Toddler shoots mother in Walmart...

[Angel4Truth]

I expected more out of Rusha. And even Angel.

I expect you should be handing your gun into authorities.

 

[Angel4Truth]

No the issue is ... I am not a criminal and do not have a criminal record OR a history of violence. Why should my right to own a firearm to defend my family, self and home be determined by someone who WILL own a firearm regardless of laws forbidding it?

:thumb:

 

[Granite]

I expect you should be handing your gun into authorities.

I own two and frankly you can bite me, all right?

Your loss entitles you to jack here, so stop acting like TOL's own avenging angel.

Fair enough?

 

[Rusha]

I expected more out of Rusha. And even Angel.

I didn't realize you were in alliance with those who wish to disarm law abiding citizens and disable them from protecting their own family and loved ones.

 

[This Charming Manc]

Where did i say anything or post anything by a gun lobby, i just showed that what you said isnt accurate with your own homicide by gun rates. All i posted was your crime rates of homicide by gun.

You posted a graph which i'm assuming you didn't make that shows a subset of data, which is factually correct but very misleading.

I assumed you got that graph form a pro gun site was I wrong?

You claimed no legal guns means no guns - that is blatantly false, your homicide by gun rates went up, not down.

Did you understand the graph that you posted or understand any of the reasoning given around it ?

I notice you didn't address the points that show why the graph didn't say what you thought it meant.

By the way as you dont understand the difference between general homicide rates are fireams crime rates.

Lets go for some more precise figures, seeing as the ban was handguns only here are the handgun murder rates in the UK, they dont go back to pro 1996 but you get a sense of the spiraling handgun problem we have .

2001 1 death
2003 3 deaths
2004 2 deaths
2005 3 deaths
2006 3 deaths
2007 2 deaths
2008 4 deaths

just in case you in any doubt those are the total for the country per year, I can only assuming the missing years have no handgun relate deaths, are you still claiming we have a significant handgun issue after the ban, or that handgun murder went up?

Want me to find the American stats?

he context was your claim that no legal guns in citizens hands means no gun violence and thats false, any way you slice it. All i posted was your homicide by gun rates ( i didnt even post shootings that didnt end in death, should i?)

No legal gun ownership only means illegal gun ownership and do you really think a criminal cares whats legal? All that did was keep law abiding people from being able to defend themselves and their family and neighbors.

Your graph said general homicide rate, which is very different from what you claim it was, which is right?

 

[This Charming Manc]

No the issue is ... I am not a criminal and do not have a criminal record OR a history of violence. Why should my right to own a firearm to defend my family, self and home be determined by someone who WILL own a firearm regardless of laws forbidding it?

Because that right creates a surplus of Guns that means guns are available on demand to anyone, guns kill 30,000 Americans per year.

Maybe you care about those 30,000 Americans per year?

Maybe you want to own a gun and let them take there chances?

 

[Totton Linnet]

What I don't understand is how a toddler could disengage the safety device and don't guns still require cocking?

As for the problem of guns I could agree with CManc but it is too late in history to disarm America, logistically how would you go about it? The turn of the century it might have been possible or after the 1st world war state by state they might have managed it.

 

[Selaphiel]

No the issue is ... I am not a criminal and do not have a criminal record OR a history of violence. Why should my right to own a firearm to defend my family, self and home be determined by someone who WILL own a firearm regardless of laws forbidding it?

The thing is, the reason that criminals in the US are armed to the teeth is the gun saturation in your society. Where I live, criminals in general do not use firearms.

The police here do not carry weapons either, they have weapons available if needed for special situations, but they never carry it as standard gear. The reason for that is that they know (research indicates this) that if they make it part of their standard gear, the same escalation will happen among criminals.

 

[zoo22]

The thing is, the reason that criminals in the US are armed to the teeth is the gun saturation in your society. Where I live, criminals in general do not use firearms.

The police here do not carry weapons either, they have weapons available if needed for special situations, but they never carry it as standard gear. The reason for that is that they know (research indicates this) that if they make it part of their standard gear, the same escalation will happen among criminals.

US citizens just need more and bigger guns in order to stop all of the senseless gun bloodshed.

 

[chrysostom]

US citizens just need more and bigger guns in order to stop all of the senseless gun bloodshed.

you are not going to bait me with that

 

[Stripe]

If you don't want to get shot accidentally with your own gun, don't carry a gun. :idunno:

 

[TomO]

That was done by the National Safety Council in the 80s. They took NRA stats on people who killed, wounded, or scared off assailants or intruders with a gun, and compared that to accidental shooting deaths.

