Only in America...

[NineseveN]

How's that been working for you in the US?



Gun politics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So guns aren't use as protection... they're used to kill yourself, to kill someone else illegally, and to kill ppl accidentally... only the minority of gun killings are actually legal (I assume that's self-defense).

:thumbup:

Damn man. I guess that's game. Set. Oh wait, fail.

5.1.1b Intent Categories

Suicide - intentionally self-inflicted injury that results in death

Homicide - injuries inflicted by another person with intent to injure or kill, by any means. Excludes injuries due to legal intervention and operations of war. Justifiable homicide is not identified in WISQARS.

Legal Intervention - injuries inflicted by the police or other law-enforcing agents, including military on duty, in the course of arresting or attempting to arrest lawbreakers, suppressing disturbances, maintaining order, and other legal actions. Excludes injuries caused by civil insurrections.

Definitions for WISQARS Fatal - NCIPC

CDC data does not identify justifiable homicide, and that's where the 31,000 number on wikipedia came from (it's actually 30,694). The numbers from the relevant reports still stand (all of which dwarf the 31,000 gun deaths by a factor or more than 100). Defensive Gun Use occurs most often without ever firing a shot. Most attackers run or comply when met with the possibility of force in the form of a firearm (which is also why even though being a cop is super dangerous, only a fraction ever end up needing to fire their gun).

 

[NineseveN]

And whoever said you'd be more likely to need your gun for defensive purposes than you would your gear on the bike...wow, I don't want to live where you live. I don't care what your damned statistics say...I can pull statistics out of my butt to support anything I damn well please, that doesn't make them true. And if you're pulling your gun on others that much, then you either need to move or someone needs to call the cops on YOU.

Translation: I don't care what every peer-reviewed study done to date says, I'm gonna put my fingers in my ears and lash out at others who see the data for what it is. I didn't pull anything out of my butt, sir, it's all government/law enforcement data (objective numbers) or peer-reviewed, scientific research. If you have any capacity for what peer-reviewed means, then you'll understand why the pulling statistics out of your butt comment falls on deaf ears and is, in all honesty, quite offensive.

Furthermore, I don't recall saying that I had to defend myself more than once, I said, out of the X number of gun owners I've known, X number have had to do so. Would you feel better if those people had no guns and were instead robbed, raped or murdered simply because you don't care what the truth is, all that matters is what you believe? Of course you wouldn't. I don't think you without morals, merely without the benefit of fact and an objective assessment of the situation. In any event, be safe.


It seems like some might be a bit too emotional over this topic, I may need to bow out here.


---------------------------------------------------
And BTW, Wavex, your fear about an otherwise law-abiding person snapping and shooting you in the street? It doesn't really happen enough to warrant your concerns. It's been documented in every state that has passed legislation allowing the carrying of concealed weapons over the last batch of years. Texas actually found that people who lawfully carry are otherwise also more lawful than normal, non-carrying citizens in all manners of the law (look it up). We can also back this up by looking at the revocation rate for each state in terms of their permit system, most of which are easily available. Every state I've studied has an exceptionally low revocation rate. The kind of act that you describe would lead to an automatic revocation in any state in this country.

Anyways, cheers. Have fun thinking whatever it was ya'll were gonna think anyway. I'm gonna go enjoy the sun.

 

[Jez]

Wavex, I have the perfect solution to your dilemma. Simply cut a hole in a large bedsheet and put it on. Wrap a towel round your head in the manner of a freshly showered female. Go to a joke shop and buy the longest beard they have in stock. Then take your AK47 and the kids and go down to the playground. If you can froth at the mouth a bit so much the better.

If he attempts to engage you in conversation then assure him that you got a B+ in your citizenship exam and that you love America very much.

 

[fzme]

I carry a gun with me everywhere I go. I also pull a hotdog stand behind me everywhere I go, cause hey, you never know...I might get hungry.

 

[Wavex]

Wavex, I'm gonna blow your whole "you can figure out where people are from just by their opinions on this topic" idea...lol.

