the plain truth?
-
It is amazing that there is anywhere to walk in countries that outlaw guns, what with all the corpses of the murdered laying about.
You mean like Natzi era Germany?
OUCH
-
It is amazing that there is anywhere to walk in countries that outlaw guns, what with all the corpses of the murdered laying about.
Yea....at the expense of freedom....and severely degraded ability to defend oneself from a nut who illegally obtained a gun
Gun nuts and just NUTS.
Well, you got half of that right, as it relates to the left's idiocy, on this issue. I'd also reference a severe level of ignorance, as well. Especially in how easily one ignores the original point of this thread, in the millions of lives saved by a gun. The person still living sure doesn't see themself or the person saved, as a nut
-
Just imagine the lives that would have been saved had every attendee at that Batman movie had been packing his own automatic AK-47.
Gun nuts are NUTS.
-
Just imagine the lives that would have been saved had every attendee at that Batman movie had been packing his own automatic AK-47.
Exactly!
How woould that crummy little coward have planned an attack if thought there would have been return fire?
These incidents do not occur at gun shows, police academy firing ranges, not even Jujitsu Dojos.
Why would a madman plan to attack a well armed bunch , or even a croud where an unpredictable number had hidden pistols?
There are plenty of venues where large numbers gather and none of them will be armed, that is an attractive prey for a well armed coward.
-
Just imagine the lives that would have been saved had every attendee at that Batman movie had been packing his own automatic AK-47.
Kinda defeats the purpose of a concealed weapon now, doesn't it. You'll of course point out anywhere in the original article, where an AK-47 was being used to defend themself
Gun nuts are NUTS.
Yea, we already went over the half part you got right
-
Either we control the guns and ammo used by lunatic mass murderers adequately, or we will continue to have mass murders. We have more of these by far than any other country not currently having a revolution. You gun nuts are to blame. You ignorte the facts and you are responsible, period.
-
That's the point, we can't control what lunatic mass murderers will do. CRIMINALS, BY DEFINITION, will kill using whatever they can get their hands on. What we DON'T do is to strip away the law abiding from their CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to bear arms. And you can dispense with the strawman of NRA is pushing that everyone carry a bazooka. ENFORCE the thousands of gun control laws we already have
So best move away from the hypocritical claim of ignoring facts, as they've been presented adnauseum, repeating how FAR MORE LIVES ARE SAVED using guns, than taken by them. You ANTI-CONSTITUTIONAL NUTS, get full blame for that
-
Yeah, sure.
How many mass murders have chosen a penknife, a dirk or a dagger as their weapon of choice?
This clown should never have been able to buy his gun or all that ammo. No one is safer because there are people strolling about with an automatic rifle and 6,000 rounds of ammo.
This is a gun nut problem. Observe how there are countries with lots of freedoms in which crap like this never or seldom occurs.
-
Yeah, sure.
How many mass murders have chosen a penknife, a dirk or a dagger as their weapon of choice?
Mohammed Atta
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/13/Mohamed_Atta.jpg)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_Atta (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohamed_Atta)
-
Touche', Plane =)
-
Pushing aside for the moment the Anti-constitutional nut rants, repeating once again the FACT that FAR MORE LIVES ARE SAVED using guns, than taken by them, in this country. With the added FACT that areas with MORE permissive gun laws have less violent crime than those with strict gun laws. How are those stricter gun laws in Chicago, DC, and NY doing in preventing violent crime & murders. Given Xo's premise, they should have virtually none
-
This is nothing but BULLSHIT and not to be believed.
Gun nuts are the CAUSE of a lot of violence. In countries with proper gun controls, these mass shooti8ngs just do not happen.
Gun nuts are both liars and sanctimonious assholes.
-
This is nothing but BULLSHIT and not to be believed.
Your ignorance is ineed blissful to behold.
sirs...The sun sets in the west.
Xo...NOT IT DOESN'T...THAT'S RIGHTWING ZIONIST PROPOGANDA, YOU IDIOT ASSHOLE, AND NOT TO BE BELIEVED
NUTS who want to hurt/kill are the cause of a lot of violence. Just because other countries have less freedom than we do, doesn't mean we follow suit
Your problem, xo, is that you weren't born in Nazi Germany or Communist Russia, where your government could take such good care of you, alleviate all your fears of "gun nuts" out to get you. Keep those blinders on good and tight, and don't let those pesky facts keep you tossing & turning at night
-
If there is any justice in the universe, some nut will take you and another several dozen fools out with his trusty semiautomatic.
