quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
the real and better question here is, why do liberals hate guns so much?

Because they represent self reliance, when we should rely totally on the government.

So then, your sense of 'self-reliance' equates to both absolute reliance on corporations, and gun ownership?

Not my or most others' notion of self-reliance, in any sense.

First I never said a word about corporations, and this from a man who brags about running away from problems ("I have been mugged and when that happens I move to another neighborhood).

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

for every story like that one, which is horrible, there are more stories of gun owners being made more safe by virtue of having and/or using a gun.

despite this accident, on the whole, the least safe population when it comes to guns are overwhelmingly the criminals who find themselves on the wrong end of one.

if you value life, which is supposedly your premise here, then how ironic is it that you cannot give people the grace to protect themselves by owning guns.

the real and better question here is, why do liberals hate guns so much?

I saw a story where a 14 got a scooter for Christmas, the first time he went out to ride it he was hit by a car and killed. Might as well say this proves that no responsible parent would get their kid a scooter.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

In any case the OP was about an accidental shooting, whereas your numerous links all involved intentional discharge of a firearm in situations of putative self-defense...

Actually, the OP was about guns making us safer (not). The clue to this apparently obscure fact can be found in the phrase, "another happy story about how carrying firearms makes us all safer." For further assistance, see here.

Addressing that topic, homicide rates in the United States have fallen more than fifty percent since their peak in the 1980's, while during the same time period the number of legal guns on the street has more than quadrupled. Granting that correlation isn't causation, even the dimmest intellect should be able to see that anyone pushing the "more guns, more crime" mantra is either a liar or a puppet.

If there's a case to be made here, it's for better and wider firearms education. The cited accident was most likely due to the weapon being a revolver. Revolvers don't have a safety. Not the best choice of weapon for anyone around children.

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
the real and better question here is, why do liberals hate guns so much?

Because they represent self reliance, when we should rely totally on the government.

So then, your sense of 'self-reliance' equates to both absolute reliance on corporations, and gun ownership?

Not my or most others' notion of self-reliance, in any sense.

First I never said a word about corporations, and this from a man who brags about running away from problems ("I have been mugged and when that happens I move to another neighborhood).

If you have a link to my ever saying that withinin your quote or anything resembling it, here or anywhere else, please link it. Otherwise shut up.

As for who proposes what about whatever, here's this from your post; "Because they represent self reliance, when we should rely totally on the government."

First, whoever in this thread, OP or otherwise, said anything about "relying totally on government"? The fact that no one on the thread said any such thing didn't stop you, did it?


Just save yourself further embarrassment and shut up.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

for every story like that one, which is horrible, there are more stories of gun owners being made more safe by virtue of having and/or using a gun.

despite this accident, on the whole, the least safe population when it comes to guns are overwhelmingly the criminals who find themselves on the wrong end of one.

if you value life, which is supposedly your premise here, then how ironic is it that you cannot give people the grace to protect themselves by owning guns.

the real and better question here is, why do liberals hate guns so much?

I saw a story where a 14 got a scooter for Christmas, the first time he went out to ride it he was hit by a car and killed. Might as well say this proves that no responsible parent would get their kid a scooter.

Crap. I got my seven year old one.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

In any case the OP was about an accidental shooting, whereas your numerous links all involved intentional discharge of a firearm in situations of putative self-defense...

Actually, the OP was about guns making us safer (not). The clue to this apparently obscure fact can be found in the phrase, "another happy story about how carrying firearms makes us all safer." For further assistance, see here.

Addressing that topic, homicide rates in the United States have fallen more than fifty percent since their peak in the 1980's, while during the same time period the number of legal guns on the street has more than quadrupled. Granting that correlation isn't causation, even the dimmest intellect should be able to see that anyone pushing the "more guns, more crime" mantra is either a liar or a puppet.

If there's a case to be made here, it's for better and wider firearms education. The cited accident was most likely due to the weapon being a revolver. Revolvers don't have a safety. Not the best choice of weapon for anyone around children.

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
the real and better question here is, why do liberals hate guns so much?

Because they represent self reliance, when we should rely totally on the government.

So then, your sense of 'self-reliance' equates to both absolute reliance on corporations, and gun ownership?

Not my or most others' notion of self-reliance, in any sense.

First I never said a word about corporations, and this from a man who brags about running away from problems ("I have been mugged and when that happens I move to another neighborhood).

If you have a link to my ever saying that withinin your quote or anything resembling it, here or anywhere else, please link it. Otherwise shut up.

As for who proposes what about whatever, here's this from your post; "Because they represent self reliance, when we should rely totally on the government."

First, whoever in this thread, OP or otherwise, said anything about "relying totally on government"? The fact that no one on the thread said any such thing didn't stop you, did it?


