T Nation

Gun Laws

Just a note. I’m writing down my thoughts here for no reason other than to see what may ensue.

Gun laws ban the use of guns.

The use of a gun when it is banned is illegal.

Criminals do illegal things.

Criminals will have guns whether legal or not.

“Regular” people are not criminals (or else they would be criminals).

Regular people do not break the law.

Regular people won’t wield illegal weaponry.

Criminals will have guns and regular people won’t.

Sounds safe to me.

umm…police?

[quote]thefederalist wrote:
umm…police?[/quote]

umm…yes, they will come after you’ve been robbed at gunpoint or killed.

[quote]thefederalist wrote:
umm…police?[/quote]

“When seconds count…the police are only minutes away.”

Just ask Alissa Blanton’s husband who watched his pretty young wife die after being shot by the man who was stalking her.

Or how about the three people who were killed at U of A recently? One of our well known gun free zones…schools and universities. Do you really think this lady would have taken a gun to that meeting with the intention to shoot people, as she apparently did, if she knew that a number of faculty members carried on a daily basis?

The police investigate crime after the fact, they very rarely have the opportunity to prevent crime before hand. They can’t possibly be every where all the time. That is why it is our responsibility as law abiding citizens to help protect ourselves and our families.

[quote]TheBigV wrote:
Just a note. I’m writing down my thoughts here for no reason other than to see what may ensue.

Gun laws ban the use of guns.

The use of a gun when it is banned is illegal.

Criminals do illegal things.

Criminals will have guns whether legal or not.

“Regular” people are not criminals (or else they would be criminals).

Regular people do not break the law.

Regular people won’t wield illegal weaponry.

Criminals will have guns and regular people won’t.

Sounds safe to me.[/quote]

Being illegal allows for punishment.

Criminals commiting an illegal crime can be punished.

Regular people performing a legal act cannot be punished.

The law sets a consequence.

well I’m sure when they’re illegal all the bad guys will turn their’s in. I mean, they will be illegal right?

[quote]JPCleary wrote:

[quote]thefederalist wrote:
umm…police?[/quote]

“When seconds count…the police are only minutes away.”

Just ask Alissa Blanton’s husband who watched his pretty young wife die after being shot by the man who was stalking her.

Or how about the three people who were killed at U of A recently? One of our well known gun free zones…schools and universities. Do you really think this lady would have taken a gun to that meeting with the intention to shoot people, as she apparently did, if she knew that a number of faculty members carried on a daily basis?

[/quote]

What do both of those criminals have in common? They are both mentally ill.

The first case the stalker would have killed the wife and the husband would shot/be killed by, the shooter.

The uni professor was clearly not there mentally it wouldnt have mattered if the police were standing outside the building.

Just b/ someone killed someone else doesnt give anyone else the right to kill that person. Pending circumstances ensue if its necessary.

Its a tough issue and whichever way you argue when the debate comes up it just makes America look bad.

When it comes to protecting yourself the only one that can do it is you. Until I can get a cop to ride with me every day, my Glock will.

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

Making alcohol illegal made sure that only the criminals had access to alcohol.
And crime didn’t go up at all and they all lived happily ever after.
I’m pretty sure they still teach that shit in school, right?

Meanwhile, guns - unlike whiskey - are covered in the Bill of Rights. “Something-something-something-SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.” Sounds like something Gandalf might say. Wait, what?

Anyway, any adult who trusts anyone else (police, big daddy government, the red cross, etc) to keep them safe from harm is pretty much guaranteed to get disappointed, and frequently deserves what they get.

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:

[quote]JPCleary wrote:

[quote]thefederalist wrote:
umm…police?[/quote]

“When seconds count…the police are only minutes away.”

Just ask Alissa Blanton’s husband who watched his pretty young wife die after being shot by the man who was stalking her.

Or how about the three people who were killed at U of A recently? One of our well known gun free zones…schools and universities. Do you really think this lady would have taken a gun to that meeting with the intention to shoot people, as she apparently did, if she knew that a number of faculty members carried on a daily basis?