Screw you, sirs, and the horse you rode in on.
-
Yep, kinda what one would expect to see from a close minded rabid leftist when confronted with the truth.
You know something xo, as much as we disagree, I'd NEVER, EVER wish upon you some grisley murderous end to your life. Nor would I wish upon you some horrible disease, like ALS. But I guess that's what really seperates our ideolgies. I debate on issues where there's a right and a wrong, where I can count on you to be wrong, 99.9% of the time.
But to the ignorant cool-aide drinking left, its now about right or wrong, its about good and evil, where you've casted yourself as the side of "good", and when confronting perceived "evil".....well that justifies anything & everything, giving you the supposed ok to call on a fellow American, to be gunned down
How proud your students must be
-
I am retired, you bleeding stupid numbskull.
-
So, you never had students? wow. Who did you teach to? Experimental rats?
-
If liberals were scientific, they would observe the diffrence that came from changes.
In Scotland and Norway there have been horrific mass shootings , Mexico has become the mass shooting capitol of the world recently and tight gun controll has had no positive effect at all.
When the expected result is not the result of a change , this is not a "fail" as an experiment . An experiment that you learn from is a success.
-
In Scotland and Norway there have been horrific mass shootings , Mexico has become the mass shooting capitol of the world recently and tight gun controll has had no positive effect at all.
HUNDREDS more have died in mass shootings in the US than in Norway. The Norway incident was unique and unprecedented.
Mexico had very little of this until the druglords took over. Mexican gun controls do not work because all the guns the druglords use come from the US, where morons think everyone is safer because assault weapons are a God-given right.
Mexico does not have a history of crazed lunatics mowing down innocent bystanders. In Mexico, the gun violence is nearly all drug related and using weapons made available by NRA inspired laws here in the US.
-
A) It's called the 2nd amendment
B) It's not about automatic assault weapons, since they are already illegal
Whether it is college campuses, Amish communities, or other gun-free zones, murderous nuts will find a way to quench their cravings. Therefore, gun control laws do not work -- because they are based on the erroneous assumption that criminals will obey the law. They don’t and won’t; hence leaving law-abiding citizens defenseless in the face of danger
The 2008 Supreme Court Case, District of Columbia v. Heller, ruled the Second Amendment indeed secures an individual’s right to possess firearms, regardless of military service, and shall not be infringed....PERIOD
-
In Scotland and Norway there have been horrific mass shootings , Mexico has become the mass shooting capitol of the world recently and tight gun controll has had no positive effect at all.
HUNDREDS more have died in mass shootings in the US than in Norway. The Norway incident was unique and unprecedented.
Mexico had very little of this until the druglords took over. Mexican gun controls do not work because all the guns the druglords use come from the US, where morons think everyone is safer because assault weapons are a God-given right.
Mexico does not have a history of crazed lunatics mowing down innocent bystanders. In Mexico, the gun violence is nearly all drug related and using weapons made available by NRA inspired laws here in the US.
It is a mystery to me XO, how anyone thinks as you do, you are working hard to avoid the intuitive answer and also working to avoid the answer provided by evidence.
Do you really feel safer when you are totally unarmed?
Some people require armament to bolster their confidence and live normally, some just enjoy guns as works of craftsmanship, tools of sport and skillbuilders.
By far the most numorous guns owner is just someone who has evaluated the risk and cost of gun ownership and found it lighter in the scales than the risk and the potential cost of being unarmed those few times that it makes a diffrence.
-
Other than on occasion, when I have a penknife in my pocket, I have been unarmed for over 69 years. I dislike crowds and avoid them. If you own a gun, it will only protect you when it is armed and in your hand or can be in your hand in a mater of seconds. The rest of the time, it is no more protective of you than my penknife is of me.
Have you been vaccinated against yellow fever? I have. It is a greater danger to me than some moron with a gun.
Mexico's violence is directly attributable to the US demand for drugs and lax gun laws in the US.
Gun owners are just stupid to think they are protecting themselves. The most likely victim of their precious guns is themselves.
