5 yr old w/ gun incident at Houston school

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by SeeBass

PS: Wasp spray is a great defence as it is just as bad as bear spray and you can shoot it a greater and more directional distance.

Yikes, I would never use wasp spray on my worst enemy, that stuff can permanently blind a person. It would be like spraying a person in the face with oven cleaner.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Stalin was famous for imposing gun control from 1929 on....
Same with, Hitler, Mussolini, Mao Tze Tung, Pol Pot, Castro the list goes on.....

http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source...W-FUIHb_myUhXQ

"Gun-control advocates look at guns only as a means to harm others even though they are more often used to prevent injury. According to a 1995 study entitled “Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun” by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, published by the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology at Northwestern University School of Law, law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year."


"Other studies give similar results. “Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms,” by the Clinton administration’s Justice Department shows that between 1.5 and 3 million people in the United States use a firearm to defend themselves and others from criminals each year. A 1986 study by Hart Research Associates puts the upper limit at 3.2 million."


"Vermont has the least restrictive gun-control law. It recognizes the right of any Vermonter who has not otherwise been prohibited from owning a firearm to carry concealed weapons without a permit or license. Yet Vermont has one of the lowest crime rates in America, ranking 49 out of 50 in all crimes and 47th in murders.
States which have passed concealed-carry laws have seen their murder rate fall by 8.5 percent, rapes by 5 percent, aggravated assaults by 7 percent and robbery by 3 percent."

Thanks for posting this. I have no doubt that this will ultimately be ignored by the anti-gun side, but regardless, good post.

[Displaced Flames fan]

If I owned a gun, and I don't now but very likely will someday, it would be for sport, not for self protection.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

"Vermont has the least restrictive gun-control law. It recognizes the right of any Vermonter who has not otherwise been prohibited from owning a firearm to carry concealed weapons without a permit or license. Yet Vermont has one of the lowest crime rates in America, ranking 49 out of 50 in all crimes and 47th in murders.

Vermont is the 49th most populace state in the USA, so ranking 47th in murders and 50th in crimes is not proof of anything.

[Kybosh]

The only reason to own a gun is to keep the King of England out of your face.

[Yasa]

I'm not sure if you'd put me on the anti-gun side of things, but I'll say it again. Owning a gun should be a very difficult thing to do. There should be extensive safety courses, thorough personality and background checks as well as a required safe with locks and trigger guards (although that last one would be impossible to ensure people are using them.)

If an incident like the one in the article occurs, that gun owner should be barred from owning a gun. Permanently or for a very long time.

Regulation is not the enemy. Irresponsibility is. You can tell me over and over again how you buy and own guns for safety and protection, but it won't sway me. I've asked twice in this thread; if you feel threatened enough in your neighborhood to own a gun, why do you live there? I understand, it's not always an option. Just getting up and moving isn't easy. Jobs, money, etc. are obstacles but to me (and this is my opinion, not a judgement) if I honestly felt I needed to have a gun in my house to protect my family; I would get my family out of there immediately.

As for the "Gun control was used by ruthless dictators" bit? Seriously pointless. Gun control is also used in the UK (a non-oppressive country.) We don't live in 2nd or 3rd world dictatorships.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Stalin was famous for imposing gun control from 1929 on....
Same with, Hitler, Mussolini, Mao Tze Tung, Pol Pot, Castro the list goes on.....

http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source...W-FUIHb_myUhXQ

"Gun-control advocates look at guns only as a means to harm others even though they are more often used to prevent injury. According to a 1995 study entitled “Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun” by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, published by the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology at Northwestern University School of Law, law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year."


"Other studies give similar results. “Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms,” by the Clinton administration’s Justice Department shows that between 1.5 and 3 million people in the United States use a firearm to defend themselves and others from criminals each year. A 1986 study by Hart Research Associates puts the upper limit at 3.2 million."


"Vermont has the least restrictive gun-control law. It recognizes the right of any Vermonter who has not otherwise been prohibited from owning a firearm to carry concealed weapons without a permit or license. Yet Vermont has one of the lowest crime rates in America, ranking 49 out of 50 in all crimes and 47th in murders.
States which have passed concealed-carry laws have seen their murder rate fall by 8.5 percent, rapes by 5 percent, aggravated assaults by 7 percent and robbery by 3 percent."

Yeah, according to this link:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murd...ally-and-state

That's true that Vermont had the 2nd lowest murder rate of any state.....in 2009, which was by all accounts a bit of an abberation Vermont has averaged about 8th or so for the 15 years of data on that chart. It's also ranked ~19 in per capital income. Is that relevant? Let's see.