Just save yourself further embarrassment and shut up.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

In any case the OP was about an accidental shooting, whereas your numerous links all involved intentional discharge of a firearm in situations of putative self-defense...

Actually, the OP was about guns making us safer (not). The clue to this apparently obscure fact can be found in the phrase, "another happy story about how carrying firearms makes us all safer." For further assistance, see here.

Addressing that topic, homicide rates in the United States have fallen more than fifty percent since their peak in the 1980's, while during the same time period the number of legal guns on the street has more than quadrupled. Granting that correlation isn't causation, even the dimmest intellect should be able to see that anyone pushing the "more guns, more crime" mantra is either a liar or a puppet.

If there's a case to be made here, it's for better and wider firearms education. The cited accident was most likely due to the weapon being a revolver. Revolvers don't have a safety. Not the best choice of weapon for anyone around children.

K.

You keep referring to 'homicide rates' (in all your links) when the OP has nothing to do with homicide, but rather with a fatal accident.

"Addressing that topic, homicide rates in the United States ... "

How is citing homicide rates "addressing that topic" of either accidental shootings OR overall gun safety, OR gun ownership as furtherance of 'safety' to society, when that 2 or 3 yr. old could have easily killed anyone in the store or on the street?

But yes, let's just argue for more voluntary gun safety classes for fuckwits too stupid to understand the basics of gun status vs. 2 yr. olds to start with, and hope they even notice the class is available to begin with, just in time them getting a clue before their child finds the trigger in public.

Otherwise, heaven forbid, we might have a public of parents of two yr. olds "totally reliant on government" to avail them of the danger of that particular disastrous combination. Better that we rely on the private sector and their economic interest in getting around to that eventually.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

In any case the OP was about an accidental shooting, whereas your numerous links all involved intentional discharge of a firearm in situations of putative self-defense...

Actually, the OP was about guns making us safer (not). The clue to this apparently obscure fact can be found in the phrase, "another happy story about how carrying firearms makes us all safer." For further assistance, see here.

Addressing that topic, homicide rates in the United States have fallen more than fifty percent since their peak in the 1980's, while during the same time period the number of legal guns on the street has more than quadrupled. Granting that correlation isn't causation, even the dimmest intellect should be able to see that anyone pushing the "more guns, more crime" mantra is either a liar or a puppet.

If there's a case to be made here, it's for better and wider firearms education. The cited accident was most likely due to the weapon being a revolver. Revolvers don't have a safety. Not the best choice of weapon for anyone around children.

K.

You keep referring to 'homicide rates' (in all your links) when the OP has nothing to do with homicide, but rather with a fatal accident.

"Addressing that topic, homicide rates in the United States ... "

How is citing homicide rates "addressing that topic" of either accidental shootings OR overall gun safety, OR gun ownership as furtherance of 'safety' to society, when that 2 or 3 yr. old could have easily killed anyone in the store or on the street?

But yes, let's just argue for more voluntary gun safety classes for fuckwits too stupid to understand the basics of gun status vs. 2 yr. olds to start with, and hope they even notice the class is available to begin with, just in time them getting a clue before their child finds the trigger in public.

Otherwise, heaven forbid, we might have a public of parents of two yr. olds "totally reliant on government" to avail them of the danger of that particular disastrous combination. Better that we rely on the private sector and their economic interest in getting around to that eventually.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn


Yeah, you got me there. The lower crime rates in most developed countries with lower gun ownership notwithstanding, ya got me there.

Don't trouble yourself to look.

But here's the news:

Your insistence upon the right to arm 2 yr. olds, however inadvertently or due to whatever abject stupidity, does not account for greater 'safety,' in this or any other country.

You keep blabbing, as though anyone who has a brain and actually thinks about things is thereby "totally reliant upon government", when the fact of the matter is that you have been and will forever be "reliant upon the government", thanks to your inability to find a real job when you were young. That's the fact of the matter.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Now who's making stuff up, ...

quote:

Please explain how lower crime rates has less do with the subject than your obsessive hatred of the private sector.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Then how can you be so sure gun ownership is a large enough deterrent to crime with no proof to back it up... at least enough proof to say the proliferation of conceal and carry is worth the carnage of children's loss of life. I am not necessarily against gun ownership but perhaps the type of weapons and where they should be allowed and penalties for carelessness resulting in injury or death may need to be weighed against the hundreds of children killed or injured each year to accidental gun accidents... Is it worth it?

I believe studies should be made by neutral entities to find answers to this question. There may very well be solutions without repealing conceal and carry but this will require new laws and regulations that will not happen without statistics to show a need.

Butch

quote:

Your figures are exaggerated.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

quote:

Your figures are exaggerated.

Bama... I gave no figures... unless you are talking about the hundreds of children killed or injured each year... is this what you are talking about?

Butch

quote:

No comment on firearms safety courses.