-
Other than on occasion, when I have a penknife in my pocket, I have been unarmed for over 69 years. I dislike crowds and avoid them. If you own a gun, it will only protect you when it is armed and in your hand or can be in your hand in a mater of seconds. The rest of the time, it is no more protective of you than my penknife is of me.
Have you been vaccinated against yellow fever? I have. It is a greater danger to me than some moron with a gun.
Mexico's violence is directly attributable to the US demand for drugs and lax gun laws in the US.
Gun owners are just stupid to think they are protecting themselves. The most likely victim of their precious guns is themselves.
Yes ,I have been vaccinated against Yellow fever.
I have also sat behind the mirror in a jewelry shop holding a shotgun.
Clever of you to point out the simularity of preparedness, no truely dangerous person ever came in the shop(as far as I know ) and I have never been exposed to any of the diseases I have been vacinated against (as far as I know).
-
Other than on occasion, when I have a penknife in my pocket, I have been unarmed for over 69 years.
Good for you...and your choice You and the constitution won't mind if we exercise the right and option of keeping or not, that of any legal firearm(s). We freedom nuts thank you in advance
-
You are not any sort of "freedom nut". You are the reason why thousands get shot each year in this country.
-
If that were the case, then I'm also the reason 10's of thousands more are able to defend themselves from injury or death at the hands of another, in this country, thank you very much. But you go right ahead and stick with your penknife.
-
You are not any sort of "freedom nut". You are the reason why thousands get shot each year in this country.
Antibiotics and vaccines kill people too.
Just a smaller number than they serve well.
Cars kill lots of people , car accidents and vehicular homocide rate as one of our most common causes of death and injury.Also cars facilitate lots of crimes.
Are car loving people responsible for the harm done with cars?
Boats , pets , bathtubs, etc. a complete list of things that you might should worry about would be huge.
For how many of these things should we be made safe by drastic government action ?
Can so few of us develop mature judgement?
-
When someone manages to kill 12 people and wound dozens more with a bathtub, let me know.
Your argument is spurious.
-
actually lately it does happen in armed events. ex gang funerals and parties. I believe in muslim weddings oversea it happens also
-
When someone manages to kill 12 people and wound dozens more with a bathtub, let me know.
Your argument is spurious.
Hundreds of people have been killed in bathtubs, by accident and on purpose.
I know that this is a spurious argument , it is exactly the same spurious as the arguement against guns.
But from too close to it the spuriosity is not clear.
Why are you not against bathtubs?
-
Actually lots of stuff is very deadly, but guns are weapons. The trick is cutting down on the dangers.
I meantion on another post i know someone who shouldn't be owning a gun and may possibly have a collection more massive than the kid in colorado. I'll keep you posted if anything happens beyound the suspension.
-
Someoone who is willing to spend several thousand dollars to have a large gun , or several thousand more to have multiple guns , and also is a dangerous personality.
Will for some reason not be willing to spend several thousand dollars to have just one gun once they are forbidden?
I don't get that , if that Person respects the law that much , he just needs to be reminded that murder is one of the most forbidden crimes in our laws, almost as forbidden as tax avoidance!
The only thing that gun controll might accomplish is disarming the very law abiding and the very poor, the effect on a dangerous person will be negligable for unavoidable reasons.
-
Will for some reason not be willing to spend several thousand dollars to have just one gun once they are forbidden?
===============================================================
Bazookas are banned, how many individuals have committed crimes with an illegal bazooka?
I am interested in how you might go about killing 12 people in several minutes and wounding dozens more with a bathtub in a movie theatre.
Not because I have any plans to do so.
At most, I only think it would be humorous to see the lifeless corpse of Grover Norquist floating in a bathtub, not that I would like to drown him myself.
-
The only thing that gun controll might accomplish is disarming the very law abiding and the very poor, the effect on a dangerous person will be negligable for unavoidable reasons.
BINGO!!
-
Will for some reason not be willing to spend several thousand dollars to have just one gun once they are forbidden?
===============================================================
Bazookas are banned, how many individuals have committed crimes with an illegal bazooka?
I am interested in how you might go about killing 12 people in several minutes and wounding dozens more with a bathtub in a movie theatre.
Not because I have any plans to do so.
At most, I only think it would be humorous to see the lifeless corpse of Grover Norquist floating in a bathtub, not that I would like to drown him myself.
I could only make a very weak argument that Bathtubs should be banned, it would be just as spurious as your argument against guns.