Meanwhile Mississippi which has the lowest per capita income has averaged the 3rd hightest murer rate over the last 15 years despite having pretty liberal concealed carry laws (you need a permit, but the requirements aren't strict at all, if you're not a criminal you can get one no problem).

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

Yeah, according to this link:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murd...ally-and-state

That's true that Vermont had the 2nd lowest murder rate of any state.....in 2009, which was by all accounts a bit of an abberation Vermont has averaged about 8th or so for the 15 years of data on that chart. It's also ranked ~19 in per capital income. Is that relevant? Let's see.

Meanwhile Mississippi which has the lowest per capita income has averaged the 3rd hightest murer rate over the last 15 years despite having pretty liberal concealed carry laws (you need a permit, but the requirements aren't strict at all, if you're not a criminal you can get one no problem).

Yeah, no doubt economics plays a role in crime rates. Damn, I was reading a page that showed how many legally purchased guns were used in homocides as opposed to illegally acquired guns. I'll try and find it.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by Yasa

I'm not sure if you'd put me on the anti-gun side of things, but I'll say it again. Owning a gun should be a very difficult thing to do. There should be extensive safety courses, thorough personality and background checks as well as a required safe with locks and trigger guards (although that last one would be impossible to ensure people are using them.)

Regulation is not the enemy. Irresponsibility is. You can tell me over and over again how you buy and own guns for safety and protection, but it won't sway me. I've asked twice in this thread; if you feel threatened enough in your neighborhood to own a gun, why do you live there? I understand, it's not always an option. Just getting up and moving isn't easy. Jobs, money, etc. are obstacles but to me (and this is my opinion, not a judgement) if I honestly felt I needed to have a gun in my house to protect my family; I would get my family out of there immediately.

As for the "Gun control was used by ruthless dictators" bit? Seriously pointless. Gun control is also used in the UK (a non-oppressive country.) We don't live in 2nd or 3rd world dictatorships.

I don't buy guns for personal protection, but for sport. That's me though.

I live in an extremely safe community. Economics plays a role in where you live and what kind of crime rates go on there. I don't judge a big inner-city person for having a pistol.

Owning a gun is somewhat of a difficult thing to do here. First you get your study book, and then you spend the better part of a day in class learning safety etc. Then you write the test, and you have to get minimum 80% (if I recall right). You have to demonstrate safety procedure for a variety of types of firearms, and then send your test results and information to the government so they can issue your acquisition license.

When your license expires you have to fill out more forms, asking questions about your family/relationships, mental health etc. to renew it. This process reminds me of what you have to do to get a passport.

And Yasa, just because we don't live in a tyranny now, doesn't mean it can't happen in the future. Things change....

[Yasa]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

I don't buy guns for personal protection, but for sport. That's me though.

I live in an extremely safe community. Economics plays a role in where you live and what kind of crime rates go on there. I don't judge a big inner-city person for having a pistol.

Owning a gun is somewhat of a difficult thing to do here. First you get your study book, and then you spend the better part of a day in class learning safety etc. Then you write the test, and you have to get minimum 80% (if I recall right). You have to demonstrate safety procedure for a variety of types of firearms, and then send your test results and information to the government so they can issue your acquisition license.

When your license expires you have to fill out more forms, asking questions about your family/relationships, mental health etc. to renew it. This process reminds me of what you have to do to get a passport.

And Yasa, just because we don't live in a tyranny now, doesn't mean it can't happen in the future. Things change....

I thanked your post by accident...but I'll leave it because you made decent points.

When it comes to laws and such, I was mostly referring to the US. I don't feel Canada really has a gun problem.

As for tyranny...yeah it could happen. Countries will rise and fall, they always do. But citizens owning guns won't make them suddenly unify and take down the government. I mean if the US government can put an entire nation and planet into financial dire straights and the people don't revolt; I don't forsee them doing it any time soon.

That and violent revolutions tend to have backing of militant groups or other countries.

[afc wimbledon]

Criminals have guns in Britain and Canada, if guns work so well to protect people how come we have lower murder rates?

[Yasa]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Criminals have guns in Britain and Canada, if guns work so well to protect people how come we have lower murder rates?

Less ghettos, I assume.

[Beerfest]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Criminals have guns in Britain and Canada, if guns work so well to protect people how come we have lower murder rates?

There are many other factors that might have to do with this besides people in the US having guns.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Beerfest

There are many other factors that might have to do with this besides people in the US having guns.

We say 'eh' alot?

It does't take a genius to realize the most likely reason that a country with a vast number of guns has a higher murder rate than a country with few guns is the guns.