Turns out, in the 80s, about 20% of Americans lived in areas dangerous enough that it was safer to have a gun than not have one.

Given the drop in violent crime in recent decades, it's probably changed. But the question of being armed or not, is not a simple one, and depends on where you are, and perhaps on how agreeable you are.

My guess is that most of us are too wary of our neighbors and not wary enough of our own tendency to mess up.

lain: Some more recent statistics/conclusions from that bastion of right wing thought; Slate Magazine:

Rethinking Gun Control
Surprising findings from a comprehensive report on gun violence.

 

[TomO]

What I don't understand is how a toddler could disengage the safety device and don't guns still require cocking?

:think: This is something which is sticking in my craw too. I'm wondering what the woman was carrying and if it was in any kind of holster/retention device inside the bag as is should have been. I mean, believe me, I have a three year old grandson. I am recently acquainted with toddlers and I know beyond a shadow of a doubt what the pint-sized psychos are capable of. They do however have limits to their considerable skills...She had to have messed up somewhere.

This woman has an interesting outlook:

http://limatunesrangediaries.wordpr...for-the-accidental-gun-death-of-an-idaho-mom/

As for the problem of guns I could agree with CManc but it is too late in history to disarm America, logistically how would you go about it? The turn of the century it might have been possible or after the 1st world war state by state they might have managed it.

Thank you for applying reality to the situation. lain:

 

[TomO]

If you don't want to get shot accidentally with your own gun, don't carry a gun. :idunno:

I know, right? lain: Duhhhh people.

 

[Rusha]

Because that right creates a surplus of Guns that means guns are available on demand to anyone, guns kill 30,000 Americans per year.

Maybe you care about those 30,000 Americans per year?

Maybe you want to own a gun and let them take there chances?

In the same way maybe you want to own a car and let them take their chances.

My owning a gun has nothing whatsoever to do with criminals misuse and abuse of firearms.

 

[Morpheus]

Certainly, gunsmithing is a rare skill but 3D printing of guns is a different animal entirely. No fabrication experience or mechanical skills are really needed as in gunsmithing. A criminal organization with "deep pockets" can simply purchase 3D prining machines and probably mass produce on a fairly high level.

Knowing what I do about building accuracy into a firearm, I might suggest that if faced with a printed gun, any shot outside of point-blank would depend heavily on dumb luck. Impact from such a weapon would be greatly diminished as well. One of the first considerations when designing a firearm is appropriate materials to stand up to the substantial forces placed upon them. Any deformation would severely affect accuracy and muzzle velocity.

 

[Morpheus]

An Amercun redneck way of life. This is what they are defending. Good sensible gun ownership. Make sure to visit the NRA booth before you leave.

Yee Haw

And check out the mini-guns, 50-cals, cannons and tanks. Ammo for all is available in the weapons sales tents in the back. No ID necessary.

 

[This Charming Manc]

Whether you like it or not, your right to own a gun does.

How you act and your morality may be exemplary ( and im sure it is )

But the law that puts a gun in your hand ensures the US has a very high murder rate, mainly due to handguns.

In the same way maybe you want to own a car and let them take their chances.

My owning a gun has nothing whatsoever to do with criminals misuse and abuse of firearms.

 

[Stripe]

Whether you like it or not, your right to own a gun does.How you act and your morality may be exemplary ( and im sure it is ) But the law that puts a gun in your hand ensures the US has a very high murder rate, mainly due to handguns.

Nope.

The law does not make anyone do anything.

Liberals are just desperate to have more rules, because they think rules can save people and love the sense of power that comes from inventing them.

 

[The Barbarian]

Some more recent statistics/conclusions from that bastion of right wing thought; Slate Magazine:

Point 7 suggests that the numbers haven't changed much, but I'll bet location still has more to do with the most rational decision to own or not. And of course, it's a probability thing; most people in the worst neighborhoods never have to shoot anyone in self-defense. A few people in the best neighborhoods have occasion to use a firearm to protect themselves or their property..

I don't think it's about rational assessment of risk. And again, a reasonable person can greatly reduce the risks by knowing the weapon, what it can do, and taking adequate care to keep it safe. As long as you avoid endangering anyone else, it's no one's business but your own. That baby might have just as easily shot some completely innocent bystander as the mother who failed to take adequate precautions.