Cars tho, cars are easily used to facilitate crime, have been used many times for murder , many times for smuggling and many times for escape from any sort of crime. Even persons with no malicious intent at all have caused mayhem by losing controll of their cars. Cars are not even protected in the constitution. There will inevitably come the day that cars, motorcycles and whatever elese is so usefull to crime and so prone to accident will be restricted strictly to those who are able to PROVE they need it.
-
There will inevitably come the day that cars, motorcycles and whatever elese is so usefull to crime and so prone to accident will be restricted strictly to those who are able to PROVE they need it.
======================
No, there will not come such a day.
This is just another stupid iteration of the slippery slope fallacy.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
-
There will inevitably come the day that cars, motorcycles and whatever elese is so usefull to crime and so prone to accident will be restricted strictly to those who are able to PROVE they need it.
======================
No, there will not come such a day.
This is just another stupid iteration of the slippery slope fallacy.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
I'm not.
But you are totally right , this day should not ever come and for the same reasons no such day should come for guns.
-
There are too many morons with guns to take them away, lamentably.
Perhaps they will exterminate one another.
-
There are too many morons with guns to take them away, lamentably.
Perhaps they will exterminate one another.
Do you realise that the guns per capata in the US has increased a lot in the same years that the rates of violent crime have decreased?
Is this decoupled, or cause and effect?
I think of it as an ongoing experiment.
-
Damn Plane, why do you keep perpetuating all these FACTS?? 8) As ususal, dead on, if you don't mind the pun.
Here's some more of those damn facts, that echo what the thread started. According to research by Florida State University criminologist Gary Kleck, guns are used between 800,000 and 2.5 million times every year in self-defense.
A study by John Lott and David Mustard found that handguns appear to help women more than men. While murder rates drop when either sex carries more guns, the effect is especially pronounced when women carry. Each additional woman carrying a concealed handgun reduces the murder rate for women three to four times more than an additional armed man reduces the murder rate for men.
Overall, some of the most heavily-armed states have very low violent crime rates and vice versa. Also, it appears that when the good guys are armed there is less gun violence. Research by John Lott shows that allowing citizens the right to carry concealed handguns reduces violent crime. In those states that passed right-to-carry concealed handgun laws, the average murder rate dropped from 6.3 per 100,000 to 5.2 per 100,000 nine to 10 years later — about a 1.7% drop in the murder rate per year for 10 years.
In states that enacted right-to-carry laws between 1977 and 1999, the overall occurrence of multiple-victim shootings dropped by a remarkable 67% with deaths and injuries from such shootings plummeting by 75% and 81%, respectively. And since 1997, two of eight school shootings were both stopped by citizens with guns (before police even arrived at the scene).
So, unfortunately, Xo's speculation of what "perhaps" could happen, is pretty much the polar opposite of what has been happening
-
Do you realise that the guns per capata in the US has increased a lot in the same years that the rates of violent crime have decreased?
=========================================
The age of the average American has increased. In the 1960's and 70's more and more women started using birth cntrol, and fewer unwanted children were born.
Older men and fewer men who grew up unwanted are the cause of the decreased violence.
I seriously doubt that people who normally assault liquor stores and 7-11's think "I won't try to rob this store because some customer MIGHT be armed". On the other hand, better po9lice communication and more security guards probably have made a difference.
Sirs owning 42 guns has had NO impact on robberies or other violent crime.
If and when some Beagle Boy breaks into Sirs Manor and steals those guns, THAT will surely make a difference.
EN SOMEONE BREAKS INTO S
-
Yea....they'll be 1 less criminal out on the street. Thanks for helping to reinforce the point being made
-
Only if Sirs never leaves his house and has an armed gun in his holster 24/7.
I deem this unlikely.
-
LOL...OR....the gun (only 2 vs 50) are locked away so that only sirs could pull it, when he does happen to be home. But they will be loaded. Keep digging Xo. Pretty soon we'll have exterminated most criminals. What's that you say?? We'll never eliminate all criminals?? You mean there will always be folks out there to try and hurt or kill us?? Say it ain't so. How dare we try to defend ourselves, under such an "obvious" reality
-
.....Not to mention that a CCW holder, pretty much ALWAYS has an "armed gun in his holster", whatever that's supposed to mean. (perhaps Xo likely meant "loaded")
-
I presume that XO is a mature fellow who has not caused crime in recent decades.