I hate guns. I grew up around them, haven't ever had a bad experience with one, but what I have been exposed to is stupid-ass rednecks who care only about their right to a gun. FYI, I'm from Kentucky, born and raised, so I know my rednecks.

Would I have called the police on the guy with the gun in the park? Maybe, maybe not. Would I have immediately left? Yes. I agree with the others who have said all you really do is make yourself an unnecessary target by showing that you're carrying.

And whoever said you'd be more likely to need your gun for defensive purposes than you would your gear on the bike...wow, I don't want to live where you live. I don't care what your damned statistics say...I can pull statistics out of my butt to support anything I damn well please, that doesn't make them true. And if you're pulling your gun on others that much, then you either need to move or someone needs to call the cops on YOU.

Oh, and one last point I'd like to make. My grandmother, who kept a revolver on the kitchen chair next to her my entire life (and knew how to use it), was murdered within arms reach of that gun. It didn't help her, did it? She didn't even get a chance to use it. Oh, what's that you say? She should've been carrying it on her hip? Ah...yeah, that's what the problem was.

The fact is, crap happens. There are bad people in this world and some of you (with or without a gun) are gonna get hurt, maybe even killed. It happens. The Constitution was written 225+ years ago and has a hard time coping with today's world. That's what the Supreme Court is there for...to figure out how it applies TODAY.

I'll leave you with one thought. That document that allows some of you to cling to your guns so vehemently? When it was written, it also considered an African American to be 3/5's of a human being. Point being? It's not always right.

I thought you were cool... but now I think you're uber cool! My best friend from Kentucky! :BLAA: :rockon:

I was trying to find the article I read not too long ago that explained how having a loaded gun under your pillow to protect your family was actually not such a great idea, and that 9 times out of 10 (yes there are exceptions, I know), if someone breaks in your home, it's to steal stuff to get $$ for drugs, not to hurt you and your family, and that your safest option for you and your family is to let the guys take whatever they want (and barricade yourself and your family in a room and call the cops)... engaging into a gun fight with bad guys in your house may indeed not to be the smartest move to ensure your family is safe... I know I would surrender (I expect french jokes go ahead ) in a second and tell them to take every material thing they want in my house.

Do I understand that some of you would prefer to load up and play Rambo? Sure, if you're trained and think you can shoot them all while keeping your family safe, I respect that as well.

 

[Wavex]

Translation: I don't care what every peer-reviewed study done to date says, I'm gonna put my fingers in my ears and lash out at others who see the data for what it is. I didn't pull anything out of my butt, sir, it's all government/law enforcement data (objective numbers) or peer-reviewed, scientific research. If you have any capacity for what peer-reviewed means, then you'll understand why the pulling statistics out of your butt comment falls on deaf ears and is, in all honesty, quite offensive.

Furthermore, I don't recall saying that I had to defend myself more than once, I said, out of the X number of gun owners I've known, X number have had to do so. Would you feel better if those people had no guns and were instead robbed, raped or murdered simply because you don't care what the truth is, all that matters is what you believe? Of course you wouldn't. I don't think you without morals, merely without the benefit of fact and an objective assessment of the situation. In any event, be safe.


It seems like some might be a bit too emotional over this topic, I may need to bow out here.


---------------------------------------------------
And BTW, Wavex, your fear about an otherwise law-abiding person snapping and shooting you in the street? It doesn't really happen enough to warrant your concerns. It's been documented in every state that has passed legislation allowing the carrying of concealed weapons over the last batch of years. Texas actually found that people who lawfully carry are otherwise also more lawful than normal, non-carrying citizens in all manners of the law (look it up). We can also back this up by looking at the revocation rate for each state in terms of their permit system, most of which are easily available. Every state I've studied has an exceptionally low revocation rate. The kind of act that you describe would lead to an automatic revocation in any state in this country.

Anyways, cheers. Have fun thinking whatever it was ya'll were gonna think anyway. I'm gonna go enjoy the sun.

You're going a bit far with your peer reviewed stuff as well aren't you?

Let's face it, if it was so clear cut that MORE guns make a country safer, don't you think the debate would have been cut short a long time ago? The USA would be the safest country in the World by FARRRRRRRRRRRR, as I believe there are MORE guns sold here for "entertainment/fun" purposes, as there are in the whole rest of the world combined... (saw that not too long ago on French TV).

Showing some numbers of DGU and stating that guns are amazing and that everyone should own one 24/7 is a bit much and I understand why some ppl think the use of stats in this discussion is useless. You're a reasonable guy, I am sure you agree to some extend.

 

[Wavex]

If that dude in the park knew what he created, he'd laugh his ass off I am sure :rof:

 

[CCHOUSEKY]

Translation: I don't care what every peer-reviewed study done to date says, I'm gonna put my fingers in my ears and lash out at others who see the data for what it is. I didn't pull anything out of my butt, sir, it's all government/law enforcement data (objective numbers) or peer-reviewed, scientific research. If you have any capacity for what peer-reviewed means, then you'll understand why the pulling statistics out of your butt comment falls on deaf ears and is, in all honesty, quite offensive.

Furthermore, I don't recall saying that I had to defend myself more than once, I said, out of the X number of gun owners I've known, X number have had to do so. Would you feel better if those people had no guns and were instead robbed, raped or murdered simply because you don't care what the truth is, all that matters is what you believe? Of course you wouldn't. I don't think you without morals, merely without the benefit of fact and an objective assessment of the situation. In any event, be safe.


It seems like some might be a bit too emotional over this topic, I may need to bow out here.

Man, you're awful snappy for someone that's been a member here for 5 months and has less than 30 posts. Oh, and since I forgot before...

:welcome:

Funny how you use "government/law enforcement data" in your argument. I would've taken you to be one of the people who don't trust what the government says. Or did those statistics come out when "W" was President, therefore they must be trustworthy?

Look, this is stupid. Half of us are never going to agree with the other half on this issue and that's fine. If I offended you...tough.

I don't get the obsession with guns in this country and I'm FROM this country. Everyone talks about their "personal freedoms" and how threatened they are by the government. Really? Show me one example, please, of the FBI, ATF, local LEOs, State Police, whatever you want...show me ONE example where a government agency entered someone's home ONLY to remove their guns when the person wasn't (a) a criminal, (b) a suspected criminal, (c) a known threat to...whatever. You won't, and you know why? Because YOU CAN'T. It doesn't happen.

I always here these gun advocates screaming about how the government is going to take away their right to keep and bear arms. WHATEVER. And every time a Democrat is elected to the Presidency, they run out and buy up all the ammunition they can afford because why? THE GOVERNMENT IS GONNA COME AND TAKE MY GUNS. And some of you want to call those of us who don't like guns PARANOID???

 

[Tailgate]

I say this whole thread is a modern day shoot out. Maybe FZ6 Forum, instead of bringing back (well, I think it already is) "Underground," should entitle it "OK Corral." By the way, this thread would've been shut down a long time ago in Soviet era times (and maybe in current PRC?).

 

[Geoff]

Man, you're awful snappy for someone that's been a member here for 5 months and has less than 30 posts. Oh, and since I forgot before...

:welcome:

Funny how you use "government/law enforcement data" in your argument. I would've taken you to be one of the people who don't trust what the government says. Or did those statistics come out when "W" was President, therefore they must be trustworthy?

Look, this is stupid. Half of us are never going to agree with the other half on this issue and that's fine. If I offended you...tough.

I don't get the obsession with guns in this country and I'm FROM this country. Everyone talks about their "personal freedoms" and how threatened they are by the government. Really? Show me one example, please, of the FBI, ATF, local LEOs, State Police, whatever you want...show me ONE example where a government agency entered someone's home ONLY to remove their guns when the person wasn't (a) a criminal, (b) a suspected criminal, (c) a known threat to...whatever. You won't, and you know why? Because YOU CAN'T. It doesn't happen.

