toldailytopic: Do you support or oppose tightening gun control laws in USA?

rocketman

Resident Rocket Surgeon
Hall of Fame
People who say "an armed society is a polite society" seem to like the idea of not daring to offend anyone, or hesitating to speak one's mind, just in case you might get shot. What kind of madness is this?

The polite kind...:chuckle:

I really do not think that is the kind of politeness in question, speech anyway, more like politeness in action. People are not going to be quick to assault or steal from someone that may be (legally) armed to defend themselves. That may be madness to you, it is just victim prevention to me, so be polite in a "will carry" state.
 

drbrumley

Well-known member
Americans have been well armed for several centuries, but “gun violence” is new. Why?

Are there more disturbed people? More medicated people? Have Americans lost self-control, their moral conscience? Are Americans being molded by violent movies and video games and by eleven years of their government’s slaughter of other peoples? Have Americans lost empathy for others?

Tom McNamara, a lecturer at the French National Military Academy, asks: “Do Arabs Cry For Their Children Too?”

The Connecticut school shooting is a tragedy in more ways than one. Children lost their lives, families lost their children, and the tragedy is being used to disarm Americans faced with a police state growing in power and menace.


SOURCE!
 

CoachZe

New member
People who say "an armed society is a polite society" seem to like the idea of not daring to offend anyone, or hesitating to speak one's mind, just in case you might get shot. What kind of madness is this?
Yeah, about that... no thanks.:e4e:
 

CoachZe

New member
When deer hunting; there is grief when you’re standing over the carcass, of the magnificent animal you just killed. But you get over it quickly while you’re preparing the fine fare; the LORD has provided for your table.

Anyone who’s gone through all the emotions of the hunt; is not likely to be the same person that would take a firearm to terrorize, and kill, innocent folks for their own personal fulfillment.

Legislation will not make a difference.
My opinion: if you want to make a change in a depraved society; take a kid hunting.
Just because you feel that sense of remorse and reverence does not mean others will, but I do see your point.
 

CoachZe

New member
The polite kind...:chuckle:

I really do not think that is the kind of politeness in question, speech anyway, more like politeness in action. People are not going to be quick to assault or steal from someone that may be (legally) armed to defend themselves. That may be madness to you, it is just victim prevention to me, so be polite in a "will carry" state.
But you can be legally armed to defend yourself now. No one is suggesting that firearms, as a whole, be taken from you.
 

CoachZe

New member
Americans have been well armed for several centuries, but “gun violence” is new. Why?

Are there more disturbed people? More medicated people? Have Americans lost self-control, their moral conscience? Are Americans being molded by violent movies and video games and by eleven years of their government’s slaughter of other peoples? Have Americans lost empathy for others?

Tom McNamara, a lecturer at the French National Military Academy, asks: “Do Arabs Cry For Their Children Too?”

The Connecticut school shooting is a tragedy in more ways than one. Children lost their lives, families lost their children, and the tragedy is being used to disarm Americans faced with a police state growing in power and menace.


SOURCE!
More right-winged propaganda. It's nonsense.
 

rocketman

Resident Rocket Surgeon
Hall of Fame
But you can be legally armed to defend yourself now. No one is suggesting that firearms, as a whole, be taken from you.

I say that it is not a gun problem but, a crazy people problem, lock em up, institutionalize them when they are a threat to themselves or society like America used to do. Americans by and large are not willing to give up any liberty to the government in place of false sense of security. Less guns does not equal less homocides and the data proves it.

"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Second Amendment.
 

Angel4Truth

New member
Hall of Fame
I say that it is not a gun problem but, a crazy people problem, lock em up, institutionalize them when they are a threat to themselves or society like America used to do. Americans by and large are not willing to give up any liberty to the government in place of false sense of security. Less guns does not equal less homocides and the data proves it.

"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Second Amendment.

Amen, catch them in the act and just string them right up on the spot like they used to.
 

CoachZe

New member
I say that it is not a gun problem but, a crazy people problem, lock em up, institutionalize them when they are a threat to themselves or society like America used to do. Americans by and large are not willing to give up any liberty to the government in place of false sense of security. Less guns does not equal less homocides and the data proves it.
Depends on what data you look at. As far as the US it remains to be seen because that scenario has not existed and I do not think it will.
 

drbrumley

Well-known member
This is not a power play by the government because what is being proposed is nothing new.

He didn't say and neither am I that this is something new. Liberals have been making this an issue for decades. They keep losing which is good but the tide seems to be turning.
 

CoachZe

New member
He didn't say and neither am I that this is something new. Liberals have been making this an issue for decades. They keep losing which is good but the tide seems to be turning.
Making what an issue? Gun reform to help alleviate tragedy? Sorry to say that is coming from both sides of the isle.
 

Angel4Truth

New member
Hall of Fame
Depends on what data you look at. As far as the US it remains to be seen because that scenario has not existed and I do not think it will.

Evanston, Illinois, a Chicago suburb of 75,000 residents, became the largest town to ban handgun ownership in September 1982 but experienced no change in violent crime. It has subsequently ended its ban as a result of the District of Columbia v. Heller Supreme Court case, upon a federal lawsuit by the National Rifle Association being filed the day after Heller was entered.

Among the 15 states with the highest homicide rates, 10 have restrictive or very restrictive gun laws.[72]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_control
 

CoachZe

New member
Evanston, Illinois, a Chicago suburb of 75,000 residents, became the largest town to ban handgun ownership in September 1982 but experienced no change in violent crime. It has subsequently ended its ban as a result of the District of Columbia v. Heller Supreme Court case, upon a federal lawsuit by the National Rifle Association being filed the day after Heller was entered.

Among the 15 states with the highest homicide rates, 10 have restrictive or very restrictive gun laws.[72]
I was talking about on a national scale. Chicago has always been towards the top regardless of local firearm enforcement.
 

CoachZe

New member
Did you fail to read the second sentence there?
Ten states (the ones with stricter gun laws) is not even a quarter of the number of states we have, thus, does not even come close to satisfying the statement "national scale". If numbers aren't your thing I can offer you a calculator.
 
Top