Exactly the sort who ought to be carrying a gun.
Perhaps a requirement, we used to draft the young and force them to carry a gun to war.
Can we draft people who have long records of good behavior and force them to be armed most or all of the time?
I have the feeling that this would have a large chilling effect on all violent crime.
-
I wouldn't advocate a "requirement" that he must have/own/use a firearm (like they apparently do in one of those countries he likes to harp about, the Swss). One would expect and assume he'd provide the same non advocating of others being prevented in having/owning/using a firearm, so long as they haven't had that right removed by way of some illegal endeavor they've been caught and prosecuted for. Yet, listening to him, you'd think that's precisely what he's advocating
-
I wouldn't advocate a "requirement" that he must have/own/use a firearm (like they apparently do in one of those countries he likes to harp about, the Swss). One would expect and assume he'd provide the same non advocating of others being prevented in having/owning/using a firearm, so long as they haven't had that right removed by way of some illegal endeavor they've been caught and prosecuted for. Yet, listening to him, you'd think that's precisely what he's advocating
It has worked well for Kennesaw Ga. , but they provided such wide lattitude for conchiencious objectors that they never have any enforcement action.
It is more like a message than it is like a real law.
-
One more gun nut killed a bunch of innocent Sikhs because the NRA made it possible for said nut to run about armed.
There are lots of Sikhs in Canada and the UK as well. How many have died there because of gun nuttery?
-
actually with the stand your ground law going around we may see people bring thier guns to neighboring houses say thier nervous and shoot them to make it legal.
oh wait that actually happened. I think the guy still went to jail since that is a total misinterpertation of that law. I`ll; see if you tube still got it.
-
Stand your ground has proven to be a stupid law, and has resulted in a lot of criminals getting away with murder and mayhem.
-
Man guilty in 'stand your ground' case (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfvnldHuixg#ws)
the problem I see is with stand your ground seems to require the guy to go never leave the scarey situation, but lead to the shooting.
kinda encourages the shoot out.
-
This guy is a moron, If he is in fear for his life, he should just go home
Loud music for a couple more hours is preferable to both getting shot and the hassle that the cops will give Rodriguez for being so stupid.
-
One more gun nut killed a bunch of innocent Sikhs because the NRA made it possible for said nut to run about armed.
There are lots of Sikhs in Canada and the UK as well. How many have died there because of gun nuttery?
Pushing aside the idiocy on the claim that the NRA largely armed this fella, guess what country has arguably some the most strictest gun control laws, in the world?? Yea, that would be Norway, where 77 people were killed by a "gun nut". "Nuttery" is all over the globe. Thank God we live in a country that gives us the right to defend ourselves, backed up by the FACT more lives are saved by the use of guns in this country, than those taken by a gun
-
One more time, that is not a fact and you are still full of crap.
-
One more time, that is not a fact and you are still full of crap.
And one more time.....IT IS A FACT. Your continued ignorant opinion still doesn't refute that FACT
-
the thing about the sikh situation is thier the wrong people to attack and when it brought up with many folks the answer sometimes will be they don`t care they`re still terrorist. samething with death penalty often I hear if they`re in deathrow alot of folks don`t care if they commit said crime they are still guilty of some unknown crime and thats good enough.
this thinking is probly why americans can`t be trusted to separate legal to illegal immigrants apart for arrest. sadly thier are cases that did happen. mostly in texas
-
Sikhs in the US are peaceful people, and their turbans and beards harm no one.
'These people were victims of stupidity and bigotry,
-
WOW......remembering how Xo is pretty much wrong on 99% of his proclaimations. We may have come across that rare 1% where he's right. 8)
-
Sikhs in the US are peaceful people, and their turbans and beards harm no one.
'These people were victims of stupidity and bigotry,
This seems to be right.
-
Vaccines kill people , but at a very low rate, the number that are spared and protected from death and disease by being vaccinated is very large.
This is the principal, but how to apply it?
I don't think that strict gun controll would work to save anyone at all, but ffor the sake of arguement lets posit that it would save a few.
Could it possibly be the savior of a greater number than guns themselves are?
Suppose it were demonstrated that drafting a huge number of otherwise unwilling persons into carrying guns would save a huge number of victims from violent death, would that result be worthy of that loss of freedom?
-
touche', once again, Plane 8)