RE: Gun Control, the SC and the potential fall out

RE: Gun Control, the SC and the potential fall out (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Termyn8or -> RE: Gun Control, the SC and the potential fall out (7/1/2010 8:55:20 PM)
"I can not accept a study, that comes either directly or indirectly from the NRA, as being 'fair' and 'honest'" I agree. They don't go far enough. They don't express the true meaning of the 2nd amendment. One of the purposes of it is to make the government think twice before attaking Citizens for frivolous reasons. The other is to assure Citizens have at least some means to fight against the govenment when oppressed. And this applies to state and local governments as well. You can be disarmed by local laws however. Do you think you can run a courtroom however Constitutional when you got a judge and baliff, and possibly 50 armed Citizens ready to shoot up the place in the event of an unfavorable ruling ? Do you think people need weapons with a mile range when the house next door is only ten feet away and made out of wood ? There are places in this country the cops won't go because they know if they tryo to make a move against a Citizen there they be opened up on from many windows on the street. That was the plan of the founding Fathers. Protection against robbers and so forth is a foregone conclusion. It comes with the territory. Can you accept the fact that more than half of the firearm deaths in this country are caused by LEOs ? That is not from the NRA. They publish it but the numbers come from the government themselves, the cites should be there somewhere on the net. Firearm deaths also include shooting of hoods breaking into Grandma's house and all of that, including suicides. When they want to separate the number, it is because it is to their advantage. When they throw all the numbers together it is because it is to their advantage. And why is it to their advantage ? Because they are the ones who should be shot. I don't deny them the right of self defense, what the hell gives them the right to deny mine ? Just another installment lesson on just who "they" are. T

Moonhead -> RE: Gun Control, the SC and the potential fall out (7/2/2010 5:08:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or Can you accept the fact that more than half of the firearm deaths in this country are caused by LEOs ? Do you have a source for that? Still, given the other points you raise, it isn't hard to see why a few bluebottles might be shooting first and asking questions later, is it?

Termyn8or -> RE: Gun Control, the SC and the potential fall out (7/2/2010 8:45:30 AM)
I just had a look around and Google is not doing too well. However it does make sense because they are the ones who are most frequently put in those positions where it is required to use deadly force. The only person I personally know who has killed about a dozen people was a cop. Also note that in the figures, suicides are lumped together, as if people couldn't jump off rooftops. There is also no distinction made of justifiable shooting, such as an intruder or robber in someone's house in the middle of the night. I'll temporarily retract that particular staement to avoid a war about it, but what I found out today was that actual homicides aren't all of them by any stretch, and they account for less than 1% of accidental deaths. That is sourced from the government. Accidents in hospitals account for about eight times the total number of gun deaths in this country as well. So why focus on guns ? That is also from government sources. But then do we trust them either ? I carefully avoided anything connected with the NRA, so it can be a bit difficult. T

SimplyMichael -> RE: Gun Control, the SC and the potential fall out (7/2/2010 11:37:10 AM)
http://www.gorman2010.com/content/index.cfm/e/blog/title/The-Fun-Little-Gun-Video-that-has-the-Left-all-Stirred-Up-06-29-10/ She is firing a real Thompson submachinegun, something that is only legal in a few states and requires massive amounts of paperwork but for those who can afford a $15,000+ toy, paperwork never seems to be much of an obstacle.

SimplyMichael -> RE: Gun Control, the SC and the potential fall out (7/2/2010 11:39:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead Well, the fact that the second amendment is seen as covering anything besides breech loading muskets is a liberal bit of interpretation from the off, isn't it? And of course free speech shouldn't cover anything like TV or Radio and of course not anything requiring amplification. Oh, and for the record, the civilian weapons were VASTLY superior to the military weapons of the day so again, you are just being silly.

thompsonx -> RE: Gun Control, the SC and the potential fall out (7/2/2010 12:06:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael http://www.gorman2010.com/content/index.cfm/e/blog/title/The-Fun-Little-Gun-Video-that-has-the-Left-all-Stirred-Up-06-29-10/ She is firing a real Thompson submachinegun, something that is only legal in a few states and requires massive amounts of paperwork but for those who can afford a $15,000+ toy, paperwork never seems to be much of an obstacle. Michael: I am sure you noticed the difference between the control she exercised on the 1911 vs. the 1928. She needs to learn about brass[;)] (breath,relax,aim,slack,squeeeeeeeezzzzzz