[/quote]

What do both of those criminals have in common? They are both mentally ill.

The first case the stalker would have killed the wife and the husband would shot/be killed by, the shooter.

The uni professor was clearly not there mentally it wouldnt have mattered if the police were standing outside the building.

Just b/ someone killed someone else doesnt give anyone else the right to kill that person. Pending circumstances ensue if its necessary.

Its a tough issue and whichever way you argue when the debate comes up it just makes America look bad.

[/quote]

…what?!

Were you drunk when you wrote this?

This thread is about gun control. When you take away the law abiding citizen’s guns, the only people left with guns are the criminals.

I contend that in the above examples had the victims been carrying, or others around them had been carrying, then they probably would still be alive.

Also, this is a fact: with less gun control laws, towns/communities have LESS violence dealing with guns. Why? Because when a criminal is walking around a neighborhood, he knows that any of these houses he’s about to rob may have someone prepared to shoot him in the fucking face. It’s a deterrent. I don’t even care about the 2nd amendment argument because personally I think that is way outdated.

Read up people.

Woman prof charged with murder in US campus shooting

HUNTSVILLE, Alabama â?? US police on Saturday charged a woman biology professor with murder after three staff members were killed and three injured in a shooting spree at an Alabama university.

Amy Bishop Anderson, 45, a mother of four, was charged with capital murder and could face other charges including aggravated assault, district attorney Rob Broussard told a press conference in the southern town of Huntsville.

Police said she used a 9 mm weapon, armed with 16 bullets, which was later found in the women’s bathroom.

The university, which has about 300 staff, has a “no-gun” policy on campus, he said. “We do not have metal detectors on our campus. This is a very safe community and it was a safe campus.”

Full Story:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5j8FbmNJV6BHdDUmD0J_kL3r88JMQ

This is a pattern with all the mass shootings. In addition to restrictive local/cnty/state/fed gun laws, there is always a “no gun” policy in effect.

[quote]TheBigV wrote:
Just a note. I’m writing down my thoughts here for no reason other than to see what may ensue.

Gun laws ban the use of guns.

The use of a gun when it is banned is illegal.

Criminals do illegal things.

Criminals will have guns whether legal or not.

“Regular” people are not criminals (or else they would be criminals).

Regular people do not break the law.

Regular people won’t wield illegal weaponry.

Criminals will have guns and regular people won’t.

Sounds safe to me.[/quote]

Guns are illegal in D.C., and that’s as dangerous a city as there is. (And I’m not talking about the politicians.)

The argument is of course a double edged sword. Guns are dangerous… “Guns dont kill people, people kill people” doesnt really account for absolute accidents and ignorance or plain stupidity.The more guns there are the more accidents there will be and the easier it will be for criminals to get even more guns. I think we need strong gun laws and education requirements. I definitely feel that law enforcement should have guns and sane responsible people should be able to have guns.

Another example of one of our well known gun free zones…churches.

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_14405480?nclick_check=1

[quote]PB Andy wrote:
Also, this is a fact: with less gun control laws, towns/communities have LESS violence dealing with guns. Why? Because when a criminal is walking around a neighborhood, he knows that any of these houses he’s about to rob may have someone prepared to shoot him in the fucking face. It’s a deterrent. I don’t even care about the 2nd amendment argument because personally I think that is way outdated.

Read up people.[/quote]

Indeed. I wouldn’t get involved in this e-discussion, but since I work on youth violence prevention in Boston, I thought I should at least give you to a useful website, where you can input your parameters and see the statistics from coroners’ and medical examiners’ reports.

For instance, in the last 8 years that they have data (1999-2006), 5,974 people died due to unintentional firearms injuries.

Also, www.gunfacts.info is not a reputable source of info in my book. The Cowboy Confessional (http://www.guysmith.org/blog/) which is this “political provocateur”'s blog doesn’t inspire confidence in his assertions (emphasis on that).

Edit: The website I think you should check out. http://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/index.html

wow I never tought you guys would create websites with phony facts to support your ideology. I never get used your national political insanity

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.