A country with more cars will have more road fatalities.

Can you honestly tell me that if the tooth fairy took away every gun in america you really think americans would continue to slaughter themselves at the same rate.

[pylon]

I have been watching this thread, and this is something I would like to give all the gun nuts to ponder.

Imagine if every single citizen had a gun, do you honestly think that shooting deaths would not go absolutely through the roof? It takes a whole lot more courage to get pissed off at a guy at a traffic light, go to his window, and try and punch him out Mano a Mano, or even run at him with a bat or golf club. It takes a very cowardly level of courage to point a gun at someone and pull the trigger.

If everyone had guns in society, the streets would be a war zone. Minor beer fueled arguments in pubs would turn into murder scenes, domestic disputes would turn into mass murders if every citizen had a hand gun.

Crying that poverty is the reason for the escalated violence in the US is such a BS argument. The most impoverished people in the US are still among the worlds wealthiest people if you look at it on a global scale, yet the murder rate and shooting deaths are amongst the highest in any civilized nation.

What pisses me off the most, is almost everyone I know that has a frikkin handgun, is the last person on earth, that I would feel safe around with one in the room.

Originally Posted by PIMking

I feel bad for anyone that thinks they're going to do a home invasion on us. Dale Gribble looks like amateur to what I'm playing with.

Look at this quote^^^. I scares the crap out of me knowing that if I had to bang on that guys door, panicking in an emergency, that he would probably puff up his chest, and blow me away through the door to assert his macho'ness to his wife. It is like a ton of you guys with hard on's for guns, can't wait for the first borderline legal opportunity to kill someone.

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

People like you concern me. Citizens are afforded the right to own firearms for sport, protection from government and crime, and hunting.

And people like you scare the living hell out of me that someway, somehow you managed to obtain a restricted PAL. If anyone issuing restricted PAL's saw some of your anti police, anti government rhetoric, there is a very likely chance, you would never get one. Again, another door I would be terrified to knock on in an emergency.

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by Ark2

Thanks for posting this. I have no doubt that this will ultimately be ignored by the anti-gun side, but regardless, good post.

mikey Godwin's the anti-gun crowd, provides on comically cherry-picked stat that took three posts to debunk, and references a study about conventional thought from 1995 - and you think he represents your side of the debate well?

'Nuff said.

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

When I think of gun ownership in general, I don't even think of the innocent deaths that will come from it, but the more long-term purpose that the gun control lobby wants me to be afraid of, the hilariously antiquated possibility of having to fight tyranny as per the 2nd amendment.

And if Obama raises taxes another 3% then you'll make a visit down to an Arizona "congress on the corner" and fight tyranny?

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by Gozer

mikey Godwin's the anti-gun crowd, provides on comically cherry-picked stat that took three posts to debunk, and references a study about conventional thought from 1995 - and you think he represents your side of the debate well?

'Nuff said.

And if Obama raises taxes another 3% then you'll make a visit down to an Arizona "congress on the corner" and fight tyranny?

Yeah Gozer, Obama raising taxes is the kind of tyranny I'm talking about.....

Both sides of the gun debate cherry pick stats to support their stance, or is this something new to message boards? There are plenty more examples of responsible citizen gun ownership, but why bother when gun grabbers won't even budge on their stance anyways....

[mikey_the_redneck]

Originally Posted by pylon

And people like you scare the living hell out of me that someway, somehow you managed to obtain a restricted PAL. If anyone issuing restricted PAL's saw some of your anti police, anti government rhetoric, there is a very likely chance, you would never get one. Again, another door I would be terrified to knock on in an emergency.

Your fear mongering is hilarious.

Yeah, everyone is going to be shooting eachother at traffic lights....and everyone will treat a knock on the door as a threat to their life....

You watch too much MSNBC news. Just because someone is critical of their government and poor police conduct doesn't mean they are a potential violent terrorist that needs to have their rights stripped away. Ridiculous....

[Yasa]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Yeah, everyone is going to be shooting eachother at traffic lights....and everyone will treat a knock on the door as a threat to their life....

It's kinda funny you say that. That's a hyperbolic statement of what I hear from people who own guns for "protection."

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

Both sides of the gun debate cherry pick stats to support their stance, or is this something new to message boards?

"It's acceptable to for me to present specious evidence because you probably do."

Hey mods, since we're on a banning spree, can we axe the guy that defends arguing dishonestly by poisoning the well?

Originally Posted by mikey_the_redneck

There are plenty more examples of responsible citizen gun ownership, but why bother when gun grabbers won't even budge on their stance anyways....

Climb off the cross bub.