I always here these gun advocates screaming about how the government is going to take away their right to keep and bear arms. WHATEVER. And every time a Democrat is elected to the Presidency, they run out and buy up all the ammunition they can afford because why? THE GOVERNMENT IS GONNA COME AND TAKE MY GUNS. And some of you want to call those of us who don't like guns PARANOID???

I would like to buy this guy a drink

 

[Shamus McFeeley]

I don't get the obsession with guns in this country and I'm FROM this country. Everyone talks about their "personal freedoms" and how threatened they are by the government. Really? Show me one example, please, of the FBI, ATF, local LEOs, State Police, whatever you want...show me ONE example where a government agency entered someone's home ONLY to remove their guns when the person wasn't (a) a criminal, (b) a suspected criminal, (c) a known threat to...whatever. You won't, and you know why? Because YOU CAN'T. It doesn't happen.

You're forgetting about Louisiana during hurricane Katrina. There was a serious lawsuit over the gun grab incident that happened there.

USA Today story

You're post(s) have a very bitter feel to them, and I am sorry that the misuse of firearms by others soured you on the subject.

 

[SirIsaac]

I don't have anything to add to this discussion. I try to stay out of such discussions, as a wise person once said "for the believer, no evidence is necessary, for the doubter, none will suffice."

But, I would like to comment on the following:

I'll leave you with one thought. That document that allows some of you to cling to your guns so vehemently? When it was written, it also considered an African American to be 3/5's of a human being. Point being? It's not always right.

The 3/5ths compromise was basically anti-slavery. Southern states wanted to count slaves as whole people for the purposes of determining representation (more population meant more representatives and electors in the electoral college, meant more power). Northern delegates to the Constitutional Convention did not want to count slaves at all. So they compromised. It arguably would have been better had slaves not been counted as persons at all, would have diminished southern political power in the years between the constitution and the civil war, maybe slavery would have ended sooner, or without a civil war. (Sorry to any historians for postulating an alternative history.)

 

[wpgibson]

Dearest Wavex:

come live in East Baltimore for a month, then i will gladly listen to your eloquently argued views on gun control. Until then, I'll be grateful the my right to possess firearms(s) for protection of my family are guaranteed by the the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and, in my view, the neglected Privileges and Immunities clause from Article IV.

When my mom was a kid, almost 60 years ago, she traveled back on forth to school (In Baltimore) with a .22 single lever Remington; she was on the rifle team.

Also: the guy in that photo screams "I'm off-duty law enforcement."

 

[FizzySix]

How timely...this happened just today as we were discussing this:

Body found after 12 killed in northern England shooting spree - CNN.com

Sort of lends some context to the idea of "gun control in country X worked"...sadly, and tragically, things like this still happen...even as our conversation was going on today, there was mass murder using a firearm in the UK.

I'm guessing the guy in the pic was a cop/federal agent/etc and was just being both a dad, and a responsible owner of a gun at the same time. We will never know. You should have asked him: may have been a new friend! :thumbup:

 

[NineseveN]

Post withdrawn. Bad manners on my part.

 

[Wavex]

nvm .................

 

[Wavex]

oh and I am going back to that park every wkd until I can meet that guy...






:BLAA:

 

[krid80]

In Missouri I have seen people openly carrying probably 5 times in my 5 years here. I did it (semi-accidentally) once. I had been working around the farm with my .22 on my hip to shoot copperheads (common problem here). Ran to town and didn't remove my gun. No one mentioned it, no noticable stares. Once back in the car from the first stop, it went in the glove box, but I wasn't breaking any laws.

Guns are not dangerous. Lack of gun education is.

 

[Admin]

its getting political :spank:.... we all agree to disagree. If we still had the underground politics area this would go there. We dont so.... Thread Closed

Cheers......

...................................................................................................
Disallowed specific topics
We're all about freedom of speech, however there are some topics that don't belong here, such as:

Running from the cops.
Police bashing/slander.
Breaking the law.
No satanic threads/links etc.
Politics.
Any form or racism PERIOD.