SimplyMichael -> RE: Gun Control, the SC and the potential fall out (7/2/2010 12:55:25 PM)
Actually, considering how slight she is, my bet is she shoots that 1911 pistol better than most men. I had to watch it again and I am not sure that is a 1928 Thompson, it might be a 1921, they look the same on the outside but they are different internally. The firing rate seems too too high, and all those people who talk about how you can't shoot a SMG without it climbing should watch that video. Oh, and if that IS a colt 1921 even though it looks refinished to me, it is worth well over $20k or $30k.

thompsonx -> RE: Gun Control, the SC and the potential fall out (7/2/2010 1:17:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael Actually, considering how slight she is, my bet is she shoots that 1911 pistol better than most men. I had to watch it again and I am not sure that is a 1928 Thompson, it might be a 1921, they look the same on the outside but they are different internally. The firing rate seems too too high, and all those people who talk about how you can't shoot a SMG without it climbing should watch that video. Oh, and if that IS a colt 1921 even though it looks refinished to me, it is worth well over $20k or $30k. It did seem a little fast to me but it has been more than 40 years since I had one to play with. If she were to put a compensator on that pea shooter and stand a little more behind it and maybe a good set of pachmyer's I think she would be able to keep it on target a little better. Nice to see you posting agian be sure to tell your missus I said howdy...nothing but the best to the both of you.

truckinslave -> RE: Gun Control, the SC and the potential fall out (7/7/2010 8:09:17 AM)
"Federal and state prohibitions aimed at keeping domestic violence offenders from having guns" SCOTUS upheld such restrictions in a Texas divorce case 12 or so years ago. The case is , by memory, almost perfectly on point.

truckinslave -> RE: Gun Control, the SC and the potential fall out (7/7/2010 8:14:39 AM)
quote: Yes, a few of those were funded by organizations with ties to the NRA. The definitive study is More Guns, Less Crime by John Lott, and it has never been successfully refuted. You might check his background, methodology, and purpose in conducting the study that led to the book.

truckinslave -> RE: Gun Control, the SC and the potential fall out (7/7/2010 8:20:05 AM)
quote: something that is only legal in a few states I certainly won't claim to be an expert on all 37,000+ state and local gun laws, but full-auto firearms (i.e. machineguns) are legal under federal law, subject to what used to be a $250 yearly tax and some security restrictions. I used to shoot with a Congressman who owned such a piece.

mnottertail -> RE: Gun Control, the SC and the potential fall out (7/7/2010 8:40:48 AM)
a class III tax stamp is $200 besides the FFL to own an NFA gun, besides all the paperwork and permissions......so, by example the sherriff or CLEO (chief law enforcement official) of the area may charge monies to do the BCA (bureau of criminal apprehension) or other FBI checks. It can run inot some money. Now for a congressman the road is a little easier than the common schlub.

rulemylife -> RE: Gun Control, the SC and the potential fall out (7/7/2010 9:03:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave The definitive study is More Guns, Less Crime by John Lott, and it has never been successfully refuted. You might check his background, methodology, and purpose in conducting the study that led to the book. You might take that advice yourself. Science Blog -- New Study Shoots Down 'More Guns Less Crime' Myth A study included in a just-released book debunks the claim by leading pro-gun researcher John Lott that allowing Americans to carry concealed handguns leads to less crime. The book "Evaluating Gun Policy," published by the Brookings Institution Press, includes research by Professor John Donohue Ph.D., J.D., Stanford University Law School, and Professor Ian Ayres Ph.D., J.D., Yale Law School, that concludes Carry Concealed Weapons (CCW) laws do not decrease crime; they may, in fact, have just the opposite effect. John Lott wrote the 1998 book "More Guns, Less Crime," which is championed by the gun lobby as a major research work that proves CCW laws reduce crime. Lott's scholarship -- including "More Guns, Less Crime" -- and actions, however, have recently come under attack on a variety of fronts. For instance, John Lott, who is currently a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, has come under fire for pretending to be a woman over the Internet (using the name "Mary Rosh") to defend himself against his critics. "Mary Rosh" claimed to be a student of John Lott's and praised his research. In addition, several academicians are seeking answers from John Lott about questions involving a telephone survey Lott claims to have done for "More Guns, Less Crime." Lott can't produce evidence the phone survey took place, claiming that his computer crashed.

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